NC Media Watch

A quest for reason and accuracy in letters to the editor, guest editorials and other issues of interest to the citizens of Western Nevada County.

Monday, February 28, 2005

More No Growth Rationalization

Jim Hurley establishes a no growth position in "Population cap" raises questions, in a February 28, 2005 Other Voices.
And the unrecognized elephant in the room is the fact that the 150,000 cap assumes that the cities will maintain current county zoning in their annexations. But the county has little or no control over the growth in the coming annexations to Grass Valley. Be afraid.

What is the difference between a population cap and a cap on the zoning which defines the maximum population? It is profound. If it were a population cap, there would be no restriction on development until the population reached 150,000, perhaps 40 years from now. But, since the buildout population (i.e. the population potential) of the existing General Plan is already at (or greater than) 150,000, the constraint applies immediately.
(Emphasis added)

Mr. Hurley, is a member of the Rural Quality Coalition, which advocates no growth, or only the growth they approve. He and his organization demonstrates the attitude uncovered in a Harvard study of 300 housing markets to determine why housing prices are climbing so fast, pricing millions out of the housing market.
Our preliminary evidence suggests that there was a significant increase in the ability of local residents to block new projects and a change of cities from urban growth machines to homeowners' cooperatives.
(Emphasis added)

Tell me what you think


Post a Comment

<< Home