California Sustainable Communities Strategy

California Sustainable Communities Strategy
Name	California Sustainable Communities Strategy
Jurisdiction	State of California

Contents

California Sustainable Communities Strategy is a statewide planning approach developed to integrate California Air Resources Board mandates, Senate Bill 375 (2008), and regional metropolitan planning organizations into coordinated land use and transportation planning. It aligns California Environmental Protection Agency objectives with regional Association of Bay Area Governments, Southern California Association of Governments, and county planning processes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while influencing California Department of Housing and Community Development allocations and California Transportation Commission funding. The strategy draws on sources such as Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, California Energy Commission, and peer-reviewed studies in journals like Environmental Research Letters.

Overview

Legally, the SCS is rooted in Senate Bill 375 (2008), which amended the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) and empowered the California Air Resources Board to set regional greenhouse gas reduction targets and review metropolitan planning organization plans. Compliance intersects with statutes administered by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, California Environmental Quality Act, and statutes guiding Regional Transportation Plan adoption under the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration funding rules. Judicial review in state courts such as the California Supreme Court and appellate panels has addressed disputes involving California Environmental Quality Act challenges and plan adequacy for Senate Bill 375 purposes.

Primary objectives include meeting California Air Resources Board greenhouse gas reduction targets, coordinating Regional Housing Needs Allocation with transportation planning, and leveraging California Strategic Growth Council grants to foster compact, transit-oriented communities. Core components comprise integrated land use maps, transportation system investments, housing siting strategies, modeling (including EMFAC for vehicle emissions and UrbanSim for land use outcomes), and performance monitoring tied to California Energy Commission and California Air Resources Board metrics. SCS plans frequently incorporate transit projects from agencies like Bay Area Rapid Transit, Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Los Angeles County), and San Diego Trolley as well as active-transport elements from organizations such as Rails-to-Trails Conservancy.

Implementation follows a multi-agency process led by metropolitan planning organizations—for example Southern California Association of Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission—that coordinates with counties such as Los Angeles County, San Francisco County, and San Diego County, and cities like Sacramento, San Jose, and Oakland. The planning process uses public engagement methods referencing precedents from Local Government Commission initiatives and collaborates with funders such as the California Strategic Growth Council and California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank. Technical steps include scenario development, travel demand modeling using datasets from National Household Travel Survey, emissions estimation with EMFAC, and environmental review under California Environmental Quality Act procedures. Implementation relies on policy tools such as zoning revisions, transit-oriented development ordinances, density bonuses under California Government Code, and funding from Cap-and-Trade revenues administered by the California Air Resources Board.

Notable SCS examples include the Metropolitan Transportation Commission Plan Bay Area for the San Francisco Bay Area, the Southern California Association of Governments Connect SoCal for the Los Angeles metropolitan area, and the San Diego Association of Governments 2050 Regional Plan. County-level efforts appear in Santa Clara County transit-oriented initiatives near Diridon Station and Los Angeles County transit corridors integrating Los Angeles Metro expansions. Smaller jurisdictions such as City of Berkeley, City of Davis, and City of Santa Monica have implemented local general plan amendments and zoning changes to align with regional SCS objectives. Academic partners like University of California, Berkeley, University of Southern California, and California State University, Long Beach contribute evaluation research.

SCS outcomes are measured against California Air Resources Boardgreenhouse gas reduction targets, vehicle miles traveled metrics derived from Federal Highway Administration and National Household Travel Survey data, and housing production tracked via Regional Housing Needs Allocation progress reports. Performance metrics include emissions reductions estimated with EMFAC, transit ridership from agencies like Bay Area Rapid Transit and Los Angeles Metro, and land-use change quantified through National Land Cover Database analyses. Independent evaluations by institutions such as RAND Corporation, Urban Land Institute, and Public Policy Institute of California assess efficacy and report mixed results on achieving projected vehicle miles traveled reductions and equitable housing outcomes.

Critics include advocacy groups such as California Housing Partnership Corporation and policy analysts at Reason Foundation and Manhattan Institute who argue SCS plans sometimes fail to produce sufficient housing affordability or rely on optimistic modeling assumptions. Legal challenges have been brought by municipal coalitions and developers in state courts including the California Supreme Court on issues related to California Environmental Quality Act compliance and plan enforceability. Practical challenges involve coordination across large MPOs like Southern California Association of Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission, financing limitations tied to volatile Cap-and-Trade revenues, and infrastructure constraints documented by California State Auditor and Legislative Analyst's Office. Equity advocates including Greenbelt Alliance and Asian Pacific American Legal Center emphasize disproportionate impacts on low-income and frontline communities such as neighborhoods in Fresno and Inland Empire.