The state Department of Water Resource (DWR) has received harsh criticism from State Auditor Elaine Howle for the department's administration of a flood protection corridor program. The auditor found that DWR lacked objective criteria for scoring applicants when it awarded $28 million in bond funds to five projects in 2001, and did not require mandated information from applicants when it awarded $29.1 million in 2003. The money for those grants, plus a remaining $3 million, comes from Proposition 13 approved by voters in 2000. Last year, voters added $330 million for similar flood protection projects via Propositions 1E and 84. Howle recommended DWR improve its selection and monitoring processes before spending the money. The auditor specifically questioned DWR's decision to award $17.6 million to The Nature Conservancy in 2001 for acquisition of 9,200-acre Staten Island, in the San Joaquin County portion of the Bay Delta. "Water Resources has yet to implement a worthwhile flood protection project on the property," the auditor reported. "Although Water Resources contends that Staten Island has already achieved significant flood protection benefits from the standpoint of preventing future development in an area prone to flooding, its contention is questionable considering the current legal restrictions prohibiting such development." The Nature Conservancy received a similar grant from the Cal-Fed Bay Delta project to complete the Staten Island acquisition. At the time, other environmental groups questioned the project because it provides for no public access to what remains private farmland. The auditor also questioned DWR's monitoring of a $4.75 million grant to the City of Santee in San Diego County. The department has received only two progress reports and has not contacted the city since Mach 2004, even though Santee never provided a requested audit. Much of the questioned activity occurred under the Davis administration and then-DWR Director Tom Hannigan. Current DWR Director Lester Snow told the Sacramento Bee the department would provide a ranking system for future project applications. But Snow also defended the Staten Island purchase, and DWR questioned a number of Howle's conclusions. The report, including DWR's response, is available on the state auditor's website at http://www.bsa.ca.gov/pdfs/reports/2007-108.pdf .

Solimar Research Group Launches New Web Site "Virtual Library" Contains 45 Research Reports Solimar Research Group, a land-use policy firm based in Southern California, has just launched a revamped web site ( www.solimar.org ) providing much more information about the firms' products and services – as well as a "virtual library" containing 45 research reports the firm has produced since 1999. "The new web site is not only more attractive, but it really gives people the information they need about Solimar and about the land use issues we deal with," said William Fulton, Solimar's president and CEO. The web site was designed by Urban Insight of Los Angeles. The web site also contains blogs from staff members at Solimar and its sister publication, California Planning & Development Report , as well as news reports on Solimar's work throughout California and the West. Recently news articles include Solimar's views on land-use planning and fire hazards in Southern California – reported by national columnist Neal Peirce – and transferable development rights programs in Santa Barbara County, California, and Gallatin County, Montana. The virtual library is a comprehensive library of almost all research reports Solimar has worked on since it was founded. The first report was a summary of growth management policies throughout Southern California in the 1990s, which was originally issued by Claremont Graduate University Research Insitute; the most recent is a guidebook for developing mixed-use districts for the Torrance/Redondo Beach area of Los Angeles, issued by the South Bay Cities Council of Governments. Solimar's mission is to provide solid research and policy analysis on land-use and related issues so that government land-use policymakers can make informed decisions. The firm's main product lines include: • Infill Development Policies and Site Identification • Growth Management and Smart Growth Policy Implementation • Transferable Development Rights Feasibility Analyses

Housing ManagerCity of Santa Monica, CA The City of Santa Monica is seeking a Housing Manager to oversee the City's development, financing and preservation of affordable housing and housing assistance programs.  Santa Monica is known for its diverse residential neighborhoods, numerous recreational and art venues, vibrant commercial districts, exciting mix of retail and high-profile corporations and a strong commitment to housing opportunity.  Serving a population of 86,000 in Los Angeles County, it is one of nation's most desirable urban coastal communities. Reporting to the Director of Housing and Economic Development, the Housing Manager oversees a division supported by 23 staff.  The ideal candidate will be an exceptional leader of people and programs and exhibit a genuine and compassionate connection to the stakeholders he/she serves.  A demonstrated ability to think and act creatively is a prerequisite for success in this role.  A Bachelor's degree is required. Total annual guaranteed compensation up to $135,810, plus potential performance bonus of up to 10% of base.  Signing bonus of 10% of base will be awarded to the candidate selected. Competitive benefits package also provided.  Visit our website for detailed brochure and to apply online:  www.tbcrecruiting.com .  The closing date for this recruitment is Friday, December 28, 2007 . Teri Black-Brann  •  tel 310.377.2612 Carolyn Seeley  •  tel 714.974.2284 Teri Black & Company www.tbcrecruiting.com

The downtown in the East Bay city of Hayward has many features that any redevelopment agency would envy — an Amtrak station, a Bay Area Rapid Transit station, historic buildings, and a modern grocery store with additional shops. Soon to come are a 12-screen movie theatre and more retail shops. But what may be helping the downtown even more is years of work to create additional housing in and around downtown, within walking distance of BART and its connections to jobs in Alameda, Contra Costa and San Francisco counties. During the past decade, the downtown's collection of vacant and underutilized lots has morphed into infill, transit-oriented developments of town homes and condominiums. More than 800 units have been built, and they may soon be followed by another 800 similar residences in the Burbank Cannery area, only one-half mile away. The city has provided financing for little of the new construction. Instead, it has focused on buying parcels that developers can build on, and then selling that land at below market rates, according to Maret Bartlett, the city's redevelopment director. City Councilman Bill Ward estimates that 4,500 new residents have moved downtown in recent years. Ward says the city can accommodate even more residential growth in its redevelopment area. He pointed to several old industrial areas that can be zoned for housing, all within walking distance of the Hayward BART station. But Ward, who also is a planning consultant and real estate agent, said the city will have to see how a housing slowdown throughout Northern California affects future demand for housing. The city does benefit, however, from a location equidistant to both the San Francisco and San Jose job markets, and from low land costs relative to other cities in the Bay Area. Hayward, which has a population of about 150,000, grew rapidly after World War II as a largely blue-collar suburb of apartments and single-family homes. Today, many of its older homes are rundown. But the new downtown development has provided a number of midsized dwellings for young families, empty nesters and those who want the convenience of commuting on public transportation. At one point, the downtown was home to many retail stores, and redevelopment focused on retail, said Ward, who has been on the council for 24 years. But 12 years ago the council shifted focus to housing. "Most of our retail uses moved out, "said Ward. "We had to respond to the market for Hayward." Stuart Cohen, executive director of the nonprofit Transportation and Land Use Coalition, said Hayward is "building in the right direction" with its downtown housing projects. But many of the projects are only two stories tall, and Cohen wondered why the city has not aimed higher. With such close proximity to mass transit, the location is good for higher-density development, he said. "They're doing it in the 1990s style of TOD ," Cohen said. "We would want more. The more people you can get by transit, the more vibrant the neighborhoods can become." Councilwoman Barbara Halliday, who was on the Planning Commission when many downtown housing units won approval, defended the two-story designs as "in scale with the surrounding buildings." With the exception of one 11-story building, downtown Hayward is composed of low buildings, she noted. Both Cohen and Halliday noted that Hayward is planning mid-rise housing near a BART station in the south end of town. However, the proposed taller buildings have stirred controversy among residents. The Burbank Cannery area provides an opportunity to expand downtown's reach and population. Developer Citation Homes Central first began looking at the Burbank Cannery several years ago, recalled Charles McTeag, vice president of land acquisition and development for the Santa Clara-based company. At the time, McTeag said, company officials realized "this is a really well-located city in terms of its access to transportation and jobs." And Hayward officials, he said, were motivated to revitalize the area. Bartlett said the city knew that developers would covet the approximately 70 acres in the Burbank Cannery area once the old Hunts Wesson cannery went out of business. The site lies west of downtown, with the BART station in between the old cannery and downtown. The cannery area was not been part of Hayward's original redevelopment district in 1975, but was added in 1998. Bartlett said city leaders recognized the cannery area's potential for high-density residences near public transit, and decided to plan for that instead of for single-family homes, which are more common in the suburban Alameda County terrain. In addition to housing at the old cannery site, an overcrowded elementary school in the area is being replaced with a new two-story structure for 900 students, along with renovations and improvements to the adjacent 14-acre Cannery Park. In addition, walking trails and parkland are being added to the area, in part to encourage pedestrian use. To provide affordable housing, a 60-unit senior citizens apartment complex is under construction nearby as well. The commercial core of Hayward's downtown, which has also undergone redevelopment, is now waiting for a few more sparks to create a vibrant district where shoppers and evening revelers feel welcome. Like many struggling redevelopment districts, Hayward needs more pieces to fit together before that happens. And it isn't as if Hayward hasn't tried: historic commercial buildings, many of which sit on the Hayward earthquake fault, have been retrofitted in recent years. A downtown supermarket moved from an outmoded building to a 60,000-square-foot building on the east end of downtown in 2002. Albertsons shares that shopping center with a number of other retail tenants. A new city hall opened downtown in 1998. A few blocks away, the new Cinema Place is scheduled to open in fall 2008 with a dozen movie screens and eight to ten restaurants. The city has added several new parking lots to the area, too. "We're hoping Cinema Place provides additional stimulus to retail and restaurants," said Bartlett. Although downtown's sidewalks and lighting have been upgraded, city officials have heard frequent complaints that downtown panhandlers, empty buildings, trash and low-level crimes keep visitors and shoppers away. The Hayward City Council is expected to vote in early December on spending several hundred thousand dollars on new efforts to clean up downtown, Bartlett said. It's not a problem unique to Hayward. "A lot of downtowns have issues like this," Bartlett said. Contacts: City Councilman Bill Ward, (510) 583-4357. Maret Bartlett, Hayward Redevelopment Agency, (510) 583-4260. Charles McTeag, Citation Homes Central, (408) 985-6071. Stuart Cohen, Transportation and Land Use Coalition, (510) 740-3150.

Developers are beginning to go green because it makes economic sense. But they're probably not going green enough to satisfy Jerry Brown. That was the impression I got last week at the annual Emerging Trends in Real Estate conference put on by the Urban Land Institute, San Diego-Tijuana Council. Dusting aside the typical numbers-and-market-glimpses approach, ULI devoted the meeting to the theme of "sustainability" and even brought in sustainability guru-ess Hunter Lovins to give a speech. The most remarkable aspect of the day was the matter-of-factness with which all the developers who spoke accepted that green building standards are inevitable. "It's no more than a 2% increase in cost for silver LEED certification," said Matt Lituchy, managing director of the Jay Paul Co. "It's 4-6% for gold and more for platinum. But half of that is getting the certification from the Green Building Council." Jonathan Bradhurst, senior vice president for United States development for Westfield Corp., the shopping mall owner, said his company would be retrofitting University Town Center in San Diego – not far from the hotel where the ULI conference was held – to be as green as possible. "Five-six years ago you couldn't find contractors who would do it," said "Now it's inevitable. As a simple business decision, it makes sense to build as efficiently as you can." The bottom line? Green building will be the norm in three to five years, and it won't cost anything more than regular building. But there's a difference between building a green building and creating a greener community with fewer greenhouse gas emissions – and that's something that developers are apparently still adjusting to. While the developers practically high-fived each other over green building, a deathly silence fell over the meeting room when Deputy Attorney General Sandra Goldberg spoke about greenhouse gas emissions. She insisted that not all projects would require an analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act to assess the impact of greenhouse gas emissions. But in responding to various questions, she used the same phrase over and over again: "feasible mitigation measures". "A lot of people are asking whether you have to incorporate GHG for a project that is already doing an environmental impact report," Goldberg said. "For me there is no discussion. The EIR should consider climate change impacts and feasible mitigation measures." The pretty clear implication being: whatever the attorney general's office decides is feasible has to be included as a mitigation measure. Otherwise … well, they are lawyers over there. They'll probably sue.

Billboard ordinances in five cities have survived constitutional challenges, as the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected claims filed by three billboard companies. In three published decisions, the Ninth Circuit upheld billboard regulations in San Diego, Beaumont and Oakland. In unpublished memoranda, the court upheld regulations in Chula Vista and Lemon Grove. In all five cases, billboard companies argued that local ordinances violated the companies' First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The court did strike down one provision in Oakland's ordinance, and it returned the Beaumont case to District Court for further proceedings on a company's claim for damages. Randal Morrison, the attorney for San Diego, Beaumont, Chula Vista and Lemon Grove, said the Ninth Circuit broke no legal ground. The decisions demonstrate that the Ninth Circuit, like other circuits, is "growing weary of billboard companies trying to attack sign ordinances, including portions of the ordinances that don't apply to them." Billboard companies argue that zoning limitations impinge on their right to free expression. However, the First Amendment applies only to billboard content; whether someone may erect a billboard in the first place, "is a straight zoning issue," Morrison contended. Oakland Deputy City Attorney Christopher Kee said the Ninth Circuit's decision in the Oakland case "upheld what we thought were the guiding principles of First Amendment law in regard to billboards. It preserved our right to regulate these things. Billboards are of considerable concern because of the proliferation of these things and visual blight." The lawsuits against San Diego, Chula Vista and Lemon Cove were all filed by the outdoor advertising company Get Outdoors. In San Diego, the company filed 24 billboard permit applications in June 2003. The city rejected all applications because the city's sign ordinance did not permit new off-site billboards. In addition, the city found the applications were incomplete and the proposed billboards would violate size and height restrictions. Get Outdoors filed a lawsuit the following month asked the court to invalidate the entire sign ordinance. Get Outdoors argued that the ordinance unconstitutionally favored commercial speech over noncommercial speech, favored certain types of commercial speech over others, constituted "prior restraint" because it gave city officials no deadline to decide on applications, and gave officials unbridled discretion. Before District Court Judge William Hayes ruled, the city amended its ordinance to include a "message substitution" clause permitting noncommercial messages on billboards, and a 45-day deadline for deciding on permit applications. After considering these amendments, Hayes ruled for the city. At the Ninth Circuit, the primary issue was whether Get Outdoors could challenge the entirety of San Diego's sign ordinance. The Ninth Circuit determined that the company could "challenge only those provisions that applied to it. … Get Outdoors II cannot leverage its injuries under certain, specific provisions to state an injury under the sign ordinance generally." The Ninth Circuit then said that the company could get relief only if the court invalidated both the size and height restrictions, and the off-site ban. But the court upheld the size and height restrictions — which vary based on the size of the street and speed limit — as "not substantially broader than necessary to protect the city's interests in traffic safety and aesthetics." Thus, the city could use the size and height restrictions to deny Get Outdoors II's applications, according to the court. Get Outdoors contended the city's discretionary provisions and absence of a time limit amounted to prior restraint in violation of the First Amendment. But the court said the company had no standing to pursue such a claim. "Get Outdoors II's applications to erect billboard structures were denied on grounds that are constitutionally valid, and neither its filings nor its actions in this case have evinced any intent to file permit applications that comply with these requirements," Judge Cynthia Holcomb Hall wrote for the three-judge panel. "Thus, Get Outdoors II cannot show that it would ever be genuinely threatened by an unconstitutional prior restraint in this case. … No change in the permit procedures would result in the approval of the permits it requests." The arguments were essentially the same in Get Outdoors II, LLC v. City of Lemon Grove , No. 05-56374, and Get Outdoors v. City of Chula Vista , No. 05-56696. In the unpublished memoranda upholding those cities' ordinance, the Ninth Circuit directed readers to the published San Diego decision for analysis. The Beaumont case was brought by Outdoor Media Group. It had filed a conditional use permit application to erect four billboards at the junction of Interstate 10 and State Route 60 in 2003. Based on subjective standards in the city's ordinance, the planning director recommended disapproval, and both the Planning Commission and City Council voted to deny the application. Outdoor Media sued, arguing that the city's ordinance violated the First Amendment because it regulated based on the billboard content and gave city officials too much discretion. The company also argued that the city violated its due process and equal protection rights. Outdoor Media asked the District Court to throw out the ordinance and award damages. The city responded by repealing the challenged ordinance and replacing it with one that banned new billboards. District Court Judge Robert Timlin upheld the new ordinance and dismissed Outdoor Media's claims as moot. The same Ninth Circuit panel that decided on the San Diego ordinance upheld Beaumont's new ordinance, but ruled that the District Court should consider whether Outdoor Media was eligible for damages based on the old ordinance. "The new ordinance justifies its ban on off-site commercial signs by citing the aesthetic harm imposed by billboards," Judge Hall wrote. "The Supreme Court and our prior case law have endorsed this rationale as a substantial government interest, and found that a complete ban on new billboards is no more extensive than necessary to serve that interest." Much of the opinion, though, discussed Beaumont's repealed ordinance. Outdoor Media contended the old ordinance was unconstitutional because it regulated noncommercial speech based on content. For example, the ordinance permitted political campaign signs, and directional and informational signs. Such provisions are unconstitutional, the Ninth Circuit said, and Outdoor Media should be allowed to develop its argument that it deserves damages because of the provisions. Judge Consuelo Callahan dissented with the damages ruling. The content of Outdoor Media's proposed billboards was unknown and not the basis for the city's denial of the application, Callahan said, and therefore Outdoor Media cannot argue it was harmed by content-based restrictions. Attorney Morrison said the city would seek a rehearing on the issue based on Callahan's dissent. In Oakland, Desert Outdoor Advertising erected two freeway-visible billboards and applied for a variance for a third sign displaying the messages "Volunteer to Be a Big Brother" and "Pray at First Baptist Church." The city concluded that the two billboards violated the municipal code and rejected the variance request based on the planning code. Desert went to court seeking to invalidate the city's ordinances and damages under federal civil rights law. The company argued the city's ordinances imposed content-based restrictions, favored commercial speech and gave city officials too much discretion. The city then amended the planning code to remove a provision allowing rejection of a variance application if the variance would "be detrimental to the public welfare." District Court Judge Martin Jenkins struck down one exception in the city ordinance allowing time and temperature displays; otherwise, he ruled for the city. On Desert's appeal, the Ninth Circuit upheld the new ordinance. The new ordinance's variance standards are "reasonably specific" and sufficiently constrain city officials' authority, the court ruled. Based on those standards, Desert's application failed, so the company does not have a viable claim for damages, the court ruled. The content of the signs was not a consideration in the city's denial, the court found. The Ninth Circuit also upheld the lower court's decision to remove the time and temperature sign exception from the ordinance. In the meantime, the city has won Superior Court rulings in a lawsuit demanding that Desert remove its two billboards. Those rulings are on appeal. The lesson from all of the Ninth Circuit decisions is that cities need to review their billboard regulations, said Kee, Oakland's attorney. "It's incumbent upon municipalities to look at the language of their ordinances to make sure they are keeping up," he said. Morrison, who specializes in billboard and sign law, agreed. "It general, most city sign ordinances are outdated and will not stand up in court. And typically it's because of time limits on political signs," he said. First Case: Get Outdoors II, LLC v. City of San Diego , No. 05-56366, 07 C.D.O.S. 12720, 2007 DJDAR 16448. Filed November 1, 2007. The Lawyers: For Get Outdoors: Adam Webb, The Webb Law Group, (770) 444-9325. For the city: Randal Morrison, Sabine & Morrison, (619) 234-2864. Second Case: Outdoor Media Group, Inc., v. City of Beaumont , No. 05-56620, 07 C.D.O.S. 12724, 2007 DJDAR 16455. Filed November 1, 2007. The Lawyers: For Outdoor Media: Jeffrey Tidus, Baute & Tidus, (213) 630-5000. For the city: Randal Morrison, Sabine & Morrison, (619) 234-2864. Third Case: Desert Outdoor Advertising, Inc., v. City of Oakland , No. 05-15501, 07 C.D.O.S. 12616, 2007 DJDAR 16324. Filed October 30, 2007. The Lawyers: For Desert: Alan Herson, (541) 770-1372. For the city: Christopher Kee, city attorney's office, (510) 238-3601.

Environmental Programs Administrator City of Irvine The City of Irvine (population: 202,000) is a 66-square mile city located in Orange County, California. Irvine, incorporated in 1971, is an award-winning master planned community, with top-rated educational institutions, an enterprising business atmosphere, sound environmental stewardship and respect for diversity. The Environmental Programs Administrator will be an innovative and entrepreneurial professional who is excited by the opportunity to implement best practices in a progressive and cutting edge organization. Under the direction of the Manager of Planning and Redevelopment in the Community Development Department, the Environmental Programs Administrator will plan, organize and direct the operations of the City's environmental, sustainable, green building and energy programs. Requires the equivalent of a Bachelor's degree in environmental science, public policy, management or a closely related field; and at least five years of related professional experience in a public or private organization, including environmental management and compliance, pollution prevention, waste minimization, energy efficiency or environmental sustainability principles; five years of supervisory experience; and a minimum of three years administrative, budgetary or financial experience. Salary $78,246 to $117,369, plus excellent work/life benefits.  For more information about this position and to apply online by December 12, 2007 , please visit www.cityofirvine.org/jobs .

Bill Fulton's UC Davis Extension Land Use Class Sign up now for Bill Fulton's overview land use class, " Planning in California ," offered by UC Davis Extension in Sacramento this winter! This course is perfect for mid-career professionals looking for a refresher; people working in planning departments seeking professional certification; and lawyers, developers, and citizen activists seeking insight into the process. The course will be taught in Sacramento on Jan. 17-18 and Feb. 21-22. You will receive the most recent edition of William Fulton and Paul Shigley's Guide to California Planning . This course features the planning process, the role of politics in local government, planning and the regulatory framework for planning efforts in California. Topics include: • current issues in California planning • historical overview of land use regulation • an introduction to the general plan process, specific plans and zoning • overview of planning implementation tools such as design review and growth management • relationship of land use planning to environmental review and transportation • property rights and takings • local government boundary issues • redevelopment and "fiscalization" of land use For more information: http://extension.ucdavis.edu/unit/land_use_and_natural_resources/certificate/land_use_and_environmental_planning/#L15429

Regional Land Use Planner Sonoran Institute  POSITION SPECIFICS Status:   Full-Time Location: Morongo Basin Area, California Closing Date: Open Until Filled Salary Range:  $60,000 - $75,000 DOE & Excellent Benefit Package POSITION SUMMARY The Regional Land Use Planner will work in the Morongo Basin area of Twentynine Palms, Joshua Tree and Yucca Valley with the Open Space Group to provide technical assistance in conservation and land use planning. The Open Space Group includes federal land management agencies, state agencies, local municipalities, and nonprofits citizens groups, all working collectively to protect open space.  The planner will help facilitate meetings and provide technical assistance for accomplishing an "open space" work plan that reflects mutual goals for conservation and land use planning in the region in support of open space protection. KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, & ABILITIES REQUIRED • Demonstrated experience working with local officials, interested citizens, non-governmental organizations, and federal agencies in a public process. • Demonstrated experience in comprehensive plan development and the design and administration of land use regulations. • Previous experience in conducting and/or supervising a wide range of technical analyses and studies, socioeconomic profiles, build out and other land use studies, cost of services studies, and natural resource mapping and analysis, including the development of Land Evaluation and Site Assessment  systems. Experience with Habitat Conservation Plans a plus. • Proven ability to design and manage inclusive public planning processes, including visioning and policy development. • Experience in integrating planning for both public and private lands with an emphasis on conservation values. • Familiarity with linkages between effective land use planning and economic development strategies. • Excellent written and verbal communication skills. • Computer proficiency in Microsoft Office word processing and spreadsheet applications as well as PowerPoint. • Familiarity with the application of GIS technology, GIS capabilities a plus. • Experience in working in Western communities with diverse constituencies. • Ability to travel by car locally and regionally. • Ability to work and communicate collaboratively in a team environment for a nonprofit organization that supports community-based conservation. EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS Advanced degree or equivalent experience in community planning or a related field and five to seven years of increasingly responsible experience in community-based planning, preferably with a focus on regional or multijurisdictional planning; or an equivalent combination of education, training, and experience that provides the required knowledge and abilities. AICP certification is highly desirable. APPLICATION PROCESS Please send cover letter, resume, and application to the address noted below.  Applications can be found on our website at www.sonoran.org .  Sonoran Institute, Human Resources, 7650 E. Broadway Blvd., Suite 203, Tucson, AZ  85710 Fax:  520.290.0969 Email: carla@sonoran.org

After several years of struggling along with a minimal website, Solimar Research Group – sister organization to California Planning & Development Report -- has just launched a handsome new site ( http://www.solimar.org ) that is far more comprehensive and attractive than the old one. The new site has a lot of features, including more detailed information about the products and services Solimar offers and even a little bit of description about the historic building where our office is located. But to me, the most important part of the new website is the "Virtual Library" – a collection of 45 studies and reports produced by Solimar and its research partners over the past eight years. It's the first time that virtually all Solimar reports have been available online. These studies range over some pretty wide territory – from a nationwide examination of who's sprawling to the economic development strategy for a tiny California city. Much of the material, obviously, covers California in general and Southern California in particular, but Solimar has spent a lot of time looking at trends in Arizona and elsewhere in the intermountain West; and in selected other metro areas around the country, including Orlando, Seattle, and Minneapolis-St. Paul. Taken together, I like to think that this body of work represents a pretty good guide to the changing zeitgeist of the land use policy world over the last decade – from concern about sprawl and urban growth boundaries of the late ‘90s to the infill orientation of the 21st Century. The turning point came in 2001, when we at Solimar produced Who Sprawls Most? and played a major role in producing Sprawl Hits The Wall . Who Sprawls Most? was written by Rolf Pendall of Cornell, Alicia Harrison, Mai Nguyen, and me, and was released by the Brookings Institution. Our report documented a counterintuitive trend – that the rest of the country was consuming land more rapidly and less efficiently than the West was. Sprawl Hits The Wall , which was released jointly by Brookings and the University of Southern California, documented the fact that metropolitan Los Angeles was running out of places to sprawl onto. Before these two reports came out, nobody believed that California and the West were running out of developable urban land. After they came out, Solimar's work – both research and consulting – has almost always been based on this assumption. In conjunction with a variety of partners in Los Angeles, Solimar developed the "California Infill Estimation Tool," a GIS-based method of determining infill housing potential in a built-up area. This led, in turn, to a pathbreaking analysis of infill opportunities along the Exposition Line in Los Angeles, which is now under construction. Solimar also worked on a variety of studies and reports about the future of land-poor areas in Phoenix – most notably "Which Way Scottsdale," which documented the dwindling land supply in the city and was at least partly responsible for Scottsdale ditching a Wal-Mart on an old mall site and putting a university research center there instead. Of course, Solimar has continued to look at growth patterns in greenfield locations, including the San Joaquin Valley   and our home turf of Ventura County, California . But even these studies have focused on the question of a limited land supply and the kinds of choices that local governments will have to make in order to maintain farmland and open space while still accommodating additional development. The chronological progression of the 45 reports also yields a steady movement away from broadbrush trend analysis toward a more specific approach focused on providing assistance and detailed recommendations on how to improve land-use policy systems so they are more effective. This movement toward diagnosis and recommendation really began with Solimar's unprecedented and comprehensive analysis of the transferable development rights programs in the Lake Tahoe area, which was released in 2003. Since that time, Solimar has worked on more client projects for local and regional agencies, yielding such varied work products as a guidebook for mixed-use development in the South Bay of Los Angeles and an assessment of a proposed TDR program in metropolitan Bozeman, Montana . It's hard to say where Solimar's work will go in the future. To a surprising degree, the 45 reports reminds me that we at Solimar have always been somewhat opportunistic, grabbing what comes our way, whether it's pointy-headed research or down-and-dirty consulting. But I can promise you one thing: Wherever the land use zeitgeist is going, that's where you'll find us. - Bill Fulton

According to the "traffic on the fives" radio station, I was avoiding all the bad freeways, just like I was supposed to. Apparently, there were no crashes or unusual conditions on my chosen route. Still, the needle on my speedometer hovered just below 10 mph. Although I was in the midst of five lanes of brake lights, the alternatives were worse. I was attempting to drive from Ventura to Riverside, a 125-mile trip that would end up taking me just short of 4 hours. But what the heck makes me so special? This was just another day in L.A., a place where seemingly every chore and every enjoyment requires a trip in the car. Is there really no other option? Everybody likes to boast that traffic in their area is the worst. All urban commuters have their anecdotes ("It took me 90 minutes to drive home and I only live 14 miles from the office!") and it is clear that traffic congestion is awful in many of the country's metropolitan areas. In the very slow "race" for the worst traffic congestion, however, there is a clear, uh, winner. L.A. And by L.A., I mean all of urban SoCal — from Santa Clarita to the Mexico border, from Santa Barbara to the Coachella Valley. No area of the country has traffic congestion to match. Everybody else is braking for second place. As we all know, SoCal has been built on a complex system of freeways that is unmatched in the world. But the system is failing. What sets L.A. apart from other places with makes-you-wanna-scream congestion is the scope. L.A. does not have a "rush hour." In many places, cars start backing up around 6 a.m. and do not start flowing freely until 8 or 9 in the evening. So, unless you're out before sunrise or late at night, you're going to get stuck. And there are no guarantees at any time of day or night. What's more, congestion is awful everywhere. Yes, there are certain hot spots, and vehicles move more slowly in certain directions at certain times. But I'm not exaggerating when I say that traffic is congested from Santa Barbara to Palm Springs — a distance of about 200 miles — and from the south end of the Grapevine to the border — merely 170 miles. Back in the late 1990s, experts were predicting that the average speed on L.A. freeways during commute hours would decrease from around 40 mph to less than 20 mph within 20 years. I remember this prediction being made at several conferences, and the audience would always chuckle. Inevitably, someone would shout out, "You mean it's not 20 already?" Well, no, it wasn't. But anybody in SoCal who possesses a drivers license knows that 40 mph is now a fantasy on the San Diego, Harbor, Ventura, Riverside, Irwindale, Long Beach, Golden State, Antelope Valley, Costa Mesa and other freeways at many times of the day. Toss in any adversity — a collision, a lane closure for road construction, a little rain — and you may lose an extra hour. The question, of course, is what to do about this in the face of ongoing population growth. The Bush administration recommends that L.A. experiment with congestion pricing. A recent Times story said this: "One of the examples administration officials cite is the success of toll lanes on the 91 Freeway between Orange and Riverside counties." It makes me wonder if any of these administration officials have ever driven on the 91, let alone asked someone commuting from Moreno Valley to their $10-an-hour job in Anaheim about this big success. In a recent op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle , former Governors Davis, Deukmejian and Wilson along with Bay Area Council President and CEO Jim Wunderman urged the use of public private partnerships for infrastructure projects. Their best example? The Alameda Corridor. Indeed, the Alameda Corridor should be considered a success. But let's be clear. The Alameda Corridor is a 10-mile-long freight rail line that cost $2.2 billion and took more than 20 years to plan and build. And the 710 freeway is still jammed with big rigs day and night. Planners have long argued that you can't build your way out of traffic congestion. The Foothill Freeway (I-210) is Exhibit A. In the last five years, Caltrans has opened extensions of the freeway from San Dimas through to San Bernardino. The freeway extensions had the undesired effect of transforming an old section of the 210 — specifically from Pasadena to about Glendora — into a parking lot. The pavement crowd might argue with the planners and point to the recently widened I-5 in Orange County. But, really, just how many miles of new freeway lanes, not to mention new freeway interchanges and access ramps, would we have to build to make any sort of real difference? And where would they go, other than on a second level above the existing freeways, which is a very costly proposition. The next option is public transit. It's a lovely concept, but retrofitting an existing urban area is colossally expensive and inherently difficult for physical and political reasons. Exhibit B is the long-discussed and still very uncertain subway to the Westside. Express buses and shuttles of various stripes may be more realistic than trains and light rail, but they have drawbacks, starting with the fact that they operate on congested streets. All of this leave us with, well … land use planning. At the risk of pointing out the obvious, the reason traffic is so bad in SoCal is because nothing is close together. Going to work, going to school, picking up groceries, stopping into the bank, grabbing dinner, even taking the dog for a walk — it all requires a trip in the car. Oftentimes, it's a trip of many miles and multiple freeways. People in L.A. are always going to drive. But what if they could take care of most of their daily needs within a mile of home? Suddenly, walking, bicycling, skateboarding (it's transportation, not a crime!) and even old-fashioned technology like streetcars become feasible. Is better land use planning truly a more realistic solution than congestion pricing or public private partnerships? Maybe and maybe not. But it must be part of the discussion. - Paul Shigley

Sustainability and Real Estate Trends – ULI San Diego, November 13 Hunter Lovins of Natural Capitalism Solutions and CP&DR Publisher William Fulton will be among the featured speakers at the Urban Land Institute San Diego/Tijuana annual real estate trends conference on Tuesday, November 13th. The theme will be sustainability and green development. Fulton will conduct a conversation with Fred Maas, developer of Black Mountain Ranch, while another panel will cover issues associated with CEQA and global warming. For more: http://www.ulisd.org/events/43