The "Third Way" to Address Sprawl in Colorado
Expected population growth in Colorado of 1.5 million people over the next 20 years will result in even heavier traffic, more open space vanishing, increased pollution and higher taxes to pay for infrastructure.
Yet despite pleas from their suburban and rural constituents, majority members of the Legislature failed last year to bring to the floor, for full debate, proposals to address the issue of Colorado's rapid growth and development. Instead, it fell back to the time-honored solution of “let's study it during the interim.” Not much happened there either.
Fighting sprawl is an economic, as well as a quality of life, issue. In today's global economy, businesses can invest anywhere in the world. The good jobs go to those regions that can attract and retain entrepreneurs and a world-class workforce - the very same people who demand a high quality of life and a clean environment.
Republican Sen. Brian Sullivant's proposed “Responsible Growth Act” last year would have required some cities and counties to develop enforceable comprehensive plans, permit local governments to assess impact fees on new developments to help finance schools and roads, and create a mechanism to resolve disputes between local governments. It was killed very early in the process.
Conservatives argue that the state has no business in “smart growth,” as it will simply result in more regulation and less individual choice. But those arguments do not hold water in Colorado. Environmental laws and state transportation projects, as well as other public works projects, have for years been important factors in attracting and guiding development. While “smart growth” should only be implemented in a way that recognizes local conditions, state government simply cannot take a “pass” on fighting sprawl.
Unfortunately, majorities in the state house and senate continue to prefer to handle this issue with mere rhetoric and no concrete solutions, shying away from any government activism that would help shape private development decisions. Conservatives will not acknowledge that market forces sometimes yield ineffective, inefficient and costly “leapfrog” development.
In an amazing upward redistribution of wealth, it has been estimated that the city of Phoenix and Maricopa County subsidize new suburban development at about $12,000 per dwelling unit. Urban sprawl, then, is not only unsightly, it also costs taxpayers money by raising infrastructure costs.
In addition, Colorado is already being threatened with increased regulation of vehicle emissions as pollution levels are rising due to increased long-distance commutes.
While conservatives ignore the issue, some liberals are suggesting draconian, one-size-fits-all solutions like limiting statewide population growth and telling suburbanites to get ready to live in cluster-housing developments and enjoy the pleasures and convenience of mass transit. But there is nothing inherently wrong with wanting to live in affordable, low-density, single-family homes.
This session, the Legislature should consider steering state infrastructure funding to projects that encourage development in existing communities and not subsidize sprawl that's gobbling up agricultural land and open space. Maryland has already implemented this strategy.
Consideration could also be given to what Utah, not generally viewed as one of the country's more liberal states, enacted last year. Its “Quality Growth Act” does three things: first, it defines “quality growth areas” where state incentives are applied to encourage higher density, more affordable housing; second, the state provides matching funds to preserve open space; and third, it created a quality growth commission to develop guidelines for minimizing sprawl through a mixture of development density and open space.
Finally, there could be the requirement that local governments publish reports which quantify quality of life indicators like average commute times, availability of mass transit, pollution levels, the proximity of schools, churches, shopping, etc.
State government cannot afford to be on the sidelines for much longer. Rather than just expressing concern about growth and development - - and then study it to death - - it's time for the Legislature to do something about it before it's too late. If the Legislature does not act, then we can expect something initiated by one or more special interest groups and placed on the ballot this year. Increasing voter frustration with sprawl could easily make any of those proposals reality.
State Rep. Bob Hagedorn (D-Aurora) is a four-term legislator who chairs the Colorado New Democrat Caucus, a group of legislators who advocate public policy ideas based on economic growth, personal responsibility, community, individual liberty and equal opportunity.