Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Community organizations and general plan adoption: a critical evaluation of the effect of community organizations on the adoption of an urban general plan
(USC Thesis Other)
Community organizations and general plan adoption: a critical evaluation of the effect of community organizations on the adoption of an urban general plan
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS AND GENERAL PLAN ADOPTION u A Critical Evaluation of the Effect of Community Organizations on the Adoption of an Urban General Plan by James Lee Arnold f f ? A Thesis Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE (City and Regional Planning) August 1965 UMI Number: EP64767 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI EP64767 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 Pu '6 6 /? 73'6 This thesis, w ritten by . . . . J ame s _ Lee^to .................. under the direction of the undersigned Guidance Committee, and approved by a ll its members, has beeji presented to and accepted by the Faculties of the School of P u b lic A d m in istra tio n and the School of A rchite ctu re and F in e A rts in p a rtia l fu lfillm e n t of the requirements fo r the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING Date. . C hai^an ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My heaviest debt in terms of this study lies with my thesis committee, Philip Brown and Ralph Crouch. When an opportunity arose for me to accept a Ford Foundation position in Eastern India their assistance allowed me to complete the final study prior to my departure date. For help in conducting the Whittier research I 'leaned heavily on the good will of Jaques DuBois and Elvin Porter whose kindness in allowing time off for appointments Iconcerning the study made it all possible. I further owe I ta research debt to Margaret Fulmar, Whittier's helpful librarian. I I A number of former instructors helped me clarify I I ideas and suggested specific areas of research. I am particularly grateful to John W. Reith of the Geography Department and to Arthur Grey, former Chairman of the Department of City and Regional Planning. I would like to express my appreciation to Mary Ellison for her intelligent contributions on matters of clarity, organization, and style and to Arlene Taslitz for typing the final manuscript under the pressure of time. I also owe a particular debt to Mary Bempechat for pointing me in the right direction in terms of University procedure. i ii iii My thanks is a meager acknowledgment for the good humor and interest of my wife Bernadette M. Arnold. Her I work as proofreader, thesaurus, and baby sitter for a I period of two years made this study possible. Finally, I acknowledge my obligation to all the citizens of Whittier who answered my questionnaires and permitted themselves to be interviewed. This study was ; dependent on their cooperation and willingness to share information and opinions. For many reasons the persons who furnished me with information must go nameless but to all those who may recognize their contributions I would like to express my thanks. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS........................................ ii LIST OF T A B L E S ........................................ vi ; Chapter i I. THE PROBLEM AND THE HYPOTHESIS............. 1 The Problem The Hypothesis I II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE: THE CONCEPT AND THEORY OF COMMUNITY POWER............. 13 I The Concept of Community Power The Theory of Community Power Studies Evaluation of Important Studies Evaluation of Other Studies I III. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE: THE URBAN : GENERAL P L A N ..................... 44 The Concept of the General Plan Evolution of the General Plan Concept The General Plan After World War II Evaluation of General Plans to Date IV. THE EVOLUTION OF THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN . 69 Development of a General Plan Proposal ! Presenting the General Plan Proposals Public Hearings by the Planning Commission V. EVALUATION OF THE EFFECT OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS..............................125 Evaluation of Public Opinion Evaluation of Consent Evaluation of Primary Groups Evaluation of Secondary Groups Evaluation of Effect IV V Chapter Page VI. CONCLUSION....................................... 154 I BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................ 170 ; APPENDIXES................................................ 182 LIST OP TABLES Table Page 1. Replies to Selected Questions on the General Plan: A Sample of Opinion of Organized Groups, Spring, 1964 ......................... 128 i 2. Replies to Selected Questions on the General | Plan: League of Women V o t e r s ..................130 3. Replies to Selected Questions on the General Plan: Coordinating Council .................. 132 4. Replies to Selected Questions on the General Plan: Chamber of Commerce......................136 5. Replies to Selected Questions on the General Plan: Motor Car Dealers Association...........138 6. Replies to Selected Questions on the General Plan: Quad Association........................ 140 7. Replies to Selected Questions on the General Plan: North Central Whittier Home Owners Association ............................. 142 8. Replies to Selected Questions on the General Plan: Presumed Ultra-right .................. 145 9. Replies to Selected Questions on the General Plan: A Sample of Primary Organized Groups, Spring, 1964............................ 147 10. Replies to Selected Questions on the General Plan: A Sample of Secondary Organized Groups, Spring, 1964 ................ ..... 149 11. Respondents Who Had Heard of the Proposed General Plan, by Income and Education. A Sample of Organized Groups, Spring, 1964 . . . 157 12. Sources of Information About the Proposed General Plan: A Sample of Organized Groups, Spring, 1964 . 159 VI CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND THE HYPOTHESIS The Urban General Plan was initiated as a signif- I ■icant concept and a working document in the State of | California as a result of the 1955 amendment to the City and County Planning Enabling Act-^ which had replaced older legislation that had originally been extracted from the Standard City Planning Enabling Act.^ Added impetus was given to the General Plan because of the requirement for a ! comprehensive General or Master Plan as a condition of ; various Federally aided Urban Renewal and housing programs. Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954^ produced a veri table landslide of General Plans as a result of the urban I planning grants which offered Federal financial assistance ! I to prepare General Plan studies. To date, there has been Istate of California, Laws Relating to Conservation, i Planning, and Zoning (Sacramento, California: State of California Documents Section, 1953). 2u.s. Department of Commerce, Advisory Committee on , City Planning and Zoning, A Standard City Planning Enabling Act (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, ! 1928). ^United States Senate, Report of the Committee on Banking and Currency, Housing Act of 1954 (Washington, i D.C.: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government I Printing Office, 1954) . 2 ! 'no systematic attempt to evaluate the effect of community organizations in modifying General Plan proposals, nor has there been a detailed record and evaluation of the adoption process. The costs and the surprising fact that many General Plans have failed of adoption by the appropriate legislative bodies point to a dramatic need for evaluation of the adoption process. The Problem ; Statement of the Problem It is the purpose of this study (1) to trace in outline form the evolution of the General Plan concept, (2) to trace the evolution of community studies and to attempt to determine a method of evaluating the urban General Plan adoption process through the community study ^method, (3) to study the General Plan adoption process in i I one community and to evaluate the effect of community 'organizations on this process, (4) to discover problem areas in General Plan adoption worthy of further research ,and evaluation. Significance of the Study Owing to the insistence of Federal and State agen- 'cies that a General Plan precede the expenditure of their funds for various municipal projects, many of California's ^communities have availed themselves of the financial aid 3 for General Plan preparation available through urban plan ning grants from the Housing and Home Finance Agency under the provisions of Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954, as amended.^ The financial aspects of the situation alone are a cause for concern. In Whittier, California, the ; basis of this study, $25,550 of Federal and $25,550 of City | funds were expended to prepare the proposed General Plan. I These figures may be multiplied many times if one considers only the California communities that have prepared proposed i General Plans. The total dollar figures for the nation ' would be staggering. The value of long-range planning programs, such as that illustrated by the General Plan concept, is such a i I cornerstone of modern American planning theory that the I author will not attempt to discuss this point, but will jrather turn his attention to the attitude of the general j ! public. ! I : It is possibly true that the general public is apathetic, but not hostile, toward planning. The author feels that there is reason to believe that hostility and i I resistance generally reflect the attitudes of particular j groups or organizations. In the planning offices of many ^Housing and Home Finance Agency, Urban Renewal j Administration, Urban Renewal Manual, Policies and i Requirements for Local Public Agencies (Washington, D.C.: : Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1955), Book I, Chapter 2. ! 4 i : 'American communities are found quantities of colorful ' illustrated pamphlets setting forth the general or Master Plan of Llie community. Unfortunately, many of these proposals have not passed the preliminary stages and have ; not been adopted by the appropriate legislative bodies. j Little use is then made of these expensive documents and the programs which they represent, during the day-to-day activities of the planning agency, since they do not repre-, sent the official policy of the legislative body. One reason for this may be the failure of the local i ; ; planning agency to "feel the pulse" of the local community. : The general problem is that emphasis on the physical approach to planning without regard for public opinion has ' resulted in many discarded plans and projects. Although no i planning problem that covers the wide area of consideration ,involved in a proposed General Plan possibly can meet the I idesires of the entire community, some effort should be made i j in advance, in modern planning, to determine the opinions ; ,of important segments of the community in regard to plan- ' ning. A planner working with an accurate picture of the desires of the community can shape policy proposals that I will reflect the public interest and result in the broad public support that so often is lacking. It has become necessary for planners to keep in mind I "for whom," and "for what," any Plan is developed. The I I power structure of a society is very important in giving I direction to policies upon which plans are based. For this reason, the orientation of planning will be determined in large part by the power structure. Two factors will tend to modify this situation somewhat, but probably will not reverse it in most instances: (1) Greater knowledge can iexpand the area of common understanding, and with it, the ! area of common agreement. Full knowledge of a subject jwithin the community reduces the variety and differences of opinion and helps to produce consensus concerning the ,choices that should be made. (2) A community that is well : informed is in a position to limit the "grabbing" or ; sabotaging of planning proposals by any one special- 'interest group. I Harvey S. Perloff suggests that one of the major .stumbling-blocks to the realization of city planning objectives is the hostility of organized groups within the city towards the idea of planning or towards particular ,provisions of a P1an.^ Many plans are unenforceable because so much opposition is aroused that municipal governments fail to support them adequately through zoning or other ordinances. Most city planning commissions make ^Harvey S. Perloff, "Knowledge Needed for Comprehensive Planning" in Donald J. Bogue (éd.). Needed ,Urban and Metropolitan Research joint publication of Scripps Foundation for Research in Population Problems, 1 Miami University (Ohio) and Population Research and ITrainning Center, University of Chicago (Oxford, Ohio : 'Scripps Foundation, Miami University, 1953), pp. 4-10. 1 6 ^systematic efforts to obtain the support of the general public through hearings, discussions, and press coverage. In short, the urban planning grants made available to communities have resulted in the drafting of a number ,of General Plan proposals, but not without certain exces sive over-all costs due to the failure of many of these documents to become official policy. Although the extent of the costs and the benefits is yet to be determined, it would appear that an evaluation of the adoption process is required in order to justify the continued spending of I 'public funds, to determine the problems in the adoption process, and to insure the improvement of future General Plan programs. The Hypothesis jMai or Hypothesis of the Study j It is the writer's thesis that significant changes i : in proposed General Plans may be made by community organ izations at the time of public hearings and that the effect ■of these groups is directly related to: I 1. the power of the organized group in the community. 2. the degree of interest and attention devoted by the group to the field of planning and to the adoption or lack of adoption of a General Plan. j The author also feels that there is a reason to I believe that strong public opinion in support of the i General Plan proposals is required if any such proposal is 7 to become public policy, since General Plan proposals often ' are in direct conflict with the concerns of vested economic , interests. Scope and Organization of the Study The research on the social and political dynamics of . t i _ the community outlined in these pages focuses on a single objective. That objective is a better understanding of the attitudes towards one planning proposal exhibited by the leadership of an American suburban community. The major item that this study will attempt to evaluate is the thesis that a significant measurable effect on a proposed General Plan may be made by various organized groups, depending ,upon their position in the local power structure and their ! interest in this particular planning issue. The author is .not attempting to demonstrate that a certain "power group" , I exists, but rather that for this particular issue in this I ; iparticular community, a certain arrangement of the power • structure is formed.^ A great deal of further research and i ; : I work must, of necessity, be undertaken before definitive j 1 answers are available as to the effect of organized groups ' ■ I on community planning problems. The shaping of our future ; suburban life seems likely to continue as a result of 'complicated public— private interaction. Suburban problem ^For further discussion of this subject see; Dahl, Robert A., Who Governs ? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961). i 8 ! solving is a matter of both individual and group action. The actions of individual private citizens, politicians, and administrators are obviously of importance in a consid eration of a civic planning action, but the author is ,attacking the problem as a system of interacting groups. A, ! certain functional population composed of organized groups i ! ,will be specified and the members will be given the atten tion that has in the past been given to the general popu lation, which often comprises a cross-section sample. In order to cut the problem down to manageable size, - several assumptions were made. Among the most important ' ,was that a survey of each individual member of an organized group would be of little value, since the official head of each group could be presumed to speak for at least the majority of the membership. It was felt that a survey of the presidents of each organized group would result in an i accurate conception of the attitudes of the groups and, in | fact, of the community. Another decision in terms of 'reducing the problem to manageable proportions was to check I ,the previously stated ideals of the group in the pre- 'hearing survey against the group action at the public I I hearings and the effect of the group on the General Plan : proposals. Methodology Whittier, California, was selected for the study 9 1 I * because of the status of its General Plan proposals at the time the study was to be made. The community had just accepted the final documents in the consultant's study. A series of informative lectures was scheduled prior to public hearings on the General Plan proposals. A list of organized groups was obtained from the ’ I local Chamber of Commerce and was expanded to include every organized group that the author and his informants thought could possibly influence planning. The list included: The Chamber of Commerce, business organizations, professional groups, realty board, and religious councils. Womens' clubs, service clubs, and homeowner groups also were included. The list was somewhat general by intent and i groups were included that were not presumed to be power groups, in the event they proved to be power groups in I their performance at the public hearings. I The pre-hearing survey was administered to the | ■ selected sample group by means of the mailed questionnaire technique under university letterhead. This form of survey was used for several reasons. One of the principal reasons' was the confidence in the university presumed to be held ■by the individuals who were surveyed. Responses were obtained in this manner that might not have been forth coming if the questionnaire had been submitted by an I ^See appendix for a list of specific organizations. 10 I iindividual. As a public employee, the author also faced i the problem of dealing with many of the individuals con tacted in the course of his daily work. He felt that a directed interview would introduce bias due to the attempt of the group president to present an acceptable public image to a public employee. Criteria for selecting the local groups followed the ! wide guidelines established by Robert A. Dahl for deter- mining local power groups : 1. Money and Credit 2. Control over jobs 3. Control over the information of others 4. Social Standing 5. Knowledge and Expertness 6. Popularity, Esteem, Charisma 7. Legality, Constitutionality, Officality 8. Ethnic Solidarity 9. Right to vote® The questionnaire was directed to the president of each organization. A sample questionnaire is found in the appendix. ^Robert A. Dahl in Social Science and Community Action, Charles R. Adrian (ed.) (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1960). 11 Operational Definitions The following terms are considered essential in order to communicate the author's hypothesis. Community Organization. A community organization is defined as a collection of individuals organized because of a common area of interest or need, who have agreed upon i their field of interest or need, priority of problems to be| considered by the group, and the pursuit of one or more Î .common goals. The degree of organization will include designation of officers or spokesmen and the adoption of a 'name. General Plan. The following definition of a General : Plan is that proposed by Professor T. J. Kent, Jr. based on 'his almost unique experience in the planning field: over I 25 years as a city planner and teacher, and service as a Planning Commissioner and City Councilman. i The general plan is the official statement of a municipal legislative body which sets forth its major ; policies concerning desirable future development; the i Ï published general-plan document must include a single, I unified general physical design for the community, and ' ; it must attempt to clarify the relationships between ■ physical-development policies and social and economic ! goals.9 Since the title of Article 7 of the Conservation, Planning, and Zoning Laws of the State of California i ®T. J. Kent, Jr., The Urban General Plan (San I Francisco : Chandler Publishing Company, 1964), p. 18. i 12 implies that "master plan" and "general plan" are inter changeable terms, the author feels it is appropriate to do the same.1® Instate of California, Laws relating to Conservation, Planning, and Zoning, op. cit., p. 27. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE: THE CONCEPT AND THEORY OF COMMUNITY POWER : The concept of community power has evolved from a Ï i I series of investigations, running from Robert and Helen I Lynd's classic study of "Middletown"1 conducted in the late 1920's, to the massive five-volume treatment of "Yankee City" made by W. Lloyd Warner. Warner studied social I I life,2 status,^ ethnic groups,social systems in factor- ' ies,^ and other related material in the first four volumes , of the study, while his fifth volume. The Living and the I Dead,^ has little of importance to offer in the specific iRobert S. and Helen M. Lynd, Middletown (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1929). 2w. Lloyd Warner and Paul S. Lunt, The Social Life of a Modern Community, Yankee City Series 1 (New Haven : Yale University Press, 1941). ^W. Lloyd Warner and Paul S. Lunt, The Status System of a Modern Community, Yankee City Series 2 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1942). "^W. Lloyd Warner and Leo Srole, The Social Systems of American Ethnic Groups, Yankee City Series 3 (New Haven : Yale University Press, 1945). ^W. Lloyd Warner and J. O. Low, The Social System of the Modern Factory, Yankee City Series 4 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1947). I ^W. Lloyd Warner, The Living and the Dead, Yankee I City Series 5 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959). L _ , . 13_____ . . . _________ ___ _____ 14 area of community power. The total body of careful I 'research in this field has become so great that certain ■ authors have devoted entire books to an evaluation of the leading studies in the field, to determine if the research ers ' studies had proven to be a valid test of the hypoth- 'esis advanced.^ Thus, the amount of attention devoted to ' i I (community studies has been extensive. : The Concept of Community Power 'Definition Nelson W. Polsby conceives of community power as the capacity of an individual or group of individuals acting in concert to do something which affects another ^ individual or group insofar as the action changes the ! probable pattern of specified future events.^ This theory ; I jis predicated on the proposition that the upper socio- j I economic classes have more power than the lower classes. I I i ,The Need for Community Power Studies ! ; A fundamental question that may be asked is, "Why are community power studies necessary?" The answer is that (1) they are necessary to analyze the outcome in almost any I form of social life, (2) the presence of these studies ^Nelson W. Polsby, Community Power and Political ! Theory (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963). ^Ibid., pp. 3-6. 1 15 allows an analysis of decision-making, (3) the studies illuminate the reasons for decisions that affect large segments of local communities, (4) the studies provide a testing ground for Established and proposed political theories. Since the concern of this study is the effect of decisions on General Plan adoption, we shall be primarily concerned with community power as it may affect the urban environment. The Theory of Community Power Studies The political theory contained in most community power studies visualizes power as an aspect of the commu nity's social structure. "The political organization of Jonesville," says Warner, "fits the rest of the social ■ structure . . . curving or bulging with the class outlines jof the body politic."® This quotation is used to advantage I I by Polsby in his discussion of stratification theory. He ! i suggests the following propositions as valid assertions (about power under the stratification concept: I ; 1. The upper class rules in community life. ‘ 2. Political and civic leaders are subordinate to the upper class. ! 3. A single power elite rules the community. I ®W. Lloyd Warner and August B. Hoilingshead, , Democracy in Jonesville (New York: Harper and Brothers, I 1949), p. 18. I 4. The upper-class power elite rules in its own interests. 5. Social conflict takes place between the upper and lower classes.10 The stratification concept has been primarily -advanced by sociologists. The popularity of this concept ;may be gained from the degree of acceptance that was accorded to Floyd Hunter's book. Community Power Structure, shortly after its publication. Of particular importance was the acclaim of public administrators and political scientists who highly praised Hunter's work. ;Robert T. Darland, William G. Gore, and Fred S. Silander praised Community Power Structure in an article in Administrative Science Quarterlyl2 and favorable reviews were written by Donald S. Strongly and Louis Smith. The second concept of an approach to community power studies is that termed the pluralist approach by Polsby. To summarize the comments of Polsby and others in the ^®Polsby, op. cit., pp. 8-11. llpioyd Hunter, Community Power Structure (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1953). 12Robert T. Darland, William J. Gore, and Fred S. Silander, "A Bibliugraphical Essay in Decision-making," Administrative Science Quarterly, IV (June, 1959), 106. l^Donald S. Strong, book review in American Political Science Review, XLVIII (March, 1954), pp. 235-37. ^^Louis Smith, book review in Journal of Politics, XVI (February, 1954), pp. 146-50. 17 Ifield, the basic assumptions of the pluralist theory may I be stated as follows: ' 1. Nothing categorical can be assumed about power in any community. 2. It should be questioned whether anybody runs the community rather than assumed that anyone at all 5 runs it. 1 3. A study of specific outcomes will determine who actually prevails in decision-making. 4. Decision-making is unlikely to reproduce itself in more than one area. This theory has been popular with political scien tists. The primary example of a detailed study that 'utilizes this theory is Robert A. Dahl's Who Governs?, There are some political scientists who are stratifica- tionists^G and some sociologists who are pluraliste, but Ehe identification of the two fields with each theory is strong enough to warrant comment. l^Robert A. Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959). ! ^^Robert E. Lane, Political Life (Glencoe, Illinois : The Free Press, 1959). I l^Arthur J. Vidich and Joseph Bensman, Small Town in Mass Society (Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1958). 18 Evaluation of Important Studies I Power studies in American communities have been made on an intermittant basis since the Lynds' landmark attempts in the middle 1920's and again in the mid-1930's. ■Today the published works in the field have reached the ‘ jpoint where some evaluation of these studies of community | I I ,life is essential to establish a background for this study ! and to emphasize the factors to be considered in this study ,of the City of Whittier, California, as it attempts to implement modern planning techniques through the adoption of a General Plan. Muncie, Indiana The pioneering effort in community power studies I was the investigation conducted by Robert and Helen Lynd I 1 Q I in Muncie, Indiana, in the 1920's. The Lynds revisited I the community in the 1930's^^ to restudy their earlier I findings in the light of the effects a decade of time 'might have. They observed in the earlier study that the 20 power group in the community was the "business class," ^^Robert S. Lynd and Helen M. Lynd, Middletown (New ; 'York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company, 1929). I ! l^Robert S. Lynd and Helen M. Lynd, Middletown in Transition (New York: Harcourt. Brace, and Company, I 1937) . ! ^^Middletown, op. cit., pp. 354, 434, 476. 19 but that ten years later control centered in an "inner business control group" that was concentrated in the hands ■of the "X" family.^i In the view of the Lynds, private business was the dominant force in the community,22 and the persons who made up the "inner business control group" 2 3 were so identified by the community. In the earlier study it was apparent that business- jmen held higher community prestige than city officials and political figures and that the situation became more marked in the 1930's because businessmen controlled both 'the national political parties in M u n c i e . ^5 The Lynds observed that "the control system operates at many points to identify public welfare with business class w e l f a r e . The most prominant example found by the Lynds was the increase of 50 per cent in the local police force, after i I General Motors located in Muncie; the city is said to have ! pledged that there would be no labor trouble if the 27 'corporation opened a plant. One factor that seemed to puzzle the Lynds was the lack of class conflict in Muncie. They found "a common 21 Middletown in Transition, op. cit. 22ibid., p. 377. 23%bid., p. 459. ■ 24Robert S. Lynd and Helen M. Lynd, Middletown, op. cit., p. 434. ; ^^Robert S. Lynd and Helen M. Lynd, Middletown in ’Transition, op. cit., p. 329. . 26lbid. , p.. 99. 27jbid. , p. 351. 20 sense of direction"^® among the power structure, in ’contrast with the disorganized condition found among the : working population of the community. I This Middletown working class, nurtured on business- ^ class symbols, and despite its rebellious Roosevelt vote in 1936, may be expected to follow patiently and j even optimistically any bright flag a middle-class ! ; strong man waves.29 | : I ■ The extent to which the Lynds believe that their ; ; I : studies indicate a complete dominance of the business class| I , may best be understood when they say that the business I class . . . bother to inject just enough control over the confusion of local politics to insure a tolerable tax rate, support for "sound" municipal cooperation in I maintaining an open-shop town, control over the numerically dominant working class, and similar broad policies calculated to enable their central business I of money-making to go forward without too much inter- i ference.20 I Newburyport, Massachusetts The most extensive, detailed, and lengthy study yet made of an American community is W. Lloyd Warner's five volume study of Newburyport, Massachusetts.^^ Warner has ' little to offer that relates specifically to the subject ' of community power except for the limited discussion of the subject in one chapter of The Social Life of a Modern 2Glbid., pp. 91, 93. ^^Ibid., pp. 454-55. 30 Ibid., p. 89. 31see footnotes 2 thru 6, Chapter II for detailed reference to Warner's studies. I ^Community. I n this chapter Warner makes the following comment: In summary it can be said that the upper classes, together with the upper middle class, dominate the high control offices. They have a proportion of these offices far out of keeping with their representation in the general population. The remaining volumes of the Yankee City Series also deal with power struggles in that they discuss conflict and divergence of interest; but for the purposes of this study, only the material cited above offers a real analysis of community power. Morris, Illinois— Study I W. Lloyd Warner conducted a study of Morris, a 'small northern Illinois community, prior to World War ill.34 The purpose of this particular study was to find a connection between social status and social participation. I I Warner confined his research almost entirely to a study of I the political party organization, rather than dwelling on * the actual office holders. Warner describes in detail the domination of the Republican Party in "Jonesville" poli tics. He found that three leaders shared the power: an ^^W. Lloyd Warner and Paul S. Lunt, The Social Life of a Modern Community, Yankee City Series 1 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1941), pp. 365-78. ' 33ibid., p. 372. Lloyd Warner and August B. Hollingshead, Democracy in Jonesville, op. cit. 1 2 2 elderly Irish, Roman Catholic judge, a rich attorney with good connections in state Republican circles, and the young editor of the local newspaper,It is clear that the policies of the three differed only slightly and that they constantly competed with each other for power within the party, The researchers also found the local Democratic 37 party faced with the problem of divided leadership. In fact, the local Democrats subsisted on patronage offered at the State and Federal levels rather than on any largess available at home. Warner seemed to feel that the .dominance of the Republicans was due in no small measure to some skill in dealing with the voters and that the economic dominance of the party contributed to rather than determined the outcome of local elections.39 j Morris, Illinois— Study II I August Hollingshead also made a study of Morris prior to the beginning of the Second World War.^^ This study attempted to discover some relationship between social status and social participation, just as Warner's i 3^Ibid., pp. 226-31. 36%bid., pp. 230-31. 37ibid., p. 228. 38ibid., p. 234. 39ibid., pp. 234-35. I ^^^j^ugust B. Hollingshead, Elmtown's Youth (New I York: Wiley, 1949). 23 had done. Although both studies were made about the same : i subject and in the same community, they were independent I I of each obher and each is considered to be a scholarly work in the field. Hollingshead's study centered about financial ! 1 ! provision for the local high school system, and although t ! i I he cited various factors to related social status to j apparently unrelated subjects that might prove of interest, the comments made here only apply to his remarks about 'those persons who controlled the community. Hollingshead quotes an unnamed informant's description of power in the | community in this manner: "It's an aristocracy of wealth, : nothing else. . . . This is the group that can really put | on the pressure. They own a lot of interests, land, town property, the banks and other things, and they have great I prestige and power.Hollingshead says that power ; conflicts were rare and that most of the community took j the "control of community institutions by the upper classes" as "natural." He also states that the upper ,classes controlled community affairs by maintaining effec- 1tive control of both major political parties. His thoughtsi I are best expressed in the following sentence: "This behind-the-scenes control results in formulation of con servative policies and the election of officials who act j------------------------------------------------------------------ I , p . 7 2 . I I in the capacity of agents for Class I interests 24 „42 Both Warner and Hollingshead agree that many community decisions were apparently predetermined to favor the upper class. The discussions of community power in 'both books stress as typical manifestations such factors as high status, high economic position, political connec tions, political position or office, control of the local newspaper, and to a lesser extent, numbers in terms of voting strength. It is difficult to determine the validity of the propositions about power advanced by the authors since both studies to some extent cite examples of failure of the upper class to prevail. Hollingshead cites the lower 'classes' successful fight for school i m p r o v e m e n t s ^ 3 and Warner discusses the successful unionization of the town's ,principal industry.These failures would seem to lend I some doubt to the proposition that the upper classes constitute the absolute power structure claimed for them. Atlanta, Georgia The Lynds' studies of Muncie marked the beginning I of important investigations of community power structure, but the giant of the contemporary scene is Floyd Hunter's ■^^Ibid. . p. 86. ‘ ^^Ibid. , p. 135. i 44w . Lloyd Warner and August B. Hollingshead, 'Democracy in Jonesville, op. cit., pp. 106-12. 25 study of Atlanta, Georgia, which he chose to call 4 5 ! "Regional City." Hunter studied the subordination of | civic and political leaders to a power elite which he ^ considered to be composed of the financial and business leaders in Atlanta.He tells us that even the governor of the state was controlled by the business interests: !". . . It became apparent that an economic elite member ■ 47 was the power behind the Governor." Hunter felt that I S one of the policies of the business-controlled community was maintenance of the status quo, sometimes expressed as, 48 "don't rock the boat." Hunter says: "When new policy is laid down it must be consistent with the general scheme of old policy and should not radically change basic ' alignments of settled policy. The method which Hunter used to reach his conclu- j sions has gained widespread acceptance as a scientifically I valid approach to the study of community p ower.^0 The ! Î : :method used was that of securing lists of community leaders! i ! ; from managers of four civic organizations, and then asking i ; a panel to cut the resulting list of about 175 names to a j . _________________________________ ________________________ _ I ^3p]_oyd Hunter, Community Power Structure (Garden | I City, New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1963). 46Ibid., p. 81. 47jbid., p. 173. 48ibid., p. 179. ^^Ibid., p. 204. 50For a discussion of study methods used by Hunter 'see Polsby, op. cit., pp. 47-56. i 26 en ! short roster of the top leaders. The actual 175 name list consisted of four separate lists that attempted to name community affairs leaders, business or financial leaders, political leaders, and leaders of wealth and social prominance. The judges rated the top leaders on 'each list. Hunter combined the opinions of the various ! ; judges to end up with list of 40, made up of the 10 highest scoring names on each list. Hunter's chart of occupations of the top 40 leaders fails to coincide with his delineation of the power structure and has been subject to criticism for this r e a s o n . 32 The criticism of Hunter's method seems to be somewhat justified since some members of his list appear ! to have been society playboys and various critics point out that Hunter presupposed the existence of a group of top, jleaders before establishing the existence of such a ! g r o u p . 33 There is some indication that even Hunter had | I ■ i ■some misgivings about his panel of judges, since he decided i 31nunter, op. cit., p. 62. / P- 75. i , 53The principal critics of Hunter's presumption of a group of top leaders prior to analysis of test results ! seem to come from staff members or former students in the Political Science Department of Yale University, the leading faculty member being Robert A. Dahl and graduate student Nelson W. Polsby. For more specific comments see, Robert A. Dahl, "Hierarchy, Democracy and Bargaining in Politics and Economics," in Research Frontiers in Politics and Government (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, * 1955), and Nelson W. Polsby, "Three Problems in the ! . Analysis of Community Power," American Sociological Review, XXIV (December, 1959), pp. 796-803. 27 'to conduct a separate study of Atlanta's Negro community: The need to study the Negro subcommunity in Regional City grew out of field experience. This community was found to represent a sub-power grouping of considerable ■ significance which could not be overlooked, particu larly since many of the issues suggested to the field investigator by white power personnel revolved around Negro-White relations.^4 <This author was impressed by Hunter's approach, but had i ! some misgivings about the use of the panel approach to the 1 ■ ; Whittier study, and the comments of Dahl and Polsby were instrumental in causing abandonment of the panel concept for use in the study of community power and its effect on Whittier's proposed General Plan. Baton Rouge, Louisiana Roland Pellegin and Charles Coates developed a study I of Baton Rouge on the basis of interviews with about 50 ' I leading businessmen, apparently using Hunter's study of IAtlanta33 as a model.3^ Some of their findings were quite , I similar to Hunter's: "The control of community affairs andj I policies resides in dominant interest groups which feel ' ! ! little incentive to disrupt the existing pattern of super- ! ! I ! ordination and subordination.The vote is evidently a 34Huntcr, op. cit., p. 262. ^Sponald J. Pellegin and Charles H. Coates, "Absentee-owned Corporations and Community Power j Structure," American Journal of Sociology, LXI (March, ^1956), pp. 413-19. I / P* 413. 28 stronger factor in Baton Rouge than in Atlanta, since the authors point out that "the lack of integration of Big- town's interest groups makes it possible for governmental I I officials to sponsor civic projects which are sometimes 'successful in spite of opposition from one or another of : the 'crowds. '"38 j Since much of the Baton Rouge study points to the ; conclusion that the authors' power group did not, in fact, I constitute the power elite of the community, the authors i reconcile the scattered policy-making found in their study I by stating that the managers of large corporations did not I ,constitute a typical power group because of their lack of interest in exercising power, their fear of bad publicity for their corporations, and the fact that they were seldom in agreement on a single issue. The authors still main tain, however, that "corporation support probably assures the success of a proposed project, while disapproval 1 I ■ spells doom for it."39 j Î It is difficult to decide on the basis of this ■ study if actual effective power groups existed in the community, since the authors limited their study to only the business community. This author feels that this study is typical of the important work whose usefulness is limited because the authors did not realize that they had I — : 58lbid., p. 414. 59ibid. 29 'set too narrow a scope for their study. Hunter, although he is criticized for it, decided to conduct a study of the Negro community in Atlanta in order to rectify his error in not structuring his study to include a specific look at power as reflected in this subcommunity.^0 I ' Ypsilanti, Michigan Robert O. Schulze made a study of Ypsilanti, i Michigan, to determine if industrialization had produced any shift in economic domination in a formerly rural community. Schulze found that economic domination of the community had shifted from the local residents into the control sphere of the local managers of absentee-owned corporations.31 This study in "Cibola," Schulze's term .for Ypsilanti, pointed to the smaller part economic dominance had in community d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g .^2 Schulze called the power structure "bifurcated" and pointed out i that power was shared by the economic dominants who had I"potential for determinative action" and "power leaders" I who had "overt direction of the political and civic life of Cibola. GOpor an excellent discussion of the weakness found ‘in this study, see Nelson W. Polsby, Community Power and ! Political Theory, op. cit., pp. 56-59. 33-Robert O. Schulze, "The Role of Economic Dominants in Community Power Structure," American Socio- ,logical Review, XXIII (February, 1958), pp. 6-9. 62Ibid. 63ibid. 30 Schulze thought that the large corporations could have had more influence over policy if they wished; how ever, he did not document this finding.• He studied two I community issues to determine power alignment: an effort to introduce the counci1-manager form of government, and ian attempt to annex county area adjacent to the commu- Jnity.^4- His findings here indicated that differing power ! I groups formed, depending on the issue involved, and that there was a new coalition for each issue. This pattern is somewhat like that found in Baton I Rouge by Pellegrin and C o a t e s , 35 and indicates a breakdown in the classic power elite pattern first observed by the Lynds' in Muncie in the 1 9 2 0 ' s .35 I Philadelphia, Pennsylvania A unique study made in the area of community power I is, Philadelphia Gentlemen, by Digby B a l t z e l l . 3 7 Baltzell j discusses the pattern of upper-class control in Phila- ! I delphia on the basis of an observation that businessmen 34Robert O. Schulze, "The Bifurcation of Power in a Satellite Community," in Morris Janowitz (ed.). Community Political Systems (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1951), pp. 60-63. 35Ronald J. Pellegrin and Charles H. Coates, "Absentee owned Corporations and Community Power Structure," op. cit., p. 414. 36Robert S. Lynd and Helen M. Lynd, Middletown, op. cit., pp. 354, 434, 476. Digby Baltzell, Philadelphia Gentlemen (Glencoe, Illinois : The Free Press, 1958) . I 31 predominate in the Social Register. Forty-two Phila delphians were in a position to exercise power, in the i opinion of Baltzell, since they were listed in Who's Who in America and also were members of the Rittenhouse or Philadelphia Clubs. He considered these 42 men to consti- ;tute the power elite of the community.^8 i Baltzell feels that the Philadelphia politicians are completely subordinate to the business elite and that they "serve the ends of the business elite."^9 He also comments on the fact that the community's aristocracy has ,no desire to hold public office.70 The factual arguments which Baltzell advances for his theory seem a bit thin, since they are based upon information from the Social j Register, Who's Who in America, The Dictionary of American I Biography, and other similar sources which would seem to evaluate social and professional status rather than 71 community power. Seattle, Washington Delbert C. Miller conducted a study of Seattle ("Pacific City") based on an elaboration of Floyd Hunter's I — 38lbid., p. 365. ^^Ibid., p. 35. ^^Ibid., e.g. pp. 170, 364. 7lAnother study of Philadelphia more adequately tests his assertions. See James Reichley, The Art of Government; Reform and Organization Politics in Philadelphia (New York: Fund for the Republic, 1959). 32 I ^Atlanta s t u d y . 72 Miller used a panel of judges who were asked to rate a list of 312 individuals supplied by j persons and organizations Miller considered to be knowl- | edgeable in regard to the power structure in Seattle. The I I ■ judges selected a total of 44 people, a group that Miller ■ termed "top influentials." These top influentials were then interviewed and asked to nominate leaders. The second list of leaders so obtained were called "key influentials" by M i l l e r . 73 Since the top group consisted largely of Ibusinessmen. Miller concluded: "Businessmen do exert a : predominant influence in community decision-making in 1 I'Pacific City.'"74 I Miller also seemed to feel that "cliques" were I running "Pacific City," the study designation for ! 75 Seattle. He based the theory on rather slender evidence which consisted principally of figures indicating that £ "key influentials" chose each other as members of the ! [ ’elite, knew each other better than they knew "top influ- :entials," and served on more committees and participated J 72p0ibert C. Miller, "Industry and Community Power I Structure," American Sociological Review, XXIII (February, 11958), pp. 9-15. ! I 23ibid.. p. 10. 24ibid.. p. 9. i 75]30iij03-t C. Miller, "Decision-making Cliques in I Community Power Structures," American Journal of Sociology, LXIV (November, 1958), pp. 299-310. i 33 in more organizations than the latter group. They also showed a slight tendency to belong to business groups or organizations as opposed to other types of organizations. Miller feels that the tendency for "key influentials" to belong to business organizations confirms his belief that the business groups and organizations are the most impor- ! 7 tant in the community. The factor of greatest importance to the Whittier study was a further validation of the author's belief that a panel concept for use in evaluating community power was not the best technique to use in determining the effect of community power on Whittier's proposed General Plan. Miller found that almost one-half of his interviews indi- I cated that there was no top group of leaders, but rather that the leadership varied in group composition depending upon the specific issue to be considered.^7 This finding seems to lend validity to the necessity of selecting some ,alternate technique to the panel concept. "Springdale," New York I Arthur Vidich and Joseph Bensman studied for a 'period of three years Lhe daily life of a small rural icommunity they chose to call "Springdale."^® This socio- ! 76ibid., p p . 3 0 1 - 3 0 3 . 77ibid., pp. 3 0 5 - 3 1 0 . i 78Arthur J. Vidich and Joseph Bensman, Small Town : in Mass Society (Garden City, New York : Doubleday and I Company Inc., 1 9 5 8 ) . 34 I logical analysis of a small community of 2500 inhabitants, which is not identified with any existing community, describes both administrative function and individual influence in a type of community that has been vanishing from the American scene. Unlike some of the previous investigators, Vidich iand Bensman found little conflict among the elected ■ ; I officials. The Village Board which governed the incor- ;porated community "was conducted on the principle of unanimity of decision. In two years of observing the Village Board meetings in Springdale, all decisions brought; 'to a vote were passed u n a n i m o u s l y ."79 They found that members of the Village Board were local businessmen, with ■ few exceptions, and had been residents of the community for at least 10 years; in many cases, they were lifelong residents. The philosophy of the board seemed to be one 1 o r ) I of low taxes and business dominance.^ I On the other hand, the town board, with jurisdiction over local unincorporated area is dominated by prosperous : farmers acting as a pressure group on the actual board 1 ,members who are, for the most part, struggling farmers. ; Some town board members are Village residents or industrial, workers with little interest in township affairs, so the dominance of the prosperous farmers is not affected. 7 9 l b i d . , p . 112. S O j b i d . , p . 119. I S l l b i d . , p p . 153-58. 35 Of greater importance to the Whittier study was the ability of Vidich and Bensman to identify leadership in the community. They found that the community power structure in Springdale consisted of only four persons. The leaders Iwere the farm feed and mill operator, the editor of the !newspaper (who was also the town clerk), a lawyer, and the ' 89 I county committeeman for the Republican party. Other Î : individuals in the power structure were found to be I 'technical assistants to the power structure who performed needed tasks, such as publicity.The case study method, utilizing an extended observation period, seems to have yielded good results for the research team without the necessity of setting up panels such as Hunter's. Undoubt edly the size of the community was a factor in the success of the method. Chicago, Illinois An authoritative and scholarly study of who actually makes the decisions in Chicago has been made by Edward C. B a n f i e l d . 34 Professor Banfield explores the pattern of I 1 influence by means of the case study method and brings the insight of a political scientists into a field that pre viously has been the concern of the sociologist. ! GZibid.. p. 264. Q3jbid.. p. 270. ! ^‘ ^Edward C. Banfield, Political Influence (Glencoe, ' ; Illinois : The Free Press of Glencoe, 1961) . i : 36 Banfield states the purpose of the study in the j following words: "Its purpose is twofold: to describe and analyze an urban political system in one of its aspects and to contribute to the theoretical understanding of influence ; Q c in political settings of all kinds." He asks four questions: j I ( 1. Who has influence and who is subject to it? 2. How does influence "work"? 3. What are the terms upon which it is expended? 4. How is action concerted by influence?33 Banfield documents six case studies of political influence ; and then interprets them and formulates a theory of polit ical influence. Since Banfield's text places a high order of impor tance on politics and upon voting in particular, and 'evaluates the situations presented in this light, it is I I somewhat difficult to extract information in the form in I which conventional sociological power studies are eval- I i ’uated. One of Banfield's interviewers was able, however, : to obtain a candid statement from a member of the Chicago Plan Commission that reflects a finding of many of the more I recent studies— that the political figure is beginning to 'emerge as a real power figure rather than a "front" for I the economic interests. The Plan Commission member expressed this trend in the following comment: "Today the i 35jbid., p. 3. ®®Ibid., pp. 4-6. : 37%bid., pp. 224-250. 37 ' I 'tendency all over the country is for the public officials | 1 to take the lead more than they did a few years ago."®® That the political figure nevertheless is still veryi much influenced by the business community is expressed by ’ Î j 'Banfield in this manner: "The political head will be open ! I to suggestions. (When Mayor Daley took office, he imme- I diately wrote to three or four of the city's most prominent; ; businessmen asking them to list the things they thought I ' 8 g :most needed doing.)" Banfield states that Mayor Daley will not create a strong planning agency because it "would ; I have one fatal defect: its makers could not supply the 'seal of approval' which is, from the political head's 90 standpoint, its chief reason for being." Banfield is, of course, referring to the fact that a plan made by big business "is sure-fire, for the people who make it and the 91 I people who pass judgment are the same." ; One finding of Banfield's text that was of particu- | ' lar importance to the Whittier study was that civic asso- !ciations, such as the League of Women Voters, did not play ,a leading role in decision-making, but rather that commer- I ^ cial interests, public agencies, and semi-public agencies , I held the real power for d e c i s i o n . | ' ^ ^ I b i d . . p . 2 5 1 . S ^ I b i d . ! 9 0 l b i d . . p p . 2 5 1 - 2 5 2 . 9 1 i b i d . . p . 2 5 2 . 1 9 2 i b i d . . p . 2 6 5 . / 38 ! , Banfield considers the concept of millionaire "top ; i leaders" to be a myth created by Chicagoans.®® He holds the decentralization of power in the community to be responsible for the lack of comprehensive planning.®^ In j I i the final analysis, he returns to the politician as a source of power : "The governor, the mayor, and the presi dent of the County Board are all in positions to assert the supremacy of 'public values.'"®^ New Haven, Connecticut— Study I ; One of the most important studies yet made of the political structure of an American city in Robert A. Dahl's study of New Haven, Connecticut.®^ Professor Dahl begins with New Haven's incorporation in 1784 and analyzes the I ■ leadership structure in the community as it evolved through nearly 200 years. Although the study is in part a defense I of the pluralistic theory of local power structure, as ^ opposed to the stratification studies of Hunter and others, | it contains a wealth of information about community power i in New Haven. Dahl says that the average person is not attracted to political activity unless there is a threat to Ills ' I 93lbid. . p. 286. ^ p. 325. 95lbid., p. 340. 9^Robert H. Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961). 39 97 ! primary goals. He does feel, however, that there are I certain individuals who "find that political action is a powerful source of gratifications, both direct and | indirect."®® Dahl found that the blue-collar occupations * in New Haven were almost entirely lacking in political : I I : influence.®® On the other hand, he also found that "social I : ! : notables" had little direct influence on government deci- ■sions. He found that money can still be used to obtain favors and that political contributions provide the most 1 : effective opportunity to use money to political advan- J tage.^®^ Money and influence seemed to have some inter dependence since, as Dahl points out, "the poor man is not likely to gain high influence; but if he does, somehow 102 along the way he is not longer a poor man." Dahl also found definite connections between power ! i ; and such factors as legal sanction, popularity, and controlj ! i over jobs.3 Control over such sources of information as ! newspapers, radio, television and magazines, also was found to be an important power source. I---------------------------------------------------------------------------- . p. 225. ^®Ibid. 99ibid., p. 230. , pp. 233-38. ^®^Ibid., pp. 242-43. ; lOZibid., p. 245. ^O^Xbid., pp. 246-55. ; lO^Ibid., p. 257. 40 ' ' I Dahl's theory seems to have some validity as a j replacement for the stratification theory, but it did not | seem to lend itself to the situation in Whittier; and although it had some influence on the structure and concept | ' ! of the present research, the investigation of organized i groups and their influence on the proposed General Plan is essentially a stratification study. New Haven, Connecticut— Study II One of Dahl's students. Nelson W. Polsby, also made 'a study of community power in New H a v e n . The bulk of | his excellent work consists of an evaluation of major stratification studies in community power in which he pointed out the weakness of some aspects of each study, j and further attempted to demonstrate that a pluralist 'theory of community power would provide a more appropriate ! ; I I alternative. j i ! Polsby also attempted to explain some policy issues in New Haven by studying newspapers and public documents to determine the course of events.^®® Participants were then interviewed and asked to describe the events and their own roles in them. Polsby selected urban redevelopment, : I ' lOSj^glson W. Polsby, Community Power and Political Theory (New Haven: Ÿale University Press, 1963) . I lO^ibid., p. 69. ! 41 public education, and political nominations as areas worthy | of s t u d y . ' Polsby then studies these three areas in terms of a modified stratification theory, using a list of 239 persons and found that it would be difficult to prove a correlation I between his list of notables and influence in the areas of i s t u d y . ! Evaluation of Other Studies An Investigation of Related Studies Among the early important publications regarding ,the role of the organized group in'the community was Walter, I IW. Pettit's Case Studies in Community Organization,^®® ! published in 1928. Dr. Pettits' book is of interest ! ,because it attempted to evaluate the problems of two different communities, called "Athens" and "Brocton," and jthe effect various power groups in these communities had on, 'the speed of their development. Although the work was a sociology case book, it was of importance to this study in ,illustrating early thought in regard to the investigation of communities and their power structure. In particular, it attempted to consider the differing attitudes and I problems in an older suburb that was slowly developing, I ^®7jbid., pp. 71-84. 108ibid., p. 80. ' ^99i[^03_t02. . Pettit, Case Studies in Community 'Organization (New York: The Century Company, 1928). 42 and in a new suburb that was rapidly expanding. In 1929, Community Conflict was published by E. C. Carter.This text was notable for its discussion of community interests and the method through which they might be integrated. Another early text in the field was Community Leadership, by Walter Burr. Although Professor Burr was discussing leadership in semi-rural communities, his comments are valuable in showing small town leadership patterns in •various community projects. The 1934 study by Robert B. Hudson titled Radburn, 119 A Plan for Living, was a pioneer attempt to analyze the power structure and social values of a planned community. One of the primary sources of knowledge for all aspects of the suburban community is The Suburban Community, edited ,by William M. Dobriner.^^^ This volume consists of a icollection of articles about almost every aspect of the IAmerican suburb, written by various experts in the field. Another recent publication that bears on the problem is HGp. c Carter, Community Conflict (New York: The (Inquiry, 1929). ^^^Walter Burr, Community Leadership (New York: Prcntice-Hall, Inc., 1929). l^^RQbert B. Hudson, Radburn, A Plan for Living (New York: American Association for Adult Education, 1934). I M. Dobriner (ed.). The Suburban iCommunity (New York: G. P. Putnam & Sons, 1958). 43 i Community Political Systems, by Morris Janowitz. His chapters on community political analysis in the satellite •city are of particular interest. Another example of early attention of sociologists to suburban communities is The 115 ,Suburban Trend, by Harland P. Douglas. A more recent ; effort in this field is Small Town,^^^ by Granville Hicks. Î Other volumes that may be of some value to a 5 researcher in the field of community power studies and the manner in which they relate to planning in-suburban communities are Community Planning, by Herbert L. Mark, Jr.^117 Community Organization and Planning, by Arthur H i l l m a n , and Charles Adrian's Social Science and Community Action. i ^^^Morris Janowitz (ed.). Community Political ■ Systems (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1961) . ^^^Harland P. Douglas, The Suburban Trend (New York: The Century Company, 1925). llGcranville Hicks, Small Town (New York: Macmillan Company, 1946). Herbert L. Mark, Jr., Community Planning (New York: The H. W. Wilson Company, 1956). 1 • } 1 p Arthur Hillman, Community Organizations and 'Planning (New York: Macmillan Company, 1950). I ll^Charles Adrian (ed.). Social Science and Community Action (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1960). CHAPTER III I REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE: THE URBAN ] GENERAL PLAN I At the Third National Conference on City Planning \ > (held in 1911 Frederic Law Olmsted, Jr., presented a paper that described the urban General Plan in the following manner: We must cultivate in our minds and in the mind of the people the conception of a city plan as a device or piece of . . . machinery for preparing, and keeping constantly up to date, a unified forecast and defini tion of all the important changes, additions, and I extensions of the physical equipment and arrangement of the city which a sound judgment holds likely to become desirable and practicable in the course of time, so as to avoid so far as possible both ignorantly wasteful action and ignorantly wasteful inaction in ! the control of the city's physical growth.1 It would be difficult to reach a reasonable jconsensus among the leaders of the planning profession in ' regard to Olmsted's definition of a General Plan, since ; f ,ideas about the scope of the General Plan have altered somewhat in the 54 years since Olmsted defined it as he I ; visualized it. Most planners, however, are in agreement ■ ^Frederic Law Olmsted, Jr., "Reply in Behalf of the City Planning Conference," Proceedings of the Third National Conference on City Planning, Philadelphia, May 15-17, 1911 (Boston, 1911), pp. 3-13, cited by T. J. iKent Jr., The Urban General Plan (San Francisco: Chandler I Publishing Company, 1964), p. 1. ' 44 45 about the need for a long-range practical planning tool to | I serve the needs of their communities and there is general ; agreemeiiL that the General Plan concept seems to be the ■ best available method. The amount of research in the field has been extensive in recent years and an entire book on , General Plans has been written by Professor T. J. Kent of | 2 . I the University of California. His book. The Urban General * Plan, is indicative of the present interest in the General Plan concept. The Concept of the General Plan Definition The following definition of a General Plan derives from the author's concept of a General Plan from the view point of a working planner in a suburban community. This j definition is not peculiar to the General Plan, since some ! ; of the purposes of a General Plan are those of planning in general and of local government in particular. The General Plan includes the following elements: 1. A program for improvement of the physical environ ment of the community, to include appearance. 2. Promotion of the public interest as a whole rather than that of individuals or special groups. ^T. J. Kent Jr., The Urban General Plan (San I Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company, 1964) . 46 3. A presentation in a document reflecting community ^ values, interests and long-range activities and providing a means for accomplishing these objec tives . 4. Political and technical coordination of the development of the community. i i 5. Interjection of long-range considerations in short-j range actions. 6. Bringing some technical knowledge to bear on political decisions, to promote wiser decision- ! making. I The definition above is essentially the author's summary of a definition of General Plans as proposed by iAlan Black.3 I ! 'The Need for General Plans ! A basic question that often is posed is, "Why are i General Plans necessary?" The answer is that they are i necessary to provide an intelligent solution for the problem of coping with the tide of urban expansion and I redevelopment that is becoming more intense as each day i passes and as our country experiences a continuing trend 'toward urbanization. I 3Alan Black, "The Function of the Urban General I Plan" (unpublished Master's thesis. The University of I California, Berkeley, 1960), p. 38. 47 The General Plan for the physical development of a community has emerged as an accepted concept in most California cities and, indeed, across the nation. The General Plan serves the particular needs of many varied communities and, as a result, the content and type of General Plan utilized in the attempt to meet certain goals may vary, but the concept of a long range general develop ment plan that expresses the wishes of a municipal legis lative body in regard to policy for the continued develop ment of the community is common to all effective General Plans. Evolution of the General Plan Concept ■ The student researcher in search of material j relating to the evolution of the General Plan concept may I be surprised to find that a very extensive and scholarly I bibliography has been prepared on the subject by Holway R. 'Jones, Head Social Science Librarian of the University of : Oregon, in Eugene. Mr. Jones' bibliography is available at present in two printed documents : as CPL Exchange Bibliography 21,^ and as an integral part of Kent's text, ; The Urban General Plan.^ Although this bibliography has ^Holway R. Jones, "A Bibliographic Essay on the Evolution of an Idea," Part III, The General Plan in the Urban Planning Process, Exchange Bibliography No. 21 , (Oakland: Council of Planning Librarians, July, 1962) , 1 pp. 22-40. ^Kent, op. cit., pp. 196-210. 48 I ^been utilized extensively in preparing the selection on important historical material relating to the General Plan concept which follows, the author has taken the liberty of eliminating references to non-specific general planning i .'material, since it is felt that the average user of material found in this thesis is familiar with general planning literature. Shortly after Olmsted delivered his paper at the 'Third National Conference on City Planning of 1911,^ Alfred Bettman began to participate in the city planning movement. Bettman was an attorney who had been active in the reform administration in Cincinnati. (His post as ^ City Attorney of Cincinnati had made him aware of the attention needed in the then embryonic field of city 'planning.) By the end of the 1920's, Bettman was the leading expert in this country in the field of city plan- 'ning legislation. In a speech before the National City Planning Conference of 1928, he defined a Master Plan in ! the following way: A city plan is a master design for the physical devel- I opment of the territory of the city. It constitutes a I plan of the division of the land between public and private uses, specifying the general location and extent of new public improvements, grounds and structures, such as new, widened or extended streets, boulevards, parkways or other public utilities and the location of public buildings, such as schools, police stations, fire stations; and, in the case of private developments, the general distribution amongst various ^Olmsted, op. cit. 49 classes of uses, such as residential, business and industrial uses. The plan should be designed for a considerable period in the future, twenty-five to fifty years.7 Bettman's definition of a Master Plan specifies in greater detail than the similar statement by Olmsted the physical elements to be dealt with by the General Plan. ; Some authorities date the Master Plan concept from Burnham's Chicago plan.^ This, however, was not a General Plan by any form of current definition, nor can some of the earlier historic plans, such as Christopher Wren's ,plan of London, Maerschalk's plan of New York, Nicolas Beilin's plan of New Orleans, and Pierre L'Enfant's plan of Washington^ be considered as General Plans, even though some of them, such as L'Enfant's plan of Washington, have I ■ ; established city patterns that are with us today. Jones^^ states that Robert Morris Copeland was the first person to ; ^Alfred Bettman, "The Relationship of the Functions : ; and Powers of the City Planning Commission, to the * ‘Legislative, Executive, and Administrative Departments of City Government," National City Planning Conference, Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas, May 7 to 10, 1928, pp. 142- ' 159, cited by T. J. Kent Jr., The Urban General Plan, op. cit., p. 30. ^Daniel H. Burnham and Edward H. Bennett, Plan of ,Chicago Prepared During the Years MCMVI, MCMVII, and MCMVIII, Charles Moore, (ed.) (Chicago: The Commercial jClub, 1909). ^Reproductions of these historic plans are available from Historic Urban Plans, Box 76, Ithaca, New York. I ! Jones, op. cit. , p. 26. 50 use the term General Plan in his classic plan for Boston. For the purposes of this thesis, however, the concept of : a Master Plan is considered to have been developed by Olmsted and Bettman. Another contemporary of Olmsted and Bettman shared ! : in the development of a Master Plan concept. This was : ‘ I jEdward M. Bassett, chairman of the New York City Heights of Buildings Commission. During the 1920's Bassett also served on the Commission on Building Districts and Restrictions as well as on the Zoning Commission. He was ! instrumental in establishing New York's comprehensive zoning ordinance, the first in the nation. Bassett was a lawyer and he apparently developed his concept of a General I Plan as a logical approach to long-range development that was not within the scope of zoning. He explored the con- ,cept of a General Plan of development in his text. Recent i ' I 1 0 ' I New York Legislation for the Planning of Unbuilt Areas. The next milestone in the development of the Master ; Plan concept was the 1928 Standard City Planning Enabling i j llRobert Morris Copeland, The Most Beautiful City 1 in America; Essay and Plan for the Improvement of the City; ■ of Boston (Boston: Lee and Shepard, 1872)^ cited in I Jones, op. cit., pp. 26-27. l^Edward M. Bassett, Recent New York Legislation ' for the Planning of Unbuilt Areas, Comprising the Text of the City and Village Planning Laws of the State of New York, a Description of Their Origin and Purposes, and ; I Suggestions as to How They Should Be Administered, ! Bulletin no. 11 (New York: Regional Plan of New York and ! I Its Environs, 1926) as cited in Jones, op. cit., p. 28. ' 51 Act. This document was the result of the efforts of a nine-man Advisory Committee on City Planning and Zoning appointed by Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover. Olmsted, Bettman, and Bassett all were members of this committee; its membership included the country's most eminent planners. ; Although the Standard Act caused difficulties and problems j i ; in certain areas, the significance of this document is : ; indicated by the positive contribution it made to the j General Plan concept and to the field of city planning in general. T. J. Kent has grouped the difficulties caused by the Standard Act under the following headings : ' (1) Confusion Between the Zoning Plan and the Working- and-Living-Areas Section of the General Plan. ' (2) Piecemeal Adoption of the General Plan. I (3) Lack of a Specific Definition of the Essential. Physical Elements to Be Dealt with in the General Plan. (4) Basic Questions as to the Scope of the General Plan. (5) Distrust of the Municipal Legislative B o d y . 14 ' ! The difficulties that Kent cited were, in some measure, ■ present in the proposed General Plan for Whittier, and it ,is obvious that the legacy of the original Standard Act has served to create problems in even the most recent General Plan proposals. ; llu.S. Department of Commerce, Advisory Committee on City Planning and Zoning, A Standard City Planning ,Enabling Act (Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office,* ; 1928) . i I I l^Kent, op. cit., p. 33. 52 ; , Bettman was the first to differentiate clearly ; between a General Plan and the official map that is a part I I of the General Plan. He felt that the official map ' involved a greater degree of exactness and that, because of the detail involved, it became justified only as a means' ; of carrying out the General Plan, and that it therefore j jbecame necessary to prepare the map subsequent to the j 'General Plan at a time near the accomplishment of improve ment that was being planned. Bettman stated his ideas in the following manner : The master plan and the official map are therefore two different concepts, with different purposes and ■ results. They are different in time, the master plan necessarily preceding the official map, which is of a greater degree of definiteness and involves a greater ; degree of surveying and engineering detail which, as I a practical matter, becomes justified only as the ! means of carrying out of the master plan and therefore i necessarily made subsequent to the master plan and at a time closer to the actual time intended for the ^ accomplishment of the planned i m p r o v e m e n t .15 ! j Today's planners do not consider the official map ' I I to be the rigid tool that Bettman thought it to be. Some idea of the exactness that Bettman and other experts in ' t the field at the time felt should be attributed to the official map may best be understood when it is realized ; l^Alfred Bettman, "Master Plans and Official Maps," ' Planning Problems of Town, City, and Region; Papers and Discussions at the Twenty-Third National Conference on I City Planning, Rochester, New York, June 22 to 24, 1931, ; I pp. 50-71, cited in City and Regional Planning Papers, ! Arthur C. Comey (ed.), (Cambridge: Harvard University ; ; Press, 1946), pp. 37-41. j I 53 I that he emphasized the contrast between the map and the i I Master Plan, calling the Plan a "plastic" document, and the official map a "rigid" document.1^ Toward the end of the 1930's, the General Plan concept had advanced to the extent that one of its advo cates, Edward M. Bassett, felt the need to devote an entire, book to the subject. Bassett discussed the purpose and development of the Master Plan and what it should contain, and in general just what needs it could serve. He cred ited Cincinatti as being the first city to appoint a 1 'planning commission with the authority to establish a j Master Plan, and stated that it was also the first large 'city to officially adopt a Master Plan (in 1925). The 'term "master plan" did not, however, begin to come into •popular use until the Standard Act was published in 1928.^® Bassett also discussed the Standard Act and credited it 'with creating a great deal of confusion, and then discussed ,the enabling legislation in the States of California, Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania that attempted ; I j ; ^^Edward M. Bassett, Frank B. Williams, Alfred •Bettman, and Robert Whitten, Model Laws for Planning ! Cities, Counties, and States Including Zoning, Subdivision ' Regulation, and Protection of Official Map (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1935). IVgdward M. Bassett, The Master Plan; With a Discussion of the Theory of Community Land Planning j Legislation (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1938) . 18 A Standard City Planning Enabling Act, op. cit 54 to introduce changes in the Standard Act intended to modify some of its weaknesses. Bassett's book represented the last publication relating specifically to the General Plan to be written before World War II. The General Plan After World War II • ; After the end of World War II the United States I I faced a readjustment of the country's social and economic 'life. Most cities faced a need for the construction of I long-postponed public works and for a long range develop- 'ment plan to guide the location of the public works and ito set a course for future development. Planners began to ' I ' question old concepts of planning, such as zoning, and ' ; attempted to develop new methods and procedures. The \ \ I influence of the Federal government began to be felt at j I this time, since Federal funds became available for i I redevelopment and urban planning in California as a result • ! ! ! of the 1955 amendment to the City and County Enabling ; I After some years of experience with the Standard ! I Act, even Bettman reversed his earlier position and drafted; I a new model urban redevelopment act defining the essential ^^State of California, Laws Relating to Conserva tion, Planning and Public Works (Sacramento: State of California Documents Section, 1953). I 55 i 2 0 I 'elements of the General Plan. Bettman originally pre pared his draft while acting as chairman of the American Society of Planning Officials’ Committee on Urban Redevel opment. Two years later he prepared a revised Model Act | that was included in Comey's City and Regional Planning 21 Papers. Cincinnati, with a long heritage of municipal reform and citizen interest in planning, produced the first of the new General Plans stimulated by the postwar evolution in 22 planning. The Cincinnati Master Plan was the first I large city General Plan to be adopted by a City Council. ^ After an extended debate of almost five years, on I 'July 15, 1949, the Congress passed the now famous Housing , I o 3 94. Act of 1949. Later legislation, such as the 1954 Act, i ' I 20^erican Society of Planning Officials, "Report ' ; of the Committee on Urban Redevelopment," Planning, 1943; ■ j Proceedings of the Annual Meeting Held in New York City, I May 17-19, 1943 (Chicago: American Society of Planning > ; Officials, 1943), pp. 93-103. i ^^Alfred Bettman, "Revised Draft of an Act for Urban; Development and Redevelopment," in Arthur C. Comey (ed.), 'City and Regional Planning Papers, op. cit., pp. 259-275. j ! t I ^^Cincinnati (Ohio) City Planning Commission, The ! j Cincinnati Metropolitan Master Plan and the Official City Plan of the City of Cincinnati, adopted November 22, 1948 (Cincinnati: City of Cincinnati, 1948). ^^United States Senate, Report of the Committee on I Banking and Currency, Housing Act of 1949 (Washington D.C.:’ Superintendent Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, : 1949) . Î t i ^^United States Senate, Report of the Committee on , Banking and Currency, Housing Act of 1954, op. cit. i I * modified provisions relating to planning, but this Act was | I the first Federal approach to the General Plan concept. Redevelopment was required by Section 105, Title I, to ; conform "to a general plan for the development of the locality as a whole." The element of weakness in this ' i requirement was the lack of a definition of a General Plan. As a result, the Housing and Home Finance Agency's Urban Renewal Division found it necessary to state in its manual the definition of a General Plan, in order to have a : uniform working guide available for its own use and the ' 2 5 use of the local agencies. At the same time that the Federal Housing and Home Finance Agency was drafting a definition of the General | Plan, Harland Bartholomew, a planner of many years experi- • ence, stated his concept of what a good General Plan should; contain, including the timing sequence of documents.The I I American Institute of Planners officially endorsed his j S i 'views as later contained in a booklet on city planning ' ^^United States Housing and Home Finance Agency, : j Office of the Administrator, Slum Clearance and Urban I Redevelopment Program Manual of Policies and Requirements j f for Local Public Agencies, Book 1, Part 2, Chapter 2, . "Community Planning," Section 2, "The General Plan." ! ^^Harland Bartholomew, "The Plan— Its Preparation, ; Composition, and Form," as reprinted in Herbert L. Marx, ‘ Jr., (ed.). Community Planning (New York: Wilson and Company, 1956), pp. 72-79. : 57 I published by the Chamber of Commerce of the United States I S. B. Zisman had been among the principal authors of I the Federal Housing and Home Finance Agency's definition^^ of a General Plan and he later attributed the importance of the General Plan to ". . . the fact that ultimately the |best redevelopment grows out of, and is in fact part of, ! ! 29 * j the general plan." The first evidence of a growing body of literature from the University of California's Department of City and Regional Planning in regard to the General Plan concept •was a thesis by Melvin M. Webber describing the nature and I function of the Urban General Plan. Professor T. J. Kent I was the apparent focal point of the University of Calif- :ornia's interest in the General Plan, and in 1954 he I publicly stated his views in an address before the ! ^^Chamber of Commerce of the United States> I Construction and Civic Development Department, City ; Planning and Urban Development (Washington D.C.: Chamber ! of Commerce of U.S., 1952). ^%.H.F.A. , Office of the Administrator, op. cit. I ^ ^ S . B. Zisman, The General Plan in the Redevelop- • ! ment Program (Chicago : National Association of Housing jOfficials, November, 1952). ; ^^Melvin M. Webber, "The Nature and Function of the ; Urban General Plan"- (unpublished Master's thesis. The University of California, Berkeley, 1952) . i 58 I 31 'California Biennial Institute of Mayors and Councilmen. i In addition to Kent, there were other advocates of the General Plan concept as a guide for the city council. The chief'members of this group were Hugh R. Pomeroy, Director of Planning for Westchester County, New York, i 3 3 and Francis Violich and Corwin Mocine, who were fellow 'staff members of Kent's at the University of California's i Department of City and Regional Planning. An example of the extent of the influence of the General Plan concept may be found in the articles of ,Eldridge Lovelace, who urges the title of "Director of the ' f City Plan" for the present common term of Planning Director.^4 The more practical problem-solving orientation ^^T. J. Kent, Jr., "Guiding City Development: A Major Responsibility of the City Council," Proceedings, 4th Biennial Institute of Mayors and Councilmen (Berkeley: ,League of California Cities, 1954). i 32 ! Hugh R. Pomeroy, "The Master Plan— Its Importance ^ and Its Implementation," Speech before the Pennsylvania ; ; Planning Association Annual Meeting and the Local ' Government Conference on Planning (Philadelphia, Novem ber 14, 1958). I ^^Francis Violich, The Urban General Plan as an ' Instrument for Guiding Urban Development: A Working Outline for the Seminar on Urban Planning, Inter-American Housing and Planning Center, Bogata, Colombia, October 5 i to 30, 1958 (Berkeley: Department of City and Regional 'Planning, University of California, May 1, 1958). ^"^Eldridge Lovelace, "1. You Can't Have Planning ; Without a Plan. 2. Needed: One-Dimensional City Plans. ; ' 3. The Flexible City Plan is No City Plan at All," Journal ' of the American Institute of Planners, XXIV, no. 1 (1958), , pp. 7-10. 59 , I of Dennis O'Harrow is evident in one of his editorial ' ; comments. The State of California broke away from the Standard; Act in 1955 with the adoption of an amendment to the City and County Enabling Act which defined the essential elements of the General Plan, specifically in Article 7.^^ j ; 1 At the same time, the Assembly prepared a colorful booklet ! 1 to enhance citizen awareness of the new California concept ' of city planning. ' Lawyers have been among the principal contributors I to the General Plan concept; one of the most active in the field has been Charles M. Haar. Haar stresses the concept that the General Plan has changed from adherence to the i activities proposed by Bassett to a broader concept that is presently in vogue.He discussed the concept of just what a general plan means to a planner and to property ^^Dennis O'Harrow, "Magic and Master Plans," ' . American Society of Planning Officials Newsletter, XXV i (February, 1959), 9. I : I : ^^California, Laws, Statutes, etc. Laws Relating i I to Conservation, Planning, and Zoning . . . (Sacramento: ■ I State Printing Division, 1955) , pp. 9-11. : ^^California, Assembly Interim Committee on \ Conservation, Planning and Public Works, Planning for Growth ; A Report on the Status of City and Regional : Planning in California (Sacramento: Legislative Bill Room, 1955). ^^Charles M. Haar, "The Content of the Master Plan: I A Glance at History," Journal of the American Institute of ' Planners, XXI (Spring-Summer, 1955), 66-70. I 60 ■ interests, and in 1959 made his most significant contri bution to planning literature with the publication of Land Use Planning. I n this text he discusses the whole subject of property law with an emphasis on urban land in our larger metropolitan areas. Haar also produced an excellent discussion of the role of the General Plan, the role of the city council, and the role of the planner in the planning process by using the very clever device of a "brilliantly argued debate" between a city planner and an attorney. Wayne State University Professor Robert C. Hoover rejects Haar's concept of the general plan as "an imper- ;manent constitution." He also seems to reject the general 'theory held by Professor Kent and proposes an elected "Metropolitan Direction-Finding Commission" to prepare a 25 year "body of sociophysical end-directions; an executive ! prepared 10-year plan for services and physical develop- 'ment; a legislatively prepared 5-year growth policy and a ' ^^Charles M. Haar, "The Master Plan: An I Impermanent Constitution," Law and Contemporary Problems, I XX (Summer, 1955), 353-418. ^^Charles M. Haar, Land-Use Planning: A Casebook on the Use, Misuse, and Re-Use of Urban Land (Boston: : Little, Brown and Company, 1959) . ^^Charles M. Haar, "The Master Plan: An Inquiry in Dialogue Form," Journal of the American Institute of 'Planners, XXV (August, 1959), 133-142. 61 I I * 5-year socio-physical development plan, the latter to be | I re-enacted annually."42 i Some of the elements of a "community design plan" I I have only recently begin to appear in General Plan litera- i !ture. Among the contributors in this field have been Henry| Fagin and Robert C. Weinberg,together with Carl Feiss. ' The General Plan has also begun to become a thesis topic, as evidenced by the increasing number of candidates for Master's degrees in city planning who have selected I the General Plan as an appropriate area of study. Among 45 the better recent examples are the thesis of Alan Black, Ronald Kaliszewski, Joshua Siegel, and Melvin Webber.'^® 42Robert C. Hoover, "On Master Plans and Constitu- ,tions," Journal of the American Institute of Planners, ' ■XXVI (February, 1960), 5-24. ! "^^American Institute of Architects, Joint Committee j on Design Control, Planning and Community Appearance, : I Henry Fagin and Robert C. Weinberg (eds.), (New York: i I Regional Plan Association, 1958) . i I ' ■^^Carl Feiss, "Planning Absorbs Zoning," Journal of • ‘ the American Institute of Planners, XXVII (May, 1961), 121-126. A C Black, op. cit. ; 46Ronald Edmund Kaliszewski, "The Master Plan: Its . Functions, Potential and Limiting Factors" (unpublished * 'Master's thesis. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, ' ; 1961) . ' ‘ ^^Joshua Siegel, "An Investigation of the Utility I of the General Renewal Plan Concept in Urban Renewal I Planning" (unpublished Master's thesis, Columbia I University, 1960). ^^Webber, op. cit I 62 ! The most recent text of significance is T. J. Kent, 49 Jr.'s The Urban General Plan. Professor Kent has pre pared what certainly is the most extensive study ever made in the field, and whether or not one accepts his premise of^ the role of the city council as the client and the General ( 'Plan as the tool that will resolve major conflicts in ■ community development policies. Professor Kent is certainly among the foremost authorities in the field and his work must be given careful attention. That the General Plan is still a suspect method in some communities is evidenced by the fact that one of our I major urban centers, Los Angeles, has yet to adopt a ' I I comprehensive General Plan. In 1956, Adams, Howard and ; : Greeley, planning consultants, were employed to survey the City Planning Department of Los Angeles and recommend ways of improving its effectiveness. In spite of the fact that I ! j the city had had an active planning department for many | years, it had failed to produce a General Plan. The ' consultants claimed that the lack of a General Plan had ,led to a great deal of confusion. The firm strongly ^ recommended the preparation and adoption of a "single ; ; master plan." The firm further condemned a unique practice' J I in the community of identifying area studies as "general ; plans" by recommending that the City should "cease the i 49 Kent, op. cit. 63 ; misleading practice of identifying each component plan as itself a master plan." In the period since the report was made in 1956, the City has yet to adopt a General Plan.; This fact is hardly a surprise to the author after his 'long residence in the City and his hobby of dusting off I long-neglected Los Angeles urban renewal applications | ! while employed by the Urban Renewal Administration.^^ It I would seem appropriate, after examining the failure of Los Angeles to adopt a General Plan, to turn to communities where the General Plan has enjoyed some success. Although i the following examples were selected by Holoway R. Jones, I they also are, in the author's opinion, outstanding ' examples of the General Plan concept at its best. Evaluation of General Plans to Date One of the most progressive large cities in the j i nation produced the first comprehensive general plan to be i I adopted by a city council. The city, as previously men- 5 3 tioned, is Cincinnati. Cincinnati's plan, however, lacks; ; Adams, Howard and Greeley, Report to the Board of , ; City Planning Commissioners, City of Los Angeles, on the I Tios Angeles City Planning Department (Cambridge, Mass- : achusetts: Adams, Howard and Greeley, November, 1956). | , Field Representative, Urban Renewal Administra- i j tion. Housing and Home Finance Agency, 1958-59. i j ^^Kent, op. cit., pp. 209-210. I ^^Cincinnati (Ohio) City Planning Commission, op. ; cit. 64 ^ several of the qualities that characterize a General Plan at its best. The official General Plan documents that represent the best efforts of the planning profession and the appropriate public bodies in recent years are those of Cleveland,Berkeley,and Philadelphia.^^ These documents focus on major development problems and deal with a common set of physical elements. They are both long- range and comprehensive. They are prepared in the form of single documents readily available to the public and so constructed as to present both text and official map in a clear format that may be understood by the layman who is . willing to study them with care; at the same time, they ! represent technically accurate documents that give defini- i ! tive answers to the professional planner. These documents j also are significant because they represent the planning j efforts of cities in a wide range of sizes, located in 1 different parts of the United States. The documents are ’ most significant, however, because they are the living proof of sustained political and professional effort that ' ^^Cleveland City Planning Commission, The General ' . Plan of Cleveland (Cleveland: City of Cleveland, 1950) . 55Berkeley City Planning Commission, Berkeley i Master Plan (Berkeley, California: City of Berkeley, ; 1955) . I ^^Philadelphia City Planning Commission, Comprehen sive Plan: The Physical Development Plan for the City of Philadelphia (Philadelphia : City of Philadelphia, 1960). 65 ; 'resulted in a product acceptable to the public, the | : ! politician, and the planner. Policy , In those communities where it is effective, the ! General Plan is a tool by which the city council may agree ■ on long-range policies for physical development. The final| document represents a compromise of major alternatives and, as such, it should have the support of the council. An effective Plan is revised to reflect council policy if it becomes apparent that there is a major conflict. This is of extreme importance because council personnel does change, and the Master Plan should reflect the policy of ^the current council. I Most councils meet either weekly or every two weeks. I The General Plan then should serve as a guide to decisions Ion an everyday basis, since if the Plan is not used it is of little value. Current development proposals should be ‘considered on the basis of relevance to the General Plan. Zoning, subdivision regulations, capital improvements, i 'urban renewal projects, park development, and street ^ improvements should all be keyed to the General Plan as jsoon as possible after its adoption, in order to achieve results in the day-to-day decisions being made by the [council and commissions. It is possible to lose the battle ; I I for community betterment if the General Plan is not used 56 I i 'to guide decisions in such matters as rezoning, variances, ■ use permits, subdivision plans, park development, street i plans, school, library, and fire station location and a wide variety of other day-to-day decisions. Expert Advice The General Plan enables the council and the varioust commissions to obtain advice in a unified form. The Plan is the principal tool of the planning department. The Planning Commission presents its recommendations to the city council, since through the Plan the commission calls , attention to the development problems of the community. The advisory function of the General Plan comes into play when the council requests recommendations on specific . problems or when the planning department points out a problem on its own initiative. The advisory function ■ should be a continuous process, since the staff may discover basic weaknesses in the Plan that should be ; brought to the attention of the council. The staff should : I i constantly maintain statistical material on population, ' I ! economics, land use, and physical conditions in the j community in order to be able to advise the council prop- ' erly and to maintain the General Plan at the request of ( the council. The advisory function is nowhere more ' important than in maintaining the Plan; a static, outdated ' I ' I Plan may well be worse than no Plan at all, since it ' offers a false _sense of security. 67 Education and Communication The General Plan educates everyone involved in its formation. The council must come to grip with long-range I development problems, the public becomes aware of the I possibilities of the future community and everyone becomes 'better informed. It gives the citizen an opportunity to measure the policies of the council and offers a great deal of general information useful to people who are not interested in the total Plan. The council has the oppor tunity to measure the reaction of the citizen to various proposals. Wide distribution of the Plan and a low purchase price can make it available to many individuals I and organizations and will usually elicit responses from ; organized groups, newspapers, citizens, and investors. The| plan preparation period has a tremendous potential for , education through the use of citizen advisory groups, a potential that Whittier did not use and which will be : discussed in a later chapter. J Public response is often less intense than the i average planner hopes for and in some cases the response i during the commission meeting is a disappointment. It is . usual, however, to have a period of spirited debate before the council, which in itself is an educational process. Haar feels this is of great importance for "stimulating 58 I S7 I public interest." i The General Plan presents a clear long-range policy ■ of development to all persons concerned. It enables the public and private interests involved in physical develop- . ■ ment to anticipate the response of the council to any given development plan. It influences private developers j ! and even may suggest projects to them. Decisions may be ! made by the private sector which never come to the atten- ' tion of the council but which are affected by council policy through the General Plan, The Plan is not infalli ble as a prediction of council actions, however, and the council may decide to amend the Plan in a given case. The Plan should not be considered as final— it is not. By the end of the 1950 ' s many medium-sized cities ' with counci1-manager governments began to join the larger cities in establishing planning programs. The need for the overhaul of old zoning plans stimulated a trend to ' considering the total problem in the community; this ; initiated the period of the General Plan concept. Whittier> j a long-established community without some of the pressing ; I problems facing other communities, was late in joining the trend to preparing a General Plan of development. The • story of Whittier's development and progress in developing ' planning concepts is described in the following chapter. ! ^^Haar, "The Master Plan: An Impermanent ' Constitution," op. cit., p. 359. I CHAPTER IV ; THE EVOLUTION OF THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN j I Î The City of Whittier is located on the southwest slope of the Puente Hills about 14 miles southeast of Los Angeles. This location has permitted the residents the enjoyment of proximity to the social amenities and activity of Los Angeles. At the same time, the distance is such I that the community grew, for some many years, in relative isolation from its large neighbor to the west. This relative isolation, coupled with the fact that Whittier was founded by a religious group, and, in California terms, i I I its comparatively old settlement date, have led to some of I the unique qualities that emerged in research in regard ito the attitude of the community towards the proposed I General Plan. The general attitude of the community toward < I i itself is summarized in an 1887 journal advertisement ’quoted b y Harris Newmark: I I i ; WHITTIER: WHITTIER: WHITTIER: I Queen of the Foothills and Crown of the San Gabriel . Valley^ I I------------------------------------- : ---------------------------- , J -, ! - ‘ -Harris Newmark, Sixty Years in Southern California 11853-1913, Maurice H. and Marco Newmark (eds.), (Cambridge:, I The Riverside Press, 1930), p. 576. 1 69 70 ; I : I Whittier, 1887 to 1952 | Whittier was the brainchild of Aquilla H. Pickering, a Chicago businessman and a prominent Quaker. Pickering ; came to Southern California with the idea of establishing , (a Quaker Colony on the Pacific Coast. The best description; of the establishment of the community is that of Pickering : himself: The idea of establishing a Friends Colony in California was in one way impressed upon our minds and hearts by | observing the need as well as the opportunity for educational and Gospel work, as we traveled from place to place during a first and recent visit. . . . The need of moral and Christian influence was everywhere apparent. . . . We spoke of this to some of our : friends and relatives; an announcement was made through, our church paper, and interest was soon aroused. I Throughout most of the year 1886 we were in receipt ' ' of many letters from different states making inquiries about the proposed colony. These questions were i usually in regard to climate, production, education, ' supply of water, etc. At the request of several ' families we were able to return to California and make j such a selection of location as we might think best. i Early in 1887 we traveled over a large portion of the ; ‘ state. We passed beyond the Sacramento to the North and as far as San Diego and from there to Ensenada, ; Lower California. Many of the older towns and colonies ' were visited and while these were attractive, yet the prices of land and other difficulties encountered left I us almost without hope of success. Toward the close of our search, during a period of three months, we found ourselves in Los Angeles. One more attempt was made to pleas© in location and price. ^ We were driven to the ranch, the present site of ; I Whittier, and hope began to revive ; a second visit was made with still more interest. From the first we were favorably impressed with this beautiful situation: the high ground sloping away from the Puente Hills from I which we could see the whole valley reaching toward 1 ! the south and west until our eyes rested upon the ocean, some eighteen miles a way.2 A meeting of friends in the area was held in an old barn on the ranch site on April 8, 1887, in order to form I _ ! i a company for the proposed colony. Pickering declined to | , serve as president because of his advanced age and his .business interests in Chicago and therefore Jonathan Bailey^ was appointed president and Hervey Bindley, secretary. During this meeting Mrs. Elizabeth Grinnell proposed that the colony be named in honor of the poet, John Greenleaf ; Whittier.^ The tract of land offered for sale consisted | ! of 1,285 acres. The new company decided to take an option ’ on the property and was able, at a later date, to purchase ' it. I j The original plot of the colony, subdivided into residence and business lots, lies between Hadley Street on ' I the north and Penn Street on the south, and between ; Pickering Avenue on the west and Painter Avenue on the ' . east. The remainder of the tract was divided into 10-acre ; ' lots. Whittier was incorporated as a city on the sixth [ : - ^A. H. Pickering, "Story of the Beginning," in Benjamin F. Arnold and Artilissa Borland Clark (eds.), i History of Whittier (Whittier : Western Printing Corpora- I tion, 1933), pp. 12-13. ! 2jbid., p. 14. 72 ■ class under the Statutes of 1883, on January 3, 1898.^ "Whittier was laid out in the same general plan as Philadelphia, on an axis of two wide streets— Hadley Street and Greenleaf Avenue," said former Planning Commissioner ' { John M. Kemmerer.^ The original colony then had the benefit of some purposeful plan but, according to Dr. W. V.: : Coffin, a pioneer citizen, "in the center was the town- site, laid off, as it seems to us now, for a village or small town and with little vision of the magnitude of what , was to follow."G The year 1887 was the year of the great real estate I boom for Whittier. Sale of lots began on May 19, 1887, at 75 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, in the offices of the company, in accordance with advertisements published in Los Angeles newspapers. Harris Newmark said: I Whittier, started by the Quakers from Indiana, Iowa, i ! and Illinois, and christened in honor of the New ! England poet, began at this time with a boom, two j hundred thousand dollars' worth of property having been sold there in four months. This prosperity led one newspaper to say with extreme modesty : "Whittier ' is the coming place : It will dwarf Monrovia and ^Statement of John M. Kemmerer at a Whittier Lions | Club luncheon, William Penn Hotel, Whittier, September 5, I 1935, as found on p. 4 of his original notes filed in I File Oil, Whittier City Planning Department. I ! ; I ^Dr. W. V. Coffin, "Outline Review from 1887," in j : Benjamin F. Arnold and Artilissa Dorland Clark (eds.), ! History of Whittier, op. cit., pp. 17-18. ( 73 I eclipse Pasadena. Nothing can stop it! The Quakers are coining in from all over the United States! "7 ( I Annie Lee Coffman, who arrived in Whittier in July, 1887, described the great boom in the following manner: Tourists, investors and home seekers poured into j the tract from Los Angeles and Pasadena in order that I they might avail themselves of the golden opportunity I to annex to themselves town lots at $3,000 and higher, I and outside lots at $800 to $1,000. Auction sales : were held and the first acre tracts were sold at $100 { per acre under the condition that the purchaser make I improvements to the amount of $1,000. By this time the great land boom of 1887 was in full swing and buildings were rapidly being put up. One of the first started was the Hotel Lindley, built by Hiram Gibbs, a brother-in-law of Aquilla H. Pickering.^ The buildings continued to be erected and the city was soon the possessor of residences, business buildings, a bakery, a drug store, and a general merchandise store which also served as the Post Office. This boom was supported by the rate wars in progress between the Union I Pacific and the Santa Fe Railroads that had lowered fares I I to one dollar for a ticket from Kansas City to Los 9 ' Angeles. This period in the history of Whittier can be I compared to the more contemporary Miami boom of 1925, j which engulfed most of the Florida coast just as the boom I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 7Newmark, op. cit., p. 576. ^Annie Lee Coffman, "Carload of Quakers," in , Benjamin F. Arnold and Artilissa Dorland Clark (eds.). History of Whittier, op. cit., pp. 22-27. . A. Brinstool and B. F. Arnold, The Great Boom 1 of 1887, in Benjamin F. Arnold and Artilissa Dorland I Clark (eds.). History of Whittier, op. cit., pp. 28-31. 74 of 1887 affected most of the Los Angeles area. j In December, 1887, the boom broke and the bottom I fell out of real estate prices. Barley fields replaced i the vision of an expanding town, and truck gardens sprang up in adjacent areas. There was no industry; the only | i means of making a living for the vast majority of the new- i i ■ comers was agriculture. The producers of these crops } i marketed their products in the city of Los Angeles. Unless! I 1 the present readers are aware of the lack of transporta- , tion, the feat involved has little significance. Dr. I , Coffin describes the process as follows : The only means of travel was by horse and wagon over dirt roads to that city via County Road to Rio Hondo, then up west to Mesa, off to where the U.P. RR now ; runs across La Guna Ranch to Los Angeles. In the I summer it was dry and dusty and in the winter it was rough and muddy. The marketing was, therefore, more of a task than is apparent today with easy access to the markets and rapid modes of travel and communica tion . . A period of subsistance agriculture followed in the ' community and various crops, such as tomatoes for canning ' I and peanuts, were fads of the time which failed, the major | market being provision of foodstuffs to Los Angeles. From 1887 to 1894, money was so tight that barter was the common means of exchange. lOprederic Lewis Allen, Only Yesterday (New York; Bantam Books, 1959), pp. 191-205. llCoffin, op. cit., p. 19 75 \ ^ I John P. Sanborn and Simon J. Murphy had purchased | I the Ramirez Rancho east of Whittier with the thought of i ' cashing in on the land boom of 1887. When the boom broke, these late-comers found themselves with more than 2,000 acres of land for which they had paid over one hundred ' thousand dollars.The investors then found themselves ! ; with this large subdivided tract for which there was no I ; j market. The Gage Colony at Riverside had demonstrated j t ! i j ! the possibility of using irrigated hillside land for | citrus production, so the investors engaged Arthur L. Reed, chief engineer of the Port Huron and Northwestern Railroad, to make a trip to California and report on the feasibility ! of developing water at a site on the San Gabriel River I near El Monte and transporting it to the ranch site. Sixty I ' acres had been purchased on the west bank of the river for this purpose. Owing to the large investment required for ' the water system, Sanborn and Murphy doubted the success ! i i of the enterprise, but after two years' delay they con- I tracted with Mr. Reed to supervise construction of large | I : I artesian wells and a conduit to the ranch that would pass | through Whittier. The water system was completed in the | summer of 1891 and served not only to create orchards in , East Whittier but also to provide ample water to the City i L. Reed and Ralph J. Reed, "Early Days of East ■ I Whittier," in Benjamin F. Arnold and Artillissa Dorland I ! Clark (eds.). History of Whittier, op. cit., pp. 79-83. ' I 76 ! t I of Whittier, which was finding that the wells in Turnbull ! Canyon could not supply its needs. With a supply of water assured in the area, nursery , businesses were established in Whittier and the following , i i ; notices were published in the first issue of the Whittier ' Register on January 28, 1892; All kinds of citrus and deciduous stock, free from frost. Peaches, plums, pears, apples, olives, figs, guavas and improved walnuts. Full line of ornamental trees, shrubs and flowers. Satisfaction guaranteed or no pay. Chas. H. Hamburg, Hotel Lindley i I will have a tree yard in Whittier in a few days ! and will be able to furnish directly, or on short ! notice, all kinds of fruit and ornamental trees. I. H. Cammack^^ I The area around Whittier rapidly developed into j ' citrus orchards, particularly in the foothills. The first , crop of Whittier oranges was harvested in the William Strawbridge orchard on South Painter Avenue in 1891.^4 I Lemons and oranges quickly became major crops. Local ! . businessmen had induced the Southern Pacific Railroad to , ; route tracks through Whittier and a contract was drawn I 1 5 ’ I that brought the railroad to town at a cost to the city | I of $40,000. The first carlot of citrus was shipped in I 1894. The volume of citrus production became so large ; ' F. Arnold and Lon A. Brundige, "Citrus Industry," in Benjamin F. Arnold and Artillissa Dorland : Clark (eds.). History of Whittier, op. cit., p. 145. ' ^^Ibid., p. 147. l^Coffin, op. cit., p. 20. I . I ' that the first packing house was built in 1 9 0 3 . Citrus I i products continued to be important in the local economy : until the post-World War II subdivisions erased the last of the large orchards. I The Puente Oil Company had developed a few shallow i oil wells in the late 1880's in the easterly portion of the Puente Hills, and the increasing need for a cheap fuel for ■ Southern California industry soon prompted a search for oil in the hillside area of Whittier. After numerous I drill sites were abandoned because of failure to find oil I in commercial quantity, some of the local companies were successful in drilling wells that yielded sufficient quality crude to be economic. The companies were Turner ! Oil Company, Fidelity Oil Company, and Whittier Crude Oil ! I Company. Alva Starbuck said: These three companies started in the latter part of j 1898 and in 1899. They drilled several wells, and , some of them were very good producers for shallow wells; compared with the wells of today, 1500 to 1600 feet, in those days were considered as deep wells.^7 Oil production in the Whittier area reached impor tant proportions by 1900. Starbuck described the produc tion rate in the following way: I ---------- ------------------------------ -------------------------- F. Arnold and Lon A. Brundige, op. cit., I P - 1 4 7 . ^^Alva Starbuck, "The Oil Industry," in Benjamin I F. Arnold and Artillissa Dorland Clark (eds.). History of Whittier, op. cit., p. 152. ; 78 i I By the year of 1900 there was being produced about 50,000 barrels or more each month. The alarming feature of the business was the possibility of an over production, which proved the condition. The fields of Brea and Orlinda were beginning to come in pretty heavy by this time, and this, together with Whittier production, made quite a quantity of oil\1^ In 1899 Murphy made trial drills for oil on his East | Whittier ranch, and developed a field in East Whittier and ! in the Coyote Hills. New fields opened through the years, i including one south of the Puente Hills developed by Union Oil Company, which produced over a million barrels of oil every four days in the first months of operation in the ;1920's, according to Starbuck.1^ The last big strike in 1 the Whittier area was that of the Santa Fe Springs oil fields in 1921.^^ I Whittier was selected as the site for the State : Reform School, for which the cornerstone was laid on 'February 12, 1890. This institution has expanded to become : one of the major boys' institutions in the state; it now is called the FredC. Nelles School for Boys. The school j was of particular importance since it represented the first* 1 state facility given to Southern California and still is an important employer locally. l^Ibid., pp. 152-153. 19starbuck, op. cit., pp. 152-153, 20Kemmerer, op. cit., p. 5. 21b . F. Arnold, "Whittier State School," in Benjamin F. Arnold and Artillissa Dorland Clark (eds.). History of Whittier, op. cit., pp. 119-143. 79 I After two unsuccessful attempts, a college called ! Whittier Academy was established in Whittier. The Academy began in 1892 with one room, which was expanded to a second room in 1893. In August, 1893, work was started on the first college building.By 1900, the Academy had | achieved full college status and was accredited to the University of California. It was a college in name also, since it had officially changed its name to Whittier College in July, 1896. The college has expanded in terms of students, faculty, and buildings and by now it has I grown to a well-known liberal arts college with an enroll- I ment of about 1,500 full-time students. Whittier continued to grow and prosper as a center [ \ of oil and citrus production and in 1903 the Pacific I Electric Railroad established a station in Whittier. Harris ' Newmark has given us an excellent picture of the coming of i the Pacific Electric to Whittier: : Toward the end of the nineties, Henry E. Huntington sold much or all of his large holdings in the San ; Francisco railways and began to buy up Los Angeles I railway stocks and to give his personal attention to i the cities' traffic-problems. At the same time, he ' I bent his energies to the crowning work of his life-- 1 the development of the various interurban electric i systems focusing in Los Angeles. In 1902, the road Lo | Long Beach was completed; and in the following year ' electric cars had began to run to Monrovia and 1 Whittier. In 1903, the seven story Huntington or 1 — , I ^^B. F. Arnold, "Whittier College," in Benjamin F. j I Arnold and Artillissa Dorland Clark (eds.). History of I Whittier, op. cit., p. 54. ' 80 Pacific Electric Building at the corner of Main and Sixth streets was finished. The effect of these extensive improvements on local commerce and on the value of real estate as well as their influence on the growth of population through the coming of tourists seeking the conveniences and pleasures of social life cannot, perhaps, be fully estimated— a fact which the people of this city should always remember with gratitude.23 During the period of the World War of 1914-1918 the I ^ community continued to expand and the scarcity of records for the period is somewhat indicative of a time of quiet expansion for which the great adventure was the leave taking of about 600 local youths for the various military , services, with the music of bands to see them off.^^ The best record of the war-time and postwar years in the area is found in Jessamyn West's South of the Angels, a novel 2 5 I of the settlement of the city of "Terra Buena," a I community some miles east of the old Pio Pico mansion, or in the same general location as Whittier. Since this author had previously written a novel about the Quakers, Friendly Persuasion, it seems probable that "Terra Buena" was East Whittier and that the character of "Perk" was based on one of the early developers of the Whittier area, j such as Simon J. Murphy. In any case, this novel is a I ----------------- ! -------------------------------------------------------------------------: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- ^^Newmark, op. cit., pp. 620-621. ‘ . George H, Flanders, "American Legion," in Benjamin F. Arnold and Artillissa Dorland Clark (eds.), : History of Whittier (Whittier : Western Printing Corpora- ; tion, 1933), pp. 343-344. ' 25Jessamyn West, South of the Angels (New York: Crest Books, 1960), pp. 11, 41. 81 I . . I colorful and well written fictional account of the early i days of a community a great deal like Whittier. The first Whittier City Planning Commission was ■ appointed by the City Council in September, 1920.^^ The j I ! entire Commission enrolled in the University of California | I : I Extension course in City Planning and traveled to Los Angeles to attend classes one night a week, in the winter 2 7 of 1920-1921. Commission meetings were held twice a month and the Commissioners traveled to other cities to see ,how they handled their planning problems, particularly street widths, parkway planting, and location of parks and playgrounds. The Commission was particularly interested , in preserving what Kemmerer called "a city of h o m e s . ' i 1 Soon after the appointment of the Commission it : learned that one reason for its appointment was the problem of permitting the location of more business property in the. i 2 Q 1 center of the city. In order to determine how the ' I , 1 traditions of the city could be maintained and how the city ; could control the spread of the business area, the Commis sion made studies of zoning. This resulted in the passage j of the first Zoning Ordinance, in 1923.^^ This simple j planning tool provided for only three zones— business, jmanufacturing, and residential. j ^^Kemmerer, op. cit., p. 2. ^^Ibid., p. 3. : ^^Ibid. 2 9 , pp. 4-5. ^^Ibid. , p. 5. ! I 82 I The Commission soon became involved in subdivisions,j since 1921 to 1929 represented a period of subdivision boom in Whittier.Practically all of the original 10- acre colony parcels were subdivided. The Commission, from . * the beginning of the Los Angeles County Regional Planning ; ' Commission in 1923, was able to secure assistance from the ; County Planning Commission. A great deal of cooperative : effort resulted in the routing of major thoroughfares, including the widening of Whittier Boulevard and other major access highways in the community. The City Planning Commission also pushed for a scenic highway along the crest of the Puente Hills from Whittier to P o m o n a .^2 In 1935, the Commission was instrumental in assist- i , ing the Federal Government in selection of a site for the I new Whitter Post Office. Zoning was, in those days, in a i very elementary form, but it had begun to achieve its ; ' j , purpose of separating living, commercial, and manufacturing! i areas. In about 1935, a request to conduct a garage business in a home was denied. Previous to 1935, a small | ' group representing the Four-Square Gospel Church contem plated the purchase of property in a residential area that ' would not be suitable for church purposes, and when they approached the City for permission to build they were ; d e n i e d . ! ! I I I ^^Ibid. ^^Ibid., p. 6. ^^Ibid., p. 8. 83 I I I During this time the Commission was particularly concerned with a deluge of applications from realtors to allow the location of filling stations and lunch stands near Whittier College. Other property owners were request-- -ing the installation of sanitariums, rest homes, and small * retail shops in residential areas. Oil drilling within the City was prohibited in 1935 except upon special permit Which required the consent of the majority of the property owners in the district affected. The oil well driller was required to furnish a bond for damages and to remove the derrick upon completion of d r i l l i n g . I I I , That the zoning ordinance was not properly used to ; ! control the reason for its enactment— the expansion of property zoned for business use in the uptown area— is ^ best illustrated by the fact that the 1962 Zoning Ordinance I Analysis and Land Use Inventory indicates that over 50 per i I : cent of the land zoned for commercial use was not being I oc ! used commercially. When it is realized that Whittier has ! two regional shopping centers in addition to the uptown I core area, the extent of commercial over-zoning becomes I ! apparent. The bulk of the unused commercial property is ' ^^Ibid. , pp. 8-9. ^9l})id. , p. 9. ^^Simon Eisner and Associates, Zoning Ordinance ! Analysis and Land Use Inventory, 1962 (Master Plan Series iReport 2), p. 157. 84 1 ' in the form of old townsite lots, 50 by 140 feet in size, ; in the uptown area. The zoning ordinance was updated in 1930, the major changes in the 1923 document being the addition of several types of residential zones. The residential zones then - consisted of single family, duplex, and apartment house * 37 * zones. The city was soon gripped by the great depression. By the time the economy was again in a state of good health, the country was on the brink of World War II. The ' war period saw Whittier expanding its industrial capacity; many of the present industrial plants had their origin during this period. During the war, industrialization had * reached such a point that even lodge halls were being used ' ; for light industrial purposes. One of the side effects of ' the war effort was the establishment of industrial facili- ! ties in residential areas, with the subsequent creation of : nonconforming uses or inappropriate industrial zoning ; based on the fact that the industry was actually estab- ! ' lished in a certain location. I j Another result of the war-time expansion was the | creation of large tracts of war-time housing. Many of the tracts were of reasonable design but in the pressure to : create housing for the flood of industrial workers, the I ^^Story in the Whittier Daily News, September 5, ; 1935. i " I I public improvements were constructed in substandard sizes | or were totally lacking. Principal among these faults | were inadequate street widths and a total lack of side walks. Some of the worst of the temporary housing was [ i eliminated only because it became the site of the new City j Hall. With the return of the veteran and the advent of the no-down-payment loan, Whittier's remaining orange groves fell victims to the bulldozer, and large tracts of j single family residences were built to the south and east , of the then City Limits. These tracts, in large measure, I I y became a part of Whittier in the Annexation of 1961. This ' ' annexation was the largest inhabited annexation ever made 1 in the State of California; it doubled both the land area ' and the population of the community. i I Development of a General Plan Proposal I ' By 1952 the City had become acutely aware of the ! I need for a revision of the Zoning and Subdivision ; I Ordinances. The Zoning Ordinance in use had been adopted i I in 1930 and was in desperate need of major revision. The ; ' City retained the firm of Gordon Whitnall and Associates ! for the purpose of preparing both the Zoning and the I ' Subdivision Ordinances. Beginning late in 1953, the City ! held numerous public hearings on the new Zoning Ordinance I and zoning map. Because of the controversy over various I 85 ! I ! proposals in the tentative ordinance, its adoption was | delayed until 1955. Whitnall was also retained to prepare a Master Plan 1 of Streets and Highways, which was completed in January, 1956, but which never received the official sanction of the City in the form of a resolution or other official documentation. In spite of the fact that Whitnall's document was primarily one relating to the street and highway element of the Master Plan, he strongly urged that the City "initiate a program of preplanning undeveloped hillside properties within the present corporate limits, and outside such limits to such distances as topography dictates.Whitnall, at the time his contract terminated ' in 1957, recommended that the City prepare a Master Plan I ' to guide the future growth and development policy of the ■ 39 ■ community. In 1958, the firm of Albert Martin and Associates submitted a proposal for a Master Plan study, which after considerable discussion by the Council and Planning Commission was rejected, somewhat to the disappointment of ; ^^Gordon Whitnall and Associates, Report on Street and Highway Element of a Master Plan, Whittier, California, Los Angeles, 1956, p. 8. F. Woermann, "Master Plan" (Letter to the City Council of Whittier, July 3, 1961), p. 1. (Mimeographed) ’ 87 Mr. Martin, who was both a local resident and a nationally ! known architect.40 Early in 1959, the firm of J. H. Pomeroy Company submitted to the City a proposal for an urban renewal I ' I program and a Master Plan. This proposal was strongly * supported by the Chamber of Commerce, but after consider able discussion, it was rejected. In the opinion of the author, this rejection was in no small part due to the current dissatisfaction with urban renewal in Southern California. An evaluation of this aspect may be found in i the excellent discussion of the subject by Kenneth Leo | ! Kraemer.^^ i ; Late in 1960, the City Council and the Planning j ' Commission, after several joint meetings, decided to I I authorize several planning consultants to prepare proposals ■ for work to include a comprehensive Master Plan, as well I ! j as other special studies of the uptown business district | j and the development of the hillside area to the north and east of the C i t y . 42 I In January, 1961, the City Council and the Planning i ^ Commission received planning proposals and interviewed | I '*'°Ibid. ; ^^Kenneth Leo Kraemer, "Public and Private Profits : vs. Social Responsibility in Urban Renewal" (unpublished ' Master's thesis. The University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1964), pp. 36-39. 42 Ibid., p. 1. 88 1 ' consultants. The firm of Simon Eisner and Associates was selected. It was decided to apply for Federal assistance I under the 701 Program, providing funds on a 50 per cent matching basis for the entire projectThe application for Federal funds was prepared by the Planning Department and submitted to the State Planning Office in late January of 1951. The application received the approval of the State early in February, 1962. Notice of the Federal government's approval was received at the end of May, 1962.44 The total cost of the Master Plan was $51,300, of which the Federal government paid $25,650, and the City paid $21,000 in cash and the remainder in service from employees of the Planning Department. The consultant was ' directed to include data on the following matters: t a. Economic Survey i 1. Population analysis and projection j 2. Commercial facilities and potential 3. Industrial facilities and potential 4. Necessary public improvements b . Master Plan 1. Land Use 2. Circulation (Streets and Highways) i 3. Public Facili Lies ; 43Housing and Home Finance Agency, Urban Renewal | ‘ Administration, Urban Renewal Manual, Policies and Require ments for Local Public Agencies (Washington D.C.: ' Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing I Office, 1965), Book III, Chapter 1. 44R, F. Woerman, op. cit., p. 1. 89 I 4. Schools and recreation ' 5. Community design c* Special Studies 1. Central business district planning 2. Hillside area plan 3. Grading ordinance 4. Zoning ordinance's ; , Shortly after the approval of the contract, the | ; j ; consultant's office undertook the hillside study because ' ' subdivision activity in this area was expected at an early date. The City also made a separate contract with Dr. F. Beach Leighton, head of the Geology Department of Whittier , I ! College, to conduct mapping and soil structure evaluation ! projects in the study area. The area of the Master Plan study was determined by the Planning Commission and the j preparation of the map was begun. Meetings were held i during June, 1962 with the representatives of Real Estate ' ; Research Corporation to determine the scope and details of I I the economic study. The Planning Department began the I : ' inventory of the uptown area on July 1, and soon after ; ! Real Estate Research Corporation began its inventory of j the eastern portion of the city. In spite of the addition of the East Whittier annexation area to the proposed study area, an addition ; , which doubled the study area, the City staff and the : research team from Real Estate Research Corporation were I -----------------------------------------------------------------; ^ 45r , F. Woerman, op. cit., pp. 1-2. I 90 : i I able to complete the first document of the Master Plan Series in late 1962. The documents completed in 1962 were the Economic Base Study^^ and the Zoning Ordinance Analysis and Land Use Inventory.47 ' On March 1, 1963, the consultant transmitted to the , City the remainder of the Master Plan Series, which con sisted of the General P l a n , 48 Uptown Business District Plan,49 Hillside Plan,^^ and Community Appearance Report. Although the consultant and the Planning Director felt that a citizen advisory group should be set up to lay the ; groundwork for public acceptance the City Council vetoed this thought. Mr. Eisner, the consultant, had particu- ■larly urged that a citizen group be formed so "We may try .to arrive at the best kind of program for them." The i Planning Director was then requested by the City Council to 4^Real Estate Research Corporation, Economic Base ! Study Whittier California, 1962 (Master Plan Series Report ' 1) . ; 47 Simon Eisner and Associates, Zoning Ordinance ^ Analysis and Land Use Inventory, op. cit., p. 157. ; I 48g^j^Qj^ Eisner and Associates, General Plan, City I I of Whittier, 1963 (Master Plan Series Report 3) . I 49siinon Eisner and Associates, Uptown Business * District Plan, 1963 (Master Plan Series Report 4). ^^simon Eisner and Associates, Hillside Plan, 1963 ; (Master Plan Series Report 5). S^Simon Eisner and Associates, Community Appearance ‘ ; Report, 1963 (Master Plan Series Report 6). ■ f ^^Story in the East Whittier Review, July 2, 1961. ; 9 i “ n ! begin a publicity program for the General Plan prior to ' the public hearings. I j Presenting the General Plan Proposals I There is no doubt that the Planning Director, ! , Jacques DuBois, undertook a publicity program with some . misgivings in view of the lack of any citizen group to provide support for the General Plan. The importance of I organized citizen support had been made clear to him as a I student, when DuBois had assisted Donald Foley in his study I of the Berkeley Master Plan and the knowledge that the lay ^ citizen had of the Master Plan.53 The Planning Director ' also had been primarily responsible for a study of organ ized groups in Richmond, while serving as Assistant Planning Director of that city.54 DuBois‘ approach to the public information problem was to enlist the aid of the local newspapers in a program I of public education and to speak about the General Plan at I meetings of organized groups. He spent almost every break- 1 fast, lunch, and dinner for a period of several months ! I 53]3^j-j^2.d L. Foley, "How Many Berkeley Residents Know About Their City's Master Plan?", Journal of the J American Institute of Planners, XXI (August, 1958) , ; pp. 138-144. ^4Richmond City Planning Commission, Organized ' Groups in Richmond (Richmond: June, 1958). 92 I I speaking to almost every organized group in the City, from , I the Lions to the Morning Y.M.C.A. Club. ' Newspaper Coverage In the area of newspaper coverage, DuBois was i indeed fortunate. The two local papers. The Whittier I Daily News and The East Whittier Review, covered the meet- I j • ; ings of both City Council and Planning Commission. When j I ' DuBois approached the respective City Hall reporters of each paper, he found a sympathetic audience, willing to . devote space to publicity about the General Plan within i . the editorial policy of each paper. The East Whittier ■ Review was a local area paper devoted to advertising and local "color" stories, while the Daily News was an old- time local paper originally called the Whittier News,55 which had been published since 1900; it has been one of the few old-time local newspapers that have survived into i the modern journalistic era that has seen large metropol itan dailies dominate the newspaper scene. , The Daily News began the publicity with an article : I ! titled, "Commission sets Boundaries of Master Plan Survey ‘ Area. " The East Whittier Review undertook a publicity ( , ‘ 55 B. F. Arnold, "Whittier Pioneer Newspapers," in jBenjamin F. Arnold and Artilissa Dorland Clark (eds.), ' History of Whittier, op. cit., pp. 43-44. ; 1951. ^^News story in the Whittier Daily News, May 13, 93 I campaign in an article titled: "Development of Master I 57 Plan Underway Here." In the article. Planning Commission Chairman R. L. McNitt was quoted as saying: "We shouldn't be stampeded into something that won't be any good." | ' In addition to its regular coverage of events | concerning the proposed General Plan, the Whittier Daily News undertook an informative series, with the first article appearing on August 3, 1963 issue under the title of "First of a Series: City Master Plan, Long-Range Guide for Future Development." The last of the series of six articles appeared on August 15, 1963. The East Whittier Review launched the General Plan : series on August 22, 1963. The articles had the following , ' titles: "Master Plan Sets Guide for City's Development;" ■ i I "City Plans Include Surrounding Territory;" "Land Use In ^ Area Surveyed by Plan;" "Density Classes Govern Residential ! I I Development;" "General Plan Cited as Guide to Future;" | ! I , "General Plan Forecasts School Plant Facilities"General I Plan Guide to Land Acquisition."^^ ‘ ; ! I ! i Public Speaking Program I I On November 10, 1963, just prior to completion of the General Plan publicity in the local newspapers, ■ I ! I ^ ^ ' — — , ; ^^News story in Whittier Daily News, July 2, 1961. I • ' ^^News stories in the East Whittier Review, ! August 22, 25, and 29; September 5; November 14; ! December 1. Date of publication of one article is unknown. 94 DuBois began a speaking tour on behalf of the Plan among the organized groups in the community. The first group to receive the presentation was the League of Women Voters, 'on September 10, 1963. The speaking tour ended only after I 37 speeches had been made to about 1,100 persons, meeting in groups of from 8 to 125. DuBois prepared a careful and detailed speech and modified it to fit the needs of the occasion. He used such graphic aids as a large General Plan map and a land use map, together with the zoning map of the City. At each presentation he passed out small copies of the General Plan map backed by a brief explana tory narrative. The Planning Director had decided to make presentations to the general public, but prior to any action on his part the City Council directed him to make at least two public presentations in advance of any public hearing on the plan. The first of the meetings called by the Planning (Director in accordance with the City Council directive, I to answer questions in regard to the General Plan propos als, as well publicized in the local papers, but when the time arrived for the presentation an audience of only 12 people were present. The second meeting held at the direc tion of the Council was even more disappointing to the staff and the Director. The audience consisted of two elderly ladies, a number exceeded by the City personnel making the presentation. j 95 Distribution of Printed Materials The primary document prepared to publicize the general plan was a fold-out map with a color printing of the general plan map on one side and a narrative descrip- *tion of the General Plan proposals on the back. This map ; was distributed over the counter to the public at the Planning Department; 38 copies were mailed to organizations on the Council's distribution list; other copies were made available to the public at presentations of the General jPlan; and copies were mailed to various school districts, enough to allow a copy of map for each school principal. A total of 1,000 maps was distributed.^^ Distribution of the General Plan text was somewhat more limited because of the cost involved. A total of 174 copies was distributed.^^ Organizations approved by the jCouncil received 92 copies, 23 copies were sold at $5.00 I : Iapiece, 4 copies were sent to members of the planning • ; profession on request— one as far away as the state of Rio Grande do Sul in Brazil. Included in the distribution were j30 copies made available to the Chamber of Commerce, the I 'League of Women Voters, and the Whittier Area Education ' \ [Study Council. I ' ^^Jacques DuBois, "October 1, 1963 Letter to the City Council" in Whittier City Planning Department File No. 018, Urban General Plan Préparâtion--Public Relations, p. 1. 60 Ibid., p. 2 96 Public Hearings by the Planning Commission It was evident from the earlier statement of the Chairman of the Planning Commission, R. L. McNitt, that the I Commission did not intend to proceed with any rapidity on 'the proposed General Plan.^^ The first piblic hearing on the proposed General Plan was held on January 17, 1964, almost a year after the final General Plan document was submitted to the City on March 1, 1 9 6 3 . The public hearings concluded on October 9, 1964, almost eight months after they had begun, and almost two years after the 63 consultant had completed the final document. Public Hearing of January 17, 1964 The first hearing on the proposed General Plan was opened by the Chairman R. L. McNitt, at 2 p.m., in the j Whittier Community Center Auditorium. He announced that I the purpose of the public hearing was to "consider a study j ordered and paid for by the City," and explained that: The study had commenced about two years ago, at the request of the City Council, in an attempt to get at ' ; least one expert's opinion of what future development I might bring to our City, both with respect to its ! I ' - I I ^^Ibid., p. 90, Note 61. 62 Ibid., p. 87, Notes 50 to 53. ^^City of Whittier, Official Minutes, "Regular Meeting, Planning Commission— City of Whittier, October 9, 1964" (Whittier: Whittier City Planning Department, 1964) , p. 1 (Mimeographed). 97 I I internal development and some of the external factors * which affect it, and as a consequence, they employed the firm of Eisner and Associates, long-time planners in Southern California, to conduct the study for them. The Chairman then informed the audience of the efforts made. ; by public officials and the Planning Director to publicize the Plan and of the fact that the Planning Commission and ' the City Council could "adopt all of the Plan, none of the Plan, certain elements of the Plan, or varying combina tions."^^ He praised the local newspapers for their , efforts in "announcing the time and place of the hearing, and as a result, we have some communications from some organized groups who have indicated that they might want to appear here today and express personal opinion on behalf of themselves as individuals or perhaps as representing organizations." The planning director then briefly summarized the proposed General Plan. I The first organized group to be heard was the League of Women Voters. Their president stated that they had ■ "adopted City Planning in Whittier as our local study I item." She said: "the League of Women Voters feels . strongly that a General Plan should be adopted to serve the ^^City of Whittier, Official Minutes, "Special Meeting to Consider Proposed General Plan of the City of Whittier, January 17, 1964, Whittier Community Center Auditorium, 2:00 p.m." (Whittier: Whittier City Planning j ' Department, 1964) , p. 1 (Mimeographed) . 65ibid. ^^Ibid. 98 'interests of orderly growth and development in our City. ”^’ 7 The fact that the General Plan was strongly favored by the League was further pointed out when the speaker said: We feel that this Plan should be adopted, and that the City Council should proceed toward its implementation. Since the Plan is a general guide, this is not the time to bog down in arguments about specifics— this can be done as new ordinances are drawn from it. She further stated that her group approved the idea of cluster-type development in the hills and high density apartments in the uptown area provided that the land coverage was restricted. The group also favored archi tectural control, incentive zoning for apartments, and pre planning to assure adequate facilities to serve multiple development. She further commented on the need for low- cost housing, a restricted manufacturing zone, upgrading i of the uptown area through private enterprise, joint school and park sites, and a program to attract light industry. The League also commented on the need for closer ! control of land uses on Whittier Boulevard, as well as other traffic arteries, such as Painter Avenue. They j favored a civic and cultural center in the uptown area and ! ' opposed a branch civic center in East Whittier. Support ,was expressed for expanded library facilities, to include | branches. Special comments were made about the traffic problems. Service roads were deemed necessary for Whittier ^^Ibid. ^^Ibid., pp. 1-2 99 I Boulevard and Painter Avenue and off-street parking was | considered of great importance, as was a street-widening 'program. Further comment was made about the necessity for "subdivision regulations which would preserve school and park sites" and the need to "proceed with the orderly development of the whole Plan, and [to] beware of pressures for any one part." An "appropriate, long range and comprehensive capital improvement program" also was sup- 71 ,ported. In closing their presentation to the Commission the j League 1 . . . recommends the formation of a citizens advisory committee to help keep citizens informed and aware of ! developments regarding the Plan, to make recommenda tions to the Planning Commission, to work for implemen- I tation of the Plan, and to consider the possibilities I of the annexation of the surrounding areas shown in the ' plan and not now in the City limits. This committee should be made up of representatives of groups rather I than [of] individuals.^^ ! j The League then further stressed the need of adopting the General Plan as "the necessary first step in solving many ; of our City's problems. j The next group to present its viewpoint was the , I I Whittier Area Coordinating Council. The representative of i this group told Chairman McNitt that they had long recog- i nized the need for more parks in the Whittier area. She stated: ^^Ibid., p. 2. ^^Ibid. ^^Ibid., pp. 2-3. ^^Ibid., p. 3. J 100 ■ . i ' The subject of parks was chosen as one of the major fields in which we would be interested for the next several years. We have very much appreciated and supported the work of our Park Commission and we have heartily endorsed their efforts in obtaining park land in the area, and in their long-range planning. . . . We would like to go on record as supporting the Master Plan in relation to parks, and we feel that the heri tage which once disappears is gone forever, that we should and must afford the constructive acquisition as ; soon as possible of these lands while they are still I economically feasible. \ Ernest Levens, Chairman of the Park and Recreation Commission, then commented at some length about the portion of the General Plan that related to parks. He, in essence, : summarized the need for parks of various types in the community, stating that: "At present time, by any of ! various standards, the City of Whittier is sadly deficient 74 I j in park space." Then, after an explanation of criteria ; ’ for judging the need for parks, he concluded with: I would urge, therefore, that the parks provision of the General Plan should be adopted along with the I General Plan and be implemented by the City Council in j those respects. ; i The Chairman then asked if the representative of ■ ' the Whittier Uptown Merchants Association was present, ! since this group had asked to be heard. After no reply I was made he requested the representative of Whittier Area ' Community Beautiful or of any other organized group that i j wished to be heard. Having no reply, he then requested I inquiries from individuals. The Planning Director of i , ^^Ibid. ^^Ibid., p. 4. ^^Ibid. 1 101 ; Santa Fe Springs, a neighboring community, then suggested i certain changes in the Plan in order to unify the proposed ' plan and the proposed General Plan for his own city inso- , far as County area between the communities was concerned. ; { < [After several individual comments were made regarding park ; acquisition, cheap housing in Uptown Whittier for the elderly, and the commercial uses proposed for the uptown area, a local planning consultant, Edward J. Till, who specialized in preparing zone cases, lot splits, and 'subdivisions for presentation to local communities in the j I area, made a long speech. He stated: We are involved considerably with planning problems in the Whittier area. We don't wish to take a position in opposition to the Plan as you have it before you. We feel that in general it is a step in the right : I direction, but we think this Plan, if anything, is ; ultra-conservative and what we need to do is to consider certain aspects in the development of the general Whittier community in a little more liberal manner so that the thing that will support all our i business areas and schools and all the taxable agencies| that this will come into the community and help us | ' further develop the area for parks and schools and all | the other facilities that are so carefully planned on your map. Till then informed the commission: "We also are priv- i ileged to be members of The Public Affairs Committee of ’ 78 the Chamber of Commerce." He further informed the ^ Commission that The Public Affairs Committee had sent a ! I circular to all the organizations within the general City I area requesting them to have their representatives attend ^^Ibid., pp. 5-6. ^^Ibid., p. 6. 102 ^ the public hearings and give the Commission their views on the proposed General Plan. Till continued to speak at some length; his major point seemed to be that there should be some unspecified increase in density and population in the East Whittier ! area, to include "high rise apartments. " It would seem ; to the author that Till allowed his personal views as a local rezoning consultant to affect his comments, which could also be construed to be the views of the Chamber of Commerce. The Planning Director reacted strongly to Till's comments and, in a memo to the Planning Commission, | later pointed out that Mr. Till's comments were not ! supported by any data and that his opinions were developed ! by himself. I The remaining comments made by individuals concerned, only their individual lots and the effect of the Plan on • them; following these, the meeting was adjourned. : , ■ ■ ■ - ■ ■ ■ . ' Public Hearing of February 28, 1964 The second in the series of hearings by the Planning, I : : Commission, held in the City Council Chambers, was the I scene of some spirited debates that reminded the author of ^^Ibid., p. 6. ^^City of Whittier, "Inter-Office Memo, Hearing on the Proposed General Plan, February 28, 1964" (Whittier : Whittier City Planning Department File No. 015), p. 1. 1 103 I I the dialogue written by Charles Haar on the subject. The| chairman opened the hearing with a brief summary of the plan and a report of the previous hearing and then recog nized the representative of the Chamber of Commerce, ' Gerrold Hathaway. The presence of Mr. Hathaway was evidently a complete surprise to the Planning Director, ■ who had been attempting to enlist his aid in adoption of ,the General Plan. That this was obvious, even to Hathaway, , seems to be substantiated by Hathaway's opening statement: I"First, I wish to apologize to Mr. DuBois for not notifying I Q2 ihim of my intention to be here for this hearing." Hathaway then offered what was to be the beginning I of a series of surprises during the afternoon, when he I I ■ announced: The Chamber has decided to study the General Plan as it pertains to each committee rather than to make an j overall recommendation from the Board of Directors at ! this time. This means that all comments and recommen- I dations by an individual committee will be released by i ' the Board only as a proposal or comment of this ' ' particular committee, and it does not necessarily mean the Board of Directors [of the Chamber of Commerce] | is in agreement with the committee's report. This, we ' ; think, is the best way to handle it. My report today ; !--------; ----------------------------------------------------------------- : Charles M„ Haar, "The Master Plan: An Inquiry in Dialogue Form," Journal ot the American Institute of Planners, XXV (August, 1959), 133-142. I ' j ®^City of Whittier, "Official Minutes, General Plan I Meeting, February 28, 1964, City Council Chambers, 2:00 I p.m." (Whittier: Whittier City Planning Department, 1964), 'p. 1 (Mimeographed). 104 i will be that of the Central Committee, which is | primarily interested in the Uptown Area. Hathaway then read the answers made by the Central Committee to a questionnaire sent out by the Planning Department. The committee favored the idea of a General Plan, endorsed the continuance of the Uptown Area as the | i major shopping area and focal point of the community, 'favored the expansion of the present Civic Center, and desired the extension of Hadley Street. The committee opposed the idea of having a branch Civic Center facility j in the East Whittier area. In addition, the Chamber of Commerce spokesman stated: I The committee recommended that (a) strict attention be paid to preserving established zoning; (b) the review ; ; and restudy of enforcement and implementation of | j recommendations made by staff and pertinent commis- , sions— in other words, they seem to feel more consider-' ation should be given to recommendations made by the commissions. j The committee also recommended that the extension of I 1 I Hadley Street be a concurrent project with the extension of I Colima Road. Hathaway also pointed out that the planning ' staff had met with the Industrial Development Committee of ; j i I the Chamber on February 18, 1964, and reviewed maps and : other data, and that "no one made any suggestions or raised . opposition to any part of it, so I would assume they are ' in favor.^^ ^^Ibid. ^^Ibid. ^^Ibid., p. 2. j 105 ' The next speaker to gain the floor was Ernest Levins, Chairman of the Park and Recreation Commission, jjyir. Levins added several comments to reinforce his remarks at the previous public hearing. He first read into the record a letter from the consultant in regard to the standards for park site acquisition, and then pointed out the implications of the General Plan park sites and the need to indicate at least a general location for the parks ; needed by the community. At this point a three-way discussion took place between the Chairman, Mr. Hathaway, and a Mr. M. E. Jordan concerning the improvement of the uptown area. After a ;brief interchange on this subject, a Mr. D. B. Brown asked }if he might speak for the Northeast Property Owners 1 Association. Mr. Brown indicated that his organized group I Iwould like to be informed concerning the General Plan. Mr. McNitt, the Chairman, then requested the Planning ,Director to set up a meeting with this property owners' ; group. It now became evident that his own prejudices had I indeed affected the judgment of the community's local ,private planning consultant, Mr. Till. He now made the i following comment: ^^Ibid., pp. 2-3. ^^Ibid., p. 3. 105 Anybody within the City of Whittier who appears before you with any element that is not in conformance with this plan will be subject to additional expenses and costs of preparing to do something to amend the General Plan so that, as I understand the law, not being an attorney, the law of the State of California as it applies to Planning, says once you have a General Plan, this Commission or the Council can't approve anything contrary to the General Plan. So, those facets of the Plan that you have before you, and as I said at the first Public Meeting, I feel that the Plan does not let us look far enough, as far as the City of Whittier, I think we deserve a better fate than this plan. It is too conservative in my opinion, and I tell you that with some knowledge of p l a n n i n g . 88 I In response to Mr. Till's comments, the Planning Director I emphasized that the Commission or Council had the power to I pass on any zone change case as they saw fit. He pointed I out that "the plan is only a statement of policy adopted by resolution."89 The chair's attempt to adjourn the I meeting was then interrupted by Mrs. Herbert McGaffey, a ,local resident known as a supporter of "conservative" causes, who stated that more study was required by the people she represented before comments could be made because "there were no copies available and we needed them in order to know what we were doing and I am a member of the League of Women Voters and I am interested in it from a citizen's point of view."90 The chairman then asked her if she had participated in the League's study. Mrs. McGaffey replied; ^^Ibid., p. 4. 89jbid., p. 5. ^^Ibid. 107 ; I was an observer. I studied it along with the program and received the information, but from the information that we have available we see no protection provided for existing improvements in the event that the Council should adopt the present Master Plan, which will ] involve present and future zone or land use changes. For this reason, at least a 60-day consideration period, for the purpose of allowing the property owners of Whittier to become informed, is requested by me who represents the Citizens Committee concerning the, i Master Plan.81 i The Chairman then informed Mrs. McGaffey that copies of thej plan were available for $5.00 per copy. The Planning Director told her these were available in the City Clerk's : office, and additional copies were stored in the City Hall basement.82 I In reply to an additional comment by DuBois that ' copies of the General Plan were available in the library for circulation, Mrs. McGaffey said, I called the library and they said they had a nice little room that we women could sit around a table and ^ study the maps, and I said it's fine if we had enough ! time to do it. She said, "You'd better come down here ' I and see if you haven't the time, so I am proposing we be given the time.83 DuBois then stated that almost 1000 small maps had been ' given out, that about 40 presentations had been made to 1 various groups and that these groups represented an ' audience of over 1,200 people. Mrs. McGaffey again asked I for more time and materials, and the Planning Director ' ! pointed out that both the local newspapers had published ' complete series of articles on the General Plan. Mrs. , ^^Ibid. 82%bid. ^^Ibid., p. 6. 108 McGaffey replied, "I think if it's going to be up for a vote, though, we should have the whole thing published." i The Chairman then pointed out that a series of public hearings would be held and asked her if she was familiar with the letters issued by the League, and ; ; i suggested she study the report on the subject issued by ; ( [Mrs. Keim, the President of the League of Women Voters. ^ Mrs. McGaffey then said, "Well, you see, the League is ' made up of two points of view also, and for that reason I don't always get the.other, and I would like to see it."^^ The Chairman then said, "You can have my copy of the first hearing, which contains a summary of it."88 The Planning Director then offered to make a presentation to Mrs. I McGaffey's group if they desired an evening appointment. At this point Mrs. Keim decided that the matter should be clarified, and made the following comment: I I am the president of the League of Women Voters. I : would like to simply for the record to clarify the ■ ‘ fact that Mrs. McGaffey is a member of the League, but she uses the words, "group which I represent." I do • not know what group she is representing. I am the ’ only individual whi is authorized to speak in the name | of the League as a whole and the report which was I given at the last meeting is the result of our meeting | held on the P l a n . 87 , : • ! After an inquiry by Mr. Hathaway, the Chairman : stated that the only time-table established for the ! f r — ■ - - ■ ■ ■ - ..... ■ ■ ■ ■ ; i ^"^Ibid. ^^Ibid. ^^Ibid. ^^Ibid. , p. 7. ‘ 109 hearings was that of "playing it by ear." The Planning Director pointed out that the Department had never turned down any group that had asked for a presentation, and stated he had never heard of Mrs. McGaffey's group. The Chairman answered several zoning questions and was about to adjourn when he noted that Mr. Dick Sieble was attempting to be recognized. ■ Mr. Sieble inquired if it were possible to amend specific portions of the General Plan. The Planning Director answered that the Commission and the Council could do as they saw fit. The Chairman replied that if the Plan were adopted by the Council his question would be "could it (the plan) be amended." Mr. Sieble replied, "I was concerned mainly about the initiation of amendments prior to the adoption of the Plan." The Chairman replied, j "Previous to the adoption of the Plan, we are operating ; with no Plan, in effect, so that any amendments that are ’ initiated are heard as we will today . . . strictly on ; : their merits under the existing ordinance." Mr. Sieble remarked, "You have little patches of color here on your ! General Plan map. You're not considering just a question ' of whether or not the entire Plan as the map represented ! should be a d o p t e d . "88 After offering an explanation, 99 I Mr. McNitt asked, "Do you have some proposal to make?" ^^Ibid., p. 8. ^^Ibid. i 110 , Mr. Sieble answered, "Not at this time. You have heard ' our request that we have evening hearings. There are so many people here in Whittier who work in the daytime. " "^^0 Mr. William Garvey, a Planning Commissioner, and Mr. DuBois assured Mr. Sieble that the General Plan did not auto matically change the zoning and that amendments to the ; I General Plan could be made as the Commission and the ; Council saw fit. The Chairman then adjourned the meeting. Public Hearing of March 27, 1964 The Chairman, Mr. McNitt, opened the meeting and summarized the information collected at the previous I ! : hearings. He then requested that the organized groups be I I heard first. I Mr. Hathaway of the Chamber of Commerce was the first representative to take the floor. The Chairman * asked him to comment on a communication that the Commis- ! ‘ sion had received from one of the Chamber's committees, the Legislative Action Committee, which had written: ! The General Plan constitutes a carefully considered I and detailed analysis of land use, present and j I proposed. The Plan should be adopted by resolution as | I a general statement of the City's policy in reference i I to land use and zoning. The resolution of adoption should recognize the utility and success of the plan I as a general statement depends on a policy of careful : application, which application should include provi sion for modification or exceptions which will protect the rights of the property owners within the City, 100 Ibid. Ill ■ and provide for modern innovations in land use and I consistant with the best interest of the City.101 Mr. Hathaway replied that this statement was "a resolution of this particular group within the Chamber and has been I released by the Board of Directors as such. The Board has not made a specific study of this and is not trying to put all these reports into one."^^^ There followed an exchange between the Chairman, Mr. DuBois, and Mr. Hathaway as to the reasons for the lack of exact coordination between color codes on the General Plan map and the Zoning map. Hathaway then said: ; I'd like to kick out one other subject that numerous people are here in regard to, the letter that was circulated by Mr. Morrison, [a local businessman] and it refers to a multiple family project on the Boule vard. The point I am making, the people ask, "This is . not a zoning map,"--which is true, and Mr. DuBois has ! stated this and has explained it, but they come up and say, "Well, if this General Plan map does not reflect ' the intended land use which will be ultimately reflected in the zoning ordinance, what's the use of having this General Plan map?"103 i ! The Chairman replied that the General Plan was "one man's I i d e a " ^84 that the Commission and the Council could ! adopt any portion of the Plan as they saw fit, and that I the only way to find out the real desires of the community was to provide the type of forum where people could be heard. He then referred to a number of letters that the ^8i(]ity of Whittier, Official Minutes, "General Plan Hearing, March 27, 1964" (Whittier; Whittier City I Planning Department, 1964), p. 1 (Mimeographed). ' 1 0 2 , p p . 1 - 2 . 1 0 3 j b i d . , p . 2 . 112 I Commission had received objecting to the multiple usage i shown on Whittier Boulevard, and requesting that the General Plan Map indicate commercial use. The Planning Director then pointed out that the General Plan map had ■ been prepared on the basis of data three years old, and that there might be certain proposals that should be \ » : changed. ! i The Chairman then read into the record letters from : almost every major landowner on the eastern portion of Whittier Boulevard objecting to any indication of other ^ than commercial use for that portion of the b o u l e v a r d . ^ ^ 5 ; I The Chairman indicated that most of the letters were in response to a letter of information sent to them by Mr. Morrison.Mr. Harold Newrock, an attorney, spoke in behalf of three additional landowners objecting to the ; indication on the map of multiple use; he pointed out that . j there seemed to be no need for additional administrative- i ; professional land uses on Whittier Boulevard. There followed various individual objections to some of the land i : i uses indicated on the Plan, and one gentleman, Mr. J. T. I Underwood, objected to adoption of any specific Plan.^^V The Chairman and the Planning Director then discussed at ; some length the uses shown on the Plan for the entire I length of Whittier Boulevard. , i ! lOSibid. . p. 3. J-O^Ibid. lO’ibid-/ P- 4. 113 ' ' Mr. George Lusk then addressed the Chairman and listed property owned by his brother, John D. Lusk, that had been placed in a multiple or administrative commercial ' use zone on the General Plan map. He objected to this ' indication and said that it had frightened away prospective users.Two other gentlemen in the audience also | ' objected to the practice of showing property in uses j other than that for which it was z o n e d . ^^9 Mrs. Robert Dore then objected to the indication of high density apartments on the General Plan map for the : area of Camilla and Painter. The Chairman pointed out that there already were some large multiple structures in the area, and Mrs. Dore replied that there also were many I lovely private homes in the area. Mr. DuBois informed : I ' Mrs. Dore that he had met with the North Central Property Owners Association on April 3rd in regard to this I 110 I problem. . At this time it appeared that the ultra-right made i ; a concerted effort to discredit even the concept of a j General Plan. No observer of the Southern Cali'fornia scene can have failed to note the efforts of persons and groups whose thinking might be characterized as ultra conservative to influence the decisions of public bodies. Ranging from the schools (selection of textbooks, I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I f PP- 5-6. / p. 8. 110 Ibid., pp. 6-7. ; 114 curriculum content, teaching methods) to health (fluorina- tion, sex education, mental hygiene programs) to public [administration (Federal funding. Urban Renewal, planning) land on into other areas affecting the welfare of the popu lation, these foci of dissatisfaction in the community may at times present unexpected and formidable "booby-traps" to j : I : administrators seeking to promote modern approaches to j I I 'community problems. The activities of this element in all j 'the fields named above are copiously documented. From the viewpoint of opposition to city and regional planning a primary document is "No Time for Softness" by Dennis jo'Harrow. In this work the author draws upon such manifesta- Itions in communities of all sizes, in all parts of the I 'country. His summary of why and how the so-called ultra- jrightist opposes planning in general and General Plans in particular is germane to this study of developments in 1 Whittier. He says : We think that almost everyone who tries to be decent, considerate and tolerant, sooner or later reaches a point where he says, "How much more of this do I have to take?" There comes a time when brotherly love and self-preservation are at odds. Freedom of speech does not mean, either legally or morally, license to lie. . . . We would now like to examine a group whose object is not just the sport of barring the individual public servant. Instead, the goal of this group, or group of ll^Dennis O'Harrow, "No Time for Softness," American Society of Planning Officials, Newsletter, XXXI, No. 1 (January, 1965), pp. 1-3. I 115 I * groups is to destroy the decent and orderly government that the public servant represents. And because the public servant can expect no mercy from these persons and no legal protection from attacks by them, he must learn to protect himself. Turning the other Cheek can be fatal. The group we speak about is the Radical Right, the hate-mongers of extremism.H2 O 'Harrow included in his comments a reprinting of an article by Arthur Prager, assistant executive secretary of the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut Metropolitan Council, titled "Here Come the Hate Groups.This article describes in the technique used by the ultra-right ! during this public hearing (March 27, 1955) which included organized disruption, circut rider technique, professional antagonism, anonmity, and blind accusations. j Both Mr. J. W. Triplett and Mr. Herbert McGaffey jexhibited these tactics during the next portion of the public hearing. The remarks are of such a length that the I author has placed them in Appendix C. Because of the I importance of the discussion and the complete lack of ; response to the questionnaire sent by the author of any group in the community which is generally considered to be ^^^Ibid., p. 1. ^I8j^rthur Prager, "Here Come the Hate Groups," Nation's Cities, November 1964 as reprinted in Dennis O 'Harrow, "No Time for Softness," op. cit., pp. 2-3. 116 'of the "far right," although such groups were included in ' the mailing, it is considered essential to extract the entire text of the debate from the official minutes in order to illustrate the tactics of this particular organized I I element in the community and make them available for the attention of those interested in the tactics of such groups. Between the remarks of Mr. Triplett and Mr. McGaffey Mr. John Nelson, attorney, appeared for his clients, Mrs. Richardson, Mr. Bell, Mr. Harris, and Mr. Marshburn. He ■objected to the proposals of the General Plan for Whittier i I Boulevard. He further stated that his clients objected to passage of the General Plan even though it might only be a ‘guideline. The Chairman then asked him if his clients 'would object to the Plan if it showed the existing zoning I on Whittier Boulevard, and Mr. Nelson replied, "I have not I ; t specifically conferred with them, but I would presume that ! ' : that would be correct." When the Chairman asked if anyone wanted the last .word several property owners discussed with the Commission and the Planning Director the dilemma of utilization of I commercial property in the uptown area, now that it appeared ■ that the new car dealers were moving to Whittier Boulevard. ; Another citizen again voiced the opinion that showing I I ,property in another use on the General Plan when it was I ' I zoned for commercial use was an unwise action. Since 117 ! discussion seemed to be at an end the Chairman adjourned j the meeting. ; Public Hearing of June 19, 1964 The fourth public hearing held on the proposed .General Plan opened with a detailed summary of the previous ^ ( I ; public hearings by the Chairman of the Commission. The | ; ! .Chairman also announced that since the last hearing he had | received and filed a petition by about 80 residents who were members of the North Central Whittier Property Owners . Association.115 The members of this group expressed opposition to the high density proposed for the area in the 'proposed General Plan. The Chairman also referred to a letter from the board of trustees of the Whittier Public 'Library in which they agreed, in substance, with the propo sals of the General Plan in so far as they were related to ! the public library. I I j At this time, the Planning Director pointed out the j changes that had been made in the General Plan map to meet , t i ; the requests of the Commission after considering the I I I I I testimony during the previous public hearings. In the area, known as the North CenLral WliiLLier Property Owners ; Association area, the existing multiple area was changed | ^l^City of Whittier, Official Minutes, "General ' I Plan Public Hearing, Planning Commission, City of Whittier, j June 19, 1964" (Whittier: Whittier City Planning Depart- I ment, 1964), p. 1 (Mimeographed). i 118 I from high to medium density and the existing single family area was changed from medium density to low density residential land use. Property on Whittier Boulevard : previously indicated as multiple use was changed to high way-related commercial use; other property shown as administrative-professional use was changed to highway- related commercial use, and additional multiple use on the 'Boulevard was shown as highway-related use. At this point a number of individuals, including Mr. Fritz, Mr. 'Nelson, Mr. Pastralik, Mr. Harris, and Mrs. Hunt, ques- ■ tioned the Commission and Mr. DuBois in regard to the specific effect of the changes on their particular prop- :erty. These individuals represented the great bulk of developable property on the eastern section of Whittier ^ Boulevard. Mrs. Hunt then thanked the Commission for its cooperation in the matter and stated, "We came into the : City and found that every time we come and talk out our ^ problems, we get fine cooperation, and I just want to 117 express my appreciation." The Chairman then gave Mr. Hathaway the floor. ^ Hathaway inquired about one specific piece of property and j then inquired if the Commission or the Council intended to ; put out revised copies of the small General Plan map. The | Chairman said the map would be reprinted as finally adopted 116 Ibid., pp. 1-2. ^^^Ibid., p. 4. Ï 1 9 ' and then said he intended to discuss the residential area of the City located north of the uptown district.The first speaker was Mr. Owens of the North Central Whittier Property Owners Association, who made the following 'statement: I Our request is simply to move the apartments away from the Hoover School area between Camilla and Hoover. We presume Painter would like to be apartments to the alley east of Painter down to that corner [referring to the large General Plan map].H^ ! The next person to speak was Mr. Seible representing the Northeast Property Owners Association, who set up a projector to show color slides to illustrate the following speech: It is an area of fine single family homes. Although in recent years some apartments have been built along the south edge of this area. The quality of the homes are high, they are maintained and improved with pride. Anyone that is familiar with this area undoubtedly knows many homes that have been extensively remodeled or currently being remodeled or enlarged, extending the life for many years. And, to refresh your memory on this area. I'd like to present a few photographs of some of the homes in the area. These are some of the fine homes, obviously, there are many outstanding homes, but we cannot take the time to present them. Because of the changes in the plan that are proposed here, I picked a few homes here in the beginning that are on Painter Avenue, near the southern end. . . . "There are several brand new homes on Painter also. S o m e o f t h e h o m e s h e r e a r e i n t h e p r i c e r a n g e o f i n e x c e s s o f $30,000. T h e r e i s a V i c t o r i a n h o m e t h a t t h e y a r e c u r r e n t l y r e m o d e l i n g i n s i d e , a n d s p e n d i n g s e v e r a l t h o u s a n d d o l l a r s i n b r i n g i n g t h e h o m e b a c k t o t h e o r i g i n a l s p l e n d o r a s a V i c t o r i a n h o m e . . . . The homes are surrounded by trees, broad lawns, and carefully tended gardens. It gives the appearance of a family community, rather than mass produced stereo- 120 typed homes that you see in many of these southern California so-called bedroom communities. This is something that is very attractive in Whittier. . . . It is the consensus of the home owners in this area that the General Plan should be changed to low density residential use or to 7 units per acre as in the R-1 for the area illustrated on the map that I have with this request. I have petitions signed by approximately 200 people that request that such a change be made on the General Plan Map. I would like to point out that the Associa tion generally favors the General Plan and recognizes the value of long-range planning. It is only by having an accepted course of action that our City can have an orderly development and remain a desirable place for people to make their homes. The General Plan for Whittier has many features that are commended and it represents the first step in maintaining the unique attraction that Whittier has as a residential commun ity. The people in the area for which I speak, ' however, feel that the General Plan mapped for this I neighborhood is not in keeping with characteristics ( or aspirations of the neighborhood nor is it in the , best interest of Whittier as a whole. The Plan de- ; grades what is now an outstanding residential area. ^ We, therefore, urge that the General Plan map be | changed in the subject area to call for low density | residential use and that in the very near future the ' General Plan as amended be adopted by the City of * Whittier.120 ' I The Chairman thanked Mr. Seible for his fine presen-: tation and informed him that the consultants had made the changes he had suggested. After a brief discussion between the Chairman, the Planning Director, and Mr. Seible' it became apparent that Mr. Seible's requests, for the most? part, were met by the revisions made in the map prior to ] the hearing. j l^^Ibid., p. 6. 121 I Mr. McNitt then asked if there were any more comments in regard to the residential portions of the plan. Mrs. William Keim made the following statement on behalf of the League of Women Voters: I am speaking for the League of Women Voters. We spoke in some detail at the first hearing on the Master Plan, stating the position of the League of Women Voters. I would like to say in connection with the changes that have been made today, that I think that this is the finest type of community planning, where the community can speak for the sort of planning it wishes to have done, and then have the changes effected. We feel that the changes made along Whittier Boulevard are in the interest of a bigger business community, which, of course, is an advantage to our community as a whole. In years to come, I think we find some concern with the surplus of commercial property, but that is a problem to face some time later. It is also a very fine thing that along with a vigorous community, that we also will listen to residential people in the town who wish to preserve a residential area, because those of us who live in the community are also concerned with how it is developed. We would like to say again only that we would heartily agree with Mr. Seibel's comments, that we would very much like to see the Master Plan adopted as a general statement of public policy so that all of the citizens of Whittier will know where we are going and to make individual plans along with the major p l a n s . 121 The Chairman then made the following statement: The Commission, I think, is at the point now where we can well start to sit down; as I say, we've had rather extensive hearings, both here and amongst different members of the Council and members of the Commission, different groups. Speaking only for my self, the Commission may very well be at the point | where we can sit down and start arriving at some ' conclusions in what we would recommend to the Council ! and then proceed with one further hearing and get the | job done. Now, that isn't going to be tomorrow. I 1 think we've got a lot of work to do. Just as an I I 1 2 1 i b i d . , p . 6 . 122 example, to some of the technical recommendations made in relation to amending technical language of our zoning ordinance procedures, although we've cleaned a lot of that up lasL year. Go, we'll probably, over the next two months, go into a series of study sessions of some kind and with the benefit of partici pation of so many of the groups of the community and the thinking of where our people want to go, and then sit down and try to put this all together and come back once'more with one full presentation and get it to the Council.122 After a few offers of assistance by the various citizen groups and a closing statement by the Chairman, the hearing was adjourned. Public Hearing of October 9, 1964 The fifth and final public hearing was held at the regular Planning Commission meeting on October 9, 1964. Owners of property on STauson Boulevard presented a petition for modification of the proposed General Plan to indicate the area of their property as commercial land use; Mrs. Pat Lokken, Mrs. G. Weatherby, and Mr. Lynn spoke in favor of the petition.1^1 Mrs. William Keim, President of the League of Women Voters asked the Commission to rec ommend approval of the proposed General Plan. 1^"^ The closing remark was made by Mr. E. Martin who stated that l^^Ibid. 123city of Whittier, "Official Minutes, Regular Meeting, Planning Commission, City of Whittier, October 9, 1964" (Whittier: Whittier City Planning Commission, 1964), p. 1. 123 I I his industrial property was zoned for industrial use but ' was shown as low density residential on the General Plan I 125 map. By this time it was obvious that the Commission had decided to take some action. It was moved by Commissioner I Bell and seconded by Commissioner Garvey, and unanimously 1 adopted that the following resolution be made, recommending to the City Council that it approve the proposed General , Plan: Over the past year or more the Commission has j conducted an exhaustive series of hearings, and they have a complete sense of the community in regard to ; Mr. Eisner's recommendations as to what amendments we might take to our existing City Planning Ordinances. ! As to the objectives of the Hillside Study, they have | been pretty well accomplished, and similarly, that the | Uptown Business District should properly be handled * by the City Council in cooperation with the newly ; , created parking district and the Uptown Merchants I Association. The comprehensive recommendation in I regard to amendments to the zoning ordinances can properly be handled by the Commission, with the assist-; ance of the City Attorney, and I would recommend to the* Council that they authorize him to proceed at once with a comprehensive review of those recommendations. We ' can assign one of our subcommittees to work with him in that regard. I would recommend to the Council that [ the Commission be authorized to proceed with further studies in relation to the residential, commercial, and industrial land use objectives outlined in Mr. ' Eisner's report. This involves, of course, considéra- ‘ tion of our own projections of densities within the ; residential zones: studies in relation to the poten- I tial adequacies or inadequacies of land available in j the classification of the "C" zones, and consideration as to whether changes might properly be made, or in | the alternative the classifications expanded. Simi- | larly, we should pursue the recommendations of creation 124 of Research-Industrial zones as outlined by Mr. Eisner. Now matters affecting the schools, the public library, parks and recreation, the highways and transportation, and water and other utility elements of his proposals, should be referred to the respective boards or commissions in the community or the City Engineer, as the case may be, and final recommendation secured from these people by. the Council. The matter of creation of a Civic Center Development Plan, being closely related to the activities of the County of Los Angeles, should be properly within the province of our City Council with the Commission standing by to pursue such studies as the council may desire. Finally, I think that we can all appreciate the fine job which Mr. Eisner has done in the study, it being much more comprehensive than the previous one authorized, and we should surely offer to him our sincere thanks for a job well done, for through this study, we will be enabled to make those amendments to our existing Master Plan which should foster and encourage a continuing and healthy development of the entire City.126 Now that we have traced the evolution of the proposed General Plan for the City of Whittier from the pioneer days to the point at which the Commission recom- I mended its adoption by the City Council, it is time to turn our attention to the effect of the organized groups on the | I recommendation to the Council. In the following chapter ; the author will attempt to evaluate the effect of the organized groups on the proposed General Plan. , pp. 1-2. CHAPTER V EVALUATION OF THE EFFECT OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS The foregoing chapter has presented a historical perspective of the community and a summary of the public hearings held on the proposed General Plan, in an attempt to discover the actions and attitudes of the organized groups in Whittier in regard to the plan. It is suggested that General Plans— indeed. Planning itself— must reflect the attitudes of the community in order to benefit by a ' broad base of support and acceptance. This chapter seeks j to evaluate the effect of the organized groups in modifiea-} : tion, acceptance, or denial of the Plan. The effect being j evaluated is that of group opinion, which is active and I ' may be either favorable or opposed, but is never neutral. Public consent has also been evaluated since it is a "passive consensus which permits"1 and this study was constructed to evaluate this factor since it was typical of many of the organized groups contacted in the survey. Let us first, however, turn our attention to those i ^Frederic H. Bair, Jr., "Opportunities for Community Relations," in Planning 1963, Selected Papers from the i ASPO National Planning Conference, Seattle, Washington, May 5-9, 1963 (Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, 1963), p. 253. j 125 I 126 organized groups which evidenced active group opinion and were able to make some impact at the public hearings. Evaluation of Public Opinion The public hearings on the proposed General Plan for the City of Whittier involved a strong element of educa tion and fact-finding, reflecting comments on the charac teristics of public hearings : 1. The public hearing is part of the process by which the opinion forming sector of the public is educated. 2. The public hearing is part of the process by which the planner, members of boards and commissions, and the legislative body are educated. 3. The public hearing is a testing ground for deter- i mination of the rationality and clarity of the proposal for determining how much of the proposal falls within i the area of passive public consent (is non-controver- ' sial) and how much is to be the subject of active | controversy, and for determining the range and weigh- | ing the potential effect of the controversy. | 4. To a limited extent, the public hearing is an I arena for the reduction of conflict to consensus.2 , The public had been properly prepared for consideration of ‘ Whittier's proposed General Plan through mailings, hand outs, newspaper articles, and speeches to organized groups and the principal item of confusion that seemed to arise at the hearings was failure to understand the difference i between a General Plan map and a Zoning map. The concept j s of the future as indicated through the General Plan seemed ' I 2ibid., p. 254. * 127 , to some to be a tool that was of little use if current planning problems were properly met. As the hearings progressed, it became evident that certain power groups were aligned together, at least on this issue, with this particular Plan, and at this point in time. See Table 1, ; below, for a reflection of this group's attitudes. ! i Proponents I It became apparent at the public hearings that there were several groups that supported the proposed General Plan as submitted by the consultants. As might be , anticipated, the groups offering support for the General i Plan were civic and governmental organizations. The greatest surprise to the Commission seemed to be the j absence from the public hearings of many civic groups such | as "Community Beautiful." The lack of the support from these organizations is even more surprising when one considers the attention these groups devoted to the presentations made to them by the Planning Director. A. Civic Groups ! 1. League of Women Voters. The most vocal and active support on behalf of the proposed General Plan came from the League of Women Voters. This sup port was no surprise to the Planning Director, who had encouraged the League to make the proposed General Plan their study project of the year. TABLE 1 REPLIES TO SELECTED QUESTIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN A SAMPLE OF OPINION OF ORGANIZED GROUPS, SPRING, 1964 Per cent of Of all respondents respondents who : Of those respond- i ents who had heard of proposed General Plan ! 1 -Attended meetings of the Planning Commission 57.1% 57.1% -Followed the activities of Planning Commission as reported in the Press or by others. 100.0% 1 100.0% -Discussed the proposed General Plan with others 100.0% 100.0% -Attended public meetings on the proposed General Plan 57.1% 57.1% -Organization has discussed the proposed General Plan 61.4% 61.4% -Has seen the proposed General Plan report 61.4% 61.4% -Has read the proposed General Plan report 61.4% ! 61.4% ! -Has read the proposed General Plan map 61.4% I 61.4% Statistics obtained from "Questionnaire, University of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted in the Spring of 1964 by the author. There were 7 respondents, 7 of whom had heard of the proposed General Plan. 128 129 i I That the League had more than a passing interest in planning is evidenced by their pamphlet, "The Whole and Its Parts, State and Regional Planning in California."^ Of particular interest is the League's representation, which included many of the resources that Robert A. Dahl considered essential for the exercise of power, such as social standing, knowledge and expertness, the right to vote, time, and personal energy. The amount of attention devoted to study of the General Plan by the League is illustrated by their reply to the group ques- t I tionnaire, as shown in Table 2 (following page). ! ) 2. Whittier Area Coordinating Council. Active support j for the proposed General Plan as first presented j was also evidenced by the Whittier Area Coordinating I Council, an organization made up of representatives i of the various organized groups in the community. | Although the group supported the General Plan concept as proposed, it evidenced a particular interest in the community's park system. The primary power available to this group was its claim| ^League of Women Voters of California, The Whole and ^ Its Parts, State and Regional Planning in California ’ (Oakland: Fontes Abbey Press, October, 1962), 29 pp. I ^Robert A. Dahl in Social Science and Community Action, Charles R. Adrian (ed.), (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1960). 1 TABLE 2 ! REPLIES TO SELECTED QUESTIONS ON THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS GENERAL PLAN Question Reply -Attended meetings of the Planning Commission yes -Followed the activities of the Planning Commission as reported in the Press or by others yes i-Discussed the proposed General plan with others yes -Attended public meetings of the iproposed General Plan yes 1 -Organization has discussed the proposed General Plan yes |-Has seen the proposed General Plan report yes j-Has read the proposed General iPlan map yes “Has read the proposed General plan report yes '-Like or dislike planning services of the City Like -Like or dislike the other City services Like Statistics obtained from "Questionnaire, University of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted by the author in the Spring of 1964. Survey reply by President of the Group. 130 131 I I to represent a large number of local organizations, thus reflecting some of the essentials of power such as social standing, popularity, and the right to vote.^ For a reflection of this group's attitudes towards the proposed General Plan, see Table 3. I IB. Governmental Organizations ' 1. Whittier City Park Commission. Strong support for ! I the proposed General Plan and particularly for the parks element of the Plan, evidenced itself in the remarks of Ernest Levens, Chairman of the Park and Recreation Commission. He was the only public official to testify at the public hearings and it was apparent that he strongly supported the General Plan proposals and felt that the Plan provided an intelligent method of indicating future park sites and requirements. Proponents of a Modified Plan Most numerous of the groups evidencing an interest in the General Plan were those that wished the Plan modified in some manner to suit their particular interests. The planning consultants opinions as to the best future land use in the community conflicted with the desires of Sibid. TABLE 3 REPLIES TO SELECTED QUESTIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN COORDINATING COUNCIL Question Reply -Attended meetings of the Planning Commission no '-Followed the activities of the [planning Commission as reported in the Press or by others yes -Discussed the proposed General Plan with others yes -Attended public meetings of the proposed General Plan yes -Organization has discussed the proposed General Plan no I-Has seen the proposed General Plan report yes i i-Has read the proposed General Plan map yes [-Has read the proposed General Plan report yes -Like or dislike the planning I services of the City Like I-Like or dislike the other 'City services Like Statistics obtained from "Questionnaire, University of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted by the author in the Spring of 1964. Survey reply by President of the Group. I 132 132 I many of the property owners. Of particular interest was the fact that some of the more recently developed commer cial property with new buildings whose economic life would ,exceed that of the proposed General Plan were included in such land use categories as high density residential. The author feels this technical "goof" may have precluded the best development of Whittier Boulevard, since it produced a rash of complaints by owners of commercial property. The 'end result was, as some planners so aptly put it, "painting the Boulevard red," thus defeating the purpose of orig- 'inally placing residential uses on Whittier Boulevard— reduction of "strip commercial use" and improvement of the deteriorating traffic situation. A. Commercial Interests 1. Chamber of Commerce. This powerful local organi zation was one of the original proponents of a General Plan for the community; it therefore was anticipated that it would offer support for some type of long-range development plan.^ The national' body of the Chamber of Commerce had shown suffi cient interest in community development to publish ! an entire series of seven pamphlets on the subject, I ^ j ^See Section II of Chapter IV for a detailed summary of the Chamber of Commerce's original proposals I for a General Plan for the Community. 133 I j including one titled "Comprehensive Planning."^ That this organization decided to split its power into fragments by authorizing each committee of the I Chamber to study and report a separate recommenda- I tion to the Planning Commission in regard to the 1 i General Plan was a surprise to all; it markedly ' reduced the effectiveness of the organization's recommendations. What validity was present in the remarks made by the official representative, Mr. Hathaway, was partially obscured by the comments of Mr. Till, a self-styled representative of the Public Affairs Committee of the Chamber of Commerce.' I The presence of two speakers to whom some group in i the Chamber had given the benefit of its views tended to reduce what Dahl called "legality" since two conflicting viewpoints were expressed.^ Since the Chamber proceeded to act through committees in the public hearings, we shall next examine the opinions of the various committees of the Whittier Chamber of Commerce that reported concerning the General Plan. ^Chamber of Commerce of the United States, Compre hensive Planning, Guide for Community Growth and Change (Washington D.C.: Construction and Civic Development Department, Chamber of Commerce of the United States, March I960). ^See Chapter I for Dahl's criteria and Chapter IV, public hearings of January 17 and February 28, 1964 for .details on the testimony of both Mr.. Till and_ Mr. Hathaway 134 a. Public Affairs Committee. Mr. Till, the local planning consultant, purported to represent this committee. His basic proposals were for a "more liberal" plan so that tax-paying enterprises could more readily locate in the community. He also said that he (or the committee) had sent circulars to organizations within the City to solicit their opinions and to urge them to express their views to the Planning Commission. Some of the author's informants felt that Till was responsible for a misleading letter circulated by a Mr. Morri- sson, but there is no evidence to support such a view. Till also expressed a need for multi ple use at unspecified locations in East Whittier. b. Central Committee. Mr. Hathaway, as chairman, expressed the support of the committee for a General Plan, and particularly endorsed the concept of the Uptown Area as a focal point. He also urged extension of Hadley StreeL, j preservation of zoning, and more attention to | Planning Commission recommendations and to ! those of the other Commissions. I 135 c. Industrial Development Committee. Hathaway said that he assumed that this committee was in favor of the proposed General Plan, since no opposition had been expressed. d. Legislative Action Committee. This committee urged adoption of the General Plan in a formal communication to the Planning Commission. The committee said that the Plan should be consid ered as a general statement and that careful application should be made and exceptions provided for to protect the property owner, in I order to make provisions for new developments, ' and provide for innovations that were in the j best interest of the City. Hathaway commented ' that this opinion was only the resolution of ! that particular board. The only over-all viewpoint known to be ' t expressed by the Chamber of Commerce was its . I answer to the author's survey questionnaire For an indication of these views, refer to Table 4 on the following page. | ( I 2. Automobile Interests. A group of property owners i I who owned land on East Whittier Boulevard objected ' strongly to any use other than commercial being indicated on the General Plan map for their ! TABLE 4 REPLIES TO SELECTED QUESTIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE i Question Reply -Attended meetings of the Planning Commission yes ‘ -Followed the activities of the Planning Commission as reported in the Press or by others yes -Discussed the proposed General Plan with others yes -Attended public meetings of the proposed General Plan yes -Organization has discussed the proposed General Plan yes -Has seen the proposed General Plan report yes -Has read the proposed General Plan map yes -Has read the proposed General Plan report yes -Like or dislike planning services of the City like -Like or dislike the other City services like Statistics obtained from "Questionnaire, University of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted by the author in the Spring of 19 64. Reply by director of the Group. 136 137 property. Mr. Newrock, an attorney, also spoke for some of these owners. The intent of most of these owners was to develop their property for automobile dealerships or related uses. Several of the owners were auto dealers; other property owners were known to be considering lease or sale to automobile users. Since the conclusion of the public hearings on the General Plan, one automobile dealer has constructed a new car facility on one of the disputed properties, and another has prepared building plans for a similar operation. The lack of confidence this group had in the General Plan proposals is indicated in the response of the Motor Car Dealers Association to the survey questionnaire as shown in Table 5. Shopping Center Interests. Whittier has two regional shopping centers and the principal owner of one facility was present to object to the inclusion of some of his property at another location in a multiple residential use area on the General Plan Map. This par Licular owner was not represented in the survey because the retail association for his particular shopping center failed to respond to the questionnaire. The association of the other shopping center did res- TABLE 5 REPLIES TO SELECTED QUESTIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN MOTOR CAR DEALERS ASSOCIATION I Question Reply -Attended meetings of the Planning Commission no -Followed the activities of the Planning Commission as reported in the Press or by others yes -Discussed the proposed General Plan with others yes -Attended public meetings of the proposed General Plan yes -Organization has discussed the proposed General Plan no -Has seen the proposed General Plan report no -Has read the proposed General Plan map no -Has read the proposed General Plan report no -Like or dislike the planning services of the City Dislike -Like or dislike the other City services Dislike Statistics obtained from "Questionnaire, University of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted by the author in the Spring of 1964. Reply by the President of the group. 138 139 pond, however, and its opinions are reflected in Table 6. B. Civic Organizations 1. North Central Whittier Home Owners Association. This group was also referred to as the Northeast Property Owners Association by a member at the public hearing of February 28, 1964, but the author is using the title given by the president, Mr. Richard Seibel and further used by the Planning Commission Chairman during the proceedings. This group of property owners proved to be very effec tive in utilizing the power resources available to them for effecting the General Plan proposals. Petitions were submitted objecting to the multiple residential land use shown on the General Plan map, a presentation with color slides was made at the public hearing of March 27, 1964, and various ! members of the group attended various public hearings. The group in general represented older successful businessmen and upward-moving young j professional people. They could command in great | i abundance many of the resources Dahl felt to be t essential, including money and credit, control over' jobs, social standing, knowledge and expertness, ' popularity, legality, solidarity, the right to i TABLE 6 REPLIES TO SELECTED QUESTIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN QUAD ASSOCIATION Question Reply i -Attended meetings of the Planning Commission 1 no j -Followed the activities of the Planning Commission as reported ;in the Press or by others i yes 1 -Discussed the proposed General jPlan with others yes -Attended public meetings of the proposed General Plan 1 yes -Organization has discussed the proposed General Plan no -Has seen the proposed General Plan report no -Has read the proposed General Plan map no -Has read the proposed General Plan report no -Like or dislike planning services of the City Like -Like or dislike the other City services Like Statistics obtained from "Questionnaire, University of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted by the author in the Spring of 1964. Reply by the group's official representative. 1 j 140 141 vote, time, and personal energy.^ Table 7 illus trates the attitudes of this group. Opponents 1. The Ultra-right. Representatives of the ultra right appeared at the public hearings of February 28 and March 27, 1964. At the public hearing of February 28, one individual was evidently "on a scouting mission." Just prior to the close of the meeting, she attempted to imply that the public had not had the opportunity to read the Plan and attempted to gain a 60-day consideration period for her alleged group, "The Citizens Committee concern ing the Master Plan." When faced with the fact that copies of the Plan were available, she requested publication of the Plan in its entirety in the local papers and turned a deaf ear to the Planning Director's offer to present the plan to her organized group. On March 27, 1964 the ultra-right reduced most of the meeting to a discussion of the role of the local, state, and federal government in planning. The very fact that a General Plan could be printed was questioned. The impression was created that the citizens asking the questions were not ^Dahl, op. cit TABLE 7 REPLIES TO SELECTED QUESTIONS i NORTH CENTRAL WHITTIER HOME ON THE GENERAL PLAN OWNERS ASSOCIATION 1 Question Reply -Attended meetings of the Planning Commission yes I -Followed the activities of the Planning Commission as reported in the Press or by others yes -Discussed the proposed General Plan with others 1 yes -Attended public meetings of the proposed General Plan 1 yes -Organization has discussed the proposed General Plan yes -Has seen the proposed General Plan report yes |-Has read the proposed General Plan map yes -Has read the proposed General Plan report yes -Like or dislike planning services of the City No response -Like or dislike the other City services Like Statistics obtained from "Questionnaire, University of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted by the author in the Spring of 1964. Survey reply by the President of the Group. 142 143 interested in the Commission’s explanation of the Plan, but rather in obstructing and delaying the Commission. Again, the ultra-right rejected any attempt to set up a conference with the Planning Director and denied that they represented any organized group. As soon as the first speaker had finished, another began to make comments. The focus of attack was on use of Federal funds, and the lack of publicity. The group lost ground, however, since its claims became so inflated that it was obvious that the Chairman of the Commission : had lost patience and he skillfully ended the conversation. | I The presumed ultra-right elements in the community i evaded the author’s questionnaires with great j I skill. No responses were made in spite of double ! j mailings and attempts to mail to various addresses j for both the "John Birch Society"and "The ; Citizen Committee concerning the Master Plan." ' The author's social informants, government inform- I ants, and other trustworthy local sources informed j him that one of his respondents was a member of ] various groups in the community known to be ; ^*^John Birch Lecture listed for June 3rd in Annette Ewing, Whittier Community Calender (Whittier: Annette Ewing Publisher, June 1965), rear cover. 144 j sympathetic to the ultra-right viewpoint. This ! respondent's answers to the questionnaire are shown in Table 8, and may be considered to be an indica tion of the response of the ultra-right's attitude in general, rather than as a valid response to the questionnaire. Evaluation of Consent I Public consent, in the opinion of the author, is passive acceptance of the General Plan proposals when some reasonable knowledge of the Plan has been acquired by an jorganized group. Frederic H, Bair, Jr. defines this concept with great clarity: j I Public consent, then, is like the submerged portion of I an iceberg, usually moving predictably with the j current. But there is a top to the berg, a spectacular' superstructure projecting above the shelter of all the j great mass beneath. The zone above the water may be i likened to the area of active public opinion, as the ' great bulk below has been compared to the area of I passive consent. ! For the purposes of this analysis, the organized groups in Whittier have been divided into two major cat egories- -primary and secondary. The primary group is made I up of those groups to which the Wliittier City Council made * a mailing of the proposed General Plan text, and the | secondary group is made up of the remaining groups which the author's informants felt could possibly be of assist- | I ance in the study of the community's power structure. TABLE 8 REPLIES TO SELECTED QUESTIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN PRESUMED ULTRA-RIGHT 1 Question Reply -Attended meetings of the Planning Commission no ;-Followed the activities of the ■Planning Commission as reported |in the Press or by others yes j-Discussed the proposed General Plan with others no -Attended public meetings of the proposed General Plan no :-Organization has discussed the proposed General Plan no ;-Has seen the proposed General Plan report no |-Has read the proposed General Plan map no -Has read the proposed General Plan report no -Like or dislike the planning services of the City Dislike -Like or dislike the other pity services Dislike Statistics obtained from "Questionnaire, University of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted by the author in the Spring of 1964. Reply from individual presumed to be Ultra-Right. 145 146 Evaluation of Primary Groups The combined consensus of these groups regarding the General Plan and other factors is evaluated in Table 9. Business Groups. This group consists of the Whittier Area Association of Insurance Agents, the Junior Chamber of Commerce, and the Motor Car Dealers Association. Also included in this group are the Quad Association and the Whittier District Board of Realtors. I i . I Education Groups. This group consists of the | Teachers Association of Whittier High School. 1 I I Professional Groups. This group consists of the | Business and Professional Womens Club. ^ ! Civic Groups. This group consists of the Friends j of the Whittier Public Library. | . . . . . I Cultural Groups. This group consists of the ! University Club. Service or Social Groups. This group consists of ; the Exchange Club, Kiwanis Club, Lions Club, Masonic , Lodge, Rotary Club, Rotary Club of East Whittier, Breakfast Optimist Club, Hi-noon Optimist Club, Toastmasters ! Friendly Club #300, and the Morning Y's Mens Club. TABLE 9 REPLIES TO SELECTED QUESTIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN A SAMPLE OP PRIMARY SPRING, ORGANIZED 1964 CROUPS, Per cent of Of all respondents respondents who had; Of those respond ents who had heard of Proposed General Plan -Attended meetings of the Planning Commission 26.7% 33.3% -Followed the activities of Planning Commission as reported in the Press or by others 86.7% 93.4% -Discussed the proposed General Plan with others 73.3% 80.1% -Attended public meetings on the proposed General Plan 47.5% 54.1% -Organization has discussed the proposed General Plan 54.1% 60.2% -Has seen the proposed General Plan report 60.2% 66.6% -Has read the proposed General Plan report 47.5% 54.1% -Has read the proposed General Plan map 80.1% 86.7% Statistics obtained from "Questionnaire, university of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted in the Spring of 1964 by the author. There were 15 respondents, 14 of whom had heard of the proposed General Plan. 147 148 i I Evaluation of Secondary Groups The combined consensus of these groups toward the i General Plan is evaluated in Table 10. Business Groups. This group consists of the Junior Chamber of Commerce Auxiliary. i Religious Groups. This group consists of B'nai B'rith, Whittier Women and B'nai B'rith, Whittier Lodge. The Jewish Community Center is also included. Educational Groups. This group consists of the ' Music Teachers Association and the Whittier UHSD Teachers ! : I Association. | I Professional Groups. This group consists of the j ' Dental Society and the Nurses Association. j ' : I Civic Groups. This group consists of the Civil | Liberties Union, the Northwest Area Property Owners | Association, the College Hills Property Owners Association, and the Sungold Hills Community Inc., and The Whittier City Employees Association. Cultural Groups. This group consists of Community Beautiful, the Symphony Association, and the Writers Club and the Art Association. TABLE 10 REPLIES TO SELECTED QUESTIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN A SAMPLE OF SECONDARY ORGANIZED GROUPS, SPRING 1964 Per cent of Of all respondents respondents who had : Of those respond ents who had heard of proposed General Plan -Attended meetings of the Planning Commission 36.0% 43.0% -Followed the activities of Planning Commission as reported in the Press or by others 75.0% 87.8% -Discussed the proposed General Plan with others 60.0% 75.6% -Attended public meetings on the proposed General Plan 32.0% 47.1% -Organization has discussed the proposed General Plan 24.0% 59.3% -Has seen the proposed General Plan report 48.0% 63.4% -Has read the proposed General Plan report 40.0% 51.2% -Has read the proposed General Plan map 56.0% 71.5% 'Statistics obtained from "Questionnaire, University of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted in the Spring of 1964 by the author. There were 25 respondents, 21 of whom had heard of the proposed General Plan. 149 150 Service or Social Groups. This group consists of the Executives Club, Junior Womens Club Whittier, Junior Womens Club East Whittier, Kiwanettes, Panhellenic, Soroptimist Club, Womens Club of Whittier, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars #37 52. Political Groups. This group consisted of the Whittier Young Republican Club. Evaluation of Effect I The General Plan as recommended to the City Council ! was modified in many respects from that which the consult- ■ I ant had submitted originally. In order to evaluate the | extent of the change and the organized groups who partie- I ipated in the changes it is necessary to return to a consideration of the organized groups who provided public opinion, and to study the effect of each group's efforts. | i Who Participated in the Decisions I The participants who affected the recommendation of , the Planning Commission concentrated their efforts in 1 areas most important to them. Participants who attempted to gain a wide area of change were not as successful in i influencing the Coiranission. Demands that were clearly ' I I unreasonable were rejected. Demands that made "economic ' I good sense" or that were representative of the majority of ; the area concerned were granted. The whole attitude of I 151 the Commission seemed to be one of accommodation to the ■opinions of the organized group where no definite public ,damage was done. With the apparent exception of Mr. Till jand the Ultra-right the public conflict seemed to be reduced to a consensus. j The major citizen participants in the hearings were ; the League of Women Voters, The Whittier Area Coordinating ,Council, the Park and Recreation Commission, the Chamber ,of Commerce, the automobile interests, the shopping center I interests, the North Central Whittier Home Owners Associa- I ition, and the ultra-right. I Who Gained I The League of Women Voters gained a General Plan I recommendation and were pleased that there had seemed to be I some community cooperation. That the League was not as pleased by the excess commercial use on Whittier Boulevard was apparent, but they seemed to feel that this matter ! could be faced at a later date. That the voice of the j residential property owners had been given careful i attention was also a matter of pleasure to this organiza- ! tion and they publicly supported the North Central Whittier I Home Owners Association. The Whittier Area Coordinating Council and the Park and Recreation Commission were successful in urging the ; Commission to make a favorable recommendation to the City I I 152 jCouncil and were also successful in maintaining the pro posed park sites as a part of the General Plan document. The Chamber of Commerce, or at least a majority of this body, seemed to favor a recommendation for approval to the City Council. The Chamber, the automobile interests, and ■the shopping center interests were all successful in converting the multiple use and certain office uses in the [shopping center areas, and primarily on Whittier Boulevard, |to a retail commercial use, and effectively completed the "strip commercial" that the County had found so objectional in pre-annexation days. The North Central Whittier Home Owners Association | was completely successful in achieving its goals. The 1 General Plan map was altered in a rather odd fashion that created land use boundaries that had no logical geographic | ! < ■origin, and were stating that there would be no change in | I the area. Land use boundaries curved and flowed over the j map to make sure that present multiple development was so indicated on the map but that no one could find that the map called for any future multiple use in the area. .Who Lost Although Mr. Till, who presented himself as spokes man for the Public Affairs Committee of the Chamber of Commerce, was given an opportunity to speak at some length there was no indication that the plan was modified in the 153 I jleast to meet his suggestions. The ultra-right evidently over-played its hand with the Commission, since its requests, although lengthy and time consuming, met little support. That the group, in viewing the chain of events, was able to gain the delay requested seems more due to the reluctance of the Commission I [rather than to any effort to meet their requests. i i Who Succeeded It is not yet apparent who succeeded. Certainly the Planning Director did not succeed since his spirited defense of the General Plan apparently made enemies among i I the commercial interests and the more conservative members j I of the community, and he resigned prior to the last public hearing. Certainly the fate of the General Plan is still very much in doubt, since the Planning Commission's I recommendation was for lengthy study in the various other ] : City commissions, and the Commission referred to the "existing Master Plan" when no document had ever been adopted by resolution of the City Council. At this point in time, the Plan hangs in limbo, since it has yet to be set for public hearing. CHAPTER VI CONCLUSION Although different in their nature, both the survey and the case study of the public hearings yielded similar findings indicating a definite effect on the General Plan proposals by the community's organized groups. Some of these characteristics were evaluated in the previous chapter. This chapter will attempt to summarize the jsignificant findings in terms of the major criteria applied 'and will attempt to draw conclusions from the findings. Problem areas will be discussed, as will insights gained i I from the case study and the survey. Some evaluation of I proposals for future studies will also be made. Findings The significant findings of this study can be summarized under four major classifications: (1) evolution Ipf the General Plan in the nation and in the City of ' ; , ! Whittier, (2) evolution of community studies in the nation j 'and in Whittier, (3) a detailed record of the General Plan | I ! adoption process in the City of Whittier, and (4) sugges- I I ,tions for criteria for future evaluation of the General i I Plan adoption process 154 ; 155 I 1 Chapter III traces the evolution of the General Plan ! in depth and Chapter IV studies the evolution of the concept in the City of Whittier from its founding to the present. Chapter II reviews the important community studies made from the 1920's to the present time. The author hopes that Chapter V has provided data of importance to the community of Whittier. It is time, then, to turn our attention to the General Plan adoption process in Whittier. The major finding which emerged from the study of the adoption process was the lack of strong public opinion in support of the adoption of a General Plan for the community. Of the 51 community organizations studied, only : ‘ 1 two offered complete support and four offered limited J I support provided their particular interests were satisfied. ' 1 I In spite of intensive publicity, seven organizations had never heard of the General Plan. The Planning Director sent a letter of inquiry to 33 organizations to which he had presented the General Plan; only 7 answered his brief questionnaire.^ The amount of public consent favoring the Plan seemed to be great, but perhaps it will not serve to , influence the community to adopt a General Plan, for, as \ I Bair says, "for some proposals, the powerful support of ' 1 I Jacques DuBois, "December 26, 1963 Letter to ; organizations" in Whittier City Planning Department File 018, Urban General Plan Preparation— Public Relations, p. 1. 156 ry ' active public opinion may be needed."^ Herbert W. Starick,! City Manager of Dayton, Ohio, also makes this point: At this point, the decision-makers I am thinking of ; should be identified. In most communities, they are the administrators, the policy-makers (or the legis- . lators) and the general public. The planners must ! learn to influence these decision-makers if they want results. Each plays a vital role in shaping the future of any community.^ There is no doubt that the Planning Director reached the organized groups that both he and the City council felt could be of assistance. The author's survey showed that in spite of the poor return on the director's questionnaire, about 86 per cent of the organized groups that responded to the survey questionnaire had heard of the General Plan proposals. Nor can what Mills calls the "power elite" in his examination of local society have been unaware of the General Plan proposals. These power groups are usually classified, along with other factors, on the basis of income and education. Table 11 illustrates this point 2 Frederic H. Bair, Jr., "Opportunities for Community I Relations," in Planning 1963, Selected Papers from the . i ASPO National Planning Conference, Seattle, Washington, I ; May 5-9, 1963 (Chicago: American Society of Planning | I Officials, 1963), p. 353. ^Herbert W. Starick, "Planning in the Decision making Process at the Local Level," in Planning 1964, ' Selected Papers from the ASPO National Planning Conference, Boston, Massachusetts, April 5-9, 1964 (Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, 1964), p. 27. I 4(2^ Wright Mills, The Power Elite (New York: Oxford I University Press, 1959), pp. 30-46, J TABLE 11 RESPONDENTS WHO HAD HEARD OF THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN, I BY INCOME AND EDUCATION. A SAMPLE OF ORGANIZED GROUPS, SPRING 1964 1 1 1 All Incomes Under 10,000 Under 15,000 Under 20,000 Under 30,000 Under 35,000 1 [All Educational Levels 86.0% 77.8% 82.4% 100% 100% 100% 'Grammar School — — — —-- — — — — — — — — — — — — 1 [High School 75.0% --- --- 100% --- — — — Some College 90.0% 100% 75% 100% 100% --- College Edu cation 90.1% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Post-graduate work 66.3% 100% 100% — —" — — — — — — — Post-graduate degree 90.0% 0% 100% 100% 100% --- Statistics obtained from "Questionnaire, University of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted in the Spring of 1964 by the author. 157 158 ; » since awareness of the General Plan proposals is higher for. both the higher income and the more educated of the ! officials of the organized groups reached by the survey. I Nor can the lack of active opinion be blamed on the local newspapers since Table 12 indicates that 58 per cent of the respondents first heard of the General Plan pro- i I ; : i posais in one of the local newspapers. The lack of support ' Î ( : ' the papers were able to muster, in spite of their excellent coverage of the subject (as previously discussed) is not as ' surprising as it may seem. For example. Mills points out in "Mass Media and Public Opinion" that although the mass media were largely against Harry Truman in the 1948 Presidential election, Truman was elected. He also points out that this is no stray happening, since political developments over the last two decades have offered other such contradictions.^ What, then, was responsible for the lack of active j public support of the proposed General Plan? What Mills ' choses to call "the business elite"^--the group which the author terms "commercial interests"— did not block passage . Wright Mills, "Mass Media and Public Opinion," : in I. L Horowitz (ed.), Power, Politics, and People--The Collected Essays of C. Wright Mills (New York: Ballantine Books, Inc., 1963), pp. 577-598. ^C. Wright Mills, "The American Business Elite: A * Collective Portrait," in I. L. Horowitz (ed.). Power, [ Politics, and People— The Collected Essays of C. Wright Mills, op. cit., pp. 110-139. TABLE 12 SOURCES OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN: A SAMPLE OF ORGANIZED GROUPS, SPRING 1964 iSource Per cent of Respondents reporting Source 1Whittier Daily News 44.0% East Whittier Review 14.0% 1 Club or Group 22.0% {Neighbors 0% Place of Work 4.0% Public Meeting 12.0% ;From Survey 2.0% Radio or Television 0% jRelatives 0% ‘ Statistics obtained from, "Questionnaire, University of Southern California Community Study, Whittier Master Plan," a survey conducted by the author in the Spring of ,1964. NOTE : Percentages do not respondents failed add to 100% because some Lo answer this question. 159 I 160 I of the General Plan, but rather assured that the Plan as recommended to the City Council represented their viewpoint about proper land use, in this case commercial use on Whittier Boulevard and in other locations. The other power group at the public hearings, the North Central Whittier Home Owners Association, did not block the General Plan proposals, but rather offered support provided their neighborhood maintained its largely single family character. Perhaps the much discussed "ultra-right" which i 7 Mills scarifies in "The Conservative Mood" is responsible. . The facts do not support this premise, however. The I ultra-right delayed the Plan with its tactics but its opinions are not reflected to any great extent in the i recommendation of the Planning Commission to the City Council. There seems to be only one logical reason for the j lack of active opinion— there was no citizens advisory group. Eisner and Associates were never directly attacked : for any lack of ability during the public hearings and it certainly would have been difficult to criticize a firm j 1 who had already completed 26 Master Plan Projects at the time they submitted their proposal for a General Plan for , C. Wright Mills, "The Conservative Mood," in I. L. , Horowitz (ed.), Power, Politics, and People— The Collected. Essays of C. Wright Mills, op. cit., pp. 208-220. 161 : ; . R the city. In any case, the consultant had recommended the organization of public support through use of a citizens' I group but felt that "a formal letter to the Council defending or justifying the need for a citizens' group to work with all of us on the Plan would weigh against the possibility of spontaneous voluntary formation of such a .group." Later in the same communication, the consultant i said: "We do feel that it is in the City's best interest ^ ; I to encourage formation of a citizens' planning association, but it is questionable to our mind whether it is something that needs the formal sanction of Council authorization or I any other official okay."^ ! The City's effective and popular librarian also had ! some misgivings about the approach to the problem: Thoughts : 1. Whittier needs knowledge and understanding of the [ whole Master Plan for the City of Whittier in order to ! handle it properly. Some key groups to take this plan | I as an education project are the following: ' ’ ®The official bid to the City listed Eisner's firm | as an author of Master Plans in the following cities : San . • Bernardino, Redlands, Santa Monica, Buena Park, Covina, j Anaheim, Upland, Baldwin Park, Coalinga, La Habra, Azusa, I Fontana Area, Fontana, Claremont, Pomona, Monrovia, Rialto, ,Pal Springs, Barstow, Duarte, Carpentria Valley, Monterey 'Park, Laguna Beach, Menlo Park, and the Monterey Area, and I Henderson, Nevada. ^Royce Neuschatz, "Letter of March 16, 1961 to ^ Mr. R. F. Woehrman, Planning Director" in Whittier City Planning Department File 018, Urban General Plan Prepara- 'tion— Public Relations, p. 1. 162 League of Women Voters American Association of University Women Education Committee, Chamber of Commerce ; Wliittier Area Education Study Council I Whittier Area Coordinating Council I Board of Trustees, Whittier Union High School ! District ; Board of Trustees, Rio Hondo Junior College Board of Trustees, Whittier Public Library President and Faculty, Whittier College 2. Study session open to public. Lectures by authori-, ties use, UCLA, and City Planning Consultants on what | makes a good community in this big urban area which is | rapidly changing and becoming more complex for inhabi- ; tants as well as for independent municipalities. This is particularly true for the old, established community like Whittier, which is in a transition almost trau matic in its effect. 3. A community educational effort should, I believe, stimulate informed and objective leadership for the good of the whole City.10 I Based on the evidence presented in the public hearings, the data collected, and the opinions of experts in the field such as Mrs. Neuschatz of Eisner and Associ ates it seems that Whittier's proposed General Plan will face an uncertain future because of the lack of the strong effective public opinion that could have been possibly attained if it had been desired. Presenting the completed package to organized groups, as was done in Whittier, does not seem to have developed the desired level of support. Conclusions The study clearly indicated that the organized l^Margaret Fulmer, "Letter to Jacques DuBois, May 23, 1963" in Whittier City Planning Department File 018, Urban General Plan Preparation— Public Relations, p. 1. 163 I I i group has a definite and effective place in achievement of ■ General Plan objectives. It also indicates that certain of these groups achieved their goals more fully than others in relation to the proposed General Plan. Specif- i ! ically, it showed that the economic objectives of the ' commercial interests were dominant in changes of proposed land use. The study also showed that a well-organized and informed property owners' group with time to devote to group goals can be very effective. The hypothesis of this study, as proposed in I j I Chapter I, is "that significant changes in community | General Plans may be made at the time of public hearings by community organizations and that the effect of these groups is directly related to (1) the power of the organ ized group in the individual community; and (2) the degree of interest and attention devoted to by the group to the field of planning and to the adoption or lack of adoption ' of a General Plan. The author feels there is reason to believe that the findings lend some support to the hypothesis of the i i study. In terms of change, the organized groups proved to I be highly successful when they utilized the second element I j of the hypothesis. The first element of the hypothesis t j was somewhat more difficult to measure, and some refine- I ‘ i ment of technique is needed to validate this assumption. ' There is an indication that commercial interests and i 1 6 4 1 [ citizen groups, acting as property-owners' organizations, ■ were exercising power in this particular situation, but a definitive answer to this portion of the hypothesis is . somewhat dependent on future research. More effective I means of measuring the power of organized groups in respect to their effect on planning problems is an area of interest that is beyond the scope of this inquiry. In retrospect, there is evidence to support the hypothesis without the benefit of an evaluation of the public hearings on Whittier's proposed General Plan. Analysis of the literature in regard to community power studies suggests that the commercial or business interests I might be successful in modification of any General Plan concept that is not in their best interest. Even evalua tion of General Plan literature suggested that economic I interests would over-ride any other considerations, as I j indeed they did in this instance. ■ I ' There is another conclusion that may be made from : this study: the method used in testing the hypothesis is generally valid, and there is some indication that similar ; i evaluations of General Plan adoption and the effect of I organized groups could be made, and worthwhile results ■ obtained, if testing methods were more carefully refined. ! Of particular importance would be some refinement of the I I , method of selecting organizations exhibiting power. The I author would suggest a "jury" of local informants to 155 , I ; narrow the selection of organized groups to only those known to exhibit power, and use of a directed interview technique to obtain data; since it is not likely that ' future researchers would face the problem of bias with | : which the author was faced and which caused him to use I mailed questionnaires rather than interviews as a source of data collection. Problem areas that were not apparent at the begin ning were revealed in the course of the study. Since these ; problems may warrant future investigation and research it | : would seem appropriate to further discuss them. j Problem Areas in General Plan Adoption The study revealed certain problem areas at the I i ■ community level in the adoption of a General Plan. The i first of these was the failure to create a citizens I advisory group, which in turn resulted in failure to • ! provide for citizen participation during the drafting of the General Plan proposals. This reflected the Council's preference, but it appears ill-advised in view of the ! considerable expenditure in funds, in staff and Commission ' time, and in the time later devoted by the public to the I proposals. The lack of a citizen group appears even more . unusual when research brought to the attention of the 1 author a bibliography of selected references for the i I guidance of citizen groups interested in City planning. 166 ' 11 prepared by the Council of Planning Librarians. The Cityj of Whittier Planning Department files yielded this bibli- ; ography, along with a great wealth of literature intended for citizen groups that was not used during the General Plan presentation. An interesting research problem might J be to analyze the correlation of citizen group activity i and the success or failure of various planning proposals, ' including General Plan adoption. The second problem related to the Commission's i statement that "we have plenty of time." Consideration by i the Commission took so long that data became out of date, ' and it was time to up-date the Plan before the Commission ■ finished its deliberations. It would be interesting to discover how many General Plan proposals have sunk into limbo during the period they were discussed by various public bodies. This would appear to be a problem that I could be solved if the appropriate legislative body would | . set a realistic time-table as a matter of policy. The third problem was inability to clarify and interpret the General Plan concept to the public. There was a great deal of confusion in the eyes of the public between the General Plan map and the Zoning map. The average citizen just was not able to understand why a ^ , ' I ^^Holway R. Jones, City Planning: Selected ; References for Citizen Groups, Exchange Bibliography I No. 5 (Oakland: Council of Planning Librarians, September ' 1962). 167 ( ! future plan of development was needed, particularly for . land use, when the community had a Zoning map. Further I I confusion was apparent when the Commission pointed out that the General Plan map would be a guide and could be 'modified to reflect City policy. Many citizens questioned ' ; i I the logic of approving a General Plan map if it had no ^ real force. They were particularly disturbed by the I "fluidity" of the General Plan concept, and some indi viduals voiced the opinion that if the General Plan were so subject to change, any big developer could exert I pressure for change to suit his proposed development. In fact, there are two problems here that would require careful investigation: the reason for the confusion between zoning and General Plan maps, and an investigation I of public attitudes towards changes in adopted General I Plan maps. ■ The fourth problem encountered was that of the failure of the General Plan proposals to meet with any great public acceptance. Economic data were available and , were used in preparing the General Plan, but it became I evident that in a community like Whittier, the research should have considered more fully the history of the area, I I the desires of the residents, their housing preferences, the future plans of the business community, and other i I factors related to preparing a General Plan for an older j conservative community. It was evident that the business 168 * community lost what confidence it had in the proposed 'General Plan when the map presented to the public indicated existing substantial areas of new commercial improvements in an area scheduled for future multiple-residential land use. During some of the presentations made by the Planning 'Director to organized groups in regard to the proposed | j i ; General Plan, individual citizens commented that if you had! t seen one of the consultants plans, you had seen them all. ; Can it be that consultants, due to the press of business, are turning out a series of "cookbook" General Plans for , our suburban communities that do not meet the needs of the individual community? This is an area outside the scope of this study, but it certainly is worthy of future I , ' investigation. , The final problem discovered in the course of the i investigation was one of import that the planner must face ; I head on. Are there communities that really are not i ; prepared to adopt the principles required to promote and maintain an effective General Plan? Certainly no community i should undertake a General Plan program unless it is certain it wants some form of long-range planning. Perhaps the General Plan has been oversold and many communities go ‘ , through the motions of adopting General Plans to satisfy ■ various State and Federal requirements, rather than in response to recognized community needs. Certainly the results of this study do not reflect the high hopes of 169 ! I ,T. J. Kent for the General Plan, based on his experience | in the university community of Berkeley. Kent optimis tically says : Once the simplicity of the general-plan concept is appreciated, the practical benefits will become appar- ! ent very quickly. Major conflicts involving community-' development policies will be resolved. Major capital- improvement programs will be agreed upon, financed, ' and carried out. A great new era of civic design will be fostered and sustained. I believe that all of these things will occur sooner or later, since I believe in social progress. But in our society, with our philos ophy of democratic self-government, these things will happen sooner if we will trust our elected representa tives and assist them, by helping to develop an urban general plan that they can use, to do well what they must do in any case.12 ; The author can only hope Kent is correct. Certainly: as a result of this study it becomes apparent that there are many unanswered questions about the effect of organized I groups on General Plan adoption. Suggestions for refine- I ment of study methods already have been made, as have j suggestions for areas of inquiry that may be rewarding to ■ future researchers in the field. This thesis is not ' : offered as an definitive answer to the problems studied ( . but rather as one attempt to delineate questions that I require a great deal of future study. 12t . j . Kent Jr., The Urban General Plan (San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company, 1964), p. 186. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Adrian, Charles R. (ed.). Social Science and Community Action. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1950. American Institute of Architects, Joint Committee on Design Control. Planning and Community Appearance. Henry Fagin and Robert C. Weinburg (eds.). New York: Regional Plan Association, 1958. Allen, Frederick Lewis. Only Yesterday. New York: Harper, and Brothers, 1931. j Arnold, Benjamin F., and Clark, Artissa D. History of Whittier. Whittier, California : Western Printing 1 Corp., 1933. Banfield, Edward C. Political Influence. Glencoe, I Illinois: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1962. j 'Baltzell, E. Digby. Philadelphia Gentlemen. Glencoe, Illinois : The Free Press, 1958. jBassett, Edward M. The Master Plan; With a Discussion of ; I the Theory of Community Land Planning Legislation. • Î New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1938. 'Bassett, Edward M., Williams, Frank B., and Whitten, Robert. Model Laws for Planning Cities, Counties, and States ■ Including Zoning, Subdivision Regulation, and : j Protection of Official Map. Cambridge : Harvard i I University Press, 1935. Bogue, Donald Jr. (ed.) Needed Urban and Metropolitan Research. Oxford, Ohio: Scripps Foundation, Miami (Ohio) University, 1953. Burr, Walter. Community Leadership. New York; Prentice- I Hall, Inc., 1929. 171 172 Carter, E. C. Community Conflict. New York: The Inquiry, 1929. Copeland, Robert Morris. The Most Beautiful City in America; Essay and Plan for the Improvement of the City of Boston. Boston: Lee and Shepard, 1872. Dahl, Robert A. Who Governs? New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1961. jDobriner, William M. The Suburban Community. New York: ‘ G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1958. j Douglas, Harland P. The Suburban Trend. New York: The ! Century Company, 1925. ! Elmer, Manual C. Techniques of Social Surveys. Los Angeles: Jesse R. Miller Press, 1927. Hallenbeck, Wilbur C. American Urban Communities. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1951. Haar, Charles M. Land Use Planning: A Casebook on the Use, Misuse, and Re-Use of Urban Land. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1959. I Hicks, Granville. Small Town. New York: Macmillan j Company, 1946. Hillman, Arthur. Community Organization and Planning. New York: Macmillan Company, 1950. iHollingshead, August B. Elmstown's Youth. New York: Wiley, 1949. jHudson, Robert P. Radburn, A Plan for Living. New York: ' American Association for Adult Education, 1934. I Hunter, Floyd. Community Power Structure. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1953. ■Janowitz, Morris (ed.). Community Political Systems. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1961. i Kent, T. J., Jr. The Urban General Plan. San Francisco: I Chandler Publishing Company, 1964. I Lane, Robert E. Political Life. Glencoe, Illinois: The I Free Press, 1959. 173 'Lynd, Robert S., and Helen M. Middletown. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company, 1929. . Middletown in Transition. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company, 1937. Marx, Herbert L. Jr. Community Planning. New York: The H. W. Wilson Company, 1956. Mills, C. Wright. Power, Politics, and People. New York: Oxford University Press, 1963. _________. The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press, 1956. Newmark, Harris. Sixty Years in Southern California, 1853-1913. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1930. Nisbet, Robert A. Community and Power. New York: Oxford University Press, 1962. Pettit, Walter W. Case Studies in Community Organization. New York: The Century Company, 1928. Polsby, Nelson W. Community Power and Political Theory. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1963. Reichley, James. The Art of Government: Reform and Organization Politics in Philadelphia. New York: Fund for the Republic, 1959. ISelltiz, Claire and others. Research Methods in Social { ! Relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, ■ 1962. Vidich, Arthur J., and Bensman, Joseph. Small Town in Mass' Society. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1958. 'Warner, W. Lloyd, and Hollingshead, August B. Democracy in Jonesville. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1949. West, Jessamyn. South of the Angels. New York: Harcourt,, ' Brace & World, Inc., 1960. 174 Books: Parts of Series Warner, W. Lloyd, and Lunt, Paul S. The Social Life of a Modern Community, Yankee City Series 1. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1941. , _________, and Lunt, Paul S. The Status System of a Modern ; i Community, Yankee City Series 2. New Haven: Yale I University Press, 1942. , and Srole, Leo. The Social Systems of American Ethnic Groups, Yankee City Series 3. New Haven: Yale; University Press, 1945. , and Low, J. O. The Social System of the Modern Factory, Yankee City Series 4. New Haven : Yale University Press, 1947. . The Living and the Dead, Yankee City Series 5 New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959. Publications of the Government, Learned Societies, and Other Organizations American Society of Planning Officials. Information Report' No. 149, Citizens' Planning Groups. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, August, 1961. I ' ............. jBartley, Ernest R. Urban Planning, An Introduction for I the Citizen. Gainesville : Florida Public Administra-; ; tion Clearing Service, University of Florida, 1962. ‘ Bassett, Edward M. Recent New York Legislation for the Planning of Unbuilt Areas, Comprising the Text of the City and Village Planning Laws of the State of New York, a Description of Their Origin and Purposes, and I Suggestions as to How They Should be Administered, Bulletin No. 11. New York: Regional Plan of New York and Its Environs, 1926. Berkeley City Planning Commission, Berkeley Master Plan. Berkeley, California: City of Berkeley, 1955. California, Assembly Interim Committee on Conservation, I Planning and Public Works. Planning for Growth; A I Report on the Status of City and Regional Planning in , ' California. Sacramento: Legislative Bill Room, 1955. 175 California, State of. Laws Relating to Conservation, Planning and Zoning. Sacramento: State of California Documents Section, 1963. Cincinnati (Ohio) City Planning Commission. The Cincinnati Metropolitan Master Plan and the Official City Plan of the City of Cincinnati, adopted November 22, 1948. i Cincinnati : City of Cincinnati, 1948. Cleveland City Planning Commission. The General Plan of Cleveland. Cleveland: City of Cleveland, 1950. Jones, Holway R. City Planning: Selected References for Citizen Groups. Exchange Bibliography No. 5. Oakland, California: Council of Planning Librarians, September, 1962. _________. The General Plan in the Urban Planning Process. Exchange Bibliography No. 21. Oakland, California: Council of Planning Librarians, July, 1962. Kent, T. J., Jr. "Guiding City Development: A Major Responsibility of the City Council," Proceedings, Fourth Biennial Institute of Mayors and CounciImen. Berkeley: League of California Cities, 1954. League of Women Voters of California. The Whole and Its Parts, state and Regional Planning in California. Oakland: Fontes Abby Press, October, 1962. Miller, Harold V. Mr. Planning Commissioner. Public Administration Service. Chicago, 1954. Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Comprehensive Plan:, The Physical Development Plan for the City of Philadelphia. Philadelphia: City of Philadelphia, 1960. Richmond City Planning Commission. Organized Groups in Richmond. Richmond: City of Richmond, June, 1958. U.S. Department of Commerce, Advisory Committee on City Planning and Zoning. A Standard City Planning Enabling Act. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1928. U.S. Housing and Home Finance Agency, Office of the Administrator. Slum Clearance and Urban Redevelopment Program; Manual of Policies, and Requirements for Local Public Agencies. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office (undated). ' I 175 I I U.S. Housing and Home Finance Agency, Urban Renewal Administration. Urban Renewal Manual, Policies and Requirements for Local Public Agencies. Washington D.C.: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1965. Books 1, 2, and 3. United States Chamber of Commerce, Construction and Civic Development Department. City Planning and Urban Development. Washington D.C.: U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 1952. United States Chamber of Commerce, Construction and Civic Development Department. Comprehensive Planning; Guide for Community Growth and Change. Washington D.C.: U.S. Chamber of Commerce, March, 1960. United States Senate, Report of the Committee on Banking and Currency. Housing Act of 1949. Washington D.C.: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing I Office, 1949. United States Senate, Report of the Committee on Banking and Currency. Housing Act of 1954. Washington D.C.: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1954. .Wood, Samuel E., and Heller, Alfred E. The Phantom Cities I of California. Sacramento: California Tomorrow, 1963. Zisman, S. B. The General Plan in the Redevelopment Program. Chicago: National Association of Housing ! Officials, November, 1952. Periodicals jDahl, Robert A. "Critique of the Ruling Elite Model," ! American Political Science Review, LII (June, 1958). 'Darland, Robert T., Gore, William J., and Silander, Fred S "A Bibliographic Essay in Decision-making," Administrative Science Quarterly, IV (June, 1959). i 'Feiss, Carl. "Planning Absorbs Zoning," Journal of the American Institute of Planners, XXVII (May, 1961). 177 Foley, Donald L. "How Many Berkeley Residents Know About Their City's Master Plan?", Journal of the American Institute of Planners, XXI (Spring-Summer, 1955). Haar, Charles M "The Content of the Master Plan: A Glance at History," Journal of the American Institute of Planners, XXI (Spring-Summer, 1955). _________. "The Master Plan: An Impermanent Constitution," Law and Contemporary Problems, XX (Summer, 1955) . . "The Master Plan: An Inquiry in Dialogue Form, ' Structures," American Journal of Sociology, LXIV I (November, 1958). ! lO'Harrow, Dennis. "No Time for Softness," American Society of Planning Officials Newsletter, XXXI, No. 1 ; (January, 1965). "Magic and Master Plans," American Society of Planning Officials Newsletter, XXV (February, 1959) I Pellegrin, Roland J., and Coates, Charles H. "Absentee- ’ owned Corporations and Community Power Structure," ' American Journal of Sociology, LXI (March, 1956). iPolsby, Nelson W. "Three Problems in the Analysis of i Community Power," American Sociological Review, XXIV I (December, 1959) . iSchulze, Robert O. "The Role of Economic Dominants in j Community Power Structure," American Sociological ! Review, XXIII (February, 1958). i Journal of the American Institute of Planners, XXV ; : (August, 1959). ' iHoover, Robert C. "On Master Plans and Constitutions," Journal of the American Institute of Planners, XXVI (February, 1960). Lovelace, Eldridge. "1. You Can't Have Planning Without a Plan. 2. Needed: One-Dimensional City Plans. 3. The Flexible City Plan is No City Plan at All," Journal of the American Institute of Planners, XXIV, No. 1 ; (1958). iMiller, Delbert C. "Industry and Community Power Struc- ' ture," American Sociological Review, XXIII (February, 1958) . _________. "Decision-making Cliques in Community Power 178 .Smith, Louis. Book review in Journal of Politics, XVI (February, 1954). Strong, Donald S. Book review in American Political Science Review, XLVIII (March, 1954). Essays in Books and Other Publications JBair, Frederic H. Jr. "Opportunities for Community Relations," in Planning 1963, Selected Papers from the ASPO National Planning Conference, Seattle, Washington I May 5-9, 1963. Chicago: American Society of Planning ■ Officials, 1963. Bartholomew, Harland. "The Plan--Its Preparation, Composition, and Form" as reprinted in Herbert L. Marx Jr., Community Planning. New York: Wilson and , Company, 1956. ,Bettman, Alfred. "Master Plans and Official Maps," ' Planning Problems of Town, City, and Region; Papers and Discussions at the Twenty-Third National Confer ence on City Planning. Rochester, New York, June 22 j to 24, 1931. !_________. "Report of the Committee on Urban Redevelopment," American Society of Planning Officials, Planning 1943 ; Proceedings of the Annual Meeting Held in New York City, May 17-19, 1943. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, 1943. . "Revised Draft of an Act for Urban Development « and Redevelopment," in Arthur C. Comey (ed.). City and- > Regional Planning Papers. Cambridge: Harvard ; ■ University Press, 1946. » i ! i Burnham, Daniel H., and Bennett. Plan of Chicago Prepared * During the Years MCMVI, MCMVII, and MCMVIII. Charles ' Moore (ed.). Chicago : The Commercial Club, 1909. ,Dahl, Robert A. "Hierarchy, Democracy, and Bargaining in ! Politics and Economics," in Research Frontiers in . Politics and Government. Washington: Bookings, 1955. Mills, Wright C. "Mass Media and Public Opinion," in I. L. Horowitz (ed.). Power, Politics and People— The : I Collected Essays of C. Wright Mills. New York; I Ballantine Books Inc., 1963. [ 179 "The American Business Elite: A Collective Portrait," in I, L. Horowitz (ed.). Power, Politics and People— The Collected Essays of C. Wright Mills New York: Ballantine Books Inc., 1963. "The Conservative Mood," in I. L. Horowitz (Gd.), Power, Politics and People— The Collected Essays of C. Wright Mills. New York: Ballantine Books Inc., 1963. Shulze, Robert O. "The Bifurcation of Power in a Satellite Community" in Morris Janowitz (ed.). Community Political Systems. Glencoe: Free Press of Glencoe, 1961. Starick, Herbert W. "Planning in the Decision-making Process at the Local Level," in Planning 1964, Selected Papers from the ASPO National Planning Conference. Boston, Massachusetts, April 5-9, 1964. Chicago : American Society of Planning Officials, 1964. Miscellaneous Publications and Unpublished Material Black, Alan. "The Function of the Urban General Plan." Unpublished Master's thesis. The University of California, Berkeley, 1960. City of Whittier. "Official Minutes, Regular Meeting, Planning Commission, October 9, 1964. _________. "Special Meeting to Consider the Proposed General Plan of the City of Whittier," Planning Commission, January 17, 1964. . "General Plan Meeting," Planning Commission, February 28, 1964 "General Plan Hearing," Planning Commission, March 27, 1964. "General Plan Public Hearing," Planning Commission, June 19, 1964. 180 Eisner, Simon and Associates. Zoning Ordinance Analysis and Land Use Inventory. Master Plan Series Report 2, 1962. _____. General Plan, City of Whittier. Master Plan Series Report 3, 1963. . Uptown Business District Plan. Master Plan Series Report 4, 1963. . Hillside Plan. Master Plan Series Report 5, j 1963. ; : I _________. Community Appearance Report. Master Plan Series I Report 6, 1963. Kaliszewski, Ronald Edmund. "The Master Plan: Its Functions, Potential and Limiting Factors." Unpub lished Master's thesis. University of Illinois, Urbana, 1961. ■Kemmerer, John M. "Notes," File Oil. Whittier City Planning Department, September, 1935. Kraemer, Kenneth Leo. "Public and Private Profits vs. ^ Social Responsibility in Urban Renewal." Unpublished Master's Thesis, The University of Southern California, ! 1964. Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission. The Southeast Area ; An Area Land Use Plan. Advance “ Planning Division. Los Angeles County Planning ■ Department, June 1, 1959. Pomeroy, J. H. and Company. Proposed Engineering Planning Services : City of Whittier Urban Renewal Project. Undated. 'Real Estate Research Corporation. Economic Base Study, i , Whittier California. Master Plan Series Report 1, I 1962. Scobe, Harry M. Jr. "Yankeetown: Leadership in Three Decision-Making Processes." Paper presented to American Political Science Association in September 1956. Siegel, Joshua. "An Investigation of the Utility of the ! General Renewal Plan Concept in Urban Renewal Planning," Unpublished Master's thesis. Columbia University, 1960. 181 'Violich, Francis. The Urban General Plan as an Instrument for Guiding Urban Development; A Working Outline for the Seminar on Urban Planning. Inter-American Housing and Planning Center, Bogota, Columbia, October 5 to 30, 1958. Berkeley: Department of City and Regional Planning, University of California, May 1, 1958. 'Weber, Melvin M. "The Nature and Function of the Urban General Plan." Unpublished Master's thesis. The I University of California, Berkeley, 1952. Whitnall, Gordon and Associates. Report on Street and Highway Element of a Master Plan, Whittier California. Los Angeles : Gordon Whitnall and Associates, 1956. Newspapers I I I East Whittier Review. News stories, August 22, 25, and 29; September 5; November 14; and December 1. , ! East Whittier Review. News story, July 2, 1961. Whittier Daily News. News story. May 13, 1961. Whittier Daily News. News story, September 5, 1935. j I Letters DuBois, Jacques. Letter to the City Council. October 1, 1963. Subject: Public Relations for the proposed General Plan. _________. "Inter-Office-Memo on the General Plan Hearing of February 28, 1964." . Letter to Organizations, December 26, 1963. I Fulmer, Margaret. Letter to Jacques DuBois dated May 23, 1963 in regard to public relations for the general plan. Neuschatz, Royce. Letter to R. F. Woehrman dated March 16, 1961, in regard to public relations for the General I Plan. iWoehrman, R. F. "Master Plan" (Letter to the City Council ■ of Whittier, July 3, 1961). APPENDIXES APPENDIX A METHOD OF STUDY ’ This study grew from an idea that was one of several (thesis topics presented to Dr. Arthur Grey, then Head of .the City and Regional Planning Department, University of ^Southern California. The basic idea was that of making a study of a community in the process of adopting a General Plan, to determine the effect of organized groups on the adoption of the community's General Plan. Elements of the ^study were borrowed from both Floyd Hunter's study of Atlanta and Donald L. Foley's survey of Berkeley. The survey methods are the author's own although they were ,considerably polished in discussions with Professor Philip I ' d . Brown, head of the University of Southern California's iGraduate Program in the Department of City and Regional Planning, out of his long experience in this particular ! field of research. ! Whittier, a community of about 70,000 population, :was selected as the study community for several reasons. It was one of the few local communities about to begin ! adoption of a General Plan; it was in an interesting population category; it was one of the older communities I 'in Southern California ; it had a planning staff; and its ; 183 184 ' population was known to represent all shades of political opinion from far left to far right. ! The methods used in conducting the study fell into three categories : (1) Theoretical analysis ; (2) Field Investigation and Survey; (3) Integration of Field j Investigation and Theoretical Analysis. | For a theoretical examination of materials on ! ! Î I community power structure, a search of libraries and book I stores was made. The books and periodicals listed in the I bibliography were studied and separated into two groups-- those basic to the study, and those that should be men- ! tioned as being of indirect interest. Many of the basic sources were purchased, in the case of books, or photo- I I copied, in the case of periodicals. , Since June, 1962, Whittier newspapers were clipped i and notes were taken about the community. Documents pertaining to the General Plan were collected and class ified. Correspondence and other documents relating to the . problem were briefed. Planning Commission Meetings were I I attended and notes taken. Analysis of materials so gathered, and the concur- ; rent organization that was required helped to develop the frame of reference for the hypothesis and the scope and ' organization of the study. Thoughts about organizing a survey also were organized. The first problem faced was ; determining which community leaders should be surveyed. 185 The second problem was to prepare a questionnaire that would be short enough to obtain cooperation and long enough to provide essential data. Lists of the presidents of community organizations, obtained from various sources, were cross-checked by social, business, and government leaders,who added the names of individuals overlooked by the author. It was decided that since today's communities are so highly organized that persons occupying positions of authority in « I local organizations would be involved with the power I 'structure of the community. The author realized that there .are some leaders who do not work through organized groups but he felt that, as Hunter says, "getting to leaders from I organizations would be a good start toward turning up I ^leaders who might operate behind the scenes."^ Hunter I , pointed out that an earlier study of "Popular Village" had ! ■ ; ! discovered that all the leaders belonged to at least one ! ! organized group.^ Since the list of organizations provided by the Chamber of Commerce and later augmented by the author included about 200 major organized groups, and since the i author was known in the community, a mailed questionnaire was selected as the survey tool in spite of its limitations. i J ^Floyd Hunter, Community Power Structure (Chapel 1 Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1963). i I ^Ibid. I 186 ' I I It would have been impossible to interview 122 persons i within the scope of the study and, even more important, bias would be present since the author dealt almost daily with some of the persons to be interviewed. The author made no attempt to narrow the list of organizations, as did Hunter, since he wished to determine the power structure on the basis of its actual performance in affecting the General Plan proposals, and by this . device to overcome one of the most common criticisms of community power studies— that the research is biased to ; produce a previously known answer. The final design of the questionnaire is shown in the appendix. The Graduate Department of City and Regional Planning at the University of Southern California aided I 1 the author in preparing the questionnaires and mailed them i under the Department's name in order to provide authority I ! known to the recipients and to keep the author's name from | creating bias in the responses. Field work in Whittier ! ; 'was carried out by the author. In spite of these precau- jtions, some respondents attempted to destroy any possible identification marks on the questionnaire. I ■ I I Response rate was considered exceptionally good by ! the author, since it ran over 50 per cent, compared to a similar survey made by the Whittier Planning Department, I which had a response rate of 5 per cent. Many of the 187 ' groups which failed to respond were considered "unimpor tant" by the author's social informants. APPENDIX E QUESTIONNAIRE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY STUDY WHITTIER MASTER PLAN 1. Have you ever attended a meeting of the Yes 41% Whittier City Planning Commission? No 59% \2. Do you follow the activities of the Whittier Yes 86% City Planning Commission as reported in the No 14% press or by others? I 3. Have you heard of the proposed Master Plan? Yes 86% No 14% ' 4. Have you discussed the proposed Master Plan Yes 70% with others? No 30% 5. Have you attended any public meetings on the Yes 40% I proposed Master Plan? No 60%■ 6. Has your organization discussed the proposed Yes 57% Master Plan at any of its meetings? No 43% : 7. Have you personally seen the proposed Master Yes 57% ! Plan report? No 43%, 8. Have you read any of the proposed Master Plan Yes 57% map? No 43% i 9. Have you read any of the proposed Master Plan Yes 49%' report? No 51% I 10. How did you first hear of the proposed Master Plan? 11 At your club or group 22 Whittier Daily News 7 East Whittier Review 0 Neighbors 2 Place of Work ; 188 189 6 Public Meeting 0 Relatives 0 Radio or Television 1 Other (Please specify) Survey 11. How long have you lived in Whittier? 15 years (av.) 12. Where are you employed or in business? 36 in City, 15 Outside 13. Do you own or rent your home? Own 47 Rent 4 ; 14. What is your age? 43 av. 15. What is the approximate yearly income of your family? 15,430 av. 16. What is level at which you completed your education? (Specify, i.e.: High School, some college, etc.) 4 years college av. 17. What is your religious faith?___varies____ (Specify, i.e.: Roman Catholic, Methodist, etc.) 18. What is your occupation? varies_______ 19. Do you hold any of the following positions? Elected City Official varies______________ Appointed City Official Officer, Service Club Officer, other club or group 20. Do you generally like or dislike the planning service ' offered by the city? * ! Like 36_____ Dislike________7 ! 21. Do you generally like or dislike the other services offered by the city? Like 42 Dislike 4 ,Please check to make sure you have answered all questions iyou desire to answer and mail to the University in the ienclosed envelope. Your cooperation is greatly appre- ' dated. I The questions are, as you see, anonymous. However, if you wish to give your name and address we will be glad to mail you a copy of the report. I RESPONSE RATE— 46% APPENDIX C Remarks of Mr. J. W. Triplett and Mr. Herbert McGaffey at the Public Hearing of March 27, 1964. Mr. Triplett I J. W. Triplett; I live at 1219 LaForge. One thing I ' would like to know, who put out this plan? Who authorized I its publication? Mr. McNitt: The City of Whittier, about three years ago. Mr. Triplett; When was it printed? Mr. McNitt; About a year and a half ago, I believe. : Mr. DuBois; The General Plan Study was commenced about three years ago. The first item of study was the land use map, this is the thing that we're saying is about three ! years out of date and has to be brought up to date. The 'completion of the text was done about February of 1963 and this went to the printers shortly thereafter and we got it back from the printers around May of 1963 and it was released by the Council within a week or two after they had a regular Council meeting to authorize a release. Mr. McNitt: Does that answer your question? Mr. Triplett: Yes, it does. There is a very interesting little item on page 57 of that book that says, the Planning ■ Commission recommends in the 3rd paragraph that following I the public hearings, the Commission resolve any differ- !ences, whatever that means, and adopt the plan by résolu- ! ■ tion. I I ■ Mr. McNitt: This is a text of his recommendations as to I how you might go about the mechanical procedure of adopting it if you did want to adopt it. I Mr. Triplett: Well, now it is my understanding that this Planning Commission did not make such a recommendation. i j Mr. McNitt: No, that is correct. | i 190 191 Mr. DuBois: I think the differences that are being resolved that he's talking about here are the very differ ences we're hearing today. The Plan was prepared and was authorized after discussion and examination by the City Council and the Planning Commission for release so that these differences could be resolved. The very things that ,are being brought up here today. This is the purpose of the hearings. Martin Whelan: I think the mi sunder standing the gentleman ; may have is when the City Council authorizes the prepara- !tion by consultants of the proposed Master Plan, and 'authorized the publication, they are not thereby adopting : that Master Plan. Mr. Triplett; I don't know whether I have a misunder standing or not, but I can read English. I have said the Planning Commission recommends that following the public hearings they adopt the Plan by resolution. Mr. McNitt: That's what he recommends. That doesn't mean we have to follow his recommendation. Mr. Triplett; That's not the Planning Commission. But, it says the Planning Commission. I don't want it thought that I'm misunderstood. This book says the Planning iCommission recommends, etc., the other things, we can pass i that. The other thing is that obviously everybody knows : we need parks and libraries. Mr. McNitt: We've heard several, a great many people with a great many interests, naturally. Today, it seems to be ’confined to the East Whittier Boulevard problem. * Mr. Triplett: Have you heard anybody criticize the parks or the libraries? i Mr. McNitt: No, all our testimony has been to expand that . ; as fast as possible. ' Mr. Triplett: All right, most of it is concerned with individuals that have an axe to grind somewhere along the ,line one way or another. i I Mr. McNitt; That is the usual type of case before the 'Planning Commission. Mr. Triplett: The other question that I have, I may be ; I jumping ahead of you three weeks, three months or a year. I wonder if this thing cannot be zoned similarly to what we' 192 have at the present time without going through the routine of adopting a General Plan. Mr. McNitt; It could be done by refusing further consider ation of this proposal. That's correct. That is what I said, we can adopt all of it, none of it, or any portion of it. ‘Mr. Triplett; Since the gist of opinion here today seems to be that I don't want anything to happen to my property. 'Now, I own a 58 ft. lot and it doesn't make much differ ence what happens to it, as long as I can keep everybody .off of it that I don't want on it. I think that these 'people are not particularly interested in seeing an over lay put on property which at the present time has a difference of classification. And, I think that is the great problem you have here today. The problem will be the problem until you either say no we're not going to take it, or yes, we are. This is going to be the main area and I frankly don't know whether you have ever published ,this thing in the paper or put out a summary of it or any thing else. I take the Whittier paper and have for about 13 years, and I haven't seen it. So we have a General Plan. I've got a General Plan too, general, like live until next week. But, I don't know why the purpose of the Plan, according to the book itself, is to notify these I people, the residents of the City and the surrounding 'terrains, which will be eventually encompassed within it. I To let them come down and air their grievances if any, or agree with whatever is being said. I was surprised you , had a meeting this Friday. iMr. DuBois: The population of Whittier is roughly 68,000 i and sitting in this room today are roughly 100-150 people. ; Mr. Triplett: I doubt seriously if you went down the block, and I would take any block in the City, that you could find 20% that even heard of it. Mr. DuBois; Let me answer your question in part about the , need for a General Plan. If you proceed on the basis of a Zoning Ordinance, you're making, and this Commission has i 'made, at every meeting, five, ten, fifteen decisions about : ; the future of the City, each of which is unrelated. One ; I of the main purposes of a General Plan is to try to get an ■ overall plan so that you don't grow like Topsy, so that I you can save money on parks and roads, so that you can , protect property value-s. This is a very valid tool, and I I think if you study planning in the U.S. today and in i I California, you'll discover that all the other cities are ; ; doing the same thing. 193 Mr. Triplett; I don't care about anywhere else in the world except right here. Mr. DuBois; Well, I guess this boils down to the argument that you don't want to profit from someone else's experi- I ence. Mr. Triplett; That's not true at all. I've got nothing to ! lose one way or another. I can just read this thing and ; it doesn't make any sense. We have zoning ordinances and ; they allow people to do things with their property that ; coincides with adjacent land use. Now, if they are ■ accomplishing this at the present time, and looking at : this map here, I don't see any great difference in what we ; have here and what's on there. I don't see why we need to ! adopt this General Plan in order to accomplish the very I thing that we have. The Plan itself says that even if you adopt, then you have to addpt a zoning plan. Î Mr. McNitt: Well, there are certain elements. A General Plan— (were you here when we opened the meeting?)— there ! are a great many elements of a so-called Master Plan as ! defined in the State law and much of the subventions that come to cities from motor vehicle fuel tax, and things are all geared to whether or not the City meets the State's ! requirements in relation to streets and highways element. ; Mr. Triplett; May I stop you before you go any further. , I got a copy of the Code last night and I read the Health j and Safety Code. Mr. McNitt: You understand, then, that there are elements of the Master Plan that a City must have on record at all times in order to participate in the State's subvention. In subventions of the motor vehicle fuel tax for the repair and maintenance of our streets, and that one element, the streets and highways element of the master plan, for example, should be very carefully considered by this Commission and the Council, for that reason alone. ’ Other elements, in relation to school planning and on this map we have this element that represents solely the best thinking at the time the study was made of the different superintendents of our various school districts. That was ' incorporated directly from the recommendations of the school superintendents. The projections of the recreation elements of the Plan represent fundamentally the best thinking of the City's own Park Superintendent and Recreation Superintendent and their Commission. Other , elements of the Plan relating to engineering things, like sewage disposal, and all that stuff, water supply and I future flood control things— all that element of the 194 Master Plan represent the best thinking of our Engineering and Water Superintendent. So, basically, all of those things are pretty well covered and might well be adopted. Now, these things that relate to specific land uses, as I said when we opened the meeting, in relation to the land uses and any classifications and difference that now exists is just one man's opinion and this particular consultant, upon the basis of his study, has made those recommendations. We can buy it, we cannot buy it, we can exercise the best thinking of the community, and I take it from what you said, it's forget it. Mr. Triplett; I would say that, and adopt a zoning plan. If you are going to have another plan anyway, I assume this would entail another study, that it will go through the City Engineer. Mr. McNitt; No, if we don't buy this plan, we just stay where we are. We don't do anything. Mr. Triplett: Well, if you would do that, is anything different than if you adopted the Plan? Mr. McNitt: Nothing is different in relation to the specific classifications of land use as of this minute. I Mr. Triplett: For what purpose do we have to adopt or , consider adopting a plan which accomplishes nothing? I I Mr. McNitt: Well, the purpose of this was an attempt to update; it has been 1955 since the City had made any thorough study of the various elements of the Plan, in that interim, of course, there had been a lot of growth : within the old town site and the annexation that doubled the size of the community. There had been in connection , with that Annex #4, 1961, which was the East Whittier Annex, all kinds of problems relating to conflicting land uses under the old County Ordinance and our new City Ordinance, so we've got to clean a lot of that stuff up by getting, as Mr. DuBois pointed out earlier, a little broadening of our C-2 uses, so these people aren't crucified on their expansion of commercial ventures out there for one thing. Mr. Triplett; This is normal in any adoptive area where you pick up a piece of the County and put it in a City. There is a little different zoning, etc. Mr. McNitt; That was an element of the study. At the time the then City Council authorized the study, there was a tremendous pressure from the Uptown Merchants Associa- 195 !tion to incorporate in such a study, as a separate element, 'the matter has been done. Some professional counsel and advise on what might be done to preserve the older shopping ,center, that was a separate element of the study. I Mr. DuBois: Mr. McNitt, there is one major reason for the ; Plan, and one major way in which it differs from a zoning ordinance that I haven't mentioned. A Zoning Ordinance j refers only to controls on private property. A Zoning i Ordinance does not provide for future parks, future school | ' sites, future street extensions or widenings. Without a i ' General Plan and only using a Zoning Ordinance, you get j ' into the problem of spending thousands of dollars of money | to acquire parks, because you haven't set them aside on | : a general plan prior to their need. This is the reason why] : in East Whittier, south of the Boulevard, there are no j present park sites and we will have to spend a great deal I of money to acquire land now, whereas if that had been on a plan prepared 10-15 years ago, the sites could have been I acquired long ago, prior to need. The main difference between a plan and a zoning ordinance is that a plan takes into account public facilities and public services, a , zoning ordinance does not. i Mr. Triplett; Now, I'm wondering though, he says about parks, is there any particular reason why you can't sub- I divide an area of land now and say, this is going to be a , park? ! Mr. McNitt: A fundamental one, the Constitution of the United States. ' Mr. Garvey: You can buy the land by right of eminent domain, and condemn it. Mr. Triplett; How are you going to buy it, if you put the ■ Plan into effect? ' Mr. DuBois: The main purpose of the Plan again, is to decide where you need the parks, how much park space you need, and when. There is no calculation on the zoning ■ ordinance to say that you need three acres here, because in 20 years time, you'll have enough people to use that park site. Mr. Triplett; We're coming back to the same thing. How are you going to get the land for parks with or without the plan? j 195 I 'Mr. DuBois; The acquisition of park land again, as the acquisition of any other public facilities, is through 'purchase by the City. We're saying the plan allows you to purchase it prior to need and at a reasonable price rather than waiting until too late. I think maybe, Mr. ; McNitt, since this gentleman has not heard the General ; Plan presentation, that if he wants to, if he represents an organized group, I would be happy to meet and go over many of these questions, and I think I can give hom some j . answers. I think your main purpose today is to hear | ; testimony. If he does want me to make a presentation, I I i will be happy to do so, and I may be able to clear up some I ; of these questions. So, perhaps at the next meeting when I he comes in, he'll have a background and will have made up | his mind where he wants to stand on the plan. I think he : is searching for information. | Mr. McNitt; We're trying to provide it. ' Mr. Triplett; I do not represent any group, organized or unorganized. I have a copy of what reports to be the General Plan. Is there any other evidence that I should have that I don't have in this book? Mr. DuBois; It is difficult to compress a complicated subject such as this into one booklet. So, what I would suggest is that you as an individual, come into my office. I'll sit down and spend two, three, four hours with you, go over this plan in a great deal of detail and the sup porting evidence behind it. There is an Economic Base Study which you don't have. There is also a land use and zoning analysis report which I'm assuming you don't have. And, I think, this will answer some of your questions. Mr. Triplett; Is this available in printed form to me, either free or by purchase? Mr. DuBois: These are available in the City Clerk's office. Mr. Triplett: Then I don't need any conference. I have just as much biisi ness elsewhere as anybody else. But, I fail to see the necessity of adopting a plan that admit tedly accomplishes nothing. 197 Mr. McGaffey i Herbert McGaffey; I live at 859 Round Hill Drive. Most of the questions I was going to ask have been answered, but there are a few— two of three that I think can be done very quickly. I noticed that the minutes of the January 17 meeting, you were quoted as saying that the plan was paid for by the City of Whittier, and, I believe, that actually ] ' $25,650 of this was obtained from Federal funds. j ; I • Mr. McNitt; So what, we're the same taxpayers, aren't we? i i Mr. McGaffey: A great many of us are concerned about | i obtaining money from Federal funds. We would rather | I sponsor this sort of thing— community development— locally j on our own, and we would not want to see this sort of i precedent in the future on any precise plan that may come ; up under this General Plan that Federal funds are also I obtained from the F.H.A. in Sacramento. Mr. McNitt; The question has nothing to do with Federal 1 or State or City funds, it all comes out of the same I taxpayer's pocket. What you are saying is, if we embark , on any further studies, be sure that they are done on a thrifty and well justified basis. I don't think anybody I disputes that. I Mr. McGaffey; Do you envision any prescribed plans under the immediate future that would require funding. . . . I , Mr. McNitt: The key to that question is "the immediate , future." No, I don't. I don't think any member of the ] Commission does. ! Mr. McGaffey; Does this Uptown Whittier development where i you have just frozen zoning, how will that be financed. ' Mr. McNitt: That affects about four pieces of property around the perimeter of the Civic Center. Mr. McGaffey: The paper wasn't clear, how far up does that go? Mr. DuBois; It's only the rear line of properties that front immediately on the Civic Center, the back line of a lot. Mr. McNitt; There are about four properties in the ' perimeter of the Civic Center in which some interested I citizens who owned property in the area have requested the 198 Council to take a look at some reclassification of those properties, and the Daily News reported here very recently that the Council has adopted an ordinance of some kind in effect freezing building permits in that small general area for 5 months so that the Commission might Lake a look at . this group's request. ! Mr. DuBois: We had a contract with the State to prepare this Plan under contract, and it is completed and closed with no strings attached. 'Mr. McNitt: What the gentleman's question is, before you ! spend money like this, take a good look at what you are : going to accomplish. Mr. DuBois: I was just going to point out that in the Uptown Study which is presently being studied by Uptown Merchants, there is no committment, no decision has been made about the means of funding, there are no requirements. I Mr. McNitt; Except that they have apparently formed some parking district where they have said to themselves as I owners of land in the district. . . . i ' Mr. DuBois: That is right, this will have nothing to do with Federal funds. ' Mr. McNitt: Nothing to do with anybody's funds. ! Mr. DuBois; Except their own, at the moment, if they decide to do this. j Mr. McGaffey: As I understand it, anytime you do use Federal funds then the Federal Government does retain ! certain rights on the land toward development with those 1 funds. I Mr. McNitt; You're talking about Urban Renewal now; we : haven't got any such plan. Mr. DuBois: We have no committments to the Federal Government at the present time. We have completed our Contract, the State completed its half of it, we're operating under the State Planning Law, and it's completely closed. Mr. McNitt; He's talking about Urban Renewal. We don't have any such project before us and I know of none contemplated. 199 I I Mr. McGaffey: One final thing in regard to getting the ; problem before the people. Is there any reason why this ! should not be printed in the paper, say the information on ; the back of the colored map? I Mr. McNitt; The newspaper has printed the map, it has ■ given us thousands of column inches of free editorial copy, and I don't think the City has the money to pay for ; an advertisement to print. Mr. McGaffey; You say they did print the map, because we ; inquired at the Whittier News and they said they had not I printed the map. ' Mr. DuBois; Both papers, the Daily News and the East j Whittier Review, have printed a series of articles running , about 5 or 6 articles each and a number of pictures. There ■ were pictures of the big General Plan map, there was a ! picture with Mr. Porter standing in the picture pointing I it out. There have been articles and pictures, there I was a picture at the time I made my presentation to the ; Chamber. I think you will find more than adequate news paper coverage short of devoting an entire special issue to the Plan and this is something you really ought to take up with the newspapers. Mr. McGaffey: I've been reading the Whittier newspaper since 1951 and I was not aware of the Plan itself until a , month ago. Could this map be posted say at the Quad, and I places where the public goes to a great deal. Mr. McNitt; It could be for about five minutes, until some kid pulled it down. Mr. DuBois: It could be. It was posted in the Whittier Library, for I believe about five days. And, the reason • ' it hasn't been posted since then, is because I have been going out to meetings and giving presentations with it, ■ and in fact, on a number of days, I would give a breakfast presentation, and a noon presentation, and an evening ' presentation, and I was continually putting the Plan in and out of the City station wagon. It has been posted since the last presentation here in the Council Chambers. We did have 1,000 of the small maps printed, and I see you have one, we've used up all of these, and we're going to a second printing on these. If you would like to see the newspaper articles, we have them in our files, and you can come in and see them. We have both the Daily News and the East Whittier Review articles, you can come in and go over those. We clipped those from the newspaper. I 200 ! Mr. McNitt; Anyone else here want to be heard? Any comment or question by any of the Commissioners. Anybody , want the last word? APPENDIX D TABLE OF SELECTED QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES BY GROUP GROUP CATAGORY a* > M - ) O t r * I a , ■ H O w C J W 0 4 f d f i 4 - P t 15+J Wt-H-HO SOi-J q '0013 P G-Pt o M t ^ Di -p . rH fd O w C )4 -> (U tp w < u C )(d C )(T J (i; -POiOUCU -H -MSHbO) (Ü (U« C pq m Q 4 -1 ^ -H 0 "b . 3 -P d U 0 0 13 (U • rH !<; P ( 1 , 4 -J 04 rH fO Ü -P 0 U C D c k 04 m Ü tn w d w t -iH d d -P ü 04 e u < ü w ü 4J < L ) a 1 w O , ■H O 13 Ui Ui ës 04 A O +j Oi rO p d O 13 S 13 0 O (0 rO p4 C O O, O O co c e ; O o: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 106 Cultural Secondary Y N N N N N N N N : 23 1 Social Primary Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y 39 Social Primary Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 47 Social Primary N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 49 Social Primary N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 60 Social Primary N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y 61 Social Primary N Y Y Y N N N Y Y 72 Social Primary Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N 73 Social Primary Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y 113 Social Primary N Y Y N N Y Y Y N 24 Social Secondary Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 35 Social Secondary N Y Y Y N Y N Y N 36 Social Secondary N Y Y Y N N Y Y Y 37 Social Secondary Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 63 Social Secondary N N N N N N N N N 78 Social Secondary Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 96 Social Secondary N N N N N N N N N 105 Social Secondary Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 70 Political Secondary Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y N --------- APPENDIX E QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES 1 1 Group 1 2 3 4 5 6 Question 7 8 9 10 Numbers 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 20 21 1 1 N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y DN 17 M 0 37 30 B P L L i 2 N Y Y N N N N N N DN 18 V 0 51 8 B P L L i 5 i N N Y N N N N N N DN 4 EWR - 0 26 8 HS J L L 1 ^ Y Y Y Y N Y N N N CL 3 N 0 41 15 HS J L L 7 N Y Y Y Y Y N Y N CL 34 D 0 50 7 B PQ L L 9 1 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y WO 1 W 1/2 0 33 14 B RC L L 1 10 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y CL 16 D 0 48 15 1/2 C P L L 11 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y CL 55 W 0 56 20 B P L L 1 1 3 I N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y DN 45 W 0 45 13 B P L L ; 18 N Y Y Y N N N Y N DN 8 W 0 37 12 M P L L 21 N Y Y N N N N Y N DN 3 W 0 25 7 B P L L 23 Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y CL 28 W 0 51 20 B P L L i 24 Y Y Y Y Y Y y Y Y CL 20 W R 60 12 B P L L 25 N Y Y N N N N Y N DN 14 W 0 58 19 B P L L i 29 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y CL 17 W 0 38 13 B P L L 30 N Y Y Y N N Y Y Y EWP 3 SF o 42 30 B J L L , 33 Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y N DN 4 W 0 31 9 B P L L 34 N N Y N N N N N N WO 15 AN 0 28 8 B P N N 35 N Y Y Y N Y N Y N DN 10 _ 0 34 20 B P — _ 203 204 APPENDIX E (Continued) Group 1 2 3 4 5 6 Question 7 8 9 10 Number 11 12 s 13 14 15 16 17 20 21 36 N Y Y Y N N Y Y Y CI 7 W 0 34 19 B RC L D ^ 37 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y RL 13 W 0 42 15 B P N N 39 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y — 15 W 0 43 15 B P L L 43 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y CL 25 N 0 40 18 B P L L 47 N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y DN 51 W 0 53 —— HS P L L 49 N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y DN 2 L/2 W 0 40 12 B P L L 56 N Y Y Y N N N N N DN EWR 10 W 0 41 30 1/2 C N D D 57 N Y N N N N N N N — 19 W R 36 4 M P N D 58 N Y N N N N N N N — 32 LP 0 32 6 B P L L 60 N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y DN EWR 5 W R 31 10 1/2 C P D L 61 N Y Y Y N N N Y Y DN EWR 12 W 0 42 9 1/2 C P L L 63 N N N N N N N N N — — 17 EM 0 38 — — B P — — L 67 N Y Y Y N N N N N DN 3 W R 52 12 HS PQ L L 69 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y CL 23 W 0 39 21 B P L L 70 Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y N CI 14 W 0 37 35 B P D L 72 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N DN 14 W 0 38 12 B P D L 73 Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y PL 32 PR 0 65 25 GR — — L L 78 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y M 14 W 0 43 — — HS P L L 82 N Y Y Y N Y N N N CL DN 14 W 0 58 30 M P D 83 N N N N N N N N N — 0 W 0 43 12 M P — 84 N Y Y N N N N N N DN 13 w 0 42 12 M ^ — L L 205 APPENDIX E (Continued) ( jGroup 1 2 3 4 5 6 Question 7 8 9 10 Numbers 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 20 21 : 89 ! N N Y N N N N N N DN 13 DW 0 37 12 GR RC L L ; N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y DN 24 W 0 42 17 B PQ L L 96 N N N N N N N N N " " " " 11 " " " " 0 40 8 HS P L L il04 N Y N N N N N N N — — 13 LA 0 47 — — B P D D 105 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y CL 9 — — 0 49 25 1/2 — — C D L :106 Y N N N N N N N N S 10 W 0 46 12 1/2PQ C L L 111 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y — — 2 DO 0 33 12 GR P — — L 113 N Y Y N N Y Y Y N CL 11 LA 0 50 9 1/2 C L L 115 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y PM 17 LA 0 50 20 —— — — —— 1116 1 N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y DN 2 W 0 44 30 B P L L 118 Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y DN 2 W 0 42 13 B P L L Abbreviations used in the table: I I to 9 - Y, Yes; N, No. 10 - CL, Club; DN, Daily News; EWR, East Whittier Review; Cl, City; M, Meetings; WO, Work; RL, Relations II - Age in years 12 - N, Norwalk; W, WhitLier; LP, La Puente; EM, El Monte ; PR, Pico Rivera; DW, Downey; LA, Los Angeles ; AN, Anaheim. 13-0, Own; R, Rent. 206- APPENDIX E (Continued) 14 - Age in years 15 - Income in thousands of Dollars per year 16 - B, College Graduate; HS, High School Graduate ; 1/2C, Two years College; M, Masters Degree ; GR, Graduate Degree in Medicine, Law, or Dentistry 17 - P, Protestant; J, Jewish; PQ, Quaker; RC, Roman I Catholic. I |20 & 21 - L, Like; D, Dislike. Notes : |l8 - No public officials. 19 - Occupations : 1 Bookeeper, 2 Housewife, 5 Housewife, 6 Land I Developer, 7 Accountant, 9 Manager, 10 Business, I 11 Relator, 13 School Administrator, 18 Dentist, 21 Mechanic, 23 Chiropracter, 24 Stationer, i 25 Housewife, 29 Insurance Broker, 30 Attorney, ! 33 Accountant, 34 Statistician, 36 Vice President of ' Corporation, 37 Housewife, 39 Architect, 43 Teacher, j 49 President of Corporation, 57 Musician, 58 Nurse, i 60 Insurance sales, 61 Store Owner, 63 Housewife, 67 Sales Promotion, 69 Relator, 70 Insurance Agency, 72 Insurance Broker, 73 Manager, 78 Shop Bookeeper, 207 APPENDIX E (Continued) 82 Housewife, 84 Teacher, 89 School Principle, 93 Insurance Broker, 96 Housewife, 104 Housewife, 105 Nurse, 106 Housewife, 111 Patent Attorney, 116 Real Estate Developer, and 118 Marketing Analyst. APPENDIX F LIST OF TOTAL MAILING MARKED FOR RESPONSE Responded! I 1. American Association of University Women X ! 2. Art Association, Whittier X j 3. Assistance League of Whittier | 4. Bar Association, Whittier 5. B'nai B'rith, Whittier Women #940 X 6. B'nai B'rith, Whittier Lodge #2074 X I 7. Business and Professional Womens Club X 8. Chamber of Commerce, South Whittier I 9. Chamber of Commerce, Whittier-Area X 10. Civil Liberties Union, Whittier Chapter X ' 11. Community Beautiful, Whittier Area X ! 12. Coordinating Council, South Whittier I ! 13. Coordinating Council, Whittier Area X 14. Cosmopolitan International 15. Cosmopolitan Club, Whittier 16. Daughters of the American Revolution 17. Democratic Club, Whittier 18. Dental Society, Whittier X I 19. Education Study Council, Whittier Area I 20. Elks, B.P.O., Whittier Lodge #1258 ^ 21. Employee's Association, Whittier City X 22. Engineers, California Society of Professional Downey-Whittier Chapter 23. Exchange Club, Whittier X 24. Executives Club, Whittier X i I ! 208 ! 209 Responded 25. Friends of the Whittier Public Library X 26. Friendly Hills Property Owners Association I 27. Hadassah, Whittier Chapter of 28. Independent Order of Odd Fellows I ' 29. Insurance Agents, Whittiers Association of X 30. Jewish Community Center, Whittier X j i 31. John Birch Society j 32. Junior Chamber of Commerce— East Whittier ' 33. Junior Chamber of Commerce— Whittier X 34. Junior Chamber of Commerce Auxiliary X I 35. Junior Womens Club— East Whittier X j 36. Junior Womens Club— Whittier X I ; 37. Kiwanettes X . 38. Kiwanis Club, East Whittier 39. Kiwanis Club of Whittier X . 40. Knights of Columbus, Whittier Council #1898 t 41. Knights Templar, Whittier Commandery #51 I 42. La Habra Heights Improvement Association 43. League of Women Voters of Whittier X 44. Lionettes 45. Lions Club, East Whittier , 46. Lions Club, West Whittier , 47. Lions Club, Whittier X 48. Masonic Lodge #776, F & AM, East Whittier 49. Masonic Lodge, Greenleaf #670 X 50. Masonic Whittier Lodge #323, F & AM , 51. Masons, Royal Arch, Whittier Chapter #91 52. Masons-Zabud Council #49, Royal and Select Masters : 53. Ministerial Union, Whittier 1 54. Moose Lodge #716, "Loyal Order of Moose" 55. Moose, Women of the ; 56. Motor Car Dealers Association, Whittier X 210 Responded 57. Music Teachers Association, Whittier X Branch 58. Nurses Association, California District 40 X 59. Optimist Club, Whittier 60. Optimist Club, Whittier Breakfast X 61. Optimist Club, Whittier, Hi-Noon X 62. Opti-Mrs. Club, Whittier 63. Panhellenic, Whittier Association X 64. P.T.A. Association Inc., Whittier Council 65. Presbyterian Hospital, Women's Auxiliary 66. Pro America, National Association of Whittier Unit 67. Quad Association, Whittier X I 68. Quota Club of Whittier I 69. Realtors, Whittier District Board of X i 70. Republican Club, Whittier Young X 71. Republican, Whittier Area Women's Club 1 Federation I 72. Rotary Club, East Whittier X 73. Rotary Club, Whittier X 74. Secretaries Association, National j Whittier Chapter 75. Secretaries Association, Rio Hondo District, \ Legal ; 76. Senior Citizens Club of Whittier i I 77. Shrine Club, Whittier i 78. Soroptimist Club of Whittier X 79. South Whittier Heights Community Club 80. Spanish War Veterans, Rice W. Means Auxilary #83 81. Sports Car Club of California, Whittier 82. Symphony Association, Whittier X 83. Teachers Association, Whittier High X 84. Teachers Association, WUHSD X 211 Responded 85. Teachers Association, California Retired, Whittier Division 86. Teachers Association^ Whittier Elementary i 87. Theater, Whittier Community ; 88. Toastmasters International, Quakertown #19 89. Toastmasters Friendly Club #300 X 90. Toastmasters, Whittier #873 : 91. Toastmistress Club, Hablamos , 92. United Nations, American Association, i Whittier Chapter j 93. University Club, Whittier X I 94. Uptown Association, Whittier Merchants I 95. Veterans of Foreign Wars, South I Whittier #3752 96. Veterans of Foreign Wars #3752 X 97. Veterans World War 1 98. Veterans of World War 1, #250 Auxilary j Barracks ' 99. Visiting Nurse Association of Whittier, Incorporated 100. Whittier College Womens Auxiliary 101. Whittwood Merchants Association 102. Womens Christian Temperance Union, Whittier ■ 103. Women's Improvement Club, East Whittier 104. Women's Club, Friendly Hills X 105. Women's Club of Whittier X 106. Writers' Club of Whittier X 107. Young Men's Christian Association, Whittier I 108. Y's Men's Club, East Whittier 109. Y's Men's Club of Whittier Incorporated 110. Y's Men's Club (evening) 111. North Central Property Owners Association X [ 112. The Citizen's Committee Concerning the 1 Master Plan 212 Responded 113. Y's Men's of Whittier, Morning X 114. Citizens Information Center 115. Northwest Area Property Owners Association X 116. College Hills Property Owners Association X 117. Canyon Crest Property Owners Association 118. Sungold Hills Community Incorporated X ! NOTE: The following groups are not included in either • category since the person to whom the questionnaire was , directed was no longer a resident and returned the I questionnaire or no correct address was available. I 119. Building Contactors Association ! 120. Christian Business Men's Committee t ' 122. Sertoma Club, Whittier 123. Toastmasters Club, East Whittier #1602
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Institutionalized elderly: design, community, and management effects on life quality
PDF
A study of the Los Angeles medical agencies providing care for certain classes of low income groups
PDF
Physical factors involved in injuries to California Highway Patrol motorcycle officers
PDF
A survey of the development of counseling and guidance services in colleges, universities and communities of Southern California resulting from the advisement and guidance program of the Veterans...
PDF
History of the organization and functions of the Office of the Auditor General of the State of California
PDF
Study of international intellectual cooperation
PDF
Assistive technology for clients with visual impairments of the Alaska Division of Vocation Rehabilitation: a qualitative evaluation
PDF
A study of the attitudes of high school teachers of vocational subjects toward vocational education and its social values
PDF
A study of the musical contributions of Leo Sowerby
PDF
Legal aspects in the development of health maintenance organizations
PDF
Lateral variability in predation and taphonomic characteristics of turritelline gastropod assemblages from Middle Eocene - Lower Oligocene strata of the Gulf Coastal Plain, United States
PDF
Some differences in factors related to educational achievement of two Mexican-American groups
PDF
Effects of age and gender on speed and accuracy of hand movements: and the refinements they suggest for Fitt's Law
PDF
The Australian gekkonid lizard genus Diplodactylus Gray: an evolutionary and zoogeographical study
PDF
A study of councilmanic backgrounds, interests, and attitudes in California council-manager cities
PDF
The comparison of the metabolism of C¹⁴ carboxyl and methylene labeled glycine in the intact rat
PDF
Predicting psychosocial adjustment in pediatric leukemia
PDF
On the limits of not being scripted: video-making and discursive prositioning in coastal southeast Sulawesi
PDF
The wayfaring stranger: a non-critical comparison of Odysseus and Leopold Bloom as the appear in the the "Odyssey" by Homer and "Ulysses" by James Joyce
PDF
A study of the ketone body metabolism of excised rat tissues with respect to labile phosphate content
Asset Metadata
Creator
Arnold, James Lee
(author)
Core Title
Community organizations and general plan adoption: a critical evaluation of the effect of community organizations on the adoption of an urban general plan
School
Graduate School
Degree
Master of Science
Degree Program
City and Regional Planning
Degree Conferral Date
1965-08
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
OAI-PMH Harvest,social sciences
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Digitized by ProQuest
(provenance)
Advisor
Brown, Philip D. (
committee chair
), Crouch, Ralph S. (
committee member
)
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c39-129320
Unique identifier
UC11312320
Identifier
EP64767.pdf (filename),usctheses-c39-129320 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
EP64767.pdf
Dmrecord
129320
Document Type
Thesis
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Arnold, James Lee
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA
Tags
social sciences