Sacramento wants to Take Over All URBAN PLANNING

SACRAMENTO WANTS TO TAKE OVER ALL URBAN PLANNING

A policy solution which solves one problem but creates another is bad policy.

LOS ANGELES, CA - Once again Sacramento is trying to legislate global housing laws for all of California, up-ending the long tradition of day-to-day land use decisions being in the hands of local communities.

Mayor Garcetti is on board with the idea.

I say these politicians are not Urban Planners.

✓They are wrong headed about the concept that “global housing rules” are ideal.

✓Their focus is exclusively on cramming more housing units in less space is already passé.

✓Our politicians are shamelessly taking the easy way out.

A few years ago Sacramento blessed California with Senate Bill 1818 which allowed developers to include “low/moderate income priced” condos in exchange for the right to build extra units. Well, that was a flop.

I tried to find out who was offering these units; what they cost; how you got one. I called every alphabet agency in LA, and not one person knew where this information was collected or available. Ok then, “maybe the City of Santa Monica is a little smaller and maybe more anal” about the implementation of the law. Nope. No one knew squat. The developers got the extra units; and no one knew/knows who actually got the benefit of the law and was allowed to buy these low/moderate priced units. Sacramento blew it.

Now Sacramento is back with Senate Bill 50 (Senator Wiener). Same idea, a global - cram it down our throats - approach to rules for new housing. In a nutshell SB 50 is a Manhattan-ization of Los Angeles.

What don’t the politicians understand?

A big component of urban planning has to include “social well-being of local and regional communities.” PS. Community comes from the Latin "communitas means"public spirit" and likewise communis means something "shared in common".

The San Fernando Valley’s original urban plan was visionary - designed as a necklace of commercial centers serving the surrounding “communities”. (eg: Studio City; Encino; Tarzana - read Eden by Design: The 1930 Olmsted-Bartholomew Plan for the Los Angeles, by the guys who famously designed NYC’s Central Park and advocated for community building as the backbone of their urban planning.

“The way we design our communities plays a huge role in how we experience our lives. Neighborhoods built without sidewalks, for instance, mean that people walk less and therefore experience fewer spontaneous encounters, which is what instills a spirit of community to a place. That’s a chief cause of the social isolation, so rampant in the modern world, that it contributes to depression, distrust, and other maladies.”

“You don’t have to be a therapist to realize all this creates lasting psychological effects. It thwarts the connections between people that encourage us to congregate, cooperate, and work for the common good. We retreat into ever more privatized existences.” Jay Walljer

…

“Cities that are designed people-first enhance the public experience and bring solutions to urban planning that are connected, resilient, healthy and emotionally rich.” Gensler.

Let me know if you can figure out how SB 50, which calls for buildings over 55 feet tall within 1/4 mile of bus/transit stops, and 45 feet with ½ mile of bus/transit stops; limited private parking; and no input from the community remotely meets the most current thinking on proper urban planning.

Joann Deutch is a Journalist and Travel Writer

Author, Studio City – A Mile of Style, What’s History What’s Gossip

Available online through Barnes and Nobel [click here] & Amazon [kindle]