Switchboard, from NRDC › Lizzeth Henao's Blog

A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: BNSF's Proposed SCIG Railyard Isn't a "Green" Project

2011-11-12T00:13:29Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

Last night, NRDC joined our environmental justice allies, including East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, Coalition for a Safe Environment, and Communities for a Better Environment at a public meeting, to express our opposition to the Southern California International Gateway (SCIG) project. The proposed project is to build a new railyard for the BNSF Railway Company in a Wilmington neighborhood, next to several schools and daycare centers. If alarm bells are not already ringing in your head, read about our recently filed lawsuit against BNSF and Union Pacific to learn about the diesel pollution they create in environmental justice communities. And read about our ongoing opposition to the SCIG project here and here.

The standing-room only crowd was a testament to what’s at stake and demonstrated the commitment of community residents to standing up against corporate greed and fighting for the well-being of their families.

Also in the crowd were members of various labor unions wearing orange BNSF T-shirts which claimed that the SCIG project would provide “Good Jobs, Less Traffic, Cleaner Air.” These T-shirts represent a textbook public relations spin for what we know is a very polluting project.

Although supporters testified that the project is “green,” will reduce air pollution, and will bring much-needed jobs, the sad truth is that the SCIG is not a “green” project. Although some of the equipment used in the proposed facility would be electrified, the two biggest sources of air pollution—the trains and the trucks—will not be electric. The project would generate 2 million truck trips a year. That’s close to 5,500 truck trips a day. While these trucks are cleaner than they used to be thanks to the ports’ Clean Truck Programs, they are still not zero-emissions vehicles. They still pollute toxic diesel particulate matter into the air. The environmental analysis for this project claims that it will reduce truck traffic, but that claim has to be taken with a grain of salt. While this project might reduce the number of trucks travelling on the I-710 freeway, it will increase—by 2 million—the trucks traveling to the neighborhoods adjacent to the project. Accordingly, as explained by a representative from the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) who testified at yesterday’s hearing, the SCIG project would increase the cancer risk for the surrounding community.

In these hard economic times, it is understandable that people want any project that promises jobs. Unfortunately, corporations use this desperation to steamroll bad projects that would do more harm than good. And just to be clear, we are not against job creation or economic growth, a charge often leveled at environmentalists. As members of the Blue-Green Alliance, a partnership of environmental and labor groups fighting for a 21st century economy, we are committed to economic development. We want good paying, local jobs and economic growth at the port, but building at the expense of the health of residents is the wrong way to grow. We cannot support projects that pose unacceptable health risks to the surrounding communities and increase toxic emissions into our air.

The reality is that the SCIG project should be built at the harbor, on-dock, and not in the middle of a low-income, minority neighborhood that is already overburdened by high air pollution levels and higher asthma and cancer risks than elsewhere in the Los Angeles region. The “good jobs, less traffic, cleaner air” claims will be more accurate for an on-dock project than for the current proposed location.

If you want to get involved, the next public hearing will be November 16, 2011, 6 p.m., at the Wilmington Senior Center, 1371 Eubank St. in Wilmington. You can read the environmental reports here. The deadline to submit comments is December 22, 2011.

Santa Monica Contemplates Bike Sharing

2011-07-22T19:15:17Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

This past Wednesday, Santa Monica transportation officials in conjunction with Global Green hosted a Bike Sharing Community Forum to get community feedback on a possible bike sharing program in Santa Monica (the city already has a successful bike sharing program for its employees but is looking to expand it to the general public). Bike sharing programs loan bikes for short one-way trips around a dense, urban environment. Unlike bike rentals, shared bikes can be returned to a different station than the one where the bike was obtained. Bike sharing programs can be useful for residents and visitors who want to get across town conveniently and for commuters who need to make the last leg of their journey to/from transit stops to their workplace. Already very popular in Europe, they are starting to be implemented in cities across the US with much success. The city of Santa Monica sees bike sharing programs as one tool towards achieving the goal of “no new net trips” and meeting GHG emissions reductions and it wants to make sure its citizens are committed to the future program from the onset.

Representatives from Alta Bicycle Share, B-Cycle and ZotWheels gave presentations on their respective programs. Alta Bicycle Share operates the Capital Bikeshare program in Washington, DC. Launched in September 2010, the program now has 1,100 bikes in over 110 stations located in the DC and Arlington areas. The bikes are available 24 hours a day, year round, and since their launch have clocked 600,000 rides. An even more impressive number: only one crash for every 50,000 rides! Considered wildly successful, the program is looking to expand further.

B-Cycle operates the Denver B-cycle program. Implemented in its current form in April 2010, the program has 500 bikes at 50 stations in the Denver metro area. The bikes are available from 5 a.m. to 11 p.m., seven days a week, from March to November based on weather conditions. The program clocked over 100,000 rides from April through December 2010. A fun feature of the program is a personalized webpage for each member where they can track duration of trips, calories burned, and carbon offsets. B-Cycle had a display showcasing their solar-powered station and bikes available for test rides.

The ZotWheels program operates on the campus of UC Irvine with 28 bikes at 4 stations available to students and staff during the daylight hours, seven days a week. The program has clocked about 1,500 rides since January 2010 through March 2011. Because Santa Monica is a small city, there were interesting points about the applicability of a smaller system over larger programs.

After the presentations, community members gave their input on station placement, outreach efforts, education and safety. Among the chorus of voices was a resounding affirmation for a bike sharing program in the city. Commissioner Phil Brock, Vice-Chair of the Recreation and Parks Commission, told the expectant crowd that he was committed to implementing a program of 350 bikes in 35 stations within 18 months (the city has been recommended to receive a grant for almost $2.5 million from LA Metro in 2016 but looks to start a program much sooner than that).

Although the city has no formal planning committee, now is the time to share recommendations and concerns about the future bike sharing program with city officials. Here are a few of mine:

The program should be available 24 hours a day, year round; utilize social media including mobile apps; and have a data collection component.
Stations should be placed near busy transit stops and be no more than ¼ mile apart.
The city should create a safety education campaign to educate both drivers and bicycle users. As part of that education campaign, helmet use should be encouraged but not mandated.
The current Big Blue Bus fare system should integrate the new bike sharing program to encourage use by transit commuters. Alternatively, a new system should be developed that utilizes a single card or payment system to facilitate use of all modes of transit.

Overall, we are supportive of bike sharing programs as a tool for cities to reduce vehicle miles traveled and achieve sustainable community goals. We look forward to working with the city of Santa Monica to ensure that its bike sharing program becomes a model for neighboring cities to emulate, thereby reducing our region’s air pollution, encouraging active transportation, and promoting a healthier lifestyle for all.

Celebrating LA's Carmageddon on the Chandler Bikeway

2011-07-14T17:40:11Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

As I write this, Los Angeles Metro’s own Carmageddon clock is showing 1 day, 12 hours, 18 minutes, and 25 seconds until the 53-hour closure of the I-405 freeway between the 101 and I-10 freeways. While many Angelenos are having mental health crises over their perceived inability to move around our great city this weekend, I have some information that may calm those frayed nerves. You don’t need a car to get from the Westside to the Valley (or vice versa)!! (Actually, I would go even further and state that you don’t need a car to get anywhere in our city but that’s a topic for another day.)

This weekend, I’m going to get from the Westside to Burbank the same way I do most weekends: using public transit and my bike. I’ll be biking from Pico-Robertson to the Hollywood and Highland Red Line station, taking the Metro to the North Hollywood Station, and then biking the Chandler Bikeway to Burbank.

Trip cost: FREE!! (Normally $1.50 each way but Metro is offering free rides during Carmageddon, yet another reason to celebrate!)

Trip length: Around 1hr 30 mn (But faster if you’re not a slow cyclist like me!)

Calories burned: Priceless!!

My favorite part of the trip is the Chandler Bikeway, a scenic, separated pedestrian/bike path that stretches a few blocks from the North Hollywood Red Line station to the downtown Burbank area. Surrounded by beautiful landscaping (even a free mulch giveaway site along the path) and public art, it never fails to put me in a good mood.

So if you find yourself with the opportunity to ditch your car, say because of a freeway closure for example, take the opportunity to discover some of the hidden gems around our city like the Chandler Bikeway. You can catch me on it Saturday morning. I’ll be the one on the XS white women’s bike wearing the pink helmet. Yes, it is as intimidating as it sounds.

Encouraging Minority College Students in LA to Be Agents of Environmental Change

2011-04-26T18:45:52Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

One of the most enjoyable aspects of my job is the opportunity to talk to minority youth about NRDC and inspire them to get involved in our work.

Last week, I participated in a panel discussion with Liz Crosson, Executive Director of Santa Monica Baykeeper, organized by Dr. Helen Boutrous, Chair of the Political Science Department and Pre-law Director at Mount St. Mary's College, a woman’s college and Hispanic-Serving Institution. Dr. Boutrous wanted us to discuss the litigation and advocacy efforts of our respective organizations, as well as offer professional advice, to a group of 50 young women, a combination of her Women and the Law class (Government/Pre-Law majors) and an Environmental Policy class (Biology majors).

In speaking about the work that we do at NRDC, I highlighted the mix of litigation, political advocacy, scientific research and grassroots activism that we use to accomplish our goals. I conveyed to the students that the diversity in our work means that there are many opportunities for them to become professionally involved at NRDC, whether as lawyers, scientists or policy experts.

Discussing the specific work of the NRDC Southern California Air and Environmental Justice Programs, I spoke about our transportation, smart growth and environmental justice efforts and linked them to the problems that we face as Angelinos and for some, as members of minority communities in toxic neighborhoods. From our work greening the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, supporting the Wilshire Bus Only Lane, to fighting against the South 710 expansion through EJ communities, I stressed the need to tackle problems by forming partnerships with affected communities and government agencies while at the same time utilizing litigation as an effective means for change.

I also challenged the students to think of themselves as agents of change, capable of making positive impacts on the environment and their communities. I asked them to think of ways they could “green” their daily habits, and offered taking public transportation, using reusable water bottles and buying locally-produced goods as examples. As members of the body politic, I informed them of how they could become involved in NRDC’s Activist Network and engage their local representatives on environmental matters. Lastly, I advised them to educate their family and friends so that they too would become advocates and increase the web of change.

I concluded my presentation by offering advice on how they could succeed professionally. I advised them to sharpen their analytical and writing skills, to expose themselves to a diverse array of issues while becoming proficient in a focused area, and to learn to be fearless when challenged to learn new things. On a personal level, I told them to follow their hearts and find their passion so that they will thrive in their jobs, to be genuine about the issues that matter to them so they will be an asset to those in need, and to have the self-confidence necessary to overcome the obstacles that they will face as minorities in the legal and science fields.

I was honored to talk to these intelligent women about our work at NRDC and how they can contribute to our success. I look forward to welcoming them as colleagues in the near future.

The 2010 Bike Plan: A Greener Future For Los Angeles

2011-03-03T07:19:02Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

At the south steps of City Hall Wednesday morning, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, accompanied by City Council members and bicycle advocates, held a press conference to announce the signing of the 2010 Bike Plan which unanimously passed the City Council the day before. For a city where the “car culture” dominates popular thinking and public coffers—this is after all where the nation’s first freeway was built more than 60 years ago—the passage of the 2010 Bike Plan is a forward-thinking leap into a greener, cleaner, less fossil fuel-dependent city for all of us (a point underscored when the Mayor gave a statement in Spanish noting that Spanish-speakers use bikes too).

Almost a decade in the making, the 2010 Bike plan has the support of elected officials, city planners, transportation experts and most importantly, the bicycling community who provided crucial input in earlier drafts and made the final version a real plan that could transform our streets.

With the goal of building more than 1,600 miles of bikeways, the Bike Plan incorporates a “Backbone Network,” a 700-plus mile system of continuous and connected bikeways along major arterial streets to allow cyclists safer and better access to important corridors; a “Neighborhood Network,” an 800-plus mile grid of bikeways through lower-traffic streets; and the “Green Network,” 100-plus miles of bikeways in the city’s green spaces. The plan includes a commitment to build 40 miles of new bike paths every year—four times the current rate—until 2045, as well as driver safety education and city-sponsored community events to educate Angelinos about the need for and benefits of transforming Los Angeles into a more multi-modal, sustainable city.

At a time when Los Angeles is ranked 7th among America’s most toxic cities, in no small part due to our poor air quality, and gas prices continue to rise with no end in sight, the 2010 Bike Plan can help us move beyond polluting cars, beyond our dependence on foreign oil and into a future where we can breathe easier, be healthier and be better stewards of Earth’s resources.

It was a good day for Los Angeles.

Santa Monica picks up speed toward cycling sustainability

2010-12-15T00:49:36Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

This past summer, the city of Santa Monica adopted the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE), a blueprint for the city’s development for the next 20 years. A complete bicycle network that encourages people of all ages and experience levels to bicycle instead of drive is a key component of the LUCE. As stated in the LUCE, “a significant increase in bicycling is necessary for the City of Santa Monica to be a leading bicycle-friendly City and reach its goals of reducing auto trips, meeting its GHG emission reduction commitments and promoting active living.” Developing an improved bicycle network is one step towards approaching the level of cycling experienced in the most bicycle friendly cities like Davis, California (14% of work trips) and Copenhagen, Denmark (over 35% bike mode share).

On Monday night, NRDC Transportation & Air Quality Science Fellow Greg Gould, Water Program Assistant Jessica Wall, and I attended the community workshop for the Bicycle Action Plan, the implementation tool for the goals set out in the LUCE and a requirement for the city to be eligible for grant money. Participants were able to provide input on specific network improvements through a myriad of topics ranging from Expo Line bike path integration, school access, public education, beach access, and bike parking, among others.

Because NRDC supports bicycling as a means to tackle the public health and environmental challenges facing our cities, the majority of our suggestions at the meeting were aimed at making sure that—at a bare minimum—all roads actually work for cyclists. Currently they do not.

While cyclists by law must travel on the streets, and not on sidewalks, in Santa Monica, most traffic signals will not change for a cyclist. We advocate for the installation of detectors that sense bikes and markings that tell cyclists where to place their bike for detection. This would help communicate to cyclists that the roads are indeed being designed with them in mind.
Car parking spaces are ubiquitous along Santa Monica’s streets, but bike parking is scarce. We advocate for more bike parking, especially along busy business corridors. More bike parking indicates that cyclists are welcome along our streets and that their patronage is desired.
Although Santa Monica has developed some nice bicycle facilities, many of these are not on the main thoroughfares. For example, there is a nice bike lane on Arizona, but most destinations are along Wilshire or Santa Monica. We advocate for signage and way finding for cyclists to promote these facilities and guide users from these facilities to final destinations. Ideally signage should provide way finding along with useful information for cyclists such as the distance from or presence of steep hills.
Currently, bike lanes only go a few miles before disappearing. We advocate for existing bike lanes to be completed to fill in the remaining gaps, particularly at busy intersections.
We suggest that these basic deficiencies should be addressed prior to the construction of more bike lanes, boulevards and paths.
Bicycle education should be an ongoing effort. The city should work with schools, colleges and major employers to promote cycling and how to do it safely.

One of the disappointing aspects of the meeting was the lack of diversity. The mostly white, male, cyclist crowd placed a strong emphasis on improvements to the north-west part of the city, indicating that other parts of the city were not equally represented by the participants. Businesses and non-cyclists did not seem to be represented either. Engaging the entire community is desperately needed to achieve Santa Monica’s goal of “no new net trips” and encourage cycling among all its residents. While we applaud Santa Monica’s commitment to creating a bike-friendly city, we hope that outreach efforts are improved so that more community members may participate in developing and implementing the bicycle plan and ensuring that the benefits are equitably distributed.

The city is currently accepting input to the Bicycle Action Plan via a community survey found here. The next steps include finalizing the plan by February, followed by committee hearings and a full City Council vote in the spring. We will continue our involvement and look forward to helping Santa Monica in its goal of competing with Long Beach and other cities for the title of “the most bicycle friendly city in America” because in this competition, everybody wins.

Los Angeles Bike Summit: A Dialogue Between Mayor Villaraigosa and Bicycle Advocates

2010-08-19T00:16:08Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

On Monday morning, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa hosted a bike summit in response to an accident a few weeks ago that left him with a permanent plate in his elbow. The Mayor and representatives from the Department of Transportation, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Department of City Planning, and Los Angeles Police Department formed a panel that answered questions from the standing-room only audience of bicycle advocates. I participated on behalf of NRDC with Greg Gould, NRDC’s transportation fellow, to show our support for transportation options that move us away from fossil fuels and promote urban mobility. Overall, the bike summit proved to be a productive dialogue with Mayor Villaraigosa and the relevant city departments, a small step towards updating the city’s street standards to more accurately reflect the multi-modal needs of its residents.

While the two hours of questions reflected a variety of concerns, the majority of issues centered on improved infrastructure, increased enforcement and a culture change in drivers.

DOT Needs to Implement Bike Plans

Advocates insisted the DOT change leadership to reflect a less car-centric agenda, implement as much of the approved 1996 bike plan as feasible and complete projects that have been green-lighted by the city council including the downtown bike paths.

They also asked for a full draft of the 2010 bike plan and for it to be fast-tracked so that it wouldn’t take 25 years to complete, along the lines of the Mayor’s 30/10 plan for subway construction. One concerned advocate commented that very little of the 1996 bike plan was actually completed, leaving little trust that the city would actually implement the 2010 bike plan in 25 years. In response, DOT General Manager Rita Robinson stated that the 2010 plan had an annual work plan component which required a progress report, making it a “livable” plan and differentiating it from the 1996 plan.

Councilmember Rosenthal, chair of the City Council’s Transportation Committee, gave an impassioned speech asking for increased safety for cyclists, a private cause of action for cyclists involved in altercations with drivers, and a three feet passing law that drew cheers from the audience.

Bike Riders Need Protection on City Streets

While praising the LAPD and Chief Beck for improved relations with the bicycle community, advocates asked for increased training of beat cops that fail to follow official guidelines and for stricter enforcements of existing laws. Calls for a cyclists’ bill of rights were also echoed throughout the summit, with some suggesting that such a bill be featured in all city departments, including the LAPD.

Biking Rights and Safety Need More Attention

Mayor Villaraigosa and advocates touted culture change as key to improving safety for the city’s bicyclists. The Mayor promised public service announcements in both print and media to educate drivers on the right of cyclists to use the roads and to increase respect for bicycling as a mode of transport. In the meantime, he advocated for a mandatory helmet law insisting that his use of a helmet saved his life. This proposal received mixed reviews from the audience. Advocates welcomed PSAs but also asked for instruction to be included in driver’s education classes and for literature to be included when drivers apply for license renewals.

Additionally, advocates spoke of greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution problems, and obesity concerns in low-income neighborhoods as additional reasons to quickly create a region-wide bike infrastructure.

In one of the few existing examples of the city working with advocates, representatives from CicLAvia spoke about the event scheduled for October 10, 2010 (10/10/10) and the need to create public space in park-poor neighborhoods. Started in Bogota, Colombia and held weekly on Sundays, CicLAVia will create a 7.5 mile public space from East Hollywood to East Los Angeles by removing car traffic from streets and instead, opening them up for bicycling and walking. Representatives thanked the Mayor for his support and expressed optimism for a great event, with the hope of repeating the event in the near future.

Dispersed throughout the summit were calls for Mayor Villaraigosa to become a champion of bicycling issues. While cities like New York, Long Beach, and Pasadena have been able to redesign their streets to include cyclists and pedestrians, Los Angeles sadly lags far behind. According to many in the audience, the missing piece in Los Angeles was a champion. They stressed that no real change would happen unless the Mayor prioritized bicycling and pedestrian safety in his agenda.

Speaking of his legacy, many implored the Mayor to seize the opportunity given by his accident and the bike summit to create real, lasting change in the city. Mayor Villaraigosa responded by stating that he cared greatly about the issues discussed and that he would assign an aide to focus on bike and pedestrian matters. He expressed frustration at the bureaucracy and promised to work with the relevant city departments to implement the suggestions made at the summit, adding that he would meet with advocates again in a year so that the city would be held accountable to their concerns.

I found the bike summit to be a positive step in the right direction and look forward to continued dialogue with the Mayor and city staff so that Los Angeles can become a model of sustainable community and green living.

For more information on bicycling advocacy in Los Angeles, visit the City of LA Bicycle Advisory Committee website at http://www.bicyclela.org/AdvisoryBoard.htm and the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition (LACBC) website at http://la-bike.org.

Working for “Everyone’s Piece of the Pie”

2010-03-09T00:45:02Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

In March 1965, the first of three civil rights marches from Selma to Montgomery took place to bring awareness to the struggles of disenfranchised African-Americans. A year later, in March 1966, Cesar Chavez organized a 340-mile march from Delano, in California’s central valley, to Sacramento to bring awareness to the struggles of farm workers. Last Friday, March 5, 2010, a diverse group of Californians began a 48-day “March for California’s Future” to bring awareness of the plight of working-class Californians affected by the budget crisis, continuing the civil rights tradition of nonviolent, public marching in order to bring about reform.

My colleague David Pettit and I had the privilege to participate in the kick off rally held at Mount Moriah Baptist Church. An incredible energy of solidarity and hope filled the church as various civil rights leaders pumped up the crowd and offered encouragement for the journey ahead. By the end of the rally, the diverse coalition of labor, education, and faith groups became one unified body, working toward the common goals of “reclaiming the promise of quality public education and services,” “rebuilding state government so it works for everyone,” and “restoring fair and equitable taxes to invest in California’s future.” As one marcher put it, they were not marching for “their piece of the pie” but for everyone’s stake in the future.

This idea of working for everyone’s piece of the pie resonated in me, not just because of the altruism it requires, but also because that is how I view the environmental justice work we do at NRDC. We consider clean air something that belongs not just to the privileged few but to the many. That is why we fight to clean up dirty trucks at the Ports and irresponsible and dangerous freeway expansions. That is why we fight for cleaner fuel and better public transit. We fight these battles to protect the right to clean air that belongs to everyone, not just the privileged few, now and into the future.

MAP-ping the Next Federal Transportation Bill

2010-02-23T19:53:12Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

Last week’s town hall meeting at Los Angeles' Metro headquarters on the federal transportation reauthorization bill gave transportation policy stakeholders the ability to share their concerns and innovative ideas with United States Department of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Senator Barbara Boxer, the Chair of the Senate Transportation Committee. With common talking points of “we get it” and “it’s not an issue of why but when” regarding the need to reform transportation policy and funding, the town hall was broken into a plenary session, a discussion with Secretary LaHood and Senator Boxer, and break away panels.

In the plenary session discussing the issues for reauthorization of the transportation bill, CARB Chair Mary Nichols proved to be the highlight of the day. She championed the role that transportation policy plays in the fight against climate change. Her speech touched on land use policy, technology, and incentives, creating the only real sense that transportation policy was tied to bigger picture issues and underscoring the needed urgency for real reform.

Thankfully, the discussion with Secretary LaHood and Senator Boxer proved to be equally insightful. Despite some terse exchanges with audience members, both Secretary LaHood and Senator Boxer seemed open to the innovative ideas for transportation reform posed by the audience. Especially heartening was Senator Boxer’s commitment to operational funding for transit systems in response to the concerns of Esperanza Martinez of the Bus Riders Union. I also appreciated Senator Boxer’s proposed MAP 21 legislation to replace SAFETEA-LU, the current federal transportation bill which allocates funding for transportation projects. Senator Boxer’s proposed legislation, “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century” or MAP 21 for short, aims to create a comprehensive policy on federal transportation. Although she could not share many details, most advocates agreed that the proposed direction of the new legislation was a positive step.

The two last panel discussions on goods movement and livable communities were extremely disappointing. The representative advocating for expansion of the freight system stressed their present and future relevance while touting their inability to move forward with new technologies. The smart growth discussion that followed paid lip service to multi modal options but no one mentioned bus services even once! The idea of creating a “first-class European-style transit system” seems to be limited to rail and inexplicably disregards that continent’s system of buses and trolleys.

Overall, I was very encouraged by the commitments made by Secretary LaHood and Senator Boxer for real, effective transportation policy reform. More than lip service is needed to get the job done, but Senator Boxer’s proposed MAP 21 legislation seems to be a good start.

Much to Love! Public Transportation: Less Congestion, Cleaner Air, More Jobs.

2010-01-19T22:49:01Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

There have been recent developments in public policy that should have positive effects on transportation policy, and specifically on the next SAFETEA-LU bill. Last December, the EPA found that greenhouse gases (GHG) are a threat to public health and welfare and that automobile emissions cause and contribute to global warming. Secondly, as NEPA, the National Environmental Policy Act, nears its 40th anniversary, the White House hopes to expand the scope of NEPA to require federal agencies to take into account climate change when approving transportation projects.

Most recently and perhaps most importantly, the Department of Transportation changed the rules by which transit projects receive federal funding by eliminating a much-hated Bush-era rule that promoted “cost-effectiveness” above all other criteria. This change, long advocated by environmental justice and civil rights activists, will be joined with another much heralded reform: environmental benefits will join the list of official factors in evaluating proposals. These welcomed changes are a direct challenge to the “old ways of doing things” and will encourage much needed environmental reforms to the movement of goods and people.

There is great potential for car-centric Los Angeles to benefit from these positive changes in transportation policy. As any Angelino can tell you, two of our most pressing problems are congestion and smog, and connecting the two is not a huge leap. Even with California’s tougher vehicle smog emission standards, residents of the South Coast Air Basin are exposed to air pollutants that have a detrimental effect on their health one third of the year (according to air monitoring data by the California Air Resources Board). Some critics deride the connection and argue that the solution to congestion is to build more highways. This reminds me of a quote I saw at a transportation meeting that read “Trying to cure traffic congestion by adding more capacity is like trying to cure obesity by loosening your belt.” Thankfully, developers who want to build more highways for the sake of additional lanes that will only be congested in the future will now have to consider the project’s contributions to climate change under NEPA’s expanded scope before being given the green light (and federal funding).

Clearly, there are better solutions to the problems of congestion and smog than creating more highways. In fact, reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) and increasing public health vis-à-vis reduced GHG emissions can be achieved in a number of ways. The most controversial, but perhaps most effective, solution involves pricing strategies. Although few politicians want to commit career suicide by talking about levying (more) fees on motorists, there is a growing consensus among economists that congestion pricing, in the form of toll roads or fees during high peak times, is a viable solution. (See Justin Horner’s blog on San Francisco's congestion pricing.)

Another solution, made more feasible thanks to the rule changes by the DOT, is to expand public transportation systems so that motorists are encouraged to switch modes of transportation. Studies, using the cost-analysis model, have found casual relationships between ridership and cost and convenience. While I strongly advocate for a free public transportation system, it is more feasible at the present time to increase the convenience (by way of expansion) of public transportation in order to encourage increased ridership.

Last fall, Los Angeles voters took a step in this direction with the passage of Measure R, a half cent sales tax specifically for transportation. Thanks in large part to Measure R funding, the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) is expanding the network of available public transit with several simultaneous projects, including bus, light rail, and traditional rail expansions.

As noted in the MTA’s website,

Measure R is expected to contribute funds towards the Expo light rail line on the Westside, a light rail connector in downtown Los Angeles, a Crenshaw corridor transit project, extension of the Metro Gold Line, the Foothill Extension of the Metro Gold Line, a rail connection to LAX, a Green Line Extension to the South Bay, a San Fernando Valley I-405 Corridor transit project, North-South Corridor transit project in the San Fernando Valley, a West Santa Ana Branch corridor project and a Westside subway extension.

The MTA is also increasing the city’s bus fleet with more buses, new rapid bus lines, and the creation of the city’s first bus-only lane along the heavily traveled Wilshire Boulevard. NRDC has been involved in the creation of this project from its beginning, advocating for the environmental benefits of having a dedicated lane for buses. Even under its current proposal of operating only during morning and afternoon rush hours, it is expected to improve travel time by as much as 24%. Is there a greater incentive to hop on a bus than to see one zoom by as you’re stuck in bumper to bumper traffic?

MTA’s proposed expansion of bus and rail services highlights the need to connect all regions of our vast city and county. From the Westside to the Foothills to the San Fernando Valley to Santa Ana, expanding the public transportation options available to commuters will facilitate the transition from car-dependency to car-freedom. A decade ago, few people could imagine subway lines connecting Hollywood to Pasadena but that’s exactly what we have today in the form of the Red and Gold lines. Data from November 2009 shows that both lines accounted for more than 4 million monthly boardings! Expanding bus and rail services to as many places as possible is the key to reducing our city’s congestion and air pollution.

I am greatly encouraged by the recent changes in transportation policy, both on a national and local level. We are seeing a convergence of thinking of the public health implications of transportation policy and the need to fund public transportation as a way to mitigate those implications. And as an added benefit, funding public transportation projects also generates much-needed jobs for our economy. (An analysis of the stimulus spending shows that “funds spent on public transportation were a more effective job creator than stimulus funds spent on highways. In the 10 months since ARRA was signed, investing in public transportation produced twice as many jobs as investing in roads.”) Funding public transportation is a win-win situation from both public health and economic standpoints. Los Angeles is taking steps in the right direction and will soon be a city as accessible by public transportation as it is by freeways. I can smell the cleaner air now.

Death to the Blacktop Gods and Other Goals for Transportation Policy

2009-12-17T18:12:03Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

I find it remarkable, in light of the media and political circus around health care reform, that Congress in the coming weeks will be debating an issue that will also have an enormous immediate impact in Americans’ daily and long-term living…transportation policy!…and no one in the media is really talking about it in this context. Of course, I don’t expect transportation policy to grab the headlines or spur protests, but it should.

Tomorrow, December 18, 2009, the SAFETEA-LU omnibus transportation bill is set to expire. However, the House passed a jobs bill yesterday that includes an extension of SAFETEA-LU until September 2010 and the Senate will likely follow suit. Despite these changing deadlines, this is still a perfect time to initiate public debate on what the next transportation bill should look like.

For the last fifty years, transportation bills were known as highway bills, which says a lot about where politicians funneled taxpayer money. These bills made construction of new roads easy while creating roadblocks (literally and figuratively) for projects aimed at improving public transit. Politicians bought, and then sold, the idea that the economy depended on pouring asphalt over every possible avenue of commerce, and not much importance was placed on creating successful public transit projects. And while this idea may have worked in post-WWII America, this blind faith in the blacktop gods is no longer necessary for the prosperity of our nation.

In the midst of the longest recession in our recent history, momentum is building for a restructuring of our economy around environmental issues, mainly renewable energy and green technology. NRDC President Frances Beinecke’s recent blog highlights the incorporation of green jobs in President Obama’s job recovery strategy. The old paradigm of environmentalists vs. labor is slowly changing, thanks in part to the creation of groups like the Blue-Green Alliance and a newfound understanding that job creation and environmentally sustainable projects are not mutually exclusive.

Akin to economic issues and job creation, we also need to incorporate environmental concerns in our transportation policy. At a time when international leaders are meeting to create new international agreements aimed at combating climate change and the EPA is moving forward to begin regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, our transportation policy needs to reflect current environmental and not just economic needs. Without this, the work of our climate negotiators in Copenhagen may be paved over.

Next blog: How to incorporate environmental concerns in the next transportation bill and what these changes could mean for public transit in Los Angeles (something of particular interest to me as one of the approximate 500,000 daily transit riders in Los Angeles). Stay tuned!

Negative health impacts of freeway expansion: A NO BRAINER!

2009-11-07T01:24:48Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

The California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) wants to dramatically expand the 18 mile stretch of the I-710 freeway that runs from the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles to East Los Angeles, through mostly urban, low-income, minority neighborhoods. Due to very questionable projections from the Ports that, despite being in the worst economic climate since the 1930s they expect their cargo growth to more than double by 2030 from current levels, the PTB (powers that be) are considering expanding the I-710 by as many as 14 lanes.

Last week, NRDC staff members Adriano Martinez, Morgan Wyenn, Sherry Goldberg, Linda Escalante and I joined forces with members from Communities for a Better Environment, East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, Long Beach Alliance for Children, Physicians for Social Responsibility, and concerned community members along the I-710 corridor to convince the I-710 EIR/EIS Project Committee to develop tougher environmental protocols to measure the health impacts of the freeway expansion. The Project Committee is made up of mainly elected officials in the I-710 corridor, and it is charged with providing direction on policy to the agencies that want to build the additional lanes of highway.

Concerned activists and experts spoke to the Project Committee of the health risks associated with the current I-710. There are numerous schools and day care facilities less than ¼ of a mile from the I-710. The 1.6 million residents along the I-710 Corridor are disproportionately impacted by local sources of pollution and as a result have higher coronary heart disease, emphysema and diabetes mortality rates compared to LA County. Mothers who live close to freeway traffic during pregnancy have more premature and low birth weight babies than the general population. The speakers implored the Project Committee to use scientifically- based standards in the environmental impact reports and studies in order to gauge the magnitude of the negative health impacts associated with the freeway expansion. Only by doing this can real mitigation measures be examined and health risks minimized. The Project Committee tabled three of the four proposed recommendations but did agree to use the significant thresholds used by the district's air quality board (SCAQMD, South Coast Air Quality Management District) to assess the health impacts of their projects. Even this victory is a very modest one because the usual SCAQMD significance thresholds may inadequately protect residents near highways and do not account for the cumulative impact of pollution, furthering harming communities that are already subjected to the highest cancer risk in the Southern California area.

Last week's meeting highlighted the need for constant community involvement in decision making. I left with the impression that some Project Committee members still need to be convinced that there are negative health impacts for people who live near freeways despite substantial scientific evidence. I suppose people still question whether cigarettes cause cancer and whether climate change is real. It is just really frustrating when their neighbors, constituents, and friends are impacted by this highway pollution. How many more asthma attacks and premature deaths from this pollution do we need to suffer before these people pull their heads out of the sand?

Maywood's water woes

2009-10-28T21:51:04Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

The City of Maywood is the third smallest city in Los Angeles and one of its densest, with about 28,000 people living in a 1.14 square mile area. Despite the city's small size, it has faced a number of big problems in the past and now faces the biggest challenge of all: trying to make the city's water supply safe and potable.

The simple issue of safe drinking water is a complicated one in Maywood. Besides having three privately-owned water companies supplying the city's water needs, the city also houses a Superfund site resulting from ground water contamination due to chemical mixing operations in the 1940s through the early 1990s. All the water companies claim that the water is safe to drink and say that they have conducted testing to substantiate their claims.

However, despite these claims, on any given day, the water can be shades of brown and emit a foul odor. Because of the water companies' unwillingness to respond to the city residents' concerns, the residents have successfully organized to make changes to improve the water quality on their own. Besides voting in progressive politicians to the city council, they were successful in conducting independent community water tests in 2006 which showed levels of manganese above the federal secondary maximum contaminant level. Although manganese is a naturally occurring mineral, there are fears that long term exposure could lead to neurological damage. More studies are being done on the subject. The city residents also successfully contributed to the passage of AB890, which aims to clean up the drinking water by issuing mandates to the water companies to reduce the manganese levels and bring the water to the same standards as that of nearby neighborhoods.

Last night, NRDC lawyer David Pettit and I had the privilege of attending a community meeting where community residents shared some of their horror stories. With a big jug of brown sludge in front of us on the table, we heard residents talk about how the water is so dirty that it has ruined their clothes when they attempt to wash with it, how the bad smell being emitted from the water makes them nauseous and how they have to buy bottled water for their everyday needs. One particular comment that stuck with me was a resident who said he doesn't even give the dog the city's water for fear of getting it sick. David and I expressed NRDC's commitment to working in solidarity with community groups and pledged an ongoing conversation with the city residents on their water problems.

You have a future!

2009-10-26T14:08:50Z

Lizzeth Henao, Program Assistant, Santa Monica

This past Thursday, I had the privilege of representing NRDC at a school assembly for students at Los Angeles High School of the Arts. LAHSA is a small Los Angeles Unified School District pilot school located in the physical grounds of my alma mater, Belmont High School, and headed by my high school English teacher.

I was invited to speak because I am one of a handful of students who graduated from Belmont HS, at that time one of the largest and most under-performing schools in the nation, and went on to attend and graduate from Harvard University.

The purpose of my speech was two-fold. Primarily, I hoped to convey to the students that college is a very real possibility for their future. In minority, low-income communities, college is often seen as something for "other kids," those privileged enough to attend better schools, with better resources, and not living in inner-city communities or the "ghetto." And when it is seen as a choice, barriers like financial aid and access to supportive environments become further roadblocks. I informed the students about the myriad of college types available to them and the corresponding financial aid that they can access to finance their schooling. I also touched on the educational and social support available to them when they attend college. I expressed my expectation that they all attend college, in some form or another, post high school and my belief that there are no barriers to achieving their college dreams.

Secondly, I spoke to the students about their obligation to do something meaningful with their education, to return to their communities and work to improve the conditions that forced them to think that college was not an option. As an example, I spoke about my current work at NRDC and how working on air and environmental justice issues has a real, immediate impact on the well-being of our communities.

It was an enormous honor to speak to these high school students about college and I look forward to the next opportunity to inspire youth to consider college as a real, viable opportunity in their lives.

*For more information on LAHSA, please visit their website at http://www.lahsa.net.