Thanks to LA Times for this week’s extensive cover of The City of Los Angeles’ housing policy. And I know I can’t comment on this without activating an avalanche of criticism for the mention, but DAMN, did it feel good to read this article and say to myself, “I’ve been saying that all year”; “And I’ve been saying that all year.” OUT OF RELIEF! When I was saying this stuff, last year, people told me I should be calling the Art Bell show, instead of the other radio talk shows I was calling to alert the masses of the crisis we are facing. It’s not like anyone handed me the total picture with a check list of negative impacts to recite. It all came together piece by piece, throughout the year, as Herb Wesson, Garcetti and the rest of Council can tell you. The funny thing is, I kinda just blurted it all out in the ultimate Zuma Dogg rant ever on City TV 35, early on in my visits to City Hall. (The one where I say I became visually “possessed” as posted below.)
Then my discussion with experts for my LA Weekly SCAG article REALLY tied it all together for me and it’s been my most discussed issue, along with LAUSD ever since.
Followed by LA Weekly’s “Smart Growth” article blowing it out of the water a couple months ago in all it’s un-splendor, and now LA Times amplifying the situation for all the mainstream to see; ZD was about to say, he feels he can finally move on to other issues…but I can’t get my fingers to type those words.
Because although the City lays out its plan for the public (or actually they dig deep enough and blast it until you can’t deny it, then the newspapers research it further and really nail you; any of these proclamations of grandeur; there is public awareness and activism that some of these projects are in violation of Charter law, and will be battled in committee and appealed on a project by project basis. And although the City usually stream rolls its way through the community, there will be victories for the people. And when I say victory, I mean projects that are just plain wrong from a zoning, safety, social or environmental analysis.
And in response to all the people representing the City who say the new downtown will be tall, dense and vibrant, filled with people who walk or bike to work and take advantage of the area's burgeoning night life and activities” (from Times article). ZD says, “Yes, that is the plan and who in the world could argue with that? Wouldn’t it be a wonderful world? Only thing is, it’s a “picture perfect” illusion in the sense that you are leaving out a whole bunch of the side effects of the magic pill it will take to create that scenario. That’s a fancy way of saying, “Yeah, great idea, but it ain’t gonna work the way you guys are planning it. (You’re going all luxury downtown. And not creating the balanced communities you will need.)
Ashwani Vasishth of CSUN (an former SCAGGER) said in ZD’s LA Weekly article, “You just can't have the rich living downtown in expensive lofts and the poor people living further and further out. You can only have a successful downtown if you have rich and poor living in the same area.” And he goes on to mention how all the people driving into downtown from outside areas to serve the area and work in the area, will continue to increase traffic congestion. (So they way the city is planning it, you get the opposite of what they are actually dreaming about.)
Too bad the City of Los Angeles refuse to embrace methods of quality and productivity to implement and achieve this goal, otherwise known as, “Bad planners.” And when I mean bad, I mean, like in-denial, negligent and illegally bad.
LA Times article
ZUMA'S SUMMARY RANT OF LA TIMES ARTICLE
ZumaTimes.com: Official ZD website