There's No Justice In Transit! -Transit Equity, Land Use, and Air Quality in Boston By Laura Beth Machala B.A., Environmental Studies (2003) Oberlin College Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology June 2007 C 2007 Laura Machala. All Rights Reserved. The author hereby grants to MIT the permission to reproduce, and to distribute publicly, paper and electronic copies of the thesis document in whole or in part. A uthor........................................... Department of Urban Studies and Planning ,/ May 18,2007 Certified by......................................... Professor James H ton Departm nt of Urban Studies and P ning Thesis Supervisor ........... 0.................... Accepted by....... , , Professor Langley C. Keyes Department of Urban Studies and Planning Chair, MCP Committee iSSACH USL~TfS INi TUTE JUL 13 27 ROTCH THERE'S NO JUSTICE IN TRANSIT! -TRANSIT EQUITY, LAND USE, AND AIR QUALITY IN BOSTON by LAURA BETH MACHALA Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 18, 2007 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in City Planning ABSTRACT: As a result of air pollution created by the Central Artery/Tunnel Project (CA/T), aka "the Big Dig," transit and other air quality mitigation projects were incorporated into the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP is mandated by the Clean Air Act (CAA) for areas that do not attain or need to maintain air quality above federally mandated levels. Originally, the transit commitments that were made to mitigate the effects of the Big Dig were located in urban and suburban areas. However, while an urban/suburban balance was arguably intended in the SIP, over the years, the urban SIP commitments have been largely neglected. As a result, transit justice in Greater Boston has been negatively effected. If the SIP is truly meant to improve air quality, its focus should be on making cities more viable and healthy places to live and on curtailing sprawling suburban land use. Furthermore, SIP requirements should change to influence a more equitable distribution of transit investment in Boston and other metropolitan areas. 4 "Harbingers of the modem civil rights movement, Rosa Parks and the Montgomery Bus Boycott of the 1950s challenged transportation racism. Later, the Freedom Riders of the 1960s defied 'Jim Crow' on interstate transportation. Despite the heroic efforts of many and the monumental human rights gains over the past five decades, transportation remains a civil rights and quality of life issue."1 Source: http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/sharemed/targets/ images/pho/t012/T012714A.jpg "The national transportation system should be socially equitable and strengthen civil rights; enabling all people to gain access to good jobs, education and training, and needed services. Where possible, personal transportation expenses should be minimized in ways that support wealth creation. Integrated with land use planning, transportation should also enhance the quality, livability, and character of communities and support revitalization without displacement. The transportation system should allow every American to participate fully in society whether or not they own a car and regardless of age, ability, ethnicity or income." -New Transportation Charter2 6 Acknowledgements- Throughout the course of my studies at MIT and especially during the last 4 months, I have thanked my lucky stars on multiple occasions that Jim Hamilton happened by DUSP the same time I did. I have learned a lot from Jim-not just about brownfields and how to deal with clients, but also about how to really think critically about issues. He has been my professor, advisor, therapist, life coach, and friend. The process of writing this thesis would have been much more difficult if it weren't for his constant thoughtfulness and sense of humor. I must also thank Scott Darling, one of the busiest people I know, for agreeing to be my reader. When I called Scott initially and explained to him that I wanted to write my thesis on transit justice issues in Boston, he exclaimed, "There's no justice in transit!," a response which I later decided had to be memorialized as the title of my thesis. I thank Scott for pushing me to consider the hardest issues-things that I might have otherwise avoided. I am also eternally grateful to my parents and wonderful friends for being so supportive throughout this process. 8 -Table of Contents- ABSTRACT ................................-....-----.-------------------------------------------------...................................................... 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS....................................................----.-................................................-- .- - -- - 7 I. INTRODUCTION/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................... 11 II. BACKGROUND- .......................................-.....----- ----------............................................... 13 A) DEFINITION OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE .................................................................... 13 Title Vi and Executive Order 12898..................................................................... 4 The EnvironmentalJustice (EJ) M ovement today......................... ............ .................................... 16 Environmentaljustice in Massachusetts ........................................................... .................. 17 B) DEFINITION OF TRANSIT JUSTICE .................................................................. 18 TransitInjustice Nationally ............................................................ .... .............................. 20 Who is not getting equitably served by transit? .............................................................................. 22 Transit equity in B oston ........................................................... ... .. --.... ----................................. 25 Transit equity and the State Implementation Plan.......................................................................... 27 C) DEFINITIONS OF URBAN SPRAWL AND SMART GROWTH ................................................................ 27 U rban Sp rawl......................................................- ....- .. -------..---................................................... 2 7 Smart Growth ........... ......................................................... .. ---------............................ 29 D) THE CAUSE OF SPRAWL AND THE NEED FOR SMART GROWTH ....................................................... 31 F ederal highway sp ending .................................................................................................................. 32 Post-WW II hom e ownership incentives............................................................................................ 32 Racist and race-driven zoning/redlining and segregation............................................................ 33 Conclusion .........................................................-- ...... .. ... .-------.---.................................. 35 III. HOW TRANSIT IS FUNDED ON THE FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LEVELS.......36 Fed eral .............................................................. .. -------.........--------................................................ 36 Sta te/L ocal .........................................................---....--------....------...................................................... 4 0 The transportationplanning process .................................................................. 44 IV. BOSTON ..................................................................--..----------------................................................--- - - - 47 A) TRANSPORTATION HISTORY.................................................................... 47 Early transit history .................................................................-----........--.. .. ---------....................... 47 The Central Artery/Tunnel Project (CA/T) aka, "The Big Dig" ...................................................... 48 B) THE CLEAN AIR ACT AND POLLUTION REDUCTION ........................................................................ 50 The State Implem entation Plan ........................................................................................................... 51 The SIP and social equity................................................................... ..--...--.......... 52 The SIP and transportation................................................................................................................. 53 The B ig D ig and air quality ................................................... ...........------..... --............................... 55 As-yet to be completed urban transit commitments.......................................................................... 57 The p roposed SIP revision .................................................................................................................. 59 SIP com m itm ent update........................................................................... .................................... 65 Transitjustice and com m uter rail ................................................................................................... 66 V. THE SIP AND LAND USE..........................................................----............................................... 67 A) UNITED STATES