Opportunities along the LA River corridor are either people-based, driven by politics, program, and community partnerships, or are place-based, derived from land assets and underlying geophysical conditions.
A series of nine geographical frames was developed by the LA River Master Plan to assist in the delineation of reach-specific concepts related to jurisdictional, hydraulic, and ecological zones. The use of the frame is purposeful—it illustrates how the areas adjacent to a river reach are critical to understand in planning and implementing a connected and accessible river corridor.
Potential site locations are based on an overlap of need and opportunity.
While people-based opportunities are critical for implementation, place-based opportunities were used to identify potential locations for sites and projects. Many of the sites in this Master Plan draw upon previous planning efforts and the community desires voiced therein. To fill gaps between these projects and ensure a consistent distribution of amenities and facilities throughout the river corridor, the Master Plan includes several newly proposed sites. In such cases, site extents were determined through an in-depth analysis of the LA River right-of-way and available adjacent land assets using publicly available parcel and land use data for LA County.
The goals pages outline needs along the LA River related to each of the Master Plan’s nine goals. After understanding the needs, it is important to identify opportunity areas where those needs can be met. In some areas, existing planned major projects can meet needs, but in other areas gaps exist and new sites need to be identified. The sites of the Master Plan identify opportunity areas to create multi-benefit projects at an equitable cadence along all 51 miles of the river.
Identify Areas of High Need
Compare Areas of Highest Need and Opportunity
As projects come to fruition, they can affect positive change in communities by addressing needs related to the nine goals. Where access to parks is significantly lacking, for example, projects can prioritize adding acres of open space; where flood risk is a concern, projects can respond with pinpointed strategies to protect adjacent neighborhoods. A project’s potential to fulfill these needs–whether one or many–is measured as “impact.” The Master Plan organizes sites into five categories of impact: extra small (XS), small (S), medium (M), large (L), and extra-large (XL).
Impact for Site-Based Projects
Impact is inherently tied to a project’s acreage, with larger sites generally having the potential to address more needs and affect greater change than smaller project sites. M, L, and XL impact projects will likely be uniquely designed and require the most capital and planning, while XS and S projects will likely involve applying design guidelines to a new access point or seating area.
In addition to acreage, the level of need at a particular project site may increase the project’s impact. If an M or L project site has an opportunity to address multiple relatively high needs near the river, its impact may increase. In this case, a project site must have at least two need scores within the top 2% of need scores within one mile of the river. Extra-large impact is the highest possible impact classification.
Planned Major Projects Impact
Similar to how opportunity sites were assessed based on their scale and expected ability to positively address local needs, existing projects were also categorized by impact. Existing planned major projects were reviewed to determine if prior planning efforts have targeted the current needs established by the Master Plan. In situations where current needs are not being met, further coordination with the project’s planning organization is recommended.
Project List By Impact
More information about individual projects and sites can be found in Appendix Volume II: Technical Backup Document.