This document discusses smart growth, displacement, and environmental justice in Los Angeles. It provides context on relevant federal and state policies and regulations. Key issues addressed include how smart growth and greenhouse gas reduction strategies can impact environmental justice communities and disadvantaged communities. Opportunities discussed include focusing development in transit priority areas, increasing affordable housing and jobs near housing, preserving open space, and adaptive reuse of existing buildings to stabilize neighborhoods. The document concludes by outlining a three-phase process to evolve plans and policies to address these issues through community advocacy, public meetings, monitoring impacts and outcomes, and linking results to policy and funding decisions.

1. Smart Growth, Displacement and Environmental
Justice: The Case of Los Angeles
4/8/2016
WilliamRiggs,PhD,wriggs@calpoly.edu
1
William Riggs
Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo

2. • Context
• Issues
• Opportunities
4/8/2016
WilliamRiggs,PhD,wriggs@calpoly.edu
2

3. Context
• Federal
– Civil Rights Act of 1964 – Title VI
– Executive Order (EO) 12898 (1994), Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
– Executive Order (EO) 13166 (2000), Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited
English Proficiency
– 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 450
– FHWA NEPA regulations in 23 CFR 771.111 A
– Section 109(h) of Title 23
– The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies act of 1970
(URA), as amended
– The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) (1998)
– Memorandum of Understanding on Environmental Justice and EO 12898 (2011)
– Federal Transit Authority (FTA) Circular 4702 1A (2011)
– FTA Circular 4703.1 (2012)
• California
– CA SB 115 (1999)
– California Government Code Section 11135
– California Code Section 65589.5 – Housing Accountability Act & Fair Housing Act
Requirements
– CA SB 375 Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008
– CEQA Guidelines
4/8/2016
WilliamRiggs,PhD,wriggs@calpoly.edu
3

4. Issues
• Smart Growth &
Regeneration
• GHG Reduction
Strategies
4/8/2016
WilliamRiggs,PhD,wriggs@calpoly.edu
4

5. 4/8/2016
WilliamRiggs,PhD,wriggs@calpoly.edu
5

6. 4/8/2016 William Riggs, PhD, wriggs@calpoly.edu 6

7. Issues
Environmental
Justice Areas
Disadvantaged
Communities
Communities of
Concern
Population 12.4 million 6.4 million 4.2 million
% of regional
population
68% 35% 23%
% minority
population
within EJ
identified area
80% 88% 91%
% of
households in
poverty within
EJ identified
area
17% 25% 40%
4/8/2016 William Riggs, PhD, wriggs@calpoly.edu 7

8. 4/8/2016 William Riggs, PhD, wriggs@calpoly.edu 8

9. Opportunities
• Focused
Development in
TPAs
– BMR / Inclusivity
– Loan Programs
– Environmental /
Permit Fast-tracking
4/8/2016
WilliamRiggs,PhD,wriggs@calpoly.edu
9

10. Opportunities
• Provide more collaboration tools
• Below Market Rate Housing Standards
– Regional Inclusionary Housing
– Require Building / Unit Type Standards
(Regional Project Performance
Requirements)
• Regional University Partnerships
• Explore Financial Tools for Affordability
– LEMs
– Tax credit / tax holidays
• Increase the number of jobs near housing
• Set regional open space standard /
performance measure
– Implement both greenbelt and urban greening
policy
– Consider food and open space access in
housing
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Challenge
Impact
In 2012 RTP / SCS Not in RTP / SCS
4/8/2016 William Riggs, PhD, wriggs@calpoly.edu 10

11. 4/8/2016 William Riggs, PhD, wriggs@calpoly.edu 11

12. Opportunities
• Adaptive Reuse
– Neighborhood
Stabilization
– Potential Economic
Buoyancy
4/8/2016
WilliamRiggs,PhD,wriggs@calpoly.edu
12

13. 4/8/2016
WilliamRiggs,PhD,wriggs@calpoly.edu
13

14. Opportunities
4/8/2016
WilliamRiggs,PhD,wriggs@calpoly.edu
14

15. Conclusion: Process & Evolution
PHASE I PHASE II
Policies
Develop formal
EJ program
Planning & Project
Development
• Target Community
Advocacy Groups
• Organize pubic
Mee ngs
• Measure and
compare impacts
• Document
processes &
mi gate impacts
Implementa on
Maintain
communica on
links with public
Evalua on &
Monitoring
• Survey Target
Advocacy
groups
• Measure
outcomes by
quan ta ve
performance
measures and
changes in
percep on
PHASE III
Link results to policy and
funding decisions
Federal
Regula ons
4/8/2016
WilliamRiggs,PhD,wriggs@calpoly.edu
15