'The Valley' Gets Place-Making Power

A new joint powers authority comprised of cities and county supervisorial districts will help planning efforts in the San Fernando Valley--a sub-region often lost in the shuffle of the sprawling Los Angeles metropolis.

The article consists of Q&A with two of the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments' leading protagonists, Robert Scott and David Fleming:

"...there is a growing need for regional governance in California. We have so many problems that cross jurisdictional boundaries. A problem along the I-5 impacts Santa Clarita, Burbank, San Fernando, the city of Los Angeles, and, indirectly, Glendale. If we didn't have something like a COG, we wouldn't be able to effectively coordinate efforts."

"One of the big issues about this organization is that it can officially generate information that had previously been gathered only on a semi-official basis. At the moment, we're completing the I-5 Corridor Study, which is an economic development initiative that has been going on for the last nine months, funded by SCAG, and giving us a roadmap for the new council of governments to follow, should they adopt it."

"As far as the city Planning Commission goes, that configuration has been changed from five to nine, and we've added the Area Planning Commissions. We have something like 35, where we once had five. That has changed the complexion of the planning process. Going back to the idea that this organization will be responsible for managing the new San Fernando Valley SCAG planning sub-region, they will be able to give input in the planning process from the headwaters, from the very beginning of the process."

Thanks to James Brasuell

Full Story: New San Fernando Valley COG Enables Valley ‘Place’-Making

Comments

Comments

This is an example of why people hate government.

"Robert Scott: One of the things that everybody agrees on is addressing AB 32 and SB 375, the greenhouse gas statutes."

Not economic development, not transportation, not working around the corruption in Los Angeles City government to get things done, not crime. Nope. The first order of business is chasing after mythical "greenhouse gases." Such a waste. This is an example of why people hate government.

Government and basic science.

This is an example of why people hate government.

No.

This is an example of people grasping at any reason to hate government.

GHGs aren't mythical, they are basic physics that one learns in 10th grade. Just because there is a small fraction of the population that refuses to acknowledge basic physics isn't reason enough to avoid taking action.

Best,

D

Basic science? Seriously?

The fact that the gases known as "greenhouse gases" exist is not being argued. What is being argued is the impact they have on our climate. Global warming is really more of a religion, but if it makes you feel good to think it's based on incontrovertible science, then more power to you. I'm just saying you're wrong and that the imposition of rules and regulations that have negative effects on people's lives and livelihoods is not something I think should be left to global warming fundamentalists.

Stop annoying people. Stop coming up with more and more things about people’s lives to control and quit acting like omnipotent moral busybodies.

(P.S. I work in government, which is why this waste of time and money infuriates me so much.)

Global Warming and Livelihood

"What is being argued is the impact they have on our climate."
"Stop annoying people."

There is general consensus among scientists that greenhouse gas emissions are having an impact on the world's climate. The only people arguing about that are right-wing ideologues who are dedicated to spreading disinformation.

If you are concerned about people's livelihood, you might think about the livelihood of all the subsistence farmers who will be threatened with famine if we do not control global warming.

The World Health Organization estimates that 300,000 people have already died because of global warming. If the global warming deniers have their way and we do nothing to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, tens of millions or maybe hundreds of millions of people will die of famine.

You think we should stop annoying people.
I think you should stop killing innocent people.

Charles Siegel

Basic argument. Srsly.

What is being argued is the impact they have on our climate.

You can argue til you are blue in the face. Great. Good on ya. But it doesn't matter. Why doesn't it matter? Because you do not have evidence-based facts on your side.

The long-ago refuted arguments that denialists make are numbered for our convenience, as they never change and are endlessly repeated. We even make a game out of the silly arguments denialists use (and 'denial' is a diagnosable psychological condition). The world's militaries are planning for future climate disruption. The rest of the planet understands what Western white conservatives refuse to acknowledge, as the Six Americas study details.

The world has moved on and is trying to figure out how to adapt to and mitigate man-made climate change. No one who is working on this problem is 'debating' GHGs effect on climate. That ship has sailed and the few standing on the dock waving there arms are fading into the distance.

HTH.

Best,

D

General Consensus

Among which scientists is there a "general consensus?"

Have there never been scientific theories about which there was a general consensus that later changed?

And your tactic of marginalizing people who disagree with you ("right wing ideologues") isn't working anymore.

General Consensus, Yes

Among which scientists is there a "general consensus?"

We can start off with the United States' National Academy of Sciences, which issued a report on May 19, 2010 saying

"A strong, credible body of scientific evidence shows that climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems."

I am not marginalizing you. You are marginalizing yourself, in the same way you would be marginalizing yourself by saying the earth is flat: "There may be scientific consensus the earth is round, but have there never been scientific theories about which there was a general consensus that later changed?"

Charles Siegel

General consensus across the round planet.

We can start off with the United States' National Academy of Sciences

...and continue with every single solitary major scientific organization on the planet.

And most minor orgs. And most large non-fossil fuel corporations. And most insurance companies. And the world's militaries. And most people on the planet. And. And. And. And. And. Andandandandandand.

Best,

D

Prepare for the AICP Exam

Join the thousands of students who have utilized the Planetizen AICP* Exam Preparation Class to prepare for the American Planning Association's AICP* exam.
Starting at $199
Planetizen Courses image ad

Planetizen Courses

Advance your career with subscription-based online courses tailored to the urban planning professional.
Starting at $14.95 a month
T-shirt with map of Chicago

Show your city pride

Men's Ultrasoft CityFabric© tees. Six cities available.
$23.00
Book cover of Contemporary Debates in Urban Planning

Contemporary Debates in Urban Planning

Featuring thought-provoking commentary and insights from some of the leading thinkers and practitioners in the field.
$18.95