Community impact assessment and environmental justice for transit agencies

Community impact assessment and environmental justice for transit agencies

Material Information

Community impact assessment and environmental justice for transit agencies a reference
Public Transit Office, Department of Transportation
National Center for Transit Research, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida
Place of Publication:
University of South Florida
Publication Date:


Subjects / Keywords:
Environmental impact analysis -- Florida ( lcsh )
Environment justice -- Florida ( lcsh )
Local Transit -- Environment aspects -- Florida ( lcsh )

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
C01-00384 ( USFLDC DOI )
c1.384 ( USFLDC Handle )
032598678 ( ALEPH )
49262106 ( OCLC )

Postcard Information



This item has the following downloads:

Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader ntm 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 008 s flunnn| ||||ineng
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00384
0 245
[An un-cataloged item [C01-00384] from Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].]
Full cataloging of this resource is underway and will replace this temporary record when complete.
1 773
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF]
4 856


Community Impact Assessment and Environmental Justice for Transit Agencies: A Reference Public Transit Office Florida Department of Transportation National Center for Tra n sit Research ...... Center for Urban Transportation Researcl} University of South Florida .-.. .. . : .. : .' : :: '. '., .. ,.


D I SCLA IMER Till' o pinions, findings, ,md wndusi on s e xprcsstd in this publ ica tion art' thost' o f author(s) who are respnnsible for tht> facts rl11in. The contnts d o not rl"flt.>l't the vitws or p nlil'it'S nf th<.> Florida Department of Transportation or tl'w Rt' search a nd S p(.lcial Programs Administra t i on. This rtport does not constitute a stand.ud, S p < c ification, or rt"gula tion. The rtport is in cooperation with tlw State of Florid,, of Transportation and the U S Dt!p.utment of T ransp< H 'tation.


. ":', ::.; Community Impact Assessment and Environmental Justice for Transit Agencies: A Reference .-.;_-_ ....... ... January 2002 Public Transit Office Florida Dep artmen t of Transportation National C ente r for Transit Researc h Center for Urban Tra nsportation Researc h Univers i t y of So u t h F lorida


Objectives This guide was developed through a grant from the National Center for Transit Research and the Florida Department ofTransportation, Public Transit Offic e The objectives of there s e arch i n cluded identifying information and materials on issues and resources re lated to environmental justice, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, social equity, and the use of community impact assessment techniques (CIA) in the transit industry. As a result of the research and the prim er, ComnumihJ Impact Assessment: A Quick Reference Guide for Transportation (hereinafter referr e d to as the CIA Reference), the purpose of this guide is to pro vide tools techniques, and references that may be used to assess transit actions. Although environmental justice and Title VI issues receive special attention, the empha sis is on the use of th e impact assessment process for all communities Many transporta tion professionals and analysts state that, if transportation actions are properly assessed e nvironmental justice Title V I and oth er social issues will be addresse d and in a manner that allows the input of the publi c throughout the decision-making process. Recognition Special thanks to the following transit pro fessionals for their assistan ce in the research: Diana Carsey Hillsborough Area Regional Transit (HARTline) Bill Carter Tallahassee Transit (Taltran) Beth Cou lliette Bay County Council on Aging-Coordinated Transportation (BCCOA) Ken Fischer County of Volusia (VOTRAN) 2 COMMUNITY IMPACT AssESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL JuSTICE F OR TRANSIT AGENCIES: A REFERENCE


Peter Gajdjis Manatee County Area Transit (MCAT) Steve Githens Lakeland Area Mass TratlSit District (LAMT) Jay Goodwill Sarasota County Area Transit (SCAT) Robert Jacobson Indian River County Council on Aging (IRRCOA) Jim Liesenfelt Space Coast Area Transit (SCAT) Perry Maull Palm Beach County Transportation Authority (PalmTran) Patrice Rosemond Miami-DadeTransitAgency(MDTA) Maria Savoia Regional Transit System (Gainesville) Spencer Stoleson Broward County Mass Transit Division Roger Sweeney Pinellas SuncoastT ransit Authority (PST A) Tony Walter LYNX (Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority) Michael Williams Tri-CountyCommuter Rail Authority (Tri-Rail) Nedra Woodyatt Escambia County Area Transit (ECAT) INTRODUCTION 3


Introduction Over the last decade, a renewed focus on the impacts of transportation a ctions on com munities has been witnessed throughout the industry The impetus has been multifaceted sometimes led by citizens or 'grassroots orga nizations, the result of adverse impacts; or proactive legi s lation and guidance from public agencies. Much oftheearly guidance on how to as se ss impacts focused on the Natio nal Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of1969 pro cess specifically proje c t development. As the public and practiti oners have gai ned a better understanding of the social effects of transpor tation actions, the need to include the public enrly 011 ill nud tlirougliout the assessment pro cess has been recognized Furthe r in the case of transit agencies the impacts of many pro posed actions are not subject t o the project development process, but should be assessed due to the use of federal funds. The Federal Transit Administra tion (FT A) Office of Planning (fPL) states in resource information on social impacts, Transit projects affect th e social environment in several ways and may change the physical layout, demo graphics and sense of neighborhood in local communities Working together, transit plan ners and communities can avoid, mitigate, or minimize these impacts, and enhance communities Community Impact Assessment "Community impact assessment (CIA ] is a p r ocess t o evaluate the effects of a transporta tion action on a comm unity and i ts quality of life" (FHWA, Apogee, and Parsons, Brinckerhoff Quade, and Douglas 1996:4). It is a way to incorporate community cons ider ations in t o transportation decision making. From a policy perspective, it is a process for assessing the social and economic impacts of transportation projects as required by the NEPA, Title VI, and other legislation. The as sessment may address a variety of important community issues and relies o n publi c involvement as a major tool for data collection 4 COMMUNITY IMPAC1' ASSESSMENT AND ENV IRONMENTAL JUSTICE R)R TRANSIT ACEN Cms : A REFERENCE


Since th e early 1990s, federal and state transportati o n agencies have refocused efforts to involv e communities when considering transp orlation ac ti ons in order to assess the social impa cts of the proposed actions. These efforts have included greater pub li c in volvement; training, regulations, handbooks, and other guidance for transporlation professionals; and the compila tion o f a number of techniques and tools co=only identified as the coD\.0\unity impact assessment p r ocess. This increased emphasis on the human envi ronmentwas first prompted by the Intermoda! Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) o specifically its revital ization of publi c involvemen t ISTEA provided a sys tematic method for ... setting up and implementing a public involv ement program for a specifi c plan, program, or project" (US DOT 1996 : 11) The Ex ecutive Order (EO) 12898, Federal Actions to Address E nvironmental Justi ce in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations and the s ubsequent orders fueled these efforts. TEA21, the s u ccessor to ISTEA, continues the strong e m phasis on public in volvement and extends the c onunitment to consideration of community impacts In May 2000 the FHW A issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Mak ing intended to coordin ate and streamline p lanning and project dev elopmen t as defined in the NEPA process. The proposed rule states that it is a requirement to coordinate and streamline the plan ning and NEP A process. The rule further requires integration of community impact assessment activities in the tran s p ortatio n plan ning process and increased coordination of the planning and project development processes. INTRODUCTION 5


Also in May 2000, FHW A published in the Federnl Register "Policy Guidance Concerning Application ofTille VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to MelTopolitan and Statewide PlaiUling." (The guidance was first issued in October 1999 a s a joint memorandum from the FHWA and FT A.) Of particular interest to transit agencies is the review by FHWA and FT A on how transit operators address Title V1 and the agencies impact assessmen t capabilities. Environmental Justice EO 12898 Federal Actions to Address En vironmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, issued on Feb ruary 11,1994, required each Federal agency to develop an agency wide environmental justice strategy The EO has as its main purpose the reinf o r ceme nt of existing environmental and civil rights l egisla tion to ensure that low-income and minority populations are not subject to disproportionately high and adverse envi ronm e ntal effects. The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Environmental Justice offers the following defi nition of environmental justice: The fair treatment and meaningful in volvement o f all people regard l ess of race color, national o rigin, o r income with respect to the devel opment, implementation, and enforcemen t of environmental laws, regulations and policies Fair treatment means that no group of people, including racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic group, should bear a disproportionate share o f the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of federal, sta t e, l ocal, and tribal programs and policies (Office of Enforcement and Co mplianc e Assurance 2000). There is a school of thought that" environ mental justice is a discipline that focuses on the recognition and mitigation of s u c h discrep ancies (i.e disparate impacts of transportation 6 COMMUNITY IMPACT AND ENVIRONMENTAL jUSTICE fOR TRANSIT ACf.NCJES: A REFERENCE


planning and devel opment]." Forkenbrock and Schweitzer slate, however, that" envi ronmental justice represents a public policy goal of ensur ing that adverse human health or en vironmental effects o f government activities do not fall dis p ropo r tionately upon minority or low-in come populations" (Forkenbrock 1997:1) The EO builds upon the directives outlined in the Title VI, the National En vironmental Policy Act o, and the Clean Air Act as amended, all of l"'TRRDUCTION 7


which are strongly linked to the Transporta tion Equity Actfor th e 21"Century (fEA-21). The United States Department ofTransporta tion (US DOT) subsequently set a goal to be come a model agency for protecting and en hancing the environment and quality of life of U .S. citizens and issued a departmental order on environmental justice in 1997. The Federal Hig hway Administration (FHWA) issued a related administrative order in 1998. Ethnic or racial minority and low-income population groups appear to expe ri e nc e differ ences in disease and death rates; however, the data explaining the environmental contribu tions to these differences are limited. Information normally is not collected on envi ronmental health effects by race and income. Nor is it collected on health risks posed by multiple industria l facilities or transportation facilities. For diseases known to have environ mental causes, data are not typically disaggregated by race and socioeconomic group. The literature suggests that racial mi nority and low-income populations experience higher than average exposures to selected air pollutants and hazardous waste facilities. This exposure does not always lead to serious health problems, but is cause for health con cerns. Beyond environmental justice, all the hu man and environment assessment issues are based on legislation and regulations that direct evaluation in transportation decision-making, planning, project development, and subse quent processes. These directives relate to economic, social, and environmental effects The topics fall into several areas : community cohesion; environmental impact assessment; environmental justice; land use planning; and socioeconomic impacts. Finally, consideration of these issues re lates to the distribution of and access to resources-power differentials. Manheim states, An essential characteristic of transporta tion is the differential incidence of its impacts. Some groups will gain from any transportation change; others may lose. Therefore, transportation choices are 8 COMMUNITY iMPACT ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL}USTICE FORTIV\NSIT AGENCIES: A REFERENCE


essentially sociopolitical choices: the in terests of different groups must be balanced (197 9:19). The sociopolitical c h oices of past transpor tation acti ons, particu larl y as related to the interstate highway system, have dispropor tionately affected low-income or minority ethnic CODIDiunities. As early as 1970, Helen Leavitt documented the d isruption of black communities by superhighway plans (in passim: 1 970 ) In Divided Highways, Tom Lewis also documents several African Ameri can co= unities dis p laced by the inte r s tates (Le\vis 1997:186-89 1 97 199). More recently grassroots organizations have begun to chal lenge transpor tationinvestme1:1ts For example, in roadway investme1:1ts versus pe destrian and bicycle facilities African Americans and other people of color walk, b i cycle, and use transit more than th eir white counterparts, but are more likely to be victims of automobile pedestri8J:l or bicycle crash es than the average p e rson (Corless and Arteaga 2000:8). Grassroots organizations also have bee n successful in challenging expenditures INTROOUC!10N 9


Ugal_ Basis Flo ri d a Statute 052 NEPA o N o ndiscrimination P r o grams of the Department ofTranspo.rtation Effei:tuation o f T i tle VI of the Civil Rights 49 C.F.R. Part. 21 .' . ... ,,. ........... .... Office of the. Secretary' of the Department o f Transportation (OST) Dock e t No. 50125 DepartinentofTransportatio n Order tO Ad dress Environmental Justice in Minority PopuJ.atio ns and Low-Income P opulations Titl e VI of the C ivil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, and related s tatutes Transportati o n Equity Actfor the 21 UMT A (FT A ) Circular47021, Title VI Program G uidelineS for Fed e ral Transit Administration Recipients 26 May 1988 for l ight rail versus rubber tire transit in Atlanta and Los Angeles (Bullard 2000:4; Garcia 2000 : 1 0). As one of the leading resea rchers on transportation and environmental justice stated "Transporta t ion is not just la w. It is politics and community." (Oedel2000:10). 10 COMMUNITY IMPACT A'\SESSM ENT AND ENVI RONMENTAL jUSTI CE FO R T IV\NSI T A GEN CIES: A REFERENCE


The Assessment Process The CIA process is holistic and iterative, beginning with the conception of an action through implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. Public involvement is an integral tool. The basic steps of the process are listed below: Step 1. Determine the nature of the action and define the study area Step 2. Develop a community profile t o gain a thorough understanding of the study area including any issues surrounding the pro posed action. TI1is information provides a baseline for analysis and is used to understand what would happen in the community with and without the action. Step 3. Analyze each alternative Identi fied and identify any potential imp acts and the magnitude of those potential impacts. Identify Step4. StepS. F igurel. TheCommunitylmpactAssessmtnl Process which group or groups may be impacted Identify potential solutions to ad verse impacts Document the findings, including impacts, solutions, and commit ments. THE AsSESSMENT PRoa:ss 11


For transit agencies, many of the above steps and the techniques discussed below are similar to the dat a collection and reporting re quirements and monitoring procedures for the Title VI Program for FT A recipients The as sessment process described, however, provides the opportunity to enhance the agencies' as sessment capabilities for all communities and its holistic approach fully incorporates Title VI and environmental justice issues into decision making. Overview of the Remainder of the Reference T he remainder of the reference provides information on how the assessment process can be used to address transit actions. The next section, Transit Service Area Profile, combines the development of a community profile with the demographic and service profile and other data collection requirements of UMTA (FT A) Circular 4702 1. The analysis of community facilities and services, population characteristics, and other socioeconomic considerations are the basis of the assessment pro cess. The following section presents examples of possible transportation actions and their po tential impacts on communities. These examples are discussed in the context of com munity cohesion, safety, Titles V I and Vlll of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, environmental jus tice, landuse, mobility and travel patterns, aesthetics and visual qualities, consistency with local, regional, and state plans, and cu mulative and secondary impacts Undergirding the assessment process is the use of public involvement and outreach, par ticularly to underrepresented segments of the public. The final section is resources, including references, websites, contacts, and so for t h 12 COMMUNITY IMPACf ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL }USTJCEFOR TRANSIT AGENCIES: A REFERENCE GUIDE


Transit Service Area Profile TheFT A TPL in its resource information on the environmental process states the regulations implementing NEPA ... ensure that information on th e social and environmental impacts of any federally-funded actio n is available to public officials and citizens before decisions are made and before actionsaretnken [emphasisor\ginalj FTA also uses the NEP A process as an "overarching umbrella" to consider other provisions, including civil rights and other social impacts, that affect decision-mak ing. This may include such actions as: changes in g eographic areas of service; travel times and r eliability; frequen cy and hours of service; changes in transit patronage and de mand; changes in transit mode; Figure 2. Communi h) impacts iu relation to other environmental issues Defining the Action changes in station acc ess and circula tion; and increased traffi c around stations and depots. Step 1 of the community impact assessment process described above is "Determine the nature of the [proposed] action and define the study area." This project identifi cation process generally has been associated with the project development and environment (PD&E) phase of TRANSIT SERVICE AREA PROFII.E 13


roadway or other constr uction projects. It is used to determine the pur pose and .need of the project and develop project alternatives as required by NEPA In planning_ this process is similar to problem definition. l.nclusio.n of community analysts, r esource agencies, and the public in this ini tial phase however, p r ov ides the opportunity for new perspec tives on the proposed action. In addition issues or con ce rns of the community are raised before major investments in staff, time and other resources are committed to particular alternatives. Early and continuous public invo l vement is central to community impact assessment. Using Title VI Demographic and Service Profile Maps, Overlays, and Charts As discussed earlie r proposed transportation actions are associated with a geog raphic area within th e service area or a proposed incre ase t o the service area. Transit may have an advantage over othe r transporta tion agencies due to the development of maps and overlays compiled as part of their program guidelines. These maps and overlays may be pro vide baseline data f or a more comprehensi ve analysis of any impacts. The benefits o f the assessment process include : providing the opportunity for consideration of environme ntal justice and Title VI issues on each proposed action by allowing input from low-income and minority communities; providing the opportunity for all af fected communities, whether l ow income, minority, or not, on each proposed action; facilitating interagency coordina tion by identi fying these stakeho ld erers and seeking their in put; and provid a proac ti ve and collabo rativ e approach to problem-solv ing. The Title VI Demogr aphic and Service Pro file Map is a base map providin g general information on the population and ke y facili ties in the service area. As service c hanges are suggested, this base map is the starting point for m ore in t ensive analysis around a smaller study area Florida Statute .052 requ ires eligible recipients of public transit block grant funds t o ... establish public transportation de velopment plans consiste nt, t o t h e 14 COMMUNITY I MI'A<..I ASSESSM E NT ANO JuSTJCEFORTRANSIT AGENC IES: A REFERENCE




Fr A Circular 4702 1 I n part CHAPTERm . DATA COLLEcriON AND REPORTING REQuiREMENTS expreSSed in raw numbers a for that tract o r zone.. .1! Thisover lliyshoul d sho w all transi t r ail lines in the service aiea their origins destirui ti ons. The type(s) q f servi ce p r ovid ed' route .. should be indicated (e g ., express limited local. o r c ommuter seiV i ce) as well a$; the ti.irie o f servici! (e g ., peak h oW' only; nonpeak hoW' all Pop ulation / R a cial Distribution Qwt ... .Fl' Areq uires a chart for each census tract o r traffic analysis zone s howing the actua l numbers and percen t a ges f o r each minority group within that zone o r tr a c ts. The tota l pop ulatio n shoUld a )so be s h own. A s u m m a ry chart. .. should be prepared f o r the entire service area. maximum ex t ent f eas i b l e w ith a p proved local g o v e rn men t compre hensive pla ns of th e units of loca l gov e rnm ent in w hich the p r o v i d e r is l ocated. C urrent l egis l atio n m an d ates t hat p r ovid e rs provi d e informa tion t o regional wor k force boards s erv icing their counties regarding the availability o f tr anspo r tation services for pe r sons in well are transition programs The transportatio n develo pment plan (TOP), with its annual upda tes is th e primary action un dertak e n b y Florid a public transporta ti o n p roviders. The refer ence t o persons in the wel fare trans i tion program heigh tens the need t o c onsi der the effects of the plan on l ow-income co mm u n iti e s. Th e commun ity impact assess ment process ca n prov i d e a com plemen ta ry set of tools t o the T OP, h e lp ing t o meet the r equire ments of the Florid a Admin istrative Code (FA C). The FAC pro v i d es th e r ul es a nd regula tions f o r compl e ting the TOP. T h e ba s i c elements of t11 e TOP i J lclude : 16 C OMMUN I'I'Y I MPACI' A5SilSSMEN 1 A ND ENVIRONM ENTAL. )UST I CEFOR TRANSIT AGENCIES: A REFER E NCE


conununity goals and policies; demographic, socioeconomic, land use, transportation, and transit data; public involvement; public and private transit service analysis; and afive-year implementation program for selected alternatives The TOP can be an extensive data collec tion and analysis undertaking, especially for first-time applicants. Some transit age ncies have in-house staff prepare the TOP, others use outside consultants Much of the information, however, is available through other resource agencies in the community or via the Internet. Resource agencies and the public are the pri mary sources for community values, issues, and needs and serve to verify data collected from other sources. The CIA Reference describes the study area as communities within and immediately surrounding where the proposed change will occur. This area may change due to impacts to other communities that are identified later. This is an iterative process. Figure 3. Study area, proposed action, bus rout e with bus stops, and comnmnties 'TRANSI T 9ERV1CB AlUlA PROFILS 17


CW.RAC!'ERSTICS !lcn'o!I'GtOMh TrCr'lds L.lba' Fotec "*' E.n'oloy

such as photographs, charts, and tables also may be presented. The CIA Rtfortnce provides the following guidance on developing a community profile: define community boundaries, and neighborhood or subdivisi o n boundaries; l ocate busines s es, r esidence s and ac tivity centers of pote n tial irnpact, especiall y neighborhoods along high way alterna tives and near interchanges; determine demographic characteristis tics e conomic base, loca tion of coaununity fac iliti es, and other characteristics; learn about a community within the study area by comparing local or area population demographics, land-use, and other characte ristics with State or regional informa ti on; and continually refine the profile through out the assessment process as irnp acts are identifie d and as situations change o ver time (1996). The community profil e provi des information o n the affected e nvi ronment" in NEPA documentati on. To complete the pro fil e several types of data are collected and summarized. The data collection effort and the level of documentation varies according to the proposed acti on. Examples o f the types of data include population and demographic characteristics; economic and social history and characteristics; and physical charact eristics that are related to coaununity activities. Socioec onomic Data Collection As discussed earlier transi t agencies may have advantages, since a cons iderabl e amount o f a rchival data may be availa ble in -hous e from devel o pn1ent of the T i tl e VI D e m ographic and S etvic e P rofile Maps. With additi onal d ata sou rces particularly p u blic inv olvement, tllese data can be supplemented to assess the irnp acts of any acti o n fo r any community. FederaL State, and local governments are good sources o f archiva l data. P lanning a g e n cies can p rovide demographic and economic infor mation for a city, county, or region. This information also may be summarized in local comprehensive plans and metropolitan planning organization (MPO) long range plans. The U.S. Census also provides much of tllis information. Demographic information is also regularly compiled and m a in taine d b y other agencies such as school distri cts, hu man service agencies, water management districts, and health departmen ts. Incr easingl y m o r e of tllis data is available o n the Internet TRANSIT 5ERVJCE AREA PROFILE 1 9


. Types of Data Population and growth trends Age distribution Average household si,ze Ethnic composition Average houSeJ.io14 income (compare to surrounding area) special groups Chjldren five years of age arid younger. Eld!!riY persons 'Mirioiit}r orJow-incoine Persons with disabilities Religious or ethnic-groups Economic Unemployment rates and _trends Workforce characteriz

map. These data are useful in determin ing impacts of the proposed action to needed services. Al though the inventory begins during initial data collection, it should be updated and expanded as the assessment proceeds. The inventory builds on data that should already be available from the Title VI Service Map. It may include the following: Medical and health care facilities TRANSIT SERVICE AREA PROFU.E 21


Couununity Profile Elements Ba.seline Conditions Social Chal'acteristics De. mographic Profile & Special Populations Community Issues CoiJ\Dlimity Facilities and Services Mobility Safety Econpinic Characteristics Labor Force Cfuiracteristics Major anli JndWil:!ies Land-use and. Transportation Facilities Existing and Planned Land Use Existing Zoning Growth Trends and Issues (past and present) Notable Features in Study Area Aesthetic Otaracter Historic Resources Socioeconomic Baseline Map Educational facilities Religious institutions Public works and services Civic centers Recreational facilities Aesthetic cultural, and h istorica l resources Commercial facilities Land-use characteristics and transportation facilities. Community Issues and Attitudes Again, public involvement is esse ntial t o community impact assess m ent. Baseline socioeconomic data is part o f a con tinuum in the assessment process. This data i s suppl emente d by input from the af fected communities. The data can be used t o identify potential impacts sta keh olders, and key persons or groups Seve ral methods may be used to collect these data. Archival data or second ary source materials may provide insigh t into community issues These sources include l ocal gov ernment comprehens ive plans, local policy studies media reports, editorials minutes of public hearings or meetings published local hist o ri es, governmen t reports photograph s of the area, or other documents. O ther sources include : 22 COMMUNITY IMPA<..I ASSESSMENT AND ENVI RONMENTAL )U STI CEFOR TRANSIT A REI'ERENCF.


interviewing key individuals ; conducting community site visits to observe how facilities are used; interviewing stakeholders, those who may be directly affected by the actio n Do cume n t Key Find ings A s llliUila1)' document of key findings should be prepared, including a representative map. This document focuses on is sues relevant to the proposed action. The map may provide relevant overlays o f key popula tion groups, neighborhoods facilities and other notable features. The map later may be used to compare alterna tives to potential impacts and to inform the community and agency staff of the trade-offs among alter natives The community profile document is a r eco r d of initial findings that is updated th r oughout the assessment It m ay be included in N EPA documentation o r used a s a s tandalone d ocument TRANS I T SER V ICE AREA PROF!l-6 23


Florida Administrative Code (FAQ Chapter14-73 Public Transportation, in part 14-73.001 ( 6)(c)2. b. State Public Transit Block Grant funding r equires the applicant to develop and adopt a T Tansit Development Plan (IDP) ... A TOP shall comply w ith th. e following elements at a m.ini.olum. I The TOP shall identify and list community goals and policies with respect to transportation and land use in general and specifi cally to transit service. D. The TOP shall identify and quantify the community's need for transit service using S;Ocioeconomic, land use, transportation, and transit data as appropriate. There shall be an oppor tunity for the public to express the need for transit service ments, such as but not limited to, Citizens Advisory Committees and workshops. ID The TOP shall include an analysis of the services currently provided in the community by public and private transi t service providers in terms of quality and quantity of service ... The process for selecting an alternative for implementati o n shall include an opportunity for public participation. ... V The TOP shall not be in conflict with the approved local government comprehensive plan and the comprehensive (long range) transportation plan .... Actions and Impacts The initia l community pro ftle doc ument, incl uding the base lin e data, provides a starting poin t for the analysis of the effects th e pro posed action on the com munity. Thr o ughout dat a collec tion, rev iew, and summary, commu n ity iss ues and needs are identified. In the p r ocess of evalu a ting e x isting transit services a n d d evelop in g a lternatives, the effects of th e alternatives o r "a c tions" also must be evalu a ted. T h e CIA Rcjem1ce suggests these guidelin es: Keep community goals in mind when identif y ing impacts. Be cogn izant o f both positive and n egative impacts Consider both te mporary and lo ng term im p acts a s w ell as seco ndary and cumulative effects. Focus on the m agnitud e of a n iss u e o r co n trove r s y as it determ ines the l evel of s p ecifici ty needed to address the iss u e. 24 COMMUNIT Y IMPACT AssESSM ENT AND ENviRONM ENT A L JuSTICE FOR TRANSIT A CENOES : A REFERENCE


Recognize the p ublic's perception of impacts If the publi c identi fies issues, then review and address these issues. Interconnection of Impacts The above list of impacts is not exhaustive, n or do impacts occur in isolatio n Different imp acts may relate to each other Impacts als o m a y be direct indirect, or cumulative, or the effects counterbalancing. Direct impacts gener ally have immediate or primary effects, such as relocation of resid e nts or bus inesse s or l o ss o f access Indirect impacts may be inadvertent or extend beyond the phys ical location of the a c tion. Cumulative impacts may r e s u lt when an actio n is considered in lig h t of othe r actions that taken individually have different implic a tions than w hen considered together. Effects of an action also m ay b e counterbalancing, both bene ficial and adverse. For example, siting a trans fer terminal in a community may increase mobility for residents in surround ing neigh borh oods, but als o may increa s e traffic, n oise, and other adverse imp acts. Civil Rights and Environmental Justice Central t o civil rig hts and environmental justice concerns is that the proposed action does not result in disproportion a tely high or adverse impacts, p articularl y to low-income or minority groups. The effects of the proposed action, beneficial and adverse, should be equi tabl y distri b uted, in a n ondiscriminato ry manner. To assure equ ity in the process, ef forts should be made to ensure that affected communiti es have access to the decisionmak ing p roc ess, d ecisionmakers, and information. Special effo rts may be n ecessary to include underrepresented groups, such as persons with disabili ties, and persons unfamiliar with the democrati c process such as r ecent immi grants or persons who have histori cally not participated in the process Executive Order 1 2898 specifically a d dresses disproportionately hig h and adv e rse impacts on low-income and minority commu niti es. Unfortunately, such impa cts tend t o occw as a r e s u l t of cumulative or in direc t impacts. That is, overtime low-income o r minority c ommunities may experience the effects (Continued on page 28.) AcnONSANDIMPACTS 2 5


Po s s ible Impacts Access a n d Economic Tax base M obility Will the proposed Emplqyment action affect the tax Narmw t Drized Will the proposed base, e.g., changes A ccess action improve in property values, What effect will the access to employ-changes in a ctivity, action h ave on mentcenters? removal of taxable b icyclists' and property from the pedestrians' access B usiness base? to facilities 7 Will the proposed action affect Genera l business access M ultimoda l ism activity, or How does the visibility? Land-use action affect access to other modes of P roperty values transportation? Will the proposed Go als action affect Is the action property values, consistent with the i.e, r elocations, local plans? The changes in land community's goals? use? 26 COMMUNITY IMPACT \ND ENVIRONMeNTAl JUSTICE FOR TRANSI T AGENC IF.S: A REFERENCB


' ) .. . ... I ...... ti' .. : :c'_:Jr .' .. ....... ..... :-':""""--,:' ..... AcnoNSANDIMPAcrs 27


Civil Rights and Related Legislidion EO 12898 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Po pula !ions and Low-income Popul ations FHW A (Administrative Order) 6640.23 Actions to Address Enviroruriental Justice in Minority Populations and Low income Populatioris FHW A /Ff A Memorandum o n Title VI Requirem en ts in Metropolitan andStarewide Plailning Nondiscrimination in Federall y-Assisted Programs of the Department of Transportation Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act," 49 C.P.R. Part21 Office of the Secretary of the Department of Transportation (OST) Docket No. 50125 Depart mentofTransportation Orde r to Address Environmental Justice in Minority PopulationS and Low-Income Populations Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended and related statutes UMT A (Ff A) Circular 4702.1, Title VI Program Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients, 26 May 1988 28 COMMUNITY IMPACT AND ENVIR ONMENTAL JUSTICE F O R TRANSI T A GEN C IES: A R EFERENCE of adverse i mpacts brough t about by the action s of one or mo r e agencies. Whil e the co mmu nity profile may help t o id e ntify such ac tions, p ubli c involveme nt and other community im pac t assess ment techniques w ill hel p to assure i d en tifi c a tion of thl'Se effects with th e h e lp of the affect ed c ommuni ties. Assessment Tools T h e CIA Reference sta t es that there are sever al approaches


to analyze impacts. The primary three dis cussed in the primer are comprehensive comparativ e, and incremental. When evaluat ing impacts comprehensively, as much data as possible is collecte d, analyzed, and a determi nation is made. In general, comparative anal yses are based on evaluations of simil ari ties and differenc es between the proposed action and previous actions. Incremental evaluations build on data overtime w1til a de t ermination can be made. The primer rec ommends that when using any appr oach to consider effects with and without the proposed action Selected Tools Florida transit agency representatives indi cated in a survey that a number of techniques are used t o analyze the impacts of their I \ I Aoce anliH;y I I 1 i I ;, """"''" Figure 5. How impac t s may interccnnect AcnoNS AND lMPACI'S 29


ac ti o n s. The following techniques or tools a re listed in o rder of frequ e ncy of respon se s: 1 Pu bliclnvolvement 2 Brainstorming 3. Compariso ns 4 Statistica l Analysis 5 E xpert Co n sulta tion 6 Peer Reviews 7 Market Research 8 GIS / Databanks 9 Internet/World Wide Web 10. MapOverlays 11. DelphiTechniques Several techniques may be combined t o gain a bette r understand ing of the community's concerns o r to assure that differ ent g r oups in th e community are rea c hed. The emphasis is n o t on a particular technique, but rather the involvement o f the community i n identifying impacts. Public Involvement As stated earlier, public involvement undergirds the CIA process The CIA R efereucc states that the public can participate as fol lows : Deve l opment o f the a c tion 's purpose and need and identi f ication of a l terna tives Development of the c o mmunity profi l e Identification and analysis o f impacts Identification o f avoidance, m inimiza tion, mitigation, and enhancement opportunities. The prin ci pl es of publi c invo l vemen t in th e community impac t accessmen t process include early and co ntinuous communicatio n between affected communiti es and the proposing agency. The process also includes open dia l ogue 30 C OMMUNITY A SSF.$ MEN1' AND ENVIRONMENTAL J U STIC E FOR T RANSIT AGENCIES: A REFEf( EN C E


Effective public involvement includes noti fication of proposed actions and activities, effectiv e communication, and appropriate tech niques to reach affected communities. Suggested techniques include : Ad hoc task for ces Advisory committees Community events Field offices Focus groups lntemetwebsites Newsletters Personal contact Public meetings QuestionnaiJ:es and smveys Workshops Other techniques are available and should be explored and used as appropriate through out the assessment. Consideration also should be given to selecting the appropriate staff or other professionals to aid in identifying the right tools or media. The resource section of this document has more information. Resolving Adverse Impacts Throughout the assessment process, tran sit analysts should seek to address adverse impacts as they are identified. The CIA Refer ence states that there are four ways to address adverse impacts. These should be considered in order, although opportunities for enhance ment should always be sought. Since the CIA process is iterative, effor ts to address one impact may give rise to another adverse impact. Here, again consideration should be given to addressing impacts in rela tion to others. The public should participate in the efforts to identify potential adverse impacts and solutions. The Community Impact Assessment Handbook advises that comments made to address .. t;1 '' ... .. '1'-. :--. -:. r l tfJ. I 'lV, AcnoNSANOIMPACI'S 31


impacts s h ould be documented. This is part of th e record o f findings whether for NEPA documentation or a stand alone summary of the assessment The documentation a lso provides a record of the commitments made in the early phases of the assessment and a report on the status of the commi tments Documenting Findings Documenta tion takes place throughout th e assess ment proc ess For some ac tio ns, specific doc umentation is required to comply with Federal or State r e gulations e.g. NEPA, the TOP. These regulations provide sugges t e d for mats for documentation. In addition, th e handboo k and the CIA Reforwcc, provide recommendations on where the CIA in formation may appear within environment a l docu mentation Within the T OP, CIA information may be p r esented as follows: 0 0 Study Area Base Data (Community Profile). E valuation of Existing Transit Services and the Development of Alternativ es. Other formattin g guidelines that may be consid e r e d particularly for stand-alon e documents, include: an executive summary; topic s rela ted to the action and as required b y leg islation; a summary of public involvement activities in cluding subs tantiv e co mments and findings ; graphics; an objectiv e, unbiased tone; conclusions, including co ncerns, alternatives or solution s and commitments. Community impact assessment techniques may be in corporated into t ransi t agencies' decision-making over time. As changes i n services are considered or with up dates to the TOP staff s hould seek oppor tunities to partner with the affec ted communities to identif y potential impacts, address adverse impacts, and find ways to enhance com munities. 32 COMMUNITY IMPACT ASSESSME N T AND ENVIRONMENTAL jUSTICE F O R TRANSIT A GENC IES: A REFeRENCE


Resources The following references and bibliography provide in formation on other resources to aid in the assessment pro cess. References Cited Corless, James and Luis Arteaga 2000 Pedestrian Safety and Social Jus tice. In Progress: Surface T ransportation Policy Project. VoL X(1):8. Federal Highway Administration et alia 1996 Community Impact Assessment: A Quick Ref e rence for Transportation. FHWA PD-96036. Washington, DC: US. Department of Transportation. Federal Transit Administration, Office of Planning n d. The Environmental Process Electronic document, http:// /office/ planning/ ep/ index.html. n.d. Social & Economic Impacts. Electronic document, http: / /office/planning/ ep/ subjareajse .h tml. n.d. Transportation Impacts. Electronic document, http:/ gov /office/planning/ ep/ subjareajtrans.html. Forkenbrock, David J. and Lisa A. Schweitzer 1997 Environmental Justice and Transportation In vestment Policy. Iowa City: University oflowa, Public Policy Center. Manheim, Marvin L. 1979 Fundamentals of Transportation Systems Analysis, Volume 1 Basic Concepts. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute ofTeclmology. Oedel, David G. 2000 The Long March to Transportation Justice in Macon. Progress: Surface Transportation Policy Project X(1):6. REsouRCE> 33


Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 2000 Environmental Justice : U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Electronicdocument. http:// I oeca f main / ej/ index htrnl. Williams Kristine A et alia 2000 Community Impact Assessm e nt: A Handbook for Transportation P r ofessionals. Electronic docu ment. http:/ cia_handboo k.htm. Bibliography Bass, R and A. Herson 1993 Mastering NEPA: A Step-by-Step Approach Solano Press. Bowles R.T. 1 9 81 Social Impact Assessment in S mall Communi ties Toronto: Butterworths Burc hell, R., Us to kin, D et alia 1994 Development Impact Assessment H andbook Urban Land I nstitute : Washington, D.C. Burdge ,RJ. 1985 Soc i al impac t Assessment and the Planning Process Planning & Public Policy. 11(2) August. 1 990 Social impac t Assessment and the Public In volvement Proc e ss Environmental Impact Assessment Review 10( 1/2): 81-90 Branch, K, e t al. Guide t o Soc i al Bould e r CO: Westview P r ess, 1984. Burdge, R.J., A Community Guide to Social Impact Assess ment Middleton WI: Social Ecology Press, 1994. Canter, L. 1996 Environmental Impac t Assessment Sec ond Edition N e w York : McG r aw-Hill Inc. Canter, L., B. Atkinson and F .L. Lesitritz, eds. 1985 Impact of Growth: A Guide fo r Socio-Economi c I mpact Assessment and P lannin g. Chelsea Ml: Lew i s 34 C O MMUNllY IMPACT AssESSMENT ANO ENVI R(lNME NTAL) USIICE FOR TRANSIT AGENCiliS: A REFEI

Conner, D. 1994 The Social Profile Consb:uctive Citizen Partici pation. Council on Environmental Quality 1 9

Finsterbusch, Kurt 1980 Understa nding Social Impact: Assessing t he Effe cts of Public Projects. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Finster busch, Kurt. Lynn Llewellyn, and C.P. Wolf, eds. 1983 Social Impact Assessment Methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publicat i ons, Inc .. International Association for Impact Assessment n d Electronic documents. http:/ I iaia.ext IAI Interorga nizational Committee on Guidelines and Prin ciples for Social Impact Assessment 1994 Guidelines and Principles for Social impact Assessment Washington, DC: U.S. Depar tment of Commerce. N ational Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad ministration Louis Berger & Associates, Inc 1998 NCHRP Report 403: Guidance for Estimating the Indirect Effects of Proposed Transportation Projects. Washington, DC: National Academy Press Mueller, Beth A et alia 1990 Environmental Factors and the Risk for Child hood Pedestrian Motor Vehicle Collison Occurrence. American Journal of Epidemiology, 1329( 3):550-560 National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board 1996 A System that Serves Everyone : Attracting Non traditional Participants into the Regional Transpor tation Planning Process Washington DC: Metro politan Washington Council of Governments. Noyes P 13., t 996 Designing the Right Process for Involv ing the Public. Resource Papers for the 1996 ITE lnterna t iona Conference 36 C OMMUNITY IMPACT ASSESSM ENT AND ENVIRONMENTAl. JUSTICE FOR TRANSIT AGENCIES: A REFERE NCE


Program for ColiUilunity Problem Solving n .d. Facing Racial and Cultural Conflicts: Tools for Rebuilding Community, Second Edition. Washington, DC: National Civic League. Skidmore Owings & Merrill 1975 Su.mmaxy of the Environmental Assessment Notebook Series. Prepared for U.S. Department of Transportation DOT P 5600.4. The Noteboo k Series contains the following individual documents: Notebook 1 : Identificatio n of Transportation Alter nativ es N otebook 2: Social Impacts Notebook 3: Economical Impacts Notebook 4: Physical Impacts Notebook 5: Organization and Content of Environ mental Assessment Materials Notebook 6 : Environmental Assessment Reference Book Stoffle, Richard et alia 1981 Establishing Native American Concerns in a Social Impact Assess ment. Social 1m pact Assess ment6566(4):9 Transportation Res earch Board Committee A1D04 2000 C ommittee on Public Involvemen t in Transportati o n Electronic document. http:/ I www.ch2m com/TRB.J>I/ default.asp. Transportation Research Board Committee A1F02 2002 Committee on Environme ntal Analysis in Transportation. Electronic document. http:/ I \VW\ A1F02/ default.htm. U.S. Environmental Prot ectio n Agency. 1998 F inal Guidance for Incorporating Environmental Justice Conc erns in EPA's NEPA Compliance Analysis. Washington, DC: E PA Office of Federal Activ iti es. U.S. Department of Transportation 1 994 Evaluating th e Environmental Impacts of Met ropolitan Trans porta lion System Plans. 1998 Community Impact Mitigation: CaseStudies. Publication No. FHW Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration: Office of EnvironmentandPlanning. May. REsoURCES 37


Vanclay, F. and D. Bronstein, eds. 1996 Environmental and Social Impact Assessment. New York, NY: John Wiley &Sons. Ward, Beverly G., Ph .D. et alia 2000 Community Impact Assessment. Electronic documents. http:/ 2001 Community Impact Assessment in Florida Transportation Projects : Case Studies Electronic document. http://www. cutr pubs/CIA in Florida. pdf. Wilson, Frank & Associates, Inc. 1994 NCHRP Report 364, Public Outreach Handbook for Departm e nts ofTransportation Wash i ngton, D .C. 38 COMMUNITY i MPA CT ANO ENVIRONMENTA L jUSTICE FOR TRANSrr AGENCIES: A REFERENCE


Project Team FDOT Ed Coven, Manager, Public Transit Office Amy Dat7., Project Manager CUTR Beverly G Ward, Ph.D., Principal investigator Kristine M Williams, AICP, Senior Research Associy Kramer Rt>search Associate Jason Vvi noker, Research AssodatC' Holly A lderman, Program Assistant Grace Hunt, Program Assistant KimllerlecGabourel, Graduate Research Assistant Jon Godwin, Goaduate Research Assistant Chrystal Smith, Gradual

' j t \ ,,... .... . Offin Florida D


Download Options

Choose Size
Choose file type
Cite this item close


Cras ut cursus ante, a fringilla nunc. Mauris lorem nunc, cursus sit amet enim ac, vehicula vestibulum mi. Mauris viverra nisl vel enim faucibus porta. Praesent sit amet ornare diam, non finibus nulla.


Cras efficitur magna et sapien varius, luctus ullamcorper dolor convallis. Orci varius natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Fusce sit amet justo ut erat laoreet congue sed a ante.


Phasellus ornare in augue eu imperdiet. Donec malesuada sapien ante, at vehicula orci tempor molestie. Proin vitae urna elit. Pellentesque vitae nisi et diam euismod malesuada aliquet non erat.


Nunc fringilla dolor ut dictum placerat. Proin ac neque rutrum, consectetur ligula id, laoreet ligula. Nulla lorem massa, consectetur vitae consequat in, lobortis at dolor. Nunc sed leo odio.