One small step for regulators, one giant leap for mass transit in Los Angeles?
As is, public transit is almost always forced to yield to car culture. Photo: (Tepper Natalie/Arcaid/Corbis)
Here in car-favoring Los Angeles, it's hard to find a mass transit project that was easily birthed. Convincing taxpayers who rely on cars to fund projects they won't use — projects for people who don't have cars and can't afford them — is not easy.
And this being California, environmental regulations, enforced by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), are fairly rigorous. Working through the reviews has kept the employment rate high for civil engineers and lawyers. Before construction can begin, the state must certify that the project does not significantly and negatively impact more than a dozen separate quality of life measures.
But the highest hurdle for big transit projects is often their projected influence on the flow of traffic, or what CEQA calls "Level of Service," or (LOS). The same holds for new properties that are supposed to make the transit experience align with the rest of city life. If you've been to Los Angeles, you'll note how, well, ugly and spartan the rail routes look. One reason: It's almost impossible to develop properties around them without significantly impinging the flow of traffic
There's an irony at the heart of California's environmental review laws, one that Eric Jaffe at The Atlantic's CityLab recognizes:
The upshot, he notes, is that "in the twisted eyes of California law, public transit is considered a greater enemy to the environment than car travel."
Soon that will change, thanks to the Democratic legislature and the governor.
A new law knocks the teeth out of the "level of service" regulation that privileges cars over mass transit in urban areas. The replacement standard has yet to be officially determined, but it will prioritize the movement and mobility of people through the city, rather than the mechanism they use to move. This means that the state can't stop a transportation project that makes vehicle traffic worse, especially if it fulfills other goals, like encouraging public transit, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and even beautifying city-owned land. The working acronym is "VMT" — or "vehicle miles traveled." It measures distance, not time. As Jaffe says,
Brigham Yen, a Los Angeles broker and evangelist for the city's downtown renaissance, says this tiny change could be transformational.
"Hopefully this new CEQA reform will expedite much needed ubiquitous urban infill projects as well as badly needed transit projects beyond just what's proposed through Measure R," he said, referring to a 2008 county ballot initiative that increased the sales tax to fund transportation projects. "Los Angeles is just shy of being great. You can't have a great city that caters almost completely to the automobile."
THE WEEK'S AUDIOPHILE PODCASTS: LISTEN SMARTER
- After Ferguson: Stop deferring to the cops
- Ferguson riots were terrible — but this racist reaction was worse
- 43 TV shows to watch in 2014
- Don't argue about politics this Thanksgiving. Just don't.
- The hilarious hypocrisy of Republicans complaining about the imperial presidency
- How to be the most productive person in your office — and still get home by 5:30 p.m.
- Is it now OK to have sex with animals?
- Alien conspiracy theorists think the government is on the verge of spilling big secrets
- 7 grammar rules you really should pay attention to
- In Ferguson, Michael Brown lost his life — and America's police lost the benefit of the doubt
Subscribe to the Week