Wednesday, August 15, 2007
The pressures of environmental policy continue to transform land use and law. Will coal-mining increase or decrease as an American land use in next few decades? Pressures to cut back on carbon-spewing coal push in one direction, while uncertainties of foreign oil supplies push in the other. The latest spate of sensationalized coal-mining accidents might result in even tougher safety laws, which would raise the cost of mining in America and work against the coal-mining industry.
A fascinating parallel story of coal's rise and fall is playing out in the Ruhr district of Germany, which my 1960 Encyclopedia Britannica refers to as one of the world's largest coal-mining regions and the "largest single industrial area in the world." Times have changed. As a result of the recent decision of the German government to phase out extensive subsidies of the now minor coal-mining businesses, analysts expect that coal mining in the Ruhr will all but cease by 2018. Mining will stop not because there is no more coal in the ground -- there is -- but because it is cheaper to import coal than it is to pay German workers and comply with tough German safety and environmental laws. Land that used to be scarred by coalmines is turning into forests, hops farms, and new housing developments. Will the same happen to American mining areas of Kentucky and Wyoming in the near future?
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
The issue of immigration, both legal and illegal, may soon become the dominant topic of the domestic political debate. While the national government has failed to take a new course, many local governments are trying to impose new restrictions -- or harassments, if you prefer -- on immigrants. What is most interesting to me is that many advocates of tougher local laws point to the impetus of -- no, not of crime, the figures for which don't necessarily point to immigrants in many places -- but, rather, land use problems. The "overcrowding" of houses and driveways and the putatively uncouth home-life habits of uneducated young men living together are spurring the new crackdowns, supporters say. Here and here are some examples.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Once upon a time, a new commercial business opened by private initiative. But in many places in our more sophisticated age, a commercial venture necessitates a partnership between the business and government land use authorities, with troubling consequences.
Consider this anecdote from my old hometown, Silver Spring. Md., where the county government has been active in channeling money into the "redevelopment" of the once-"declining" old suburban downtown. The big news last year was that the semi-famous mid-sized music hall, "The Birchmere," of Alexandria, Va., was planning to open a second hall in Silver Spring, in a long-disused department store. As a devotee of the alt-country, bluegrass, and blues music that the Birchmere presents, as I was thrilled that the business had chosen my old hometown for its second music venue. How naïve I was. In places such as the rigidly controlled downtown Silver Spring, businesses don't decide to open commercial ventures; rather, businesses propose ventures to the government, which then decides whether to fund such a venture, or whether another type of business would be better for the government's vision for the economic development of the area.
In the case of the Birchmere, the original plan was that the county and state governments would pony up more than half of the multi-million cost of opening the music hall. (Who knew that it costs so much to take an old store, paint the interiors black, bring in a few chairs, and string up a sound system? Not me, apparently.) But the new reports are that the county government then decided that it wanted a much larger hall that could accommodate 2000 patrons, instead of the 700 or so that the Birchmere planned. The county government dreams, of course, of thousands of music-goers spending money in downtown Silver Spring each night. (Imagine 2000 patrons! Will Silver Spring become the new Times Square?) So the Birchmere "deal" (it really wasn't a business plan at all, but a joint venture between government and business) appears to be dead.
Here another subtext that I'd be willing to bet played some role. When government chooses which unique business to subsidize, it does so at the risk of annoying those businesses -- and customers -- that it doesn't subsidize. Paying for the Birchmere to open in Silver Spring would have pleased fans of alt-country, bluegrass, and blues -- who are predominantly middle-aged white folks (like me). The music hall wouldn't have been as popular, I can be sure, with people who didn't fit this demographic; as many downtown Silver Spring patrons are African American as are white (and a growing number are Latino and Asian immigrants). If I were a local politician, I wouldn't want to be in the position of trying to explain why I used taxpayer money to subsidize the musical tastes of alt-country-listening white professors.
It's a tangled web that local governments create when they steer and control business through land use planning. In fact, I can think of no other aspect of our society in which the "S" word seems so alive and kicking. While socialistic governmental policies are in retreat elsewhere in the world, many local governments are increasingly eager to have themselves, not just business, decide the sociology and economics of which businesses will be established. The music fan in me may be unhappy because of the loss of a chance to hear the blues, but the land use law critic in me fears even greater problems.
This blog is an Amazon affiliate. Help support Land Use Prof Blog by making purchases through Amazon links on this site at no cost to you.
- Stephen Miller on New Arkansas law requires local governments to pay for a "takings" where certain "regulatory programs" reduce FMV by at least 20 percent
- Josh Galperin on New Arkansas law requires local governments to pay for a "takings" where certain "regulatory programs" reduce FMV by at least 20 percent
- Jesse Richardson on New Arkansas law requires local governments to pay for a "takings" where certain "regulatory programs" reduce FMV by at least 20 percent
- Jamie Baker Roskie on Uber Goes to the State House Seeking Preemption of Local Government Control
- Stephen R. Miller on Why are building inspectors so often on the take?
- Can UberPOOL Make Carpooling Cool?
- Are Earth Day cookies an endangered species?
- Fordham Urban Law Center's Sharing Economy | Sharing City Conference - April 24
- Land Use, Telescopes and Sacred Land in Paradise
- Tekle on Percent-for-Art Ordinances