Nikolas Patsaouras

Historian Kevin Starr calls him “the most influential transportation activist of this generation.” He made an unsuccessful run for mayor in 1993. He has built a highly successful electrical engineering firm, spent long hours promoting civic projects and created strong ties to powerful political figures. Yet, few Angelenos would recognize Nikolas Patsaouras, or even know his name.

Unless, perhaps, they are among the tens of thousands of commuters who pass each day through the Patsaouras Transit Center adjacent to Union Station. Part of the $300-million, federally funded Gateway project, it has been lambasted by some for its opulence. Yet, it has won several design awards, is popular with commuters and is seen as a cornerstone for future development in the area north of downtown. It is also the most visible achievement in Patsaouras’ dream of restoring Los Angeles by reforming its transportation system.

A Greek immigrant who came to this country as a foreign student, Patsaouras earned an engineering degree and built a profitable business designing electrical systems for large building projects. He had an engineer’s optimism and an appetite for civic affairs that he inherited from his father. His work introduced him to major developers and to elected officials. In 1981, Mayor Tom Bradley appointed him to the board of the RTA. That agency was eventually merged with the Metropolitan Transit Assn. (MTA) and Patsaouras remains an alternate member on the board, with support from such powerful members as L.A. County Supervisor Mike Antonovich and L.A. City Council member Richard Alatorre.

A vocal proponent of a mixed transportation system, which melds buses, light rail, subways and even bike paths, Patsaouras combines persistence, vision and personal relationships with powerful politicians and developers to advance his cause. He sees the Gateway project as the sort of public building that helps shape a sense of identity and community in a city sadly lacking in both. Possessing classic Greek features and silver hair, Patsaouras, 53, tempers his passion for city building with a family man’s concerns. His wife, Sylvia, is an urban planner; he loves to talk about his daughter, just back from a stint in the Peace Corps, and his son, now studying law at Yale University.

Patsaouras worries that he has been falsely portrayed as an advocate of rail over buses, when, in fact, he sees a role for both in solving the city’s transportation problems. In a conversation over dinner, he talked about leadership, civic responsibility and his belief that tackling tough transportation problems is the key to creating a functional and vibrant Los Angeles of the future.

*

Question: How have your feelings about Los Angeles evolved since you first came here in the early 1960s?

Answer: As an engineer, I’ve always thought that transportation, energy and land use were the keys to rebuilding Los Angeles. But looking back now, to when I was younger, I started with a very technical outlook. My attitude has matured, and now I think about city-building. Take, for instance, the current debate about transportation in this city. It’s degenerating into an argument between bus and rail. In fact, the debate should be about what sort of city we want to build, and how transportation should be organized to help us meet our vision.

Buses are a popular solution. But they are limited in right of way and get caught in traffic jams. They’re labor intensive--one driver drives one bus, while a single rail driver can drive a whole train. They have been the backbone of our transportation system, but buses alone will not solve the problem.

Now the mayor is proposing busways. This is a great idea. If you reserve a right of way, whether it’s a bus with rubber tires or a train with wheels of steel, it’s pretty much the same thing.

In 1991, I proposed that the Exposition rail line right of way--from USC to Santa Monica--be converted into a busway. The cost was $250 million, and it could be built in three years. Everybody yawned. In 1994, after the earthquake, when the Santa Monica Freeway was closed, I proposed it again. For about a week, people were interested, then [Gov. Pete] Wilson said, “We’re going to rebuild the freeway in six months,” and everybody yawned again. Now that the MTA is out of money, and the Valley is not going to get their subway, people are saying, “Wow, we should have a busway.”

So now, we have all kinds of people going all over the world--going to Brazil--to see busways. And we have one right here, the most successful busway in the world, on the 10 Freeway from downtown to Pomona. The point here is that buses play a very important part in any transportation plan, but we also need rail, we need bikeways, we need pedestrian-friendly streets and carpool lanes. Unfortunately, the politicians take the short-term view. They say, “Why should we build a $200-billion rail system. Let’s just put more buses on the streets.” When in fact, that $200 billion is a 75- or 100-year investment in building the city.

Q: Why are you convinced that transportation is the means to creating a better Los Angeles?

A: Transportation is key to the future of the city. Every time something is built, whether it’s a school, a shopping center, an office building, what is the debate about? It’s not about the aesthetics of the building, or its function. It’s about traffic, about parking. What does that say? It says, let’s plan a city to preserve our neighborhoods and also has a place for our children to live. No housing advocate will be successful by destroying a neighborhood, and no neighborhood advocate will be successful by forcing his children to live in Nevada or Oregon, or his parents to live in substandard housing. So what do we do? We preserve neighborhoods by building high-density housing along transportation corridors.

Q: What do you say to those who believe that subways and rail systems are an old idea, based on a European model, which doesn’t apply to Los Angeles?

A: No one with any sense thinks a subway will solve all our transportation problems. As I’ve said, we need a combination--subway, light rail, carpool lanes and busways. But in fact, we can’t even build a busway, because some neighborhood group is going to object.

That is the fundamental problem in Los Angeles today: a lack of leadership. When we got the first money for the subway in the early 1980s, there were strong interests in downtown behind the idea--the banks, the oil companies, the department stores. Right now, we have absentee landlords. The strong voices for a rail system have been muted.

Q: How much of the vacuum of leadership downtown is due to the economic downturn of the early ‘90s.

A: Economics has clearly played a role in creating an absence of civic leadership among the business community. And that’s where the mayor has a unique opportunity in history to shape the transportation debate. He’s not done that yet. He’s yet to present a clear plan to tackle the transportation problem. Is he going to stop the subway? Then what? The key is not to stop, but to redirect. We have limited resources right now, and we have to be creative.

Q: The public perception of the MTA is that it is a mess. What’s wrong with our chief public-transit agency, and what needs to be done?

A: What’s not wrong is the board structure. There’s no more vigilant watchdog than [County Supervisor and MTA Board Member] Zev Yaroslavsky.

The basic problem, and the cause of my frustration, is the transit-industry culture at MTA. The public-transit industry is a closed society that wastes millions of dollars. And until we get a CEO who is willing to kick ass, nothing will change.

Here’s the problem. The transit community bases its budgets--how it spends public dollars--on how others in the transit community spend their dollars. If you are wasteful in Washington, and they say, “Look, we’re going to do it for 10% less here,” that’s not going to make it. We need a CEO who will ask how the Corps of Engineers spends money, or how the state university system spends money.

Forget the private sector, let’s not even try to make MTA reach that standard. Just get to a place that is comparable with other public institutions. Just doing that would mean enough savings to build another rail line--or maybe even two. It was a brilliant move by the mayor to bring in an outsider, Julian Burke, to take over until a permanent CEO can be found.

Q: Population projections for the area show us growing rapidly over the next few decades. How do we plan a Los Angeles of the future where transportation is not a nightmare?

A: The people who built this city destroyed it by continually building outward. Sprawl, sprawl, sprawl, more freeways, more traffic, more air pollution, more gasoline destroy more open space. That’s why the “infill” concept--developing urban spaces--is so important now in Los Angeles. Not only does it protect our remaining open space, but also it’s a place where the infrastructure--sewers, gas, electric--are already there. By increasing housing density along existing transportation corridors, we can accommodate a growing population while preserving our existing neighborhoods. But, unfortunately, the planning policies of 40 years ago have created a secluded and indifferent city.

Q: How can a political leader, or anyone for that matter, create a sense of civic unity in a town so diverse, so spread out, so disjointed and, as you said, so indifferent?

A: Remember, I said you have to protect the neighborhoods. Would you rather have a six-story condo next to you on a residential street, or would you rather have that condo along Ventura Boulevard? We have more than enough room along the hundreds of miles of rail and bus corridors for high-density housing--enough for even the highest population projections for the future.

As for the subway, there have been problems--but I’m sure when Mulholland built the aqueduct, he had problems, too. I imagine the Romans had quite a few problems. Our children will not remember a sinkhole in Hollywood caused by the subway construction. When the subway opens in a year or so, the Hollywood merchants will hear their cash registers ring and that area is going to be revitalized. All anyone will remember in a few years was that we had the good sense to build a subway.

Q: People are now talking about a new definition of downtown--bounded on the north by Dodger Stadium, on the south by USC, and interconnected with transit and walkways. Is this part of your vision?

A: It is. Just a few years ago, people would think you were crazy if you wanted to develop the area north of the Hollywood Freeway in downtown, and today we have tens of thousands of people arriving at Union Station every day who commute into downtown. It may take another five years, but you will see a very vibrant downtown Los Angeles. The cathedral will be built, the sports arena will be built, the subway to Hollywood will be in place.

Q: You’ve been credited with envisioning and spearheading the construction of the Gateway Transit Center next to Union Station, and you see it as an important civic statement. How does a piece of transportation architecture make us feel better about Los Angeles?

A: History tells us that it does--whether it’s Rome, Paris, Athens or Los Angeles. Great public buildings have always created a sense of pride and public unity. But it is important that public buildings be accessible--public buildings must be public. When I got involved with the Gateway project, I said I didn’t want a building that just looked good in a post card. I wanted a building that people would enjoy and appreciate at the ground level. I believe you will see a kind of Rockefeller Center developing around the Gateway/Union Station area.

Q: What is your vision and your hope for this city, and what is your fear if we don’t do the right things?

A: My vision is to live in walking distance from shops, schools, social services and the like. There will be open space, and my children will be able to buy a house. A city vibrant with culture, with a strong downtown, which is the center of regional mobility. Maybe I am biased as a Greek, but I believe culture provides us with a sense of civic pride in who we are--if it is accessible. Being able to ride the subway from East L.A. and go to the new cathedral--things like that are what make a city.*