A first step would be coming to a unified and realistic view of itself as a metropolis. LA’s inherently fragmented nature has been a major obstruction to that view. LA has been divided up and re-organized in so many ways, it’s hard to determine the actual form of the metropolis. But careful exploration does reveal existing patterns of organization and the hidden logic of the city.
The metropolitan center lies in the northern part of the LA Basin. On 4% (171 square miles) of LA County land, nearly 25% (2.5 million) of the couny’s population lives. Comparatively, the San Fernando Valley holds about 20% (2 million) of the county’s population on 8.5% (345 sq. mi.) of its land area. The San Gabriel Valley holds another 20% (2 million) on 9.2% (374 sq. ml.) of county land. The north basin is the region’s densest, most urbanized area, as well as it’s obvious center.
With this in mind, the metropolis needs to stop subsidizing sprawl and embark upon a regional development policy of recentralization. Halting sprawl is a case of, “If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging.” Despite the ease and short-term profitability of developing the metropolitan fringe, every new sub- and ex-urban subdivision or office park adds to a mounting toll on the region, forcing it to spend more of its resources on infrastructure where none previously existed, to serve development where none previously existed. Furthermore, fringe development exerts a centrifugal force upon the core, making recentralization increasingly difficult with each new acre of land opened up. The same development redirected into the center reinforces the centripetal force of the core, holding the region together in a tense orbit around it.
Recentralization is about reconcentrating resources in the center of the city. Transit structure will not be spread evenly throughout the region, nor should it be if it is to be effective. Of course, developers, politicians, and citizens of the surrounding sub-regions may protest what they perceive as Downtown’s or the Westside’s receiving of a disproportionate share of transit investment. This is the current situation with the Gold Line Foothill Extension. If for no other reason than to prevent misguided objections and demands like these from undermining long-term objectives, Metro must have an overall plan and a strategy, both of which carry broad support throughout the metropolis. Beyond that, leaders must prevent transit from becoming a zero-sum competition for resources pitting regions, communities, and neighborhoods against one another. Centralization is the most effective, efficient, and equitable use of LA’s resources, but it will require the cooperation of all areas of the metropolis.
Upgrades in transit infrastructure coupled with residential and commercial re-centralization will prime land in the north basin to absorb a greater proportion of LA’s projected growth. Surrounding regions will continue to grow, only with better planning and at a much slower, more sustainable rate. The objective should be to stabilize the surrounding regions while channeling growth into a strong, revitalized core.
1 comment:
Amazing series, John.
I would extend the Van Nuys Orange Line to Warner Center. Those hills do throw a big of a oddity in Los Angeles topography. I think Valley recentralization will occur all along the Orange Line and Ventura Blvd.
The San Gabriel Valley really wants the Gold Line(s) are are well organized in rallying for it. It's better to have centralization along these lines that just more sprawl.
The hard part with implementing this is that the places where transit is most needed is where it is most expensive to build because of the amount of digging and tunneling necessary.
In past decades, the NIMBYs who want Los Angeles dragged back to 1965 unlimited car culture, and those who just fear people unlike themselves, had the political power with our area's political elites to sabotage all mass transit improvements. Ever-worsening congestion and ever-increasing gas prices is what is really uravelling the car culture in Los Angeles, and has rallied enough political support to overcome the remaining NIMBYs in most areas.
60 years of social engineering in favor of the car culture is giving way to the economic and environmental realities of the limits of the automobile.
Increased density is coming. Recentralization along busy transit corridors is the responsible way to plan for it. And those people who want an atypical suburban-within-urban automobile based lifestyle to last a high quality will have to move to the actual suburbs.
Great, great work, John.
Post a Comment