Old, new models of ‘smart growth’

Re “Mega-projects could reshape L.A. growth,” Dec. 13

The article contrasts today’s “smart growth” with what came before: “In the 1960s and ‘70s, for example, city planners created a second downtown in Century City, but they did so far from any freeways or mass transit, a legacy that Westside commuters deal with daily.”

However, Century City was intended to be smart growth. From a 1972 Times article: “When the Planning Commission approved the master plan of Welton Becket Associates for the vast development of Century City, it was agreed that both a Beverly Hills freeway and a rapid transit line would be needed to make the center possible.”

None of that happened, yet Century City continues to be developed. The City Council recently OKd the construction of two 47-story condominium towers in Century City. Smart -- and not-so-smart -- planning continues.

JONATHAN WEISS

Cheviot Hills

*

At this time of unprecedented energy use, worldwide urbanization and climate change, is it really beyond the imagination of our design community to conceive urban growth that is both humane and ecologically accountable?

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and city planner Gail Goldberg have said that new growth in Los Angeles must be designed to encourage density, diversification and greater reliance on public transportation. Do these goals inevitably require that we continue building huge, sealed, high-rise structures that are ecologically untenable?

Building operations use more than half of all electricity produced in the United States. Power plants poison our planet, and huge distribution systems are vulnerable to weather, supply manipulation (Enron) and terrorism.

Shouldn’t we challenge architects and planners to lead the world with truly new and ecologically responsible models of urban growth?

RALPH KNOWLES

Professor emeritus

USC School of Architecture

Los Angeles