Stanton’s old approach for a new downtown

California eliminated redevelopment agencies a dozen years ago, yet some cities have yet to dispense with the redevelopment mindset. One of the core problems with that planning approach – beyond encouraging officials to abuse eminent domain and run up taxpayer-backed debt – was that it empowered City Hall to centrally plan new projects.

Stanton is a 1950s-era north Orange County suburb, known mainly for its nondescript tract-house neighborhoods and commercial strips. Officials there have long dreamed of a new town center. The idea, which previously surfaced in 2010, is back again. City Council recently approved a new zoning plan to create a 157-acre downtown area to include residential and commercial projects.

Per a staff report, the city will “encourage revitalization and intensification of underutilized commercial uses within the city through the redevelopment process” and promotes “revitalization, mixed-use redevelopment” that better “responds to changing economic market conditions.” City officials have said they expect the project to take 20 years to complete.

We appreciate the vision. A downtown area could provide much-needed new housing and offer a distinctive focal point in a city that’s usually overlooked. Unfortunately, Stanton is taking that same-old central-planning approach that has long failed it and neighboring cities.

In 2000, Stanton City Council declared the entire city “blighted” so it could take advantage of redevelopment tax benefits – yet decades later it has little to show for these redevelopment efforts. Instead of taking a page from the past, officials ought to seek inspiration from a more market-oriented approach that’s gaining traction statewide. Instead of planning every inch of a project area, the city ought to “upzone” the area and let the market do the rest.

This allows broader uses of properties, similar to what Anaheim embraced in the early 2000s to spur development of its Platinum Triangle. Instead of dictating specific uses, cities should reduce their restraints and allow (not mandate) higher densities and mixed uses so developers can create their own vision in response to actual market demand. The result will be more interesting – and probably won’t take 20 years for the build out.