earlier this year. The Sacramento-based California Center for Jobs and the Economy is a 501 public benefit corporation that bills itself as nonpartisan and providing objective analysis.
That might mean unions or labor-backed groups, which have been known to use CEQA lawsuits as leverage to try and force developers to sign project labor agreements; sometimes it’s neighborhood groups who would simply rather see a project not built in their area. Some lawsuits filed in 2020 that were analyzed by Holland & Knight challenged changes to zoning laws that would have allowed for more residential density in existing neighborhoods, per Hernandez, who said those complaints potentially obstructed an unknowable quantity of additional units in California. That unknown quantity is not included in the 47,999 units cited by the study.
Hernandez said she believes the CARB study doesn’t accurately reflect CEQA’s impact in part because it included projects that were considered by-right approvals.
sadly, that is pro-sprawl propaganda. While CEQA is a problem and needs reform to ease urban infill, we shouldn't be making such arguments based on the fact that climate-destroying sprawl is being fought via CEQA.
대한민국 최근 뉴스, 대한민국 헤드 라인
Similar News:다른 뉴스 소스에서 수집한 이와 유사한 뉴스 기사를 읽을 수도 있습니다.
출처: svbizjournal - 🏆 334. / 59 더 많은 것을 읽으십시오 »
출처: svbizjournal - 🏆 334. / 59 더 많은 것을 읽으십시오 »
출처: svbizjournal - 🏆 334. / 59 더 많은 것을 읽으십시오 »
출처: svbizjournal - 🏆 334. / 59 더 많은 것을 읽으십시오 »