City planning and easing traffic
Discuss the fourth round of this week's Dust-Up.
Comments will close after two weeks.
From the Los Angeles Times
Discuss the fourth round of this week's Dust-Up.
Comments will close after two weeks.
From the Los Angeles Times
| Advertisement |
It's funny because I think the problem is the city council getting in the way of the planning commission. Recently, one of the board members that planning should be on the part of the city council, not the planning department. What kind of logic is that?! We have no cohesive plan for this city. We need to give more power to the planning department to oversee the future of this metropolis.
Anthony Fernandez @ 1:47 PM PDT, May 2, 2008
Peter your comments on the market deciding seem to imply that developers should have free reign to build what they want when they want. And to be honest that's basically what they've had, and look where it's gotten us. Maybe it's time to do some "planning".
Aviking @ 8:38 AM PDT, May 2, 2008
Peter rants about evil "central" planning, does this guy actually teach planning? The cold war is over, and stuck in the "cold war" rhetoric doesn't actually make any arguments about what we should do now? Lot's of talk about suburban sprawl being a choiice? Yea, people like to live 2 hours from where they work , and love paying $4 a gallon, because they like the "choice". Charging them even more "congeston fees" to drive to work will make even better off? But. at least we won't have any evil central planning!
BOB2 @ 7:15 AM PDT, May 2, 2008
As a civil engineer let me comment by say that it now costs more in fees to get a city to approve a plan then it does to design said plan. We should do our best to avoid the special kind of efficiency that is everything a bureaucracy touches.
Rep. Mike @ 4:18 PM PDT, May 1, 2008