By BARBARA SIMPSON
If you live in California — as I do — you are awash in politicians who have devoted their activities to “solving” the dilemma of global warming. Keeping in mind that not everyone buys into that political position, it presents an interesting situation to see the proposals for new laws that are supposed to be part of the solution.
Now, lawmakers in Sacramento are aiming their arrows at “parking.” Actually, not at parking in general but the rationale behind it. They believe that by providing parking for vehicles, cars, and trucks — whether private or commercial — they are encouraging people to drive gas-fueled cars and to them. That is a No-No because they believe those vehicles are contributing to global warming.
Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a new law that frees developers from any parking requirements for new housing or businesses within a half mile of a public transit stop. The measure, AB 2097, means that developers can’t be required to provide off-street parking for their projects. They can do it if they choose to, but they can’t be required.
The political rationale behind this is that if new housing without parking is built near transit, or stores, or jobs, or schools, people won’t have to drive to use those facilities. They’ll walk or take the bus — and in fact, have no need for a car.
I don’t know about you, but I could not do my weekly food shopping, carrying all those bags of groceries, on a bus or a train. I doubt we’ll see Gov. Newsom’s wife doing it.
Politicians say this will lower the cost of building houses, meaning that it will be less expensive for people to purchase those houses, and, in addition, it will eliminate emissions from gas-burning vehicles!
Voila! Fewer greenhouse gases and an end to global warming.
Would that it were that easy.
This change in the law as signed by Gov. Newsom is enormous. The regulation to require parking for houses, apartments, and commercial areas is decades old and one that is accepted by most people as normal.
Think about it. Would you buy a house or live in an apartment at California’s prices, if it did not have a place for you to park your vehicle?
The assumption that the only use people have for their vehicles is to go to work, to shop, or to go to school is ridiculous. Like it or not, in our country, our vehicles are a guarantee of freedom — freedom to go anywhere, anytime, without permission from anyone, least of all, the government.
The bill was authored by Assemblywoman Laura Friedman, a Democrat from Glendale. As for her rationale: “It’s recognizing that what we’ve been doing for so long in California not only hasn’t worked, but it has made our cities less livable, more congested, less affordable (sic), and unsafe for pedestrians and cyclists — all of the things we want to avoid.”
Essentially, what she is saying is that cars are the cause of all our problems.
The idea of such a change in regulations is not new — in fact, it has been floating around in the legislature for years. Now with a Green governor — one who, despite what he says, has his eye on the presidency — we have the change. The ultimate goal is to get rid of gasoline-powered vehicles, change to electric vehicles, or better yet, rely on mass transit.
Newsom had just attended an international climate conference in New York where he announced his signature to the bill.
He said, “Basically we’re making it cheaper and easier to build new housing near daily destinations like jobs and grocery stores and schools. This means more housing at lower prices closer to walkable neighborhoods and public transit. Again, reducing housing costs for everyday Californians and eliminating emissions from cars.”
With this legislative move, California has become the first U.S. state to put such a comprehensive parking measure into practice. A number of other states and cities have considered it, but none have, thus far. It remains to be seen if and when other jurisdictions copy California and pass similar legislation. It is known that California often leads other states in passage of laws — so with all the emphasis on the danger of climate change, it wouldn’t be surprising if other states follow suit.
How any of this fits in with the heavy emphasis on people switching to electric vehicles remains to be seen — a situation that is complicated by the fact the grid isn’t able to handle the load now.
As an example, just last week, Californians were asked by the governor not to use electricity at night for home appliances or recharge their electric cars, because of the strain on the grid due to negative weather conditions.
Another negative aspect of electric vehicles, in addition to the enormous purchase price, is the cost of recharging or replacing their batteries when needed. It is not the same as filling up at the gas station and it is a situation most people could not afford.
And then, of course, there is the cost of electricity. Have you looked at your bill lately? Don’t expect it to get any lower when all this electric car push takes effect. It won’t be cheap! What it all will mean for “climate change” is anyone’s guess.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress