The Next 50 : Planning: Valley residents tell officials how they want their city to look and function over the next half-century.

It’s a grand vision.

After strolling along the lush Los Angeles River parkway, one might head up to Reseda’s charming pedestrian promenade to take in the ambience and a cappuccino at some outdoor cafe. Then it’s a hop on the Sherman Way light-rail line to visit the kids in their affordable North Hollywood townhome.

That, at least, is the vision of 100 San Fernando Valley residents who last week told urban planners how they want their city to look and function 50 years from now--from where they want to live to where their children will play to how they’ll get to work each morning.

They want a city where people walk or bicycle instead of drive, a city where safe parks are abundant, a city where traditional neighborhoods of single-family homes are not overrun by ticky-tack apartment buildings.

The sentiments aren’t surprising. But, in one of a series of public workshops to be held this year, ordinary residents will have a chance to tell officials not just what they want in their city, but where they want it--and how such goals should be achieved.

The suggestions will be used to guide Los Angeles planners redrawing the city’s General Plan, which serves as the blueprint for growth.

In order to build citywide consensus over the document, which is expected to go before the Planning Commission in November, 1994, planners are encouraging the public to participate in workshops similar to the one held last Wednesday in Woodland Hills.

Many of those who attended the workshop in a hospital basement were members of homeowners organizations, the usual land-use crusaders, junkies or gadflies who know planning officials by first name and casually toss around such terms as “floor area ratio” and “transit centers.” They can even tell you that an “active water feature” is a fountain.

But most of those attending were just ordinary people worried about their neighborhoods and traffic jams and what sort of city they are leaving to their children. Indeed, since the plan is intended to guide growth well into the next century, many at the meeting will never see the city they envision.

There is no guarantee the plan will achieve all its goals. City archives are stacked high with plans of various times that were never implemented, sometimes for lack of political will, sometimes for lack of money. Planning experts say the city’s current General Plan, adopted in 1974, was a fine one. The problem, they say, was that it was never really followed.

A general plan sets broad guidelines but does not address specific projects. A plan could call for more recreational facilities in Sylmar, for example, but the city would still have to find the money to build them--or find a developer who would build them in exchange for getting the OK to erect, say, condominiums.

Regardless, said many residents at the workshop, nothing changes if no one tries.

So they gathered around tables, coloring giant maps with felt-tip markers to indicate which areas are suitable for apartments, parks, industry or single-family homes. Under the direction of a moderator, they offered suggestions and answered questions about the West Valley.

“We like trees,” said Woodland Hills resident Mary Greenstein, part of a group discussing the southwest Valley. “We like the hills.”

Added Glenda Zeledon: “Warner Center has a real village feeling.”

And from David Kipen: “I just moved here from downtown and certainly the presence of children is an amenity.”

Up on huge sheets of newsprint went their comments and around the room other groups did the same for other parts of the Valley--from Chatsworth to Studio City. Then each group turned its attention to the things they believe make Los Angeles a dysfunctional city at times:

Too much traffic, too much red tape, too many apartments. Too ugly, too. Too much of everything, in fact, except for parks and parking spaces.

“Ventura Boulevard is a real eyesore,” Zeledon said. “There is no continual look. It’s just a hodgepodge.”

Those are the kinds of problems the new general plan is intended to solve. Goals of the project include:

* Reducing traffic congestion and cleaning up the air by improving public transportation systems. Such systems could prompt more economic growth, encouraging shops to open around new subway or transit stations, for example.

* Revitalizing poor communities while preserving existing neighborhoods.

* Encouraging the construction of affordable housing.

* Eliminating what builders call a burdensome environmental review process for some projects, but at the same time conserving natural resources.

* Encouraging cooperation between public agencies and individuals.

So, group leader Hassan Haghani asked, how should it be done?

Blank stares.

Then the ideas poured forth.

Start electric shuttle-bus routes between shopping malls and residential areas. Plant more trees along streets. Build bike paths. Put height limits on buildings so they don’t create urban canyons of glass and steel. Try mixing commercial and residential uses, such as allowing a dry cleaner underneath an apartment complex.

Those sorts of suggestions will be compiled with others received at similar workshops around Los Angeles and presented in a report this summer. That document will guide the direction of the plan.

The plan, of course, might end up being only that--a plan. But Kipen said it was worth taking three hours out of his Wednesday night to share his vision.

“I can’t give up on stuff like this,” he said. “I think it’s important just to get people talking about Los Angeles in 50 years.”

NEXT STEP

The city of Los Angeles is holding a series of workshops for members of the public to express their views on the city’s General Plan, a broad blueprint for development over the next 50 years. The next meeting will be held April 13 at 6:30 p.m. at Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, 13652 Cantara St., Panorama City.