MasterPlanning! The Myth of the Far Future

by Tony Chavira

Okay, fire threats have subsided for now and people are back to their nine-to-five life schedules, which (of course) involves only minimal breaks for social concerns. But, lucky for us, Mayor Villaraigosa is following through with his big plans to turn Los Angeles into a "global city," regardless of whether or not all politics are local. With a united vision of the future and a commitment to workforce housing, it's a win-win for Southern California from here on out, right?

Now, before I go any further, let me clarify this article's title so there's no confusion: masterplanning has to do with the city, a developer, or whoever basically playing God with city funds as an architect for urban structure. Parks go here, communities go here, schools go there, mayor's mansion goes there ... you get the point. They plan the city's urbanscape so that it perfectly suits the residents, or plan its destruction and eventual downfall. Whichever.

When most people think about masterplanning, they have two distinct visions of "who's in control." First, a faux-democracy where the community and developers collectively design the urbanscape to hopefully bring all walks of people together in a civic area. Second, a totalitarian government that controls how our communities are structured and planned for the greater good. One is so democratic that the urban landscape evolves too slowly and possibly too randomly, and the other is controlling enough to make fast changes but doesn't give enough flexibility for grassroots opinion or for developers to choose what to do with their properties.

Of course, you can take your pick, but this is all contingent on something I'll call "The Myth of the Far Future", just because I like how epic that phrase reads. When you think about "The Far Future," what comes to mind? Mega-structures? Quadruple-decker Freeways? Moving sidewalks? Flying cars? This super-masterplanned, super-organized utopia is the hopeful outcome for developing Transit-Oriented Developments (TODs), tons of workforce housing, and responsible urban design. Parks, streetscapes, mixed-use affordable developments…

But who's developed a firm vision of the future? We definitely don't want Los Angeles looking like the post-apocalyptic fallout slums from the movie Bladerunner, but at the same time we can't expect that the architecture from The Jetsons would work when an earthquake hits.

What would the Los Angeles utopia look like? Small steps in the near future can help develop a vision for the Los Angeles landscape for the far future, but we should be thinking about three steps at once:

1. The Near Future – The CRA and City of L.A. seem to have most of their bases covered, with a checklist of communities that need the planning and the TODs and require the highest amount of workforce housing.
2. The Distant Future – I've already seen hints at this plan, but I get the impression that it's not set in stone. Imagine light rails around all of Los Angeles, Ventura, Orange and Riverside counties. Imagine fully-planned hubs with developments, parks and resources close to these hubs. Eventually, they'll grow and interconnect and we'll have semblance of a Southern California where (GASP) you don't need to drive!
3. The Far Future – How do we see people interacting with each other 100 years from now? It might seem like a far way off, but too often we think about the tactics of urban planning without envisioning a brave or bold future. Instead, we run the risk of overcrowding these TODs, over-developing communities and even masterplanning our communities away from being able to constantly evolve.

I'm not saying that the Near and Distant Future aren't important, but there's enough theoretical work on urban planning and research at this point so that the city can develop a firm but adjustable vision of the far future to work toward. Of course, affordable complexes, parks and streetscaping can still turn ugly if the communities aren't well-planned. It's just feels sometimes that Southern California hasn't yet fully articulated to developers what kind of city it wants to be, and all the rhetoric in the world about the "global city" is nothing compared to a strong vision from city planning. Whether the control is in the developer's hands or the city's, the vision of the far future needs to be solidified before it becomes a myth of our badly-planned past.