Community Impact Assessment and Environmental Justice for ... · UMTA (now known as FTA ) Circular 4702.1, May 26, 1988, in part CHAPTER I 2. The objectives of the [FTA] Title VI

Community Impact Assessmentand Environmental Justicefor Transit Agencies:A Reference

Public Transit OfficeFlorida Department of Transportation

National Center for Transit ResearchCenter for Urban Transportation ResearchUniversity of South Florida

DISCLAIMER

The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in thispublication are those of the author(s) who are responsible for the factsand accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do notnecessarily reflect the views or policies of the Florida Department ofTransportation or the Research and Special Programs Administration.This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.

The report is prepared in cooperation with the State of FloridaDepartment of Transportation and the U. S. Department ofTransportation.

1INTRODUCTION

Community Impact Assessmentand Environmental Justice

for Transit Agencies:A Reference

January 2002


National Center for Transit ResearchCenter for Urban Transportation Research

University of South Florida

2 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND COMMUNITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR TRANSIT AGENCIES: A REFERENCE

Objectives

This guide was developed through a grantfrom the National Center for Transit Researchand the Florida Department of Transportation,Public Transit Office. The objectives of the re-search included identifying information andmaterials on issues and resources related toenvironmental justice, Title VI of the CivilRights Act of 1964, social equity, and the use ofcommunity impact assessment techniques(CIA) in the transit industry. As a result of theresearch and the primer, Community Impact As-sessment: A Quick Reference Guide forTransportation (hereinafter referred to as the CIAReference), the purpose of this guide is to pro-vide tools, techniques, and references that maybe used to assess transit actions.

Although environmental justice and TitleVI issues receive special attention, the empha-sis is on the use of the impact assessmentprocess for all communities. Many transporta-tion professionals and analysts state that, iftransportation actions are properly assessed,

environmental justice, Title VI, and other socialissues will be addressed and in a manner thatallows the input of the public throughout thedecision-making process.

Recognition

Special thanks to the following transit pro-fessionals for their assistance in the research:

Diana CarseyHillsborough Area Regional Transit (HARTline)

Bill CarterTallahassee Transit (Taltran)

Beth CoullietteBay County Council on Aging-Coordinated

Transportation (BCCOA)

Ken FischerCounty of Volusia (VOTRAN)

3INTRODUCTION

Peter GajdjisManatee County Area Transit (MCAT )

Steve GithensLakeland Area Mass Transit District (LAMT)

Jay GoodwillSarasota County Area Transit (SCAT)

Robert JacobsonIndian River County Council on Aging

(IRRCOA)

Jim LiesenfeltSpace Coast Area Transit (SCAT)

Perry MaullPalm Beach County Transportation Authority

(Palm Tran)

Patrice RosemondMiami-Dade Transit Agency (MDTA)

Maria SavoiaRegional Transit System (Gainesville)

Spencer StolesonBroward County Mass Transit Division

Roger SweeneyPinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA)

Tony WalterLYNX (Central Florida Regional Transportation

Authority)

Michael WilliamsTri-County Commuter Rail Authority (Tri-Rail)

Nedra WoodyattEscambia County Area Transit (ECAT)


Introduction

Over the last decade, a renewed focus onthe impacts of transportation actions on com-munities has been witnessed throughout theindustry. The impetus has been multifaceted,sometimes led by citizens or "grassroots" orga-nizations, the result of adverse impacts; orproactive legislation and guidance from publicagencies.

Much of the early guidance on how to as-sess impacts focused on the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 pro-cess, specifically project development. As thepublic and practitioners have gained a betterunderstanding of the social effects of transpor-tation actions, the need to include the publicearly on in and throughout the assessment pro-cess has been recognized. Further, in the caseof transit agencies, the impacts of many pro-posed actions are not subject to the projectdevelopment process, but should be assesseddue to the use of federal funds.

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA)Office of Planning (TPL) states in resource in-

formation on social impacts, "Transit projectsaffect the social environment in several waysand may change the physical layout, demo-graphics and sense of neighborhood in localcommunities." Working together, transit plan-ners and communities can avoid, mitigate, orminimize these impacts, and enhance commu-nities.

Community Impact Assessment

"Community impact assessment [CIA] is aprocess to evaluate the effects of a transporta-tion action on a community and its quality oflife" (FHWA, Apogee, and Parsons,Brinckerhoff, Quade, and Douglas 1996:4). It isa way to incorporate community consider-ations into transportation decision-making.From a policy perspective, it is a process forassessing the social and economic impacts oftransportation projects as required by theNEPA, Title VI, and other legislation. The as-sessment may address a variety of importantcommunity issues and relies on public involve-ment as a major tool for data collection.

5INTRODUCTION

Since the early 1990s, federal and state transportation agencieshave refocused efforts to involve communities when consideringtransportation actions in order to assess the social impacts of theproposed actions. These efforts have included greater public in-volvement; training, regulations, handbooks, and other guidance fortransportation professionals; and the compilation of a number oftechniques and tools commonly identified as the community impactassessment process. This increased emphasis on the human envi-ronment was first prompted by the Intermodal SurfaceTransportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991, specifically its revital-ization of public involvement. ISTEA provided a systematic methodfor ". . . setting up and implementing a public involvement programfor a specific plan, program, or project" (US DOT 1996:11). The 1994EO 12898, as discussed above, and the subsequent orders fueledthese efforts. TEA-21, the successor to ISTEA, continues the strongemphasis on public involvement and extends the commitment toconsideration of community impacts.

In May 2000, the FHWA issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Mak-ing intended to coordinate and streamline planning and projectdevelopment as defined in the NEPA process. The proposed rulestates that it is a requirement to coordinate and streamline the plan-ning and NEPA process. The rule further requires integration ofcommunity impact assessment activities in the transportation plan-ning process and increased coordination of the planning and projectdevelopment processes.

Assessing Title VI Capability–FederalTransit Administration (FTA)/FHWA

Actions Environmental Justice in StatePlanning and Research (SPR) and Unified

Planning Work Programs (UPWPs)

At a minimum, FHWA and FTA shouldreview with States, MPOs, and transitoperators how Title VI is addressed as partof their public involvement and plandevelopment processes. Since there is likelyto be the need for some upgrading ofactivity in this area, a work element to assessand develop improved strategies for reachingminority and low- income groups throughpublic involvement efforts and to begindeveloping or enhancing analytical capabilityfor assessing impact distributions should beconsidered [emphasis added] in upcomingSPRs and UPWPs.

Federal Register: May 19, 2000 65(98)


Also in May 2000, FHWA published in theFederal Register "Policy Guidance ConcerningApplication of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of1964 to Metropolitan and Statewide Planning."(The guidance was first issued in October 1999as a joint memorandum from the FHWA andFTA.) Of particular interest to transit agenciesis the review by FHWA and FTA on how tran-sit operators address Title VI and the agencies'impact assessment capabilities.

Environmental Justice

The Executive Order (EO) 12898, FederalActions to Address Environmental Justice inMinority Populations and Low-Income Popu-lations, issued on February 11, 1994, requiredeach Federal agency to develop an agencywideenvironmental justice strategy. The EO has asits main purpose the reinforcement of existingenvironmental and civil rights legislation toensure that low-income and minority popula-tions are not subject to disproportionately highand adverse environmental effects. The Envi-ronmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of

Environmental Justice offers the following defi-nition of environmental justice:

The fair treatment and meaningful in-volvement of all people regardless ofrace, color, national origin, or incomewith respect to the development,implementation, and enforcement ofenvironmental laws, regulations, andpolicies. Fair treatment means that nogroup of people, including racial, eth-nic, or socioeconomic group, shouldbear a disproportionate share of thenegative environmental consequencesresulting from industrial, municipal,and commercial operations or the ex-ecution of federal, state, local, andtribal programs and policies (Office ofEnforcement and Compliance Assur-ance 2000).

There is a school of thought that “environ-mental justice is a discipline that focuses onthe recognition and mitigation of such discrep-ancies [i.e., disparate impacts of transportation

7INTRODUCTION

planning and devel-opment].”Forkenbrock andSchweitzer state,however, that “envi-ronmental justicerepresents a publicpolicy goal of ensur-ing that adversehuman health or en-vironmental effects ofgovernment activitiesdo not fall dispropor-tionately uponminority or low-in-come populations”(Forkenbrock 1997:1).

The EO buildsupon the directivesoutlined in the TitleVI, the National En-vironmental PolicyAct of 1969, and theClean Air Act asamended, all of for

UMTA (now known as FTA ) Circular 4702.1, May 26, 1988, in part

CHAPTER I

2. The objectives of the [FTA] Title VI program are as follows:

a. To ensure that UMTA-assisted benefits and related services are made available andare equitably distributed without regard to race, color, or national origin;

b. To ensure that the level and quality of UMTA-assisted transit services are sufficient toprovide equal access and mobility for any person without regard to race, color, ornational origin;

c. To ensure that opportunities to participate in the transit planning and decision-making processes were provided to persons without regard to race, color, or nationalorigin;

d. To ensure that decisions on the location of transit services and facilities are madewithout regard to race, color, or national origin; and

e. To ensure that corrective and remedial action is taken by all applicants and recipi-ents of UMTA assistance to prevent discriminatory treatment of any beneficiarybased on race, color, or national origin.

These objectives are the basis for the implementation of the [FTA] Title VI program.Applicants, recipients, and subrecipients of [FTA] financial assistance must adopt a Title VIcompliance program that is consistent with the requirements in this circular.


which are strongly linked to the Transporta-tion Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21).The United States Department of Transporta-tion (US DOT) subsequently set a goal tobecome a model agency for protecting and en-hancing the environment and quality of life ofU. S. citizens and issued a departmental orderon environmental justice in 1997. The FederalHighway Administration (FHWA) issued arelated administrative order in 1998.

Ethnic or racial minority and low-incomepopulation groups appear to experience differ-ences in disease and death rates; however, thedata 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 bymultiple industrial facilities or transportationfacilities. For diseases known to have environ-mental causes, data are not typicallydisaggregated by race and socioeconomicgroup. The literature suggests that racial mi-nority and low-income populations experiencehigher than average exposures to selected air

pollutants and hazardous waste facilities.This exposure does not always lead to serioushealth problems, but is cause for health con-cerns.

Beyond environmental justice, all the hu-man and environment assessment issues arebased on legislation and regulations that directevaluation in transportation decision-making,planning, project development, and subse-quent processes. These directives relate toeconomic, social, and environmental effects.The topics fall into several areas: communitycohesion; environmental impact assessment;environmental justice; landuse planning; andsocioeconomic impacts.

Finally, consideration of these issues re-lates to the distribution of and access toresources—power differentials. Manheimstates,

An essential characteristic of transporta-tion is the differential incidence of itsimpacts. Some groups will gain from anytransportation change; others may lose.Therefore, transportation choices are

9INTRODUCTION

essentially sociopolitical choices: the in-terests of different groups must bebalanced (1979:19).

The sociopolitical choices of past transpor-tation actions, particularly as related to theinterstate highway system, have dispropor-tionately affected low-income or minorityethnic communities. As early as 1970, HelenLeavitt documented the disruption of blackcommunities by superhighway plans (inpassim: 1970). In Divided Highways, TomLewis also documents several African Ameri-can communities displaced by the interstates(Lewis 1997:186-89, 197, 199). More recently,grassroots organizations have begun to chal-lenge transportation investments. Forexample, in roadway investments versus pe-destrian and bicycle facilities, AfricanAmericans and other people of color walk, bi-cycle, and use transit more than their whitecounterparts, but are more likely to be victimsof automobile-pedestrian or -bicycle crashesthan the average person (Corless and Arteaga2000:8). Grassroots organizations also havebeen successful in challenging expenditures

Legal Basis

There are several Federal regulations, statutes, policies, andorders that require assessment of the social impacts of transporta-tion actions. Many of the legal requirements relate to all federallyassisted projects. Others, however, place specific requirements onrecipients of funds from FTA.

EO 12898 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice inMinority Populations and Low-income Populations

EO 13166 Improving Access to Services for Persons with LimitedEnglish Proficiency

FHWA (Administrative Order) 6640.23 Actions to AddressEnvironmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-incomePopulations

FHWA/FTA Memorandum on Title VI Requirements in Metro-politan and Statewide Planning

Florida Administrative Code (FAC) Chapter 14-73

(continued)


light rail versus rubber tire transit in Atlantaand Los Angeles (Bullard 2000:4; Garcia2000:10). As one of the leading researchers ontransportation and environmental justicestated, "Transportation is not just law. It ispolitics and community." (Oedel 2000:10).

Legal Basis (continued)

Florida Statute §341.052

NEPA of 1969

"Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs of theDepartment of Transportation - Effectuation of Title VI of the CivilRights Act," 49 C.F.R. Part 21

Office of the Secretary of the Department of Transportation (OST)Docket No. 50125 Department of Transportation Order to Ad-dress Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and relatedstatutes

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

UMTA (FTA) Circular 4702.1, Title VI Program Guidelines forFederal Transit Administration Recipients, 26 May 1988

11THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

The Assessment Process

The CIA process is holistic and iterative,beginning with the conception of an actionthrough implementation, monitoring, andevaluation. Public involvement is an integraltool. The basic steps of the process are listedbelow:

Step 1. Determine the nature of the ac-tion and define the study area.

Step 2. Develop a community profileto gain a thorough understand-ing of the study area, includingany issues surrounding the pro-posed action. This informationprovides a baseline for analysisand is used to understand whatwould happen in the communitywith and without the action.

Step 3. Analyze each alternative identi-fied and identify any potentialimpacts and the magnitude ofthose potential impacts. Identify

which group or groups may beimpacted.

Step 4. Identify potential solutions to ad-verse impacts.

Step 5. Document the findings, includingimpacts, solutions, and commit-ments.

Figure 1. The Community Impact Assessment Process

12 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND COMMUNITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR TRANSIT AGENCIES: A REFERENCE GUIDE

For transit agencies, many of the abovesteps and the techniques discussed below aresimilar to the data collection and reporting re-quirements and monitoring procedures for theTitle VI Program for FTA recipients. The as-sessment process described, however, providesthe opportunity to enhance the agencies' as-sessment capabilities for all communities andits holistic approach fully incorporates Title VIand environmental justice issues into decision-making.

Overview of the Remainderof the Reference

The remainder of the reference providesinformation on how the assessment processcan be used to address transit actions. Thenext section, Transit Service Area Profile, com-bines the development of a community profilewith the demographic and service profile andother data collection requirements of UMTA(FTA) Circular 4702.1. The analysis of commu-nity facilities and services, populationcharacteristics, and other socioeconomic con-

siderations are the basis of the assessment pro-cess.

The following section presents examples ofpossible transportation actions and their po-tential impacts on communities. Theseexamples are discussed in the context of com-munity cohesion, safety, Titles VI and VIII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964, environmental jus-tice, landuse, mobility and travel patterns,aesthetics and visual qualities, consistencywith local, regional, and state plans, and cu-mulative and secondary impacts.Undergirding the assessment process is theuse of public involvement and outreach, par-ticularly to underrepresented segments of thepublic.

The final section is resources, includingreferences, websites, contacts, and so forth.

13TRANSIT SERVICE AREA PROFILE

Transit Service Area Profile

The FTA TPL in its resource information on theenvironmental process states the regulationsimplementing NEPA "...ensure that information onthe social and environmental impacts of any feder-ally-funded action is available to public officialsand citizens before decisions are made and before ac-tions are taken [emphasis original]." FTA also usesthe NEPA process as an "overarching umbrella" toconsider other provisions, including civil rightsand other social impacts, that affect decision-mak-ing. This may include such actions as:

• changes in geographic areas of service;

• travel times and reliability;

• frequency and hours of service;

• changes in transit patronage and de-

mand;

• changes in transit mode;

• changes in station access and circula-

tion; and

• increased traffic around stations and

depots.

Defining the Action

Step 1 of the community impact assessment process described aboveis "Determine the nature of the [proposed] action and define the studyarea." This project identification process generally has been associatedwith the project development and environment (PD&E) phase of

Figure 2. Community impacts in relation to other environmental issues


roadway or other construction projects. It is used to determine the pur-pose and need of the project and develop project alternatives as requiredby NEPA. In planning, this process is similar to problem definition.

Inclusion of community analysts, resource agencies, and the publicin this initial phase, however, provides the opportunity for new perspec-tives on the proposed action. In addition, issues or concerns of thecommunity are raised before major investments in staff, time, and otherresources are committed to particular alternatives. Early and continuouspublic involvement is central to community impact assessment.

Using Title VI Demographic andService Profile Maps, Overlays, and Charts

As discussed earlier, proposed transportation actions are associatedwith a geographic area within the service area or a proposed increase tothe service area. Transit may have an advantage over other transporta-tion agencies due to the development of maps and overlays compiled aspart of their program guidelines. These maps and overlays may be pro-vide baseline data for a more comprehensive analysis of any impacts.The benefits of the assessment process include:

• providing the opportunity for consideration of environmental

justice and Title VI issues on each proposed action by allowinginput from low-income and minority communities;

• providing the opportunity for all af-

fected communities, whether low-income, minority, or not, on eachproposed action;

• facilitating interagency coordina-

tion by identifying thesestakeholderers and seeking their in-put; and

• providing a proactive and collabo-

rative approach to problem-solv-ing.

The Title VI Demographic and Service Pro-file Map is a base map providing generalinformation on the population and key facili-ties in the service area. As service changes aresuggested, this base map is the starting pointfor more intensive analysis around a smallerstudy area.

Florida Statute §341.052 requires eligiblerecipients of public transit block grant funds to

...establish public transportation de-velopment plans consistent, to the


FTA Circular 4702.1, in partCHAPTER III

DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

3(1)(1) Demographic and Service Profile Maps, Overlays and Charts. The [Department of Justice] DOJ and [Depart-ment of Transportation] DOT regulations state that Federal agencies should require information on the minoritypopulation eligible to receive federally funded services. To address this requirement, FTA requires transit providersmeeting the threshold to prepare the following demographic and service profile maps, overlays, and charts....

1. Base Map. A legible scaled map of the transit service area which identifies:

a Each census tract by number or traffic analysis zone;b Major streets and highways;c Fixed transit facilities, including rapid rail stations, fixed transit guideways, maintenance and

garage facilities, and administrative buildings; andd Major activity centers or transit trip generators, such as the central business district, outlying high

employment areas, schools, and hospitals.

2. Overlays. Two transparencies must be submitted which show the distribution of the minority popula-tion and transit service in the service area....

a Minority Population Overlay. This overlay should encompass the entire service zone, showing thetotal minority population for each census tract or traffic analysis zone shown on the base map


FTA Circular 4702.1, in partCHAPTER III

DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS(continued)

expressed in raw numbers and as a percentagefor that tract or zone....

b Transit Service Overlay. This overlay shouldshow all transit routes, including rail lines in theservice area, with their origins and destinations.The type(s) of service provided on each routeshould be indicated (e.g., express, limited, local,or commuter service) as well as, the time ofservice (e.g., peak hour only; non-peak hour allday service).

3. Population/Racial Distribution Chart. ...FTA re-quires a chart for each census tract or trafficanalysis zone showing the actual numbers andpercent ages for each minority group within thatzone or tracts. The total population should also beshown.

A summary chart...should be prepared for the entire service area.

maximum extent feasible, with ap-proved local governmentcomprehensive plans of the units oflocal government in which the pro-vider is located.

Current legislation mandates that provid-ers provide information to regional workforceboards servicing their counties regarding theavailability of transportation services for per-sons in welfare transition programs. Thetransportation development plan (TDP), withits annual updates, is the primary "action" un-dertaken by Florida public transportationproviders. The reference to persons in the wel-fare transition program heightens the need toconsider the effects of the plan on low-incomecommunities. The community impact assess-ment process can provide a complementary setof tools to the TDP, helping to meet the require-ments of the Florida Administrative Code(FAC).

The FAC provides the rules and regula-tions for completing the TDP. The basicelements of the TDP include:


Figure 3. Study area, proposed action, bus route with bus stops, andcommunties

• community goals and policies;

• demographic, socioeconomic, land

use, transportation, and transit data;

• public involvement;

• public and private transit service

analysis; and

• a five-year implementation program

for selected alternatives.

The TDP can be an extensive data collec-tion and analysis undertaking, especially forfirst-time applicants. Some transit agencieshave in-house staff prepare the TDP, others useoutside consultants. Much of the information,however, is available through other resourceagencies 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 collectedfrom other sources.

The CIA Reference describes the study areaas communities within and immediately sur-rounding where the proposed change willoccur. This area may change due to impacts toother communities that are identified later.This is an iterative process.


The Community Profile

More and more agencies are using geographic information systemsto develop Title VI maps and for other purposes, either through in-housesystems or online resources. This base map provides a bird's eye view of

conditions in the service area and is an inte-gral part of developing a community profile.Williams et al. state,

The community profile is a summaryof baseline conditions and trends in acommunity and study area. It estab-lishes the context for assessingpotential impacts and for.. . . decision-making. Developing a communityprofile involves identifying commu-nity issues and attitudes, locatingnotable features in the study area, andassessing social and economic condi-tions and trends in the communityand region that have a bearing on thetransportation action (2000).

The baseline map, as shown in Figure 3,provides a visual presentation of the studyarea characteristics. Other elements of thecommunity profile may include a narrative de-scription of the area, with emphasis oncommunity characteristics, demographics, his-tory, and important facilities. Other graphics,

Figure 4. Developing a Community Profile

IDENTIFY COMMUNITY ISSUES & ATTITUDES

Review Secondary SourcesTalk to Knowledgeable Persons

Visit the CommunityInterview Stakeholders

REVIEW SOCIAL & ECONOMIC

CHARACTERISTICSDemographicsGrowth Trends

Labor ForceMajor Employers

Housing

SUMMARIZE

FINDINGS

Written Summary

Socio-Economic Inventory Map

INVENTORY STUDY AREA

FEATURES

Community Facilities & ServicesLand Use Characteristics

Transportation Characteristics

Aesthetic & Cultural Resources

Update

Update

IDENTIFY COMMUNITY ISSUES & ATTITUDES

Review Secondary SourcesTalk to Knowledgeable Persons

Visit the CommunityInterview Stakeholders

REVIEW SOCIAL & ECONOMIC

CHARACTERISTICSDemographicsGrowth Trends

Labor ForceMajor Employers

Housing

SUMMARIZE

FINDINGS

Written Summary

Socio-Economic Inventory Map

INVENTORY STUDY AREA

FEATURES

Community Facilities & ServicesLand Use Characteristics

Transportation Characteristics

Aesthetic & Cultural Resources

Update

Update


such as photographs, charts, and tables alsomay be presented.

The CIA Reference provides the followingguidance on developing a community profile:

• define community boundaries, and

neighborhood or subdivision bound-aries;

• locate businesses, residences, and ac-

tivity centers of potentialimpact,especially neighborhoods along high-way alternatives and nearinterchanges;

• determine demographic

characterististics, economic base, loca-tion of community facilities, and othercharacteristics;

• learn about a community within the

study area by comparing local or areapopulation demographics, land-use,and other characteristics with State orregional information; and

• continually refine the profile through

out the assessment process as impactsare identified and as situations changeover time (1996).

The community profile provides information on the "affected envi-ronment" in NEPA documentation. To complete the profile several typesof data are collected and summarized. The data collection effort and thelevel of documentation varies according to the proposed action. Ex-amples of the types of data include population and demographiccharacteristics; economic and social history and characteristics; andphysical characteristics that are related to community activities.

Socioeconomic Data Collection

As discussed earlier, transit agencies may have advantages, since aconsiderable amount of archival data may be available in-house fromdevelopment of the Title VI Demographic and Service Profile Maps. Withadditional data sources, particularly public involvement, these data canbe supplemented to assess the impacts of any action for any community.

Federal, State, and local governments are good sources of archivaldata. Planning agencies can provide demographic and economic infor-mation for a city, county, or region. This information also may besummarized in local comprehensive plans and metropolitan planningorganization (MPO) long range plans. The U.S. Census also providesmuch of this information. Demographic information is also regularlycompiled and maintained by other agencies such as school districts, hu-man service agencies, water management districts, and healthdepartments. Increasingly, more of this data is available on the Internet.


Representatives ofthese agencies alsoare good resourcepersons who may beinterviewed or other-wise participate inthe assessment pro-cess.

Inventory Com-munity Facilitiesand Resources

A compilation offacilities, services,and other resourcesin the study area ispart of the data col-lection effort.Depending on theextent of the pro-posed action, theseresources may beadded to the base

Demographic

Population and growth trendsAge distributionAverage household sizeEthnic compositionAverage household income (compare to

surrounding area)Concentrations of special groups

Children five years of age andyounger

Elderly personsMinority or low-income populationsPersons with disabilitiesReligious or ethnic groups

Economic characteristics

Unemployment rates and trendsWorkforce characterization (SIC codes)Dominant business sector typeMajor employers

Housing

Age, type, and condition of structuresVacancy rates and trendsLength of residency (percentage of resi-

dents five years or more)Extent and availability of low-income

housingTypes of residences

Rental unitsHomeowners

Types of Data


map. These data areuseful in determin-ing impacts of theproposed action toneeded services. Al-though the inventorybegins during initialdata collection, itshould be updatedand expanded as theassessment proceeds.

The inventorybuilds on data thatshould already beavailable from theTitle VI Service Map.It may include thefollowing:

• Medical and

health carefacilities

Data

Sources

Aerial and road mapsCensus Bureau and statistical abstractsCity, Donnelley, or Yellow Pages directories

and Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) databasesField surveys and reviewsInterviews and public involvement with

business owners and community leadersand residents

Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)Historical societies and State Historic

Preservation Officer (SHPO)Real estate journals and interviewsState and local government and social

service agencies (including employmentservice and workforce board)

State, local, and university librariesOther important agencies, e.g., American

Automobile Association, AmericanAssociation of Retired Persons, chambersof commerce, congregate meal sites,religious institutions, etc.

Typical Uses

Community boundaries, physical charac-teristics, activity centers, facilities,

businesses, and servicesPopulation, demographics, socioeconomic

indicators, and housingBusinesses and community facility loca-

tions and typesLocation of structures and activity patternsCommunity values, issues, and needsEconomic base, land use, long range plansHistorical background, location of historic

structures, and districtsHousing prices, characteristics of struc-

tures, and neighborhood compositionComprehensive plans, human service and

other programs, and other generalinformation

General information, historical back-ground, and socioeconomic information

Special populations and needs and issuesof underrepresented communities


• Educational facilities

• Religious institutions

• Public works and services

• Civic centers

• Recreational facilities

• Aesthetic, cultural, and historical resources

• Commercial facilities

• Land-use characteristics and transportationfacilities.

Community Issues and Attitudes

Again, public involvement is essential to community impact assess-ment. Baseline socioeconomic data is part of a continuum in theassessment process. This data is supplemented by input from the af-fected communities. The data can be used to identify potential impacts,stakeholders, and key persons or groups. Several methods may be usedto collect these data. Archival data or secondary source materials mayprovide insight into community issues. These sources include local gov-ernment comprehensive plans, local policy studies, media reports,editorials, minutes of public hearings or meetings, published local histo-ries, government reports, photographs of the area, or other documents.Other sources include:

Community Profile Elements

Baseline ConditionsSocial Characteristics

Demographic Profile & SpecialPopulations

Community Issues and AttitudesCommunity Facilities and ServicesCommunity CohesionMobilitySafety

Economic CharacteristicsLabor Force CharacteristicsMajor Employers and IndustriesLand-use and Transportation

FacilitiesExisting and Planned Land UseExisting ZoningGrowth Trends and Issues (past

and present)Notable Features in Study Area

Aesthetic CharacterHistoric Resources

Socioeconomic Baseline Map


• interviewing key individuals;

• conducting community site visits to observe how facilities are

used;

• interviewing stakeholders, those who may be directly affected by

the action.

Document Key Findings

A summary document of key findings should be prepared, includinga representative map. This document focuses on issues relevant to theproposed action. The map may provide relevant overlays of key popula-tion groups, neighborhoods, facilities, and other notable features. Themap later may be used to compare alternatives to potential impacts andto inform the community and agency staff of the trade-offs among alter-natives. The community profile document is a record of initial findingsthat is updated throughout the assessment. It may be included in NEPAdocumentation or used as a stand-alone document.


Florida Administrative Code (FAC)Chapter 14-73 Public Transportation, in part

14-73.001 (6)(c)2. b. State Public Transit Block Grant fundingrequires the applicant to develop and adopt a Transit DevelopmentPlan (TDP)...A TDP shall comply with the following elements at aminimum.

I. The TDP shall identify and list community goals and policieswith respect to transportation and land use in general and specifi-cally to transit service.

II. The TDP shall identify and quantify the community’s need fortransit service using demographic, socioeconomic, land use, trans-portation, and transit data as appropriate. There shall be an oppor-tunity for the public to express the need for transit service improve-ments, such as but not limited to, Citizens Advisory Committees andworkshops.

III. The TDP shall include an analysis of the services currentlyprovided in the community by public and private transit serviceproviders in terms of quality and quantity of service...The processfor selecting an alternative for implementation shall include anopportunity for public participation....

V. The TDP shall not be in conflict with the approved localgovernment comprehensive plan and the comprehensive (longrange) transportation plan....

Actions and Impacts

The initial community profile document ,including the baseline data, provides a startingpoint for the analysis of the effects the pro-posed action on the community. Throughoutdata collection, review, and summary, commu-nity issues and needs are identified. In theprocess of evaluating existing transit servicesand developing alternatives, the effects of thealternatives or "actions" also must be evalu-ated. The CIA Reference suggests theseguidelines:

• Keep community goals in mind when

identifying impacts.

• Be cognizant of both positive and

negative impacts.

• Consider both temporary and long-

term impacts as well as secondary andcumulative effects.

• Focus on the magnitude of an issue or

controversy, as it determines the levelof specificity needed to address theissue.

25ACTIONS AND IMPACTS

• Recognize the public's perception of

impacts. If the public identifies issues,then review and address these issues.

Interconnection of Impacts

The above list of impacts is not exhaustive,nor do impacts occur in isolation. Differentimpacts may relate to each other. Impacts alsomay be direct, indirect, or cumulative, or theeffects counterbalancing. Direct impacts gener-ally have immediate or primary effects, such asrelocation of residents or businesses or loss ofaccess. Indirect impacts may be inadvertent orextend beyond the physical location of the ac-tion. Cumulative impacts may result when anaction is considered in light of other actionsthat taken individually have different implica-tions than when considered together. Effects ofan action also may be counterbalancing, bothbeneficial and adverse. For example, siting atransfer terminal in a community may increasemobility for residents in surrounding neigh-borhoods, but also may increase traffic, noise,and other adverse impacts.

Civil Rights and Environmental Justice

Central to civil rights and environmentaljustice concerns is that the proposed actiondoes not result in disproportionately high oradverse impacts, particularly to low-income orminority groups. The effects of the proposedaction, beneficial and adverse, should be equi-tably distributed, in a nondiscriminatorymanner. To assure equity in the process, ef-forts should be made to ensure that affectedcommunities have access to the decisionmak-ing process, decisionmakers, and information.Special efforts may be necessary to includeunderrepresented groups, such as personswith disabilities, and persons unfamiliar withthe democratic process, such as recent immi-grants or persons who have historically notparticipated in the process.

Executive Order 12898 specifically ad-dresses disproportionately high and adverseimpacts on low-income and minority commu-nities. Unfortunately, such impacts tend tooccur as a result of cumulative or indirectimpacts. That is, overtime, low-income or mi-nority communities may experience the effects (Continued on page 28.)


Possible Impacts

Access andMobility

NonmotorizedAccessWhat effect will theaction have onbicyclists' andpedestrians' accessto facilities?

GeneralMultimodalismHow does theaction affect accessto other modes oftransportation?

Displacement

Business Displace-mentsDoes the actionrequire displace-ment of businesses,religious institu-tions, or otherspecial landuse?Do the businessesor institutionshave characteris-tics unique to thecommunity?

NeighborhoodsWhat are theeffects on theneighborhoods?

RelocationAre relocationsites available?

ResidentsWill the actionrequire displace-ment of residents?What types ofresidential unitsare affected? Areany residentsfrom specialpopulationgroups, e.g.,elderly, low-income, personswith disabilities?

Economic

EmploymentWill the proposedaction improveaccess to employ-ment centers?

BusinessWill the proposedaction affectbusiness access,activity, orvisibility?

Property valuesWill the proposedaction affectproperty values,i.e, relocations,changes in landuse?

Land-use

Compatibility withGoalsIs the actionconsistent with thelocal plans? Thecommunity's goals?

Tax baseWill the proposedaction affect the taxbase, e.g., changesin property values,changes in activity,removal of taxableproperty from thebase?


Physical Intrusions

BarriersWill the actioncreate a barriersuch as from wallsor fencing?

SoundsWill the actionincrease noise orvibrations?

Other intrusionsWill the actionincrease dust orodors? Will itdecrease visibility?Create a shadow-ing effect onproperty?

Possible Impacts (continued)

Public Services

Use of PublicFacilitiesWill the actionincrease access topublic facilities(e.g., schools,recreationfacilities, etc.)?

Compatibilitywith PlansIs the proposedaction consistentwith local plansand zoning?

Safety

Pedestrians andBicyclistsHow will theproposed actionaffect the safety ofnonmotorists?

EmergencyResponseWill the proposedaction affect theresponse time ofemergencyworkers (e.g., fire,police, medical,etc.)?

Social

CommunityCohesionWill the actionaffect interactionamong personsand groups? Willit change socialrelationships andpatterns?

IsolationWill groups ofpeople be sepa-rated from others?

PopulationChangesWill the proposedaction causeredistribution?

Quality of LifeHow will theaction affect thequality of life?

ValuesWill the actioncause a change insocial values?

Visual

AestheticsHow will theaction affect thecommunity'scharacter? Whatare potentialaesthetic effects?


Civil Rights and Related Legislation

EO 12898 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations andLow-income Populations

FHWA (Administrative Order) 6640.23 Actions to Address Environmental Justice in MinorityPopulations and Low-income Populations

FHWA/FTA Memorandum on Title VI Requirements in Metropolitan and Statewide Planning

"Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs of the Department of Transportation -Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act," 49 C.F.R. Part 21

Office of the Secretary of the Department of Transportation (OST) Docket No. 50125 Depart-ment of Transportation Order to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations andLow-Income Populations

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and related statutes

UMTA (FTA) Circular 4702.1, Title VI Program Guidelines for Federal Transit AdministrationRecipients, 26 May 1988

of adverse impactsbrought about by theactions of one ormore agencies.While the commu-nity profile may helpto identify such ac-tions, publicinvolvement andother community im-pact assessmenttechniques will helpto assure identifica-tion of these effectswith the help of theaffected communi-ties.

Assessment Tools

The CIA Referencestates that there areseveral approaches


to analyze impacts. The primary three dis-cussed in the primer are comprehensive,comparative, and incremental. When evaluat-ing impacts comprehensively, as much data aspossible is collected, analyzed, and a determi-nation is made. In general, comparativeanalyses are based on evaluations of similari-ties and differences between the proposedaction and previous actions. Incrementalevaluations build on data overtime until a de-termination can be made. The primerrecommends that when using any approach toconsider effects with and without the proposedaction.

Selected Tools

Florida transit agency representatives indi-cated in a survey that a number of techniquesare used to analyze the impacts of their

Figure 5. How impacts may interconnect


actions. The following techniques or tools arelisted in order of frequency of responses:

1. Public Involvement2. Brainstorming3. Comparisons4. Statistical Analysis5. Expert Consultation6. Peer Reviews7. Market Research8. GIS/Databanks9. Internet/World Wide Web10. Map Overlays11. Delphi Techniques

Several techniques may be combined togain a better understanding of thecommunity's concerns or to assure that differ-ent groups in the community are reached. Theemphasis is not on a particular technique, butrather the involvement of the community inidentifying impacts.

Public Involvement

As stated earlier, public involvementundergirds the CIA process. The CIA Referencestates that the public can participate as fol-lows:

• Development of the action's purpose

and need and identification of alterna-tives.

• Development of the community profile.

• Identification and analysis of impacts.

• Identification of avoidance, minimiza-

tion, mitigation, andenhancement opportunities.

The principles of public involvement in thecommunity impact accessment process includeearly and continuous communication betweenaffected communities and the proposingagency. The process also includes open dia-logue.


Effective public involvement includes noti-fication of proposed actions and activities,effective communication, and appropriate tech-niques to reach affected communities.Suggested techniques include:

• Ad hoc task forces

• Advisory committees

• Community events

• Field offices

• Focus groups

• Internet websites

• Newsletters

• Personal contact

• Public meetings

• Questionnaires and surveys

• Workshops

Other techniques are available and shouldbe explored and used as appropriate through-out the assessment. Consideration also shouldbe given to selecting the appropriate staff or

Resolving AdverseImpacts

Avoid the impact

Minimize the effects

Mitigate the effects

Enhance thecommunity

other professionals to aid in identifying theright tools or media. The resource section ofthis document has more information.

Resolving Adverse Impacts

Throughout the assessment process, tran-sit analysts should seek to address adverseimpacts as they are identified. The CIA Refer-ence states that there are four ways to addressadverse impacts. These should be consideredin order, although opportunities for enhance-ment should always be sought.

Since the CIA process is iterative, efforts toaddress one impact may give rise to anotheradverse impact. Here, again, considerationshould be given to addressing impacts in rela-tion to others. The public should participate inthe efforts to identify potential adverse impactsand solutions.

The Community Impact Assessment Handbookadvises that comments made to address


impacts should be documented. This is part of the recordof findings whether for NEPA documentation or a stand-alone summary of the assessment. The documentationalso provides a record of the commitments made in theearly phases of the assessment and a report on the statusof the commitments.

Documenting Findings

Documentation takes place throughout the assess-ment process. For some actions, specific documentation isrequired to comply with Federal or State regulations, e.g.NEPA, the TDP. These regulations provide suggested for-mats for documentation. In addition, the handbook, andthe CIA Reference, provide recommendations on where theCIA information may appear within environmental docu-mentation.

Within the TDP, CIA information may be presented asfollows:

• Study Area Base Data (Community Profile).

• Evaluation of Existing Transit Services

and the Development of Alternatives.

Other formatting guidelines that may be considered,particularly for stand-alone documents, include:

• an executive summary;

• topics related to the action and as required by leg-

islation;

• a summary of public involvement activities, in-

cluding substantive comments and findings;

• graphics;

• an objective, unbiased tone;

• conclusions, including concerns,alternatives or

solutions, and commitments.

Community impact assessment techniques may be in-corporated into transit agencies' decision-making overtime. As changes in services are considered or with up-dates to the TDP, staff should seek opportunities to partnerwith the affected communities to identify potential impacts,address adverse impacts, and find ways to enhance com-munities.

33RESOURCES

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 Arteaga2000 Pedestrian Safety and Social Jus-

tice. In Progress: Surface Transportation PolicyProject. Vol. X(1):8.

Federal Highway Administration et alia1996 Community Impact Assessment: A

Quick Reference for Transportation. FHWA-PD-96-036. Washington, DC: U.S. Department ofTransportation.

Federal Transit Administration, Office of Planningn.d. The Environmental Process. Elec-

tronic document, http://www.fta.dot.gov/office/planning/ep/index.html.

n.d. Social & Economic Impacts. Electronic document,http://www.fta.dot.gov/office/planning/ep/ subjarea/se.html.

n.d. Transportation Impacts. Electronic document,http://www.fta.dot.gov/office/planning/ep/subjarea/trans.html.

Forkenbrock, David J. and Lisa A. Schweitzer1997 Environmental Justice and Transportation In-

vestment Policy. Iowa City: University of Iowa,Public Policy Center.

Manheim, Marvin L.1979 Fundamentals of Transportation Systems

Analysis, Volume 1 Basic Concepts. Cambridge,MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Oedel, David G.2000 The Long March to Transportation

Justice in Macon. Progress: Surface TransportationPolicy Project X(1):6.


Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance2000 Environmental Justice: U. S. Environmental

Protection Agency. Electronic document. http://es.epa.gov/oeca/main/ej/index.html.

Williams, Kristine A. et alia2000 Community Impact Assessment: A Handbook

for Transportation Professionals. Electronic document. http://www.cutr.usf.edu/pubs/cia_handbook.htm.

Bibliography

Bass, R. and A. Herson1993 Mastering NEPA: A Step-by-Step Approach.

Solano Press.

Bowles, R.T.1981 Social Impact Assessment in Small Communi-

ties. Toronto: Butterworths.

Burchell, R., Listokin, D., et alia1994 Development Impact Assessment Handbook.

Urban Land Institute: Washington, D.C.

Burdge, R.J.1985 Social Impact Assessment and the Planning

Process. Planning & Public Policy. 11(2), August .1990 Social Impact Assessment and the Public In-

volvement Process. Environmental ImpactAssessment Review 10(1/2): 81-90.

Branch, K, et al. Guide to Social Assessment. Boulder, CO:Westview Press, 1984.

Burdge, R.J., A Community Guide to Social Impact Assess-ment, Middleton, WI: Social Ecology Press, 1994.

Canter, L.1996 Environmental Impact Assessment. Second

Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Canter, L., B. Atkinson, and F.L. Lesitritz, eds.1985 Impact of Growth: A Guide for Socio-Economic

Impact Assessment and Planning. Chelsea MI:Lewis.

35RESOURCES

Conner, D.1994 The Social Profile. Constructive Citizen Partici-

pation.Council on Environmental Quality

1997 Considering Cumulative Effects Under the Na-tional Environmental Policy Act. Washington, DC:Executive Office of the President.

Creighton, J. L.1981 The Public Involvement Manual. Cambridge:

ABT Books.1992 Involving Citizens in Community Decision

Making: A Guidebook. Washington, DC: Programfor Community Problem Solving.

Environmental Justice Resource Center1996 Proceedings of the National Conference on En-

vironmental Justice and Transportation: BuildingModel Partnerships. Atlanta: Clarke-Atlanta Uni-versity.

Federal Transit Administration.1995 Transportation, Environmental Justice, and So-

cial Equity Conference Proceedings. Prepared bythe Surface Transportation Policy Project and Cen-ter for Neighborhood Technology. Washington,DC: U.S. Department of Transportation.

1997 Planning, Developing, and Implementing Com-munity-Sensitive Transit. Washington, DC: Officeof Planning. October .

Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Ad-ministration

1994 Innovations in Public Involvement for Trans-portation Planning. Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Transportation. January .

1996 Public Involvement Techniques for Transporta-tion Decisionmaking. Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Transportation. Summer.

Florida Atlantic University-Florida International UniversityJoint Center for Environmental and Urban Problems

1998 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts of Trans-portation Projects - Final Report. Prepared for theFlorida Department of Transportation.


Finsterbusch, Kurt1980 Understanding Social Impact: Assessing the

Effects of Public Projects. Beverly Hills, CA: SagePublications, Inc.

Finsterbusch, Kurt, Lynn Llewellyn, and C.P. Wolf, eds.1983 Social Impact Assessment Methods. Beverly

Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. .

International Association for Impact Assessmentn.d. Electronic documents. http://iaia.ext.nodak.edu/

IAI

Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Prin-ciples for Social Impact Assessment

1994 Guidelines and Principles for Social ImpactAssessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department ofCommerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad-ministration.

Louis Berger & Associates, Inc.1998 NCHRP Report 403: Guidance for Estimating

the Indirect Effects of Proposed TransportationProjects. Washington, DC: National AcademyPress.

Mueller, Beth A. et alia1990 Environmental Factors and the Risk for Child-

hood Pedestrian-Motor Vehicle CollisonOccurrence. 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. B.,1996 Designing the Right Process for Involving the

Public. Resource Papers for the 1996 ITE Interna-tional Conference.

37RESOURCES

Program for Community Problem Solvingn.d. Facing Racial and Cultural Conflicts: Tools for

Rebuilding Community, Second Edition. Washing-ton, DC: National Civic League.

Skidmore, Owings & Merrill1975 Summary of the Environmental Assessment

Notebook Series. Prepared for U.S. Department ofTransportation DOT P 5600.4. The Notebook Seriescontains the following individual documents:Notebook 1: Identification of Transportation Alter-

nativesNotebook 2: Social ImpactsNotebook 3: Economical ImpactsNotebook 4: Physical ImpactsNotebook 5: Organization and Content of Environ-

mental Assessment MaterialsNotebook 6: Environmental Assessment Reference

Book

Stoffle, Richard et alia1981 Establishing Native American Concerns in a

Social Impact Assessment. Social Impact Assess-ment 65-66(4):9.

Transportation Research Board Committee A1D042000 Committee on Public Involvement in Transpor-

tation. Electronic document. http://www.ch2m.com/TRB_PI/default.asp.

Transportation Research Board Committee A1F022002 Committee on Environmental Analysis in

Transportation. Electronic document. http://www.itre.ncsu.edu/A1F02/default.htm.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.1998 Final Guidance for Incorporating Environmen-

tal Justice Concerns in EPA's NEPA ComplianceAnalysis. Washington, DC: EPA Office of FederalActivities.

U.S. Department of Transportation1994 Evaluating the Environmental Impacts of Met-

ropolitan Transportation System Plans.1998 Community Impact Mitigation: Case Studies.

Publication No. FHWA-PD-98-024. Washington,DC: Federal Highway Administration: Office ofEnvironment and Planning. May.


Vanclay, F. and D. Bronstein, eds.1996 Environmental and Social Impact Assessment.

New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Ward, Beverly G., Ph.D. et alia2000 Community Impact Assessment. Electronic

documents. http://www.ciatrans.net.2001 Community Impact Assessment in Florida

Transportation Projects: Case Studies. Electronicdocument. http://www.cutr.usf.edu/pubs/CIA inFlorida.pdf.

Wilson, Frank & Associates, Inc.1994 NCHRP Report 364, Public Outreach

Handbook for Departments of Transportation.Washington, D.C.


Project Team

FDOTEd Coven, Manager, Public Transit OfficeAmy Datz, Project Manager

CUTRBeverly G. Ward, Ph.D., Principal InvestigatorKristine M. Williams, AICP, Senior Research AssociateMartin Catalá, Research AssociateJeffrey Kramer, Research AssociateJason Winoker, Research AssociateHolly Alderman, Program AssistantGrace Hunt, Program AssistantKimberlee Gabourel, Graduate Research AssistantJon Godwin, Graduate Research AssistantChrystal Smith, Graduate Research Assistant



National Center for Transit ResearchCenter for Urban Transportation Research

University of South Florida

Photographs by Beverly G. Ward

Documents

Community Impact Assessment and Environmental Justice for ... · UMTA (now known as FTA ) Circular 4702.1, May 26, 1988, in part CHAPTER I 2. The objectives of the [FTA] Title VI