Land Use and Climate Change, II

Following up on this post from last week, an article in the San Francisco Chronicle highlights some efforts underway in CA to combat climate change via smart growth:

In Oakland, Fruitvale Village demonstrates how infill development, where new land uses are created on sites previously used for another purpose such as manufacturing, can encourage economic revitalization and the use of mass transit. Built on former Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) parking lots next to the Fruitvale BART station, the transit village combines dozens of mixed-income homes, shops and restaurants, office space and community services such as a library, clinic and senior center. The resulting neighborhood allows residents to walk or use public transit for their regular recreation-, work- or school-related commutes. Ultimately, that creates less reliance on automobiles and reduces greenhouse-gas emissions.

It seems logical, but the bureaucratic impediiments are incredibly strong. There’s also a huge asymmetry invloved: the effects of climate change are felt globally, but land use is usually done hyper-locally. I’m not sure how you get these to line up. Federal incentives for communities that adopt smart growth plans, maybe? More federal funding for infill and transit?