Orange 20 Bikes » Inside Outside

LADOT HQ: looks like the Matrix, but it’s just where people work….

Here in LA we’re having to get used to the idea that LADOT and Planning actually want to work with us on bicycle matters–though they’re having to get used to it themselves, and have been more than occasionally clumsy in their efforts to involve “civilians” in the process.

But just so you don’t think it’s all been sunshine and roses in those happy Northern European towns where bicycling is so widespread the average joe just does it without thinking about it much, take a look at these excerpts from a recent Planetizen article. Here, Wulf Daseking, head of Urban Planning in Freiburg, a model cluster of financially self-sustaining ecovillages in Germany–one which has been in existence for over twenty-five years!–gave this wonderful response to a question about working with municipal bureaucracies:

“One thing you have to be aware of within a city bureaucracy is that creative minds always play an outsider role. The key in my case was that I’ve had the support of a great planning team that found a way to realize these visions, against all odds. Just look at the Stühlinger district and the whole axis around the central station that we completely revitalized. Look at the once desolate Seepark area or the industrial parks that now have solar factory buildings. You can really accomplish things with planning. City planning is not just about configuration, it’s about ideas and content, about substance. Just like people, it’s not only about looks and a facade, but what’s behind a person.

The point here is that city administrations usually don’t want creative people because they don’t fit into the system. So when a creative person like myself is thrown into a system like that you’re always struggling rather than functioning. The key is to find the right openings and slip through them. One of the mayors once said to me that I wasn’t maneuverable. What does that mean? Maneuverable for whom and towards what? When you’re in the presence of administrators you’ll notice a clear and authentic difference between creative people and bureaucrats. The creative person is very conscious of what he’s done, whether it was good or bad, and whether the final outcome works, whereas the administrator’s primary concern is whether it was done by the book. The administrator might even say, ‘well I did everything by the book, so I don’t care what the final creation looks like.’”

Note that Daseking is not an outsider howling at the gates, as the statement above might imply; rather, he has been working as Freiburg’s Head of Urban Planning since 1984. The point is that creative persons within the bureaucracy that holds the levers of the machine can make things happen. Unfortunately we lost a couple of good ones that could have grown into Dasekings of our own with the departures of Carlos Morales and Chris Kidd from LADOT…but there will be, almost certainly there already are, others. We must let ourselves find them and work with them, rather than characterizing large and complex organizations as monolithic entities. They never are.

Here is what Daseking says about Los Angeles, which he visits often:

“[I]n Los Angeles, you’ve got what–4 million people with perhaps as many as 15 million in the metropolitan area? Freiburg has a population of 220,000. So in a city like Freiburg you can have a central government to oversee everything, but why would we presume to do the same in a place like L.A.? Why not have a bunch of smaller autonomous suburbs that can govern and plan for a much more manageable space and population? There may be a few things that need to be centrally directed, but for everything else, like whether a school should be built here or there, each suburb or town should be able to make their own planning decision. This way you get people closer together again. Someone who is miles and miles away from his city hall may as well have no city hall at all. It loses all its meaning and relevance. You see, you could fit 60 or 70 Freiburgs into L.A. or Istanbul and that’s how we have to look at it: We have to reconnect people to their civic centers again, and you can only do that on a smaller, more local scale. Big politics doesn’t like that idea of a more engaged public, but ask yourself why there’s only 50% voter turnout in the US. It’s because people feel disenfranchised and powerless, knowing that these distant representative do whatever they want anyway.”

Sadly, this might have happened had the city allowed real decision-making power to the neighborhood councils. I think it’s not so much “big politics” that scotched that here as big corporations, especially developers.

However, Planning and LADOT seem to be turning, albeit slowly, to our side; the people running things now are younger and more progressive, more tolerant of the complications of rebuilding Los Angeles as a city that accommodates more transport modes, more neighborhood form factors, than it did in the one-dimensional ’40s, ’50s, and ’60s. Multi-modal LOS is coming to LADOT; it will count people moved through a corridor, whether by car, bike, bus, trains, or shoes, not only cars as at present. Transit-oriented development (TOD) is here, though all too often imperfectly realized (I suspect by connivance or sheer corruption of developers). A hard-fought bike plan is here, and anyone who lives or passes through LA is invited to join in refining it.

In other words, now we have our hands on some of the levers. It’s time to stop complaining that the machine in this big city is big, and instead start learning how to steer it.

Link to the Daseking interview on Planetizen: Universal Principles for Creating a Sustainable City. It doesn’t actually mention bicycles, perhaps because they’re taken for granted in Northern Europe. But all the cities mentioned have extensive bicycle infrastructure that their residents use, and use often. Over 30% mode share, among other things.

This entry was posted on Sunday, August 14th, 2011 at 5:33 pm and is filed under current events. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

I appreciate that Daseking expresses this POV:

“…bring together the different neighbors who are building homes, have them talk to each other and to the architects, so that everyone has a say in what it will look and feel like.”

It’s ironic because in European planning circles in my understanding, that outreach is certainly not reflexive. It’s a bit more top-down, albeit with the general consent of the people. Of course, they as a rule are a bit more aligned in their interests than, say a bunch of Angelenos from across a wider social and economic spectrum.

It’s also ironic that in America, where actually formalized requirements for a public conversation in NEPA and CEQA, the exchange is so much more pro-forma. I suspect that it’s less fruitful than I expect Mr. Daseking finds with his neighbors.

Maybe its because we’re litigious, or because planning (esp. in LA) is captured to some extent by developers. But we’re too often left with two minutes at the mic after decisions have been made. Your DEIR comment will be perfunctorily acknowledged, sure.

I think in LA stakeholders are beginning to get hands on levers. It has been, what, 20+ years since a homeowner’s association forced the city to rezone? That was a key victory, but those levers remain slippery, and I’ve got limited confidence in LA Planning.

To the extent that we’ve got any grip at all with Metro, DOT or Planning it’s through tenacity. But I”m afraid that inside/outside dynamic is alive and well…. especially here in Beverly Hills, where last week’s conversation with a planner was more of the same, “We’ll let you know when we have something to review.” Ugh.

Comment by Mark Elliot — August 14, 2011 @ 11:40 pm

[...] time to stop complaining that the machine driving our cycling infrastructure is big, it’s time to start learning how to steer it. The Santa Monica Mirror looks at SaMo’s new Bike Action Plan; Bikeside’s Mihai Peteu likes [...]

Pingback by Pristine bike lanes adorn 7th Street for your morning commute, and a weekend full of links « BikingInLA — August 15, 2011 @ 12:57 am

Mark, don’t forget that Daseking is describing exactly how difficult it was at first. That he kept working at it, from the inside, is what made it work in the end. Planning and LADOT are in the midst of an evolution to a more responsive involvement with the rest of us. I have myself experienced this, personally and by phone and email, and gotten changes made here and there, despite having no standing anywhere, being member of no group (I’m not even in LACBC), because I am willing to step into their turf and meet with people to discuss, not just accuse, and work out what can be done.

They’re not monsters, any more than the shouters and spouters on our side are monsters (and I too shout and spout on occasion); but we are all people with habits of perception and expression. If you’re willing to let go of habits you can do much more. The current generation in LADOT and Planning is willing not to be bound by the past. We should be willing to break free from our past as well.

Now, that’s LA. It looks to me as though you have a much tougher situation in BH! However, confrontation tends to make people dig in and entrench their positions. As you know, I suspect you can get farther by dealing with the business community in BH directly, since bike infrastructure can only benefit them (at least in SoBev); they will have much more influence on the BH government than a bunch of “regular folks.”

See my comments on BH earlier in this blog:
http://orange20bikes.com/2011/07/a-lack-of-imagination/

Comment by Rick Risemberg — August 15, 2011 @ 8:14 am

3 Comments »

Leave a comment