by Robert Yaro, President, Regional Plan Association
When it comes to smart growth, New York State has historically been more of a laggard than a leader. Although it has the most robust transit network in the nation and some exemplary open space conservation programs, there has been little in the way of coordinated state planning to promote development in city and town centers and curtail suburban sprawl. Maryland, Oregon, New Jersey and other states have taken a much more proactive approach, and can point to results such as New Jersey's success with transit-oriented development and regional management plans in the New Jersey Pinelands and Highlands.
New York's status in the national smart growth debate may be about to change. This week, Governor Spitzer announced the formation of a Smart Growth Cabinet that would elevate land use development as a state priority and coordinate the actions of state agencies in support of a center-oriented agenda. The action is significant for two reasons. First, it fulfills a campaign pledge of the Governor to instill smart growth principles into agency plans and investments, which reaffirms his commitment to carefully balancing economic development and environmental goals. Second, it attempts to align this agenda with an economic development strategy that promotes job growth in underperforming cities, towns and villages. Other states have struggled with shaking the image of smart growth as a cloak for environmentalists with an anti-development agenda.
This new initiative from the Empire State could help inject energy into a movement that is showing signs of age. Original proponents such as former Maryland Governor Gleddening have moved into the private sector and state plans everywhere are struggling to fulfill their early promise. By demonstrating that a smart growth strategy can revive struggling cities such as Schenectady, Buffalo or Newburgh, New York State could broaden the base of support for these policies and give a renewed sense of purpose in places like the Rust Belt where "growth management" has a hollow ring.
Specifically, New York's Smart Growth Cabinet will review state agency spending and policies to determine how best to discourage sprawl and promote smart land use practices. The Cabinet will consist of senior officials from the Empire State Development Corporation, Department of Environmental Conservation, Department of Transportation, Department of State, Department of Housing and Community Renewal and other state agencies that have an impact on growth and development patterns. Concurrently, a $2 million fund will promote initiatives in 3-4 regions throughout the state.
While the initiative has promise, it can also learn some hard-earned lessons from other states. New Jersey had a "Smart Growth Policy Council" under Governor McGreevey, which was supposed to do similar things as Spitzer's Smart Growth Cabinet. In the end, it did very little, in part because of conflicts between competing state agencies who felt threatened by the idea. Maryland and Massachusetts on the other hand, had similar cabinets that were far more effective. Ultimately, state efforts have only been successful to the degree that they have found a common platform and backed up administrative initiatives with investments, policies and recommendations.
These lessons indicate a number of benchmarks for evaluating the success of Governor Spitzer's fledgling effort. One is persistence. Leadership from the top is essential, but it takes time and effort to change the organizational cultures in agencies that take a narrow interpretation of their missions and are used to autonomy and performance that is measured by gross output rather than long-term impacts. Another is incentives, particularly for the municipalities that have to be brought on board to overcome traditional resistance to higher density, affordable housing and mixed-use development. These can be either in the form of carrots or sticks, and probably need to combine some of each. But in the end, there needs to be powerful incentives for municipalities to act in concert with regional and statewide needs. This leads to a third requirement--resources. It will take far more than a $2 million statewide fund and an interagency cabinet to provide both the infrastructure investments and local incentives that will be needed to get the job done. While the state is in an extremely challenging fiscal environment, this promising start will whither if it is not soon supported by substantial funding commitments.
The responsibility of making this initiative work is not entirely with the Governor and the legislature, or even solely with the public sector. Civic and business interests also need to be mobilized to generate public support, hold elected officials accountable, and match public dollars with private resources. For this reason, Regional Plan Association is helping lead a coalition of statewide organizations to parallel the State's efforts. A new organization, Empire State Future, is getting started to coordinate activities among participating groups, educate the public and key stakeholders, and advocate for smart growth and urban revitalization policies at the state, regional and municipal level. Stay tuned for more details on this effort. With a push from both inside the Executive Chamber and outside Albany, New York has an opportunity to build on both the successes and lessons learned from the pioneering efforts in other states.
When it comes to smart growth, New York State has historically been more of a laggard than a leader. Although it has the most robust transit network in the nation and some exemplary open space conservation programs, there has been little in the way of coordinated state planning to promote development in city and town centers and curtail suburban sprawl. Maryland, Oregon, New Jersey and other states have taken a much more proactive approach, and can point to results such as New Jersey's success with transit-oriented development and regional management plans in the New Jersey Pinelands and Highlands.
New York's status in the national smart growth debate may be about to change. This week, Governor Spitzer announced the formation of a Smart Growth Cabinet that would elevate land use development as a state priority and coordinate the actions of state agencies in support of a center-oriented agenda. The action is significant for two reasons. First, it fulfills a campaign pledge of the Governor to instill smart growth principles into agency plans and investments, which reaffirms his commitment to carefully balancing economic development and environmental goals. Second, it attempts to align this agenda with an economic development strategy that promotes job growth in underperforming cities, towns and villages. Other states have struggled with shaking the image of smart growth as a cloak for environmentalists with an anti-development agenda.
This new initiative from the Empire State could help inject energy into a movement that is showing signs of age. Original proponents such as former Maryland Governor Gleddening have moved into the private sector and state plans everywhere are struggling to fulfill their early promise. By demonstrating that a smart growth strategy can revive struggling cities such as Schenectady, Buffalo or Newburgh, New York State could broaden the base of support for these policies and give a renewed sense of purpose in places like the Rust Belt where "growth management" has a hollow ring.
Specifically, New York's Smart Growth Cabinet will review state agency spending and policies to determine how best to discourage sprawl and promote smart land use practices. The Cabinet will consist of senior officials from the Empire State Development Corporation, Department of Environmental Conservation, Department of Transportation, Department of State, Department of Housing and Community Renewal and other state agencies that have an impact on growth and development patterns. Concurrently, a $2 million fund will promote initiatives in 3-4 regions throughout the state.
While the initiative has promise, it can also learn some hard-earned lessons from other states. New Jersey had a "Smart Growth Policy Council" under Governor McGreevey, which was supposed to do similar things as Spitzer's Smart Growth Cabinet. In the end, it did very little, in part because of conflicts between competing state agencies who felt threatened by the idea. Maryland and Massachusetts on the other hand, had similar cabinets that were far more effective. Ultimately, state efforts have only been successful to the degree that they have found a common platform and backed up administrative initiatives with investments, policies and recommendations.
These lessons indicate a number of benchmarks for evaluating the success of Governor Spitzer's fledgling effort. One is persistence. Leadership from the top is essential, but it takes time and effort to change the organizational cultures in agencies that take a narrow interpretation of their missions and are used to autonomy and performance that is measured by gross output rather than long-term impacts. Another is incentives, particularly for the municipalities that have to be brought on board to overcome traditional resistance to higher density, affordable housing and mixed-use development. These can be either in the form of carrots or sticks, and probably need to combine some of each. But in the end, there needs to be powerful incentives for municipalities to act in concert with regional and statewide needs. This leads to a third requirement--resources. It will take far more than a $2 million statewide fund and an interagency cabinet to provide both the infrastructure investments and local incentives that will be needed to get the job done. While the state is in an extremely challenging fiscal environment, this promising start will whither if it is not soon supported by substantial funding commitments.
The responsibility of making this initiative work is not entirely with the Governor and the legislature, or even solely with the public sector. Civic and business interests also need to be mobilized to generate public support, hold elected officials accountable, and match public dollars with private resources. For this reason, Regional Plan Association is helping lead a coalition of statewide organizations to parallel the State's efforts. A new organization, Empire State Future, is getting started to coordinate activities among participating groups, educate the public and key stakeholders, and advocate for smart growth and urban revitalization policies at the state, regional and municipal level. Stay tuned for more details on this effort. With a push from both inside the Executive Chamber and outside Albany, New York has an opportunity to build on both the successes and lessons learned from the pioneering efforts in other states.
@RegionalPlan
Leave a comment