Green building standards coming to Big D
Tuesday, November 6, 2007 at 8:54 AMWe need some good news, folks. And I read some yesterday in the Dallas Business Journal. The first snippet of the article is here (the rest is only for print subscribers so la-di-da).
But you get the gist from the first bit. The city is going to implement green building standards city wide for new commercial and residential building. There is a task force that is studying the issue and will be reporting back to the city council in March. Let's hope we get some standards that will really make a difference and not something watered down.
Of course there is concern that regulations like these will make Dallas less competitive with our neighbors for new construction. That may be the case short term, but in the long run we will have a leg up on everyone else as this becomes standard. And believe it or not, lots of companies actually want to be officed in sustainable development. There is one architect quoted in the article who has been promoting sustainable design who believes that this would be an immediate advantage for Dallas.
And when we get some type of carbon tax - and that's more likely a when not if - Dallas will be poised to take advantage of the system with new energy efficient building already in place.
It pains me greatly to say this - Good leadership on this issue, Mr. Mayor.
Ideology trumping kid safety at CPSC?
Tuesday, November 6, 2007 at 11:26 AMI meant to post this last week, but you know how it goes.
The New York Times reported that Nancy Nord, the head of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, has asked Congress not to increase their authority and funding to protect the public. Here's the Times editorial.
Congress is taking this action in the midst of week after week of toy recalls, most of which have lead paint from China. If you are a parent you know that probably 95% of toys are made in China. And there is no way to know if the toys you are buying are safe.
The CPSC has one toy inspector. One. Almost all of our toys come from overseas and there is one full time inspector.
So now the head of the agency is about to get resources to better protect Americans and she writes a note that she'd rather not. She has a number of objections, some of which may even be defensible, but instead of working with the lawmakers to craft a workable solution, Ms. Nord is joining with industry lobbyists to oppose the legislation.
OK - the commission's WHOLE JOB is to protect the public. They are understaffed and unable to carry out their function in a land full of imports and new consumer products. And now Nancy Nord is effectively lobbying against the interests of her own agency and the public she is supposed to serve.
This is what happens when you put "starve the beast" ideologues in positions of power. You get the guy against international law as Ambassador to the UN, you get a toothless EPA, and you get the head of the CPSC that doesn't want the resources to be able to better protect the public. Heckuva job, Nancy.
Notes from loser-town
Tuesday, November 6, 2007 at 9:07 AMMy thoughts last night were this: Dallas hasn’t changed; we’re still rooting for Goliath (RIP Molly Ivins). I think that’s true in some respects, but I really do believe that the city is changing for the better. Looking at the precinct results, I’d say the cool people live in East Dallas. Props to them and to Angela Hunt and all the Prop 1 supporters who ran this campaign and elevated this issue.
A few people were quoted in the DMN as saying that the petitioners wasted $2M of taxpayer money to have this election. That’s not very gracious of them – just be happy you won. 91,000 people signed the petitions to get this on the ballot and give the city a chance to decide if we really want this. I was hopeful but now we know – the city wants a highway in its floodway. If you want to talk about wasting taxpayer money, let’s talk about the $1.3B (and rising) road you want to build.
Schutze is munching sour grapes this morning. I think he’s right: This project is too dumb to build. But they’ll try like mad to do it.
If this road does get built, they might as well scrap the park. You won’t be able to get to it and once you’re there you’ll be situated next to a truck route. And one day – it may be decades from now – but one day we’ll be ripping that sucker out of there and wondering “what were we thinking?”
Election Day
Tuesday, November 6, 2007 at 1:48Why is this vote such a big deal? Why over 20 editorials from the Dallas Morning News on this one issue? Why is everyone picking sides? (And despite all this why is there still an expected 10% turnout?)
Here's my take. This vote will tell us something about the future of this city. Will we continue to pave our way to becoming another sprawled out smog congested Texas version of LA? Or will we maybe start to lean a little more towards some place like Portland, OR? Make no mistake, we'll still have congestion and smog and gridlock and sprawl tomorrow. But what will we be saying is important to Dallas and Dallasites? Will we continue to disregard our natural resources, bird habitats and wetlands, or will we embrace a more pedestrian friendly city with more bike paths, green space, and smarter mass transit to draw the "creative class" to the city core?
Even if Vote No wins, I think the success of the grass roots campaign of TrinityVote tells us something exciting about the future of Dallas. Just go read the comments on this Frontburner post and you will feel good about this city's future. Hopefully our future leaders won't be saddled with tearing a highway out of our levees in 25 years. Vote For Prop 1.
And while you're waiting for the election returns to come in, read these two (long) columns from Sam Merton.
Vote No Starts Making Sense
Park and Tollroad Can't Coexist