Transforming the Los Angeles River | Earth Focus | Season 5, Episode 2 | PBS SoCal
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 май 2024
- A transformed L.A. River is envisioned by the communities that live at its edge. In the process, residents also must reconcile with the river channel's past. From artists in Elysian Valley, to store owners in Chinatown, to Indigenous leaders, these communities are working to ensure everyone is included in new plans for the river's 51 miles.
Watch Part 1: • Reimagining the Los An...
00:00 - 01:01 - Introduction
01:01 - 07:34 - The Impact of Gentrification
07:34 - 15:16 - River Restoration in the Community
15:17 - 18:31 - Friends of the LA River
18:31 - 23:46 - Native Communities Voices on L.A. River
23:46 - 25:58 - Conclusion
25:58 - 26:37 Credits
Want to learn more? Watch more at bit.ly/3NrIzUQ
~~~~~~
Subscribe to our RUclips Channel: bit.ly/3wiFfZ2
Follow us:
Instagram: / pbssocal
TikTok: / pbssocal_kcet
Facebook: / pbssocal
Sign-up for our Newsletter: bit.ly/3wby5Gb
#EarthFocus #LosAngeles #LARiver #Environment 
Развлечения
Seoul, South Korea, revived a stream that required the demolition of a major highway overpass and some displacement of traditional businesses. It is less daunting than the proposed L.A. River revival but perhaps Los Angeles can learn lessons from what happened in Seoul with the Cheonggycheon Stream Revival.
I watch programs like this and I feel hope for humanity; this is great initiative, and it certainly sounds like their really thinking out of the box here.
Remembering a Pomo woman teaching me how to make a bird figure out of tules ♥️♥️ learned a lot of history that day♥️♥️♥️
This is a hopeful story. Let's move forward in a way that truly heeds all voices and communities. This can be one more medicine to further the healing that we all need, together. 🙂
good to see some green in downtown LA
The bike path is so idiotically designed. Why is pedestrian friendly infrastructure so hard to implement in LA? Overall, instead of adding more walkable places and spaces, they keep taking. It is really frustrating to live through.
Another example is the Little Tokyo Metro station. Instead of adding public green space on the surface, its an ugly blank concrete slab with absolutely 0 usage most of the time since it opened.
@@acf1507 Unfortunately any public green space in LA quickly turns into a homeless camp. Maybe that's why.
They're too afraid to take space away from cars, so instead they took away from the walking path. They probably could have easily removed parking on a parallel street and added a bike lane, but they didn't.
I think because LA is trying to reduce traffic, which means you need to prioritize bicycle infrastructure over everything else. It sucks, but the people walking on that path are doing it mostly for leisure and exercise, while many of the people cycling on that path are replacing trips typically done with a car. One is nice to have, the other is necessary for decarbonization.
@@todddammit4628 we reduce traffic by investing in public transport, make walking around town, taking buses and trains safe and enjoyable.
there are only so much walkable area you can turn into roads for cars.
I love the emphasis on indigenous voices and land back. I think we should absolutely protect the communities already there, and I imagine that prioritizing and putting indigenous voices in power will also help in that goal. Please allow natives to gather cultural materials ! People are a part of the ecosystem and will help if involved !
It sounds nice, but when push comes to shove, how do you allocate the limited land along the river? There are many historical claims to the land -- Tongva, Spainish, Mexicans, Americans, Asian/Latino immigrants? What about the current landowners who have an opportunity for generational wealth by selling their low-income apartment complexes to developers? Is it wrong to create spaces for up and coming millennials who want to live in a re-vitalized LA interior?
This also ignores the interests of the taxpayers who will be footing the $2B+ project!
Displacement seems obvious and inevitable if/when the river becomes highly desirable, albeit sad.
Fundamentally, the reasons why investment in an area creates gentrification is 1.) The rest of the city is strapped for housing supply in attractive places for people to live, 2.) The car infrastructure makes commuting from one side of the city to the other a viable option for a professional/worker's daily life, and 3.) High proportions of the community are renters and renters have very little protections. If these were not factors, investments in a community would benefit that community.
So, to remove these factors we need to, in order of your enumeration,
1) Upzone the entirety of LA for duplexes, triplexes, townhouses, and bungalow courts;
2a) Enable mixed-use zoning to decrease the need for many car trips, 2b) Stop all highway expansions and even begin implementing road diets to decrease excess pavement and increase space for walking and bicycling infrastructure, and 2c) Continue expanding transit, including reinstating LA's historic tram lines; and
3) Find new funding structures for land trusts and other nonprofit housing cooperatives that de-capitalize housing and promote both the accumulation of generational wealth and community investment.
"Fundamentally" you want to may be google capitalism in the USA....its over
They have to seriously consider dredging the riverbed of the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers to at least 2.5 to 3 times its old natural depth if they want to remove the concrete proection system. That way, in case of heavy winter rains the river does not become a flooding hazard.
There's other things they could do though. They could build aquifer recharge stations every couple of miles that take overflow water and pump it underground. We need to recharge the aquifers anyway, so this seems like a win-win.
@@todddammit4628 While it sounds like a good idea, the unstable geology of the Los Angeles Basin (there's a lot more earthquake faults than just the San Andreas Fault!) might make the idea no practical.
@@todddammit4628 You don't need to build recharge stations. Giving the river a natural bottom will lead to absorption..
I watched the first episode and was about to go off on the makers of this when I saw there's a part 2, good for them because if they hadn't included the First People's of this area many of which are my friends I would have raised hell. Blessings to the original human beings of the Tatavian, Tongva Gabrieleno, and the Chumash who have been here for tens of thousands of years. I am Ox'kon Tasen'(Red Thunder) in the language of the Village of Kalawa'Shaq in Santa Ynez Valley, Tule is life. kipu chumawish tani hey'
It would be wonderful to see horse stables, open space and dirt paths along the river for horses and their riders.
Also, separate paths for bicycles and for walkers would be safer.
Horses are a luxury for the wealthy. Fuck that.
most folks on the Westside have no idea there are horse properties in and around South Los Angeles
It’s understandable that local communities may feel jeopardized and exposed to real estate investment speculation because Gehry’s name is attached to the project, but in reality it makes sense to have such a firm with its vast global professional and institutional knowledge/ experience to oversee the vision of the project to be successful
Gentrification is just another word for demand exceeding supply. If you make a location more desirable then obviously it’s going to charge a premium. The only way to combat this is by simultaneously increasing supply with the increase in demand. Failure to do so is what prices people out.
it makes sense the tribes would be in touch with the river because they were there when people directly took water from the river rather than water being piped in from different places
That was multiple generations ago. Do the descendants of those people still have that knowledge?
Just remember nature doesn’t cost money to happen, it just happens.
Why don't they just require all new development to have 10% of their housing set aside for low-income only? These buildings have much higher density, so 10-15% would be enough to replace most of the housing lost through redevelopment. Seems like it would be the easiest path to get both the restoration and guard against displacement.
That is called "inclusionary zoning" and it doesn't work, it's expensive to permit and build in California so forcing developers to lose money they need to recoup costs means they go build somewhere else and actually results in less housing being built. You can subsidize units but you can't just force someone else to lose money. Imagine homeowners are forced to sell there homes for ten to twenty percent less than they are worth there'd be uproar but we force similar concessions on multifamily residents and builders.
The people who live in the expensive housing don't want 10% of their area to become slums, that is the reality.
What does this have to do with a river
Does PBS have a tik tok or ig reels? Cross media publications would aid in a diverse public discussion!
No comrade 😂
there should be a study going back to geologic recorded flood histroy of the intire valley first before any more greening takes place so local insurcance tables can be updated at the same time and also get someyhing on wich to based what if any flood pertection to save or rebuild in the syatem.
What happened to the Chinatown sign?
Unfortunately I'm not seeing a path to success here. It's a nice thought to ask everybody and attempt to minimize all impacts but the idea could be paralyzed with conflicting interests. Better use of adjacent space is certainly welcome but the existing drainage infrastructure is here to stay - this last storm season it was nearly at capacity. The fear of development is quite interesting as it seems to highlight people across the region are seeking "somewhere better" so you tend to capture that demand immediately upon building said better place. If you want to fight this current imbalance you must create policy that blatantly favors local interests and actively deincentivizes non-locals from moving there. Idk, try it? Chances are change will bring change though. I'm potentially in favor of incentivizing developers to build more "basic" dense housing with subsidies, but I'd argue this needs to be paired up directly with transit options to access more widespread opportunity in the region to actually make a dent in the economic situation. But I'm just a random internet commenter so who knows. Glad we're thinking about it at least.
can the land tryst go bust what happens if it dose.
I've love to see a green LA river. It will make my bike rides more enjoyable than running the homeless gauntlet.
Nothing mentioned as affordable is really affordable. $3500 a month for a studio on the 10th floor is Not affordable or desirable to most in earthquake country.
i get that the teenage girl likes her mom's food truck business although i lived near macarthur park for 10 years and those food trucks were a menace cuz they were so noisy they'd honk their horns on the block frequently to tell people they were there the noise was bad. course idk if this woman honks hers
River restoration hardware
The problem stems from not enabling renters to become owners. As long as they don't have access to ownership (aka capital), they are going to be oppressed and displaced by those with capital. The state needs to create a system for long-term renters in a community to get low-interest loans to become owners in their community. The state can make that attractive to sellers by nullifying most or all of the tax sellers pay on their highly profitable sale from speculated public investment. However, this is hard when you elect silver-spooned greasy politicians to high office whose friends and family are wealthy investors and not teachers and small business owners. Tax policy and helping the subjected working class grow in capital and agency are not solved by the type of politicians we keep on electing and supporting at all levels.
Los Angeles wasn't founded where China town is now lady. Olvera street is considered the birthplace of Los Angeles
she said one of the first lol
The first settlement of Los Angeles was EXACTLY where Chinatown is now. There was a flood shortly thereafter and things were moved to where the Plaza and Olvera Street are now, which was a few feet higher. What became Chinatown was subject to too-frequent flooding.
new rich people are bad and speculation but new poor people ore immigrants are good hoo?
Watching this from Europe is so weird. Gentrification is not what’s happening here. The river is a sewer and those low income neighborhoods are social economic ghettos/prison that need to open up and participate to society. There’s been decades of lacking investment in infrastructural and environmental projects. Incomes and backgrounds need to mix. You can’t choose the type of diversity you want if you want the community to succeed. Most of the new buildings are built up on vacant land, parking lots, and disinfected land. And that bike path must be a joke. They seriously couldn’t make it bigger? Where 6 lane stroads and sprawls are everywhere they couldn’t fit a bike and walk path? Seriously??? Pathetic planning.
👍 I’m glad you see through the BS
The elusive solution to economically depressed neighborhoods aside, the bike path is small very likely because it was the only space between the buildable edge of LA river infrastructure and adjacent property lines. The legal burden to reduce all river-adjacent lot sizes to create the optimal path width would effectively mean no bike path would ever get built, so it's nice they did the best they could with available space now I think. Substantial change that requires significant redevelopment will occur over decades as with most but cities, but the policies have to be put in place now to incentivize a new direction. Truly the hardest part is being patient. The tide is turning for sure but only a shortsighted person will check back next year and roll their eyes because it hasn't been transformed into a utopia yet.
There is no space. You would have to eliminate businesses and homes to make thevpath wider.
The mistake was made when the LA River was first channeled. Had they thought back then to make the apron on both sides of the river much wider, things would be very different today.
Astroturf it l🧐
the land trust sgould hace to be reautirizes at leadt once a cubtury if notonce a geberation why should the great grabd cgildreb be force to stayy where the great gran parent creayer a great idea of a land trust,
The L.A. river is a sewer.
So was the river in Paris. But look at what they've been able to do in a few short years with that river.
How can you talk down colonizer's name for Whittier Narrows and then have a name, like Kimberly Johnson? See minute 19:05.
Yep nothing but irony, all the while wearing the "colonizers" clothes and accessories.. Natives should really move on..
Im sorry but tribal land? or tribal rituals on the LA river? C'mon. At some point you have to let go.
burn
@darrellr8534 There’s space for everyone 😊 a designated park like space along the river won’t take a big piece of the river bank. It’s 50 miles long with banks on both sides. That’s 100 miles of river front altogether. Plenty of space
Let's see 10 million homeless people crossed the border in the last three years. The American People whose tax money built the cities we live and worked in for 80 years, are being thrown in the streets across America not just LA. It's horrific. Thank your local government and wall street.
If I’m watching a video about transforming the river I don’t need a history lesson. Get to the point