Measure HLA would be a serious mistake to approve
The key to understanding transportation planning in Los Angeles is that the goal is not transportation. The goal is faster and higher-density real estate development.
California has adopted an assortment of laws over the last two decades to limit “sprawl” and address climate change. These laws are causing ongoing damage to state residents by reducing single-family housing construction and raising electricity bills.
California has also adopted laws to make traffic unbearable. For example, the state changed an environmental impact measurement applied to major construction projects from “Level of Service” to “Vehicle Miles Traveled.” Instead of measuring whether a project will cause unacceptable traffic delays (level of service), the state now demands measurements of projected commuting by car (vehicle miles traveled). That makes development of suburban single-family homes very difficult, and development of dense apartments near bus stops much easier.
Then there’s state funding. “This is a document that can help us get active transportation funds from the state,” nowformer councilman Mike Bonin told his City Council colleagues in 2015. “This is a document that can help us tap into capand-trade funds because it will help us reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is a smart thing to be doing.”
He was talking about Mobility Plan 2035, a document that laid out goals, objectives and policy guidelines for adding hundreds of miles of bus lanes, bike lanes, pedestrian paths, “road diets” and traffic-slowing measures to the streets of Los Angeles.
Sacramento had a billion dollars to give away, thanks to a hidden tax on energy. On January 1, 2015, the California Air Resources Board began to apply its “cap and trade” program to transportation fuels, requiring refiners to buy permits to emit greenhouse gases. That raised the price of gasoline, diesel fuel and anything moved by truck. The money rolled in to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for legislators to spend.
However, the council members were aware that a significant segment of the public was not on board with removing traffic lanes and narrowing streets to make room for bikes, bollards and buses.
“This is a concept,” now-former council president Herb Wesson told council members. “If you choose to vote on this today, it will not be put in place tomorrow.”
A test of the concept had already begun in the San Fernando Valley, where a lane was removed from Reseda Blvd. between Parthenia Avenue and Plummer Street to make room for bike lanes on one of nowformer Mayor Eric Garcetti’s “Great Streets.”
“People love it,” now-former city councilman Mitchell Englander said.
This episode of “Where Are They Now?” is presented to demonstrate that Mobility Plan 2035 was a con from the start. They never intended to fully implement it. They intended to draw up plans and draw down funds.
Real estate interests in the city, however, employ lawyers and consultants to track and calculate all the density bonuses and CEQA exemptions available for projects that are located within one-half mile of “transit,” as defined. It’s defined to include a bus stop with frequent service during selected hours of the day.
By coincidence, or maybe not by coincidence, real estate interests are backing Measure HLA on the March 5 ballot in Los Angeles. They’re major contributors to the campaign to persuade voters to pass it.
Measure HLA would make Mobility Plan 2035 mandatory.
Every time the Bureau of Street Services seeks to repave one-eighth of a mile or more of any street included in the plan, the city would be required to implement one of the Mobility Plan 2035 “treatments,” such as a road diet, a protected bike lane, a bus-only lane, or some traffic-twisting conglomeration of jutting curbs and circles.
What will it cost? That’s disputed, but these “treatments” require a process of design, engineering and public outreach, and there’s no magical money in the measure to pay for it.
The Bureau of Street Services warned city leaders in January that HLA will lead to delays in implementing the Pavement Preservation Program, causing costly deterioration on major city streets.
Real estate developers don’t care about that. Transit planning alone qualifies their projects for bonuses.
This is no way to plan transportation in Los Angeles. Vote no on HLA.