View of West LA from Franklin Canyon
Amazing Rainbow after Six Day and Nights of Rain
Popular posts from this blog
Neighborhood Integrity Initiative Won’t Block Affordable Housing – Critics Should Back up their Claims!
DICK PLATKIN, City Watch LA, 03 MARCH 2016 LOS ANGELES PLATKIN ON PLANNING-If you are concerned about planning issues in Los Angeles, then you have undoubtedly heard about the Neighborhood Integrity Initiative , and perhaps a counter-initiative, the Build Better LA Initiative. Affordable housing: You have may have also heard the repeated claims by the Neighborhood Integrity Initiative’s opponents that it would block the construction of affordable housing. Nice try, but it takes far more than repetition of a talking point to actually make it true. This is why I still stand by my previous Citywatch articles: the critics have not yet presented evidence that LA's zoning laws and General Plan designations impede the construction of affordable housing projects. While Neighborhood Integrity Initiative supporters are already looking under every rock for any relevant data, we also invite those who make the “affordable housing argument” to bac...
WHAT CRITICS SAY ABOUT THE PROPOSED UPDATE OF THE HOLLYWOOD COMMUNITY PLAN: BEWARE OF INTENDED CONSEQUENCES
After 18 years of work, LA’s Department of City Planning has finally unveiled a draft update for the 1988 Hollywood Community Plan, including 105 pages of detailed amendments to increase permitted building densities in Hollywood , as well as a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). If or when this update is eventually adopted, it will then become a template for similar updates of LA’s 34 other community plans. In theory, it also could become a model for Specific Plan amendments to permitting greater densities. Because of the Hollywood plan’s importance to potentially alter private land use patters all throughout Los Angeles , many analysts have carefully scrutinized the draft, especially its DEIR, and submitted their analyses to the Department of City Planning. Among these many submissions, one theme stands out; the Draft Environmental Impact Report does not present a credible planning rationale for the proposed Community Plan update. The following six points summarize muc...
Comments
At issue: With regard to urban planning in Oakland, less is being done with less, while thrusting regressive taxes on its citizens and furloughs on its workers. Recently, when I asked a councilperson her justification for imposing exhorbatent increased parking fees and extended hours from 8-8 in all commerical districts, the response was to ask me a false question: Would you rather see the libraries close completely? The Mayor posters a bit differently. While residents are told by its City Council to pay higher taxes, the Mayor has been exposed for tax evasion for the past 3-years and will not issue a public comment on his criminal behavior. In fact, he is notorious for simply being MIA during his tenure while his city suffers its worse crisis since the Great Depression; his silence is deafening.
With regard to your point that Los Angeles officials are using the Great Recession as an opportunity to rush big projects through the planning process - and ignore its legal responsibility to update its General Plan/Community Plans - I do not see this as any change in planning practice comparative to the pre-Great Recession. If you recall, the only reason the plan was updated in the 1990s was because the city was sued for being out of compliance for
35-years! In addition, of the 35-out-of-date CPs, it took a grassroots effort by 10-communities to update those 10-communities most affected by the 1992 LA uprising. To this point, the residents planned its own communities - no longer waiting for the planning department to do it for them. Those community plans were formally adopted into the General Plan and became law. I know first-hand because I played a leadership role in organizing and implementing the process.
At the end of the day, urban planning is always much more effective if done by the people for the people. Left to only the municipal planners, which really means their bosses (city councils), planning documents are hollow, ineffective and rpepresent only a few special interests. A true inclusionary planning process yields greater functionality affecting all area residents, not just the fortunate few. However, you are correct that right now many municipalities will wield its mighty hand, utilizing exclusionary planning practices, in the name of "we-had-to-balance the-budget-in-these-harsh-economic times" mantra. Oh the burdens they bear.
Ultimately, I fear you are correct that urban planning staffing levels throughout the country, not just in Los Angeles, will never be replenished once the Great Recession finally ends. Urban Planing is not a priority in this country until there is a crisis. Even then we see a lack of political will to really plan as we witness, to date, New Orleans has yet to be rebuilt. Perhaps if the many displaced urban planners continue to write these types of articles and conduct peripheral planning, we can hope to slowly breathe new life into our ignored profession. And, by the way, Oaklanders organized a true grassroots effort to rescind the abusive parking fees and hours. Power to the people! A Luta Continua!
Email follow-up to: Stacie Sanders: stacie-sanders@att.net