University of Southern California



PPD 531: Community Development Strategy for Inglewood’s Arbor Neighborhood

Fall 2016 Fridays 9:00am-12:20pm Office Hours by Appointment

CLIFFORD W. GRAVES, FAICP, Adjunct Professor

Phone 310/407-9709 (cell) Email: cliffgraves39@

Planning Studio

This studio applies class and core studies to a real- world setting. In this case, the setting is a community in the city of Inglewood, immediately east of LAX. The Arbor Neighborhood is about to be buffeted by some regional development projects nearby. The studio will produce a community development plan taking advantage of these “action-forcing events” to revitalize the neighborhood. The projects and their regional benefits are not at issue; the challenge is to create local benefits from them as well.

Cities are living organisms, always evolving. Their evolution is uneven and nonlinear, pushed by internal and external forces. Effective city planning guides this dynamic to improve the quality of life and equity of benefits for the people who live and work there.

Inglewood is a city of 115,000 people. Ethnically diverse, it is a working-class city that is beginning to capitalize on its strategic location as “Gateway to LAX” and access to major transportation corridors. It is best known in the region as home to the Hollywood Park racetrack and casino. It will be the home of the Los Angeles Rams. Big changes are in the works:

• The Crenshaw/LAX Metro Line is under construction. Its route runs through the heart of the city, including a downtown station.

• The LAX modernization plan includes major changes to ground access, runway relocation, and new terminal facilities. Inglewood is heavily impacted.

• The 300-acre Hollywood Park site is being redeveloped into a mixed-use community east of the city’s center. The plan includes a stadium for the LA Rams. The entire project is fully entitled. The site is adjacent to the Forum, an event and concert venue similar to Staples Center in Los Angeles.

None of these projects is located within the Arbor Neighborhood, but each will have impacts there.

Other forces are at work that can planned for:

• The wave of “Silicon Beach” is spreading into Inglewood, inflating property values and accelerating demographic change.

• Like all communities, Inglewood residents and businesses are facing technological changes that will affect the way they live and work.

During this Studio, we’ll assess the impacts of each of these major projects and conduct a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis of the Arbor Neighborhood. The goal of our plan is to provide the best outcomes for the residents and businesses there.

Group collaboration is the critical part of this Studio. Students will apply the sub-disciplines of planning (transportation, sustainability, economic development, community-based planning, fiscal planning, land use, etc.) to create an integrated strategy for the neighborhood. The class will include lectures, discussions, site visits, and guest presentations. Communication skills are important: students will use a variety of techniques for presentations and discussions. Students are expected bring their own personal/professional experiences to the class work.

All reports and presentations will be packaged as briefings for a specific client: The Mayor of Inglewood. The Mayor is a busy person. Individual reports must be packaged for absorption in 5 minutes or less. This implies a tight structure and liberal use of graphics and charts. Team and group presentations should not exceed 15 minutes. Backup material belongs in appendices.

Most individual reports will be shared among all students. They are “building blocks” for the final, group project.

The readings are the foundation for the lectures and class discussions, as well as plan development. Assigned readings are to be completed prior to class.

Most class sessions will be part lecture-and part discussion or workshop. The first half of the semester will focus on neighborhood and project analyses and “how-to” lectures. The second half will be focus on plan development.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND GRADES

• Class Discussion/participation 20%

• Writing Assignments 25%

• Midterm Project 30%

• Final Project Portfolio 25%

Students will attend all classes and actively participate in discussions and group exercises. Late assignments will be graded down substantially. While allowances will be made for personal and medical needs, unexcused absences will be penalized.

Assignments

A number of reports, projects and presentations will be assigned during the semester. Each will be linked to lectures and class discussions. The list below is subject to change as the studio proceeds, but illustrates the types and range of assignments to expect.

1. Impact Analyses

The first half of the course will focus on the forces driving change in our Inglewood community. Each student will work on one of those forces, and present findings as a midterm project. As noted above, the forces are:

• Hollywood Park Redevelopment

• The NFL Stadium

• Crenshaw/LAX Metro Line

• LAX Redevelopment

• Silicon Beach

• Transportation Technology

• Community Demographics and Economic Activity

• Community Land Use and Transportation

The results of these analyses will be the basis for the Final Project.

2. Occasional Papers

From readings and class discussions, students will be assigned short (2-4 page) reports. Most will be assigned as our project proceeds, with 2-week turnaround. Topics of the first two papers are:

• Inglewood Snapshot

• Views of a “good” community

3. Final Project

Working in teams and as a group, students will prepare a proposed community development plan and benefits strategy for The Mayor’s consideration.

Reading List

• Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Delacorte Press, 1983

• Alvin Toffler, Future Shock , (any edition)

• Sidney Brower, Neighbors & Neighborhoods, American Planning Association 2013

• Cherry, Rubin, Tawilian, & Clark, Neighborhood Rx; What makes Urban Districts Thrive? RTKL, 2014

• Roberta Brandes Gratz, We’re Still Here, Ya Bastards, Nation Books, 2015

• Drier, Mollenkopf & Swanstrom, “Urban Politics and City Limits: What Cities Can and Cannot Do,” in Place matters: Metropolitcs for the Twenty-First Century. University Press of Kansas, 2004

• Coates & Humphereys, “Can New Stadiums Revitalise Urban Neighbourhoods?” in Significance, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 2011

• LA Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Crenshaw LAX Transit Corridor Final EIR/EIS, 2011

• Los Angeles World Airports Specific Plan Amendment Study (SPAS), Environmental Impact Report and Specific Plan, 2013

|Weekly Schedule (Tentative) |Topic | | Studio | | Assignment |

| | | | | | |

|26-Aug | | | | | |

|Introductions | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Good Community | | | | | |

|Inglewood Snapshot | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|2-Sep | | | | | |

|Plan for Change | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|City Tour | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Future Shock | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|9-Sep | | | | | |

|Future Shock | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Project Research | | | | | |

|The Art of War | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|16-Sep | | | | | |

|The Art of War | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Progress Reports | | | | | |

|Client Research | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|23-Sep | | | | | |

|Knowing the Client | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Community SWOT | | | | | |

|Getting to Yes | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|30-Sep | | | | | |

|Getting to Yes | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Technology | | | | | |

|Draft Reports | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|7-Oct | | | | | |

|Infographics | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Draft Reports | | | | | |

|Midterm Paper | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|14-Oct | | | | | |

|MIDTERM PROJECT PRESENTATIONS | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Benefits Package | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|21-Oct | | | | | |

|Community Benefits | | | | | |

|Midterm Debrief | | | | | |

|Urban Rx | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|28-Oct | | | | | |

|Community Plan Outline | | | | | |

|Missing Pieces/Task Assignments | | | | | |

|Good Community Update | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|4-Nov | | | | | |

|The Art of War II | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Negotiations | | | | | |

|"We're Still Here…" | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|11-Nov | | | | | |

|Plan Pitfalls | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Plan Development | | | | | |

|Draft Task Elements | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|18-Nov | | | | | |

|Review Plan Elements | | | | | |

|Plan Development | | | | | |

|Final Report | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|25-Nov | | | | | |

|THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|2-Dec | | | | | |

|FINAL PROJECT PRESENTATION | | | | | |

|Course Debrief/Wrap-Up | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|26-Aug |Introductions | |Good Community |Inglewood Snapshot |

|2-Sep |Plan for Change | |City Tour | |Future Shock |

|9-Sep |Future Shock | |Project Research |The Art of War |

|16-Sep |The Art of War | |Progress Reports |Client Research |

|23-Sep |Knowing the Client | |Community SWOT |Getting to Yes |

|30-Sep |Getting to Yes | |Technology |Draft Reports |

|7-Oct |Infographics | |Draft Reports |Midterm Paper |

|14-Oct |MIDTERM PROJECT PRESENTATIONS | | |Benefits Package |

|21-Oct |Community Benefits |Midterm Debrief |Urban Rx |

|28-Oct |Community Plan Outline |Missing Pieces/Task Assignments |Good Community Update |

|4-Nov |The Art of War II | |Negotiations |"We're Still Here…" |

|11-Nov |Plan Pitfalls | |Plan Development |Draft Task Elements |

|18-Nov |Review Plan Elements |Plan Development |Final Report |

|25-Nov |THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY | | | |

|2-Dec |FINAL PROJECT PRESENTATION |Course Debrief/Wrap-Up | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download