What to Consider When Choosing LA's Next City Planning Director

As a City Councilman, you soon will be selecting a new planning director for the city of Los Angeles. What talents are needed for this job at this time?

I think the number one thing is creativity, and number two is somebody that brings energy to that position. One of the things that I needed to do immediately upon taking office was to start working on reshaping public perceptions about the viability of economic development in my district. I went to ICFC, for example, and was one of the few elected officials in the state to be there. What I took with me was essentially a virtual tour of the 10th District and a new marketing study that showed that the 10th Council District has equal buying power to that of South Pasadena and Altadena. It was a mindblower for many of the national retailers as well as developers. Since that time, we've literally been taking developers, both non-profit and for-profit developers, on guided tours showing them the beautiful historic homes, the beautiful historic neighborhoods and the corridor. People are seeing three things: a buying power that they didn't realize existed in this community, beautiful historic middle-class and upper middle-class households and neighborhoods, and then a dearth of services and retail outlets along these corridors just begging for economic revitalization.

So we need a planning director who is going to tap into that type of capacity, that type of potential and use every available planning tool, best practices worldwide, with a sense of urgency. With that, at the end of the day, we will have a win-win-win. It's a win for the private sector, which is looking for good opportunities to invest; it's a win for communities that are looking for smart development that will bring services and good retail; and then obviously it's a win for the shoppers and consumers who don't want to drive great distances, adding to the traffic congestion and so forth, if they could actually walk in their neighborhoods and find those services. That is the kind of vision, energy and creativity that I'm looking for.

Two major issues for the city are the need to build housing and the need to improve mobility. Let's talk about transportation first. As one of the mayor's appointees to the MTA board, what is your agenda and how does it fit with your vision for the 10th District.

It's been rather unfortunate, and you may be shocked to know that the mayor has not called me into his office once since appointing me to the MTA board to talk about his vision or his agenda for the city. I think that's part of the problem. You have four members on the board representing the city and I don't think there's been one moment when we have come together to talk about that vision or to talk about how to utilize our political power on the second largest transportation body in the nation.

Would things be much different under a different mayor?

Absolutely. Now, let me take politics out of it and talk about the transportation agenda. Transit line development is essential. Projects at Wilshire and Western and Vermont and Western are classic examples of mixed-use, transit-oriented development. Those projects absolutely need to be prioritized by the mayor's office and need to be given every ounce of support that the MTA and the City of LA can muster. I think that they could win awards that would call attention to the smart projects that we need, which allow people to live, work, and get on transportation without getting into a car. We simply have to do more of that kind of thing in the City of LA. I happen to be very fortunate that two of the biggest transit-oriented development projects in the city are in my district.

Another major project is the Expo Light Rail. Assemblymember Karen Bass and I just co-authored a letter to about 35 community-based organizations. We're bringing them together to begin talking about the planning of the La Brea Expo Light Rail station. I think Chinatown and the station in downtown Pasadena are examples of very good public processes that came up with award-winning depots. We've got to do not only that, but we've got to do a little bit better, given that we're going into very strong residential neighborhoods with the La Brea train station. Throughout that corridor, our challenge is going to be to keep the MTA's construction on target. One of the things that the MTA did that was smart was to move federal funding out of the Expo Light Rail project, which means we're going to be able to move that project along more quickly. I believe that by 2008 we will get trains on the rails.

One political challenge for the Exposition line will be dealing with what I call West South Pasadena. By this, I mean moving the rail from Venice and National, through West LA, through Beverlywood, right up to the Santa Monica Bay. At that point, you're going to be able to get westsiders out of their cars. They can get on that Expo Light Rail in West LA and get to their offices in downtown Los Angeles, taking hundreds of thousands of cars off the 10 Freeway. That's got to be our vision. It is going to be a tough sell, and I use South Pasadena as an example because of the years and years and years of political gridlock trying to move forward on the extension of the 710. I don't expect it to be easy, but I do think it's something we've got to confront head on.

Let's turn to the densification of LA. The projections are that in the next 25 years the population equivalent of two Chicagos will be added to this metropolitan area. The City has been considering inclusionary zoning ordinances as a way of encouraging moderate low-income housing. Address the challenges of balancing neighborhood quality of life and densification.

That's a great question. There is no doubt that people are moving back into the middle sections of the city at a rate probably as great or greater than people left 25 years ago. As that happens, there are a couple of very good movements that are underway, such as the preservation movement. I think the historical preservation movement is a good movement, and, contrary to public opinion, it is a very diverse movement. My district, which represents the heart of the mid-city of Los Angeles, is a microcosm of what the future of the city is going to look like. It is the most diverse district in the city. The historical preservationists in my district come in every color of the rainbow; make no mistake about it. And so I think it's a mistake for anybody to assume that the historical movement and the development of HPOZs is a white movement, or a Jewish movement, or a gentrification movement. It's a movement of people who understand the value of homes that were built in the 1920s and 30s and don't want to see them devastated by poorly done apartment buildings, as has happened in the past. There has been wholesale demolition of beautiful historic homes in south Koreatown, Greater Wilshire Center area, Country Club Park, the Wilshire Center, and Hancock Park. So, I think that that movement is a good movement.

Where do you find the places for multi-family housing? I think mixed-use development is the development of the future. There are vast corridors throughout this city that are aching for smart development like you're seeing in downtown Culver City and even in places like Pasadena, where people have built retail on the first floor and housing on the 2nd and 3rd. I think an inclusionary zoning ordinance can be crafted in a way that will allow those projects are to flourish. Developers can do good while doing well, and the community can do well while doing good. There just needs to be a commitment on the council's part to prioritize inclusionary zoning and to prioritize the location of the new, mixed-use housing in LA on commercial and transportation corridors. I think we could find miles of opportunities for this during one daylong tour of the city.

Let's talk about the Ambassador School site. It is a 24-acre site in the heart of midtownLos Angeles. What is approved is not a mixed-use plan; it now planned solely as school district site. Why isn't joint use appropriate? Why not leverage the $11 billion in school bond funds to also transform and benefit our neighborhoods?

The future of the city is in our ability to build educational institutions and facilities that are "smart." Let me give you an example of what I see happening at the Ambassador that I think is smart. Literally 3.4 acres of green space on the front will be available for kids during the day and available for the public during the evenings and weekends. I think that is an incredible change from the original design. When I was running for office, my predecessor was supporting putting up 20 stories of office space and retail on that ground, in a city that has a dearth of green space. By the way this is another important aspect of the design work that planners need to do in the city. The new planning director as well as new graduates coming out of the various planning schools need to figure out how to expand green space through multi-use. One of the things being done at the Ambassador is to create general-purpose athletic fields, rather than dedicate a football field, or dedicate a soccer field. An athletic field that has natural space for viewing stands can double as a park on the weekends and can be used for festivals. You don't have to have huge bleachers; you don't have to have big goal posts. Using some creative planning tools to expand that green space, it is now what it needs to be. The final point on the Ambassador is that 4,200 students who could be able to walk to school are currently being bussed all over Southern California. At a certain point, the ability to have parents involved in the classroom, the ability to allow students to build relationships with their peers and come home at the end of the day from school and continue those relationships, doing homework and after-school activities, has really got to be a priority in this city. I have to say that the multi-use plan is smart from a planning perspective.

Yet, while there is $11 billion in bond funding available for facilities investment by LAUSD, many critics believe the District has very little interest in authenic community planning and joint-use neighborhood development. Do you think the council, as a whole should be more aggressive with regard to ensuring that LAUSD is building schools that work for LA's neighborhoods to the greatest extent possible, or is it just too difficult to work with LAUSD's real estate staff?

I don't think that it's too hard to work with LAUSD. On a relative basis, I think LAUSD is doing much better than it's ever done before, and they're doing a far superior job at community outreach than in the past. There were thousands of people from the community in the surrounding areas that came out and testified on the Ambassador either in public hearings or community meetings or who attended informational meetings that were organized by LA Unified. I actually give the LA Unified -- and I think most people would -- very high marks on the outreach efforts regarding the Ambassador.

Setting aside the case of the Ambassador, what about with regard to the $11 billion building program generally.

I understand, but I want to be sure that there's no mistake about where I am on the outreach and in working with the community regarding the Ambassador. Regarding the broader question, I think we all need to be more open to creative ideas. I think LA Unified has been pushing hard to reduce the overcrowding in classrooms, and I think, quite frankly, they're probably moving more aggressively than we are in some areas. I do think there are examples all over the city where we are all working together to try to meet diverse needs. In my district, we just did the ribbon cutting a few weeks ago on the LA Center for Enriched Studies. You should see this amazing facility. It has a brand new indoor swimming pool, a brand new dance facility, a brand new weight lifting facility, new classrooms and it's a multi-use facility that during the day is for the kids and in the evening is for the community. That's one example. I just get off the phone with Bill Chadwick, the president of the Coliseum Commission. He thinks that the new Exposition Park facility has amazing crossover potential for a variety of learning opportunities, not only for children, but also for parents. Can we do more? Absolutely. And that is exactly why we want to put a visionary in the post of planning director for the City of LA.

One last question, a segue from your conversation with Bill Chadwick: What are your thoughts about LA's prospects for bringing the NFL back to the Coliseum?

I think the prospects are great. A number of people have been reaching out. I'm going to be hosting the first ever high school football combine at the Coliseum in May. It's an opportunity for possibly a thousand high school football players from around LA Unified to come try-out in front of NCAA scouts. We're doing it in partnership with Bob Golic, a former all-pro defensive lineman from the Raiders and the Browns.

I think that the work that's been done over the last 15 years at the Coliseum and the Exposition Park has been significant. Local elected officials, state officials, and federal officials have been working in partnership with the private sector and I think that facility is really beginning to shine. I'm not convinced that an NFL team will necessarily be at the Coliseum, but I am convinced that the NFL wants to come back to LA and I think that we're learning a lot about what it takes to work with the NFL. We have to be unified and we have to be willing to put the private sector at the forefront. There is very little support from the public to put in public sector dollars. I think as long as everybody understands that, there's the will to help the NFL in any way we can. I'm hopeful. I think they'll come and I don't think it'll be too long. I don't know whether it will be an expansion team or a team relocating, but I think are at least three teams around the country that would love to move to LA, and it's a welcome thing in my book. I'm a big fan of it, and I think it's something that's long overdue.