Transit-Oriented Development

So I am a big fan of mixed land uses, as long as it doesn't push lower income residents out of the neighborhood and raise property values high, which happens A LOT. In class today, we took a tour of some transit-oriented development sites around Los Angeles and Pasadena. It is interesting to note how developers are ready to invest in blighted neighborhoods in hopes that the new hip yuppies will be willing to live next to transit so they can LIVE. WORK. and PLAY. in LA and bring in oodles of revenue. (LA Live is being built to make it the "24-hour city." Seriously, Los Angeles will never be New York.)

These developments that spring up next to transit sites are expensive. They tell you they are affordable but they aren't...for a 2 bedroom apartment in Lincoln Heights, next to a train....its around $450,000. Seriously. The people who can afford this force those of lower socio-economic status to be pushed back further to the periphery. Gentrification.

So how can we make this right. Engineers. Architects. Politicians. Developers. Public. They all have their own agenda. It is a planner's job to translate the jargon of each to the other. And especially if a planner is working under the same company, jurisdiction etc. That's how the decision-making process can the best outcome. That's how we plan better communities, by communicating and not blindly superimposing an idea onto land that doesn't mesh well with the surrounding community. Planning is for the people. Yes, it is about money and politics. But we can't forget quality of life, equity and sustainability. Planning Matters. deal with it.