Planning Data


31
Mar 10

Indirect Impacts in Recent Transportation EISs and EAs

While uploading documents to the Cubit NEPA Library, I researched 30 transportation EIS and EAs from various states that were published in 2009 or early 2010, focusing on the indirect impact section of the documents. The chart below shows what types of indirect impacts the documents discussed.

What I learned from my unscientific Indirect Impacts survey:

  • Almost 100% of documents noted that the proposed project would indirectly impact land usage. Since the documents I studied were all transportation projects, this is not surprising.
  • Traffic indirect impacts encompassed almost 70% of the researched documents. Again, the documents I studied were infrastructure projects so long-term traffic effects should be prevalent, but did not necessarily need mitigation.
  • 47% of the documents addressed socioeconomic indirect effects. Perhaps the number of documents that were concerned with this issue wasn’t higher, because some proposed projects were in rural locations and not near existing residents.
  • Water Resources, Wetlands, and Biological indirect impacts were prevalent in about the same percentage of documents. Maybe the percentages aren’t higher because some agencies encompassed these effects within the broader category of land use.
  • A mere 13% of the documents addressed air quality as an indirect impact.

A Closer Look at the Indirect Impact Section:

The most ambiguous part of exploring possible indirect impacts is the requirement for the effects to be “reasonably foreseeable.” Even the guidelines for analyzing potential indirect impacts aren’t very clear. What if an area’s population grows dramatically within the next ten years, regardless of whether or not an improvement is made to an existing roadway? NEPA documents are supposed to address indirect impacts of all of the proposed alternatives, including the no-build alternative where no changes would be made. But after doing my research, I’ve discovered that some documents don’t separate the analysis of indirect and direct effects, or they just analyze direct and cumulative impacts without delving into studying indirect impacts separately. Perhaps because indirect impacts are very difficult to distinguish from direct impacts or already existing or future conditions, agencies don’t spend as much time analyzing them. In conclusion, indirect impacts are difficult to predict but must be addressed.


23
Mar 10

But Is It Healthy? (Part 1) – Health Impact Assessment and NEPA

Alaskan North Slope Oil Production

Alaskan North Slope Oil Production

You’ve never heard of Nuiqsut, Alaska, but this small Inupiat community located 7 miles from a large oil development is changing how NEPA documents are written.  According to a former mayor, the health impacts of oil development show “up in our health statistics, alcohol treatment programs, emergency service needs, police responses – you name it.”

While preparing an EIS for an oil and gas lease of the National Petroleum Reserve, the Bureau of Land Management conducted the first-ever joint federal Health Impact Assessment/Environmental Impact Statement (HIA/EIS) to address the community’s health concerns. You can read the innovative Northeast NPR-A EIS and learn more in the PowerPoint presentation “Integrating Health and Environmental Impact Assessment”.

The idea of including health in an EIS document is covered by NEPA (Sec 1508.27 (b)(2)Sec. 2 [42 USC §4321]), which encourages agencies to include HIAs in their NEPA documents.  According to Aaron Wernham, Director of the Health Impact Project, 4 other HIA/EIS have begun and the EPA in California is calling for an HIA on large highway project and port expansion.  It seems that new environmental analysis requirements start in California before trickling across the rest of the nation, so agencies in your backyard may require HIAs in your NEPA documents in the near future.

What is an HIA?

Essentially, an HIA is a tool to measure potential health impacts of policies or projects, in an attempt to avoid “unintended health consequences and unexpected costs,” according to the Health Impact Project.  They combine qualitative and quantitative methods, and can vary in scope and complexity, depending on the project and funding.

How does the HIA work?

Here are the major HIA steps, (according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention):

  • Screening – Identify if the project would benefit from an HIA.
  • Scoping – Identify which health effects to consider.
  • Assessment – Identify risks and benefits, and which people will be affected.
  • Recommendation – Suggest changes/alternatives to proposals to mitigate adverse health effects.
  • Reporting – Present the results.
  • Evaluation and Monitoring – Identify indicators and track the outcomes of the Recommendation.

Where can I learn more?

  • The Health Impact Project is calling for proposals for demonstrations of HIA projects. Grant money is awarded, and the website provides a wealth of helpful info regarding the process, and the future of HIAs.
  • The American Planning Association offers a free in-depth online workshop (requires realplayer) on HIAs, complete with a quiz, an evaluation, interactive tools, and tons of helpful resources.

Speaking of helpful resources:

Incorporating Health Impact Assessment into Community Design and Transportation Decisions.  A video presentation from February 23, 2010.

Integrating Health into Environmental Impact Reports.  The San Francisco Department of Public Health and the San Francisco Planning Department are leading the way with this process. On this page, you can go to their Eastern Neighborhoods Community HIA (pdf).

So, what do YOU think – is the HIA a valuable tool or more paperwork? Have you worked on a project that required an HIA? Share your opinion in the comments below.


15
Mar 10

American Community Survey Sumlevel

I needed to know the sumlevels for the American Community Survey today. I couldn’t find this data anywhere online. Finally, I googled “Geographic Summary Level Census” and found the information that I needed.

Here’s the information for anyone googling “American Community Survey sumlevel.”

Sumlev

Sumlevel Codes
010 Nation

020 Region – Four groupings of states established by the Census Bureau in 1942 for the presentation of census data.

030 Division – A grouping of States within a census geographic region, established by the Census Bureau for the presentation of census data.

040 State – the primary legal subdivision of the United States

050 County – the primary legal subdivision of every state except Alaska and Louisiana

061 Minor Civil Division – the Census Bureau produces estimates for MCDs in 20 states. These legally defined county subdivisions are known by various descriptions, including towns (in New England, New York and Wisconsin), townships, and districts.

071 MCD Place Part – incorporated places can cross MCD boundaries, therefore a place name (with the pt. following it) can appear in more than one MCD. The 071 code designates that part of a place that is within one MCD.

157 County Place Part – incorporated places can cross county boundaries, therefore a place name (with the pt. following it) can appear in more than one county. The 157 code designates that part of a place that is within one county.

162 Incorporated Place total

170 Consolidated City – An incorporated place that has combined its governmental functions with a county or subcounty entity but contains one or more incorporated places that continue to function as local governments within the consolidated government.

172 Consolidated City-Place within Consolidated City – An incorporated place or consolidated city “balance” within a consolidated city

The source of the above information is: http://www.census.gov/popest/geographic/


8
Mar 10

Creating Jobs Over Coffee – A new business incubator model could help build jobs in your city

Kristen’s article in the December 2009 American Planning Association’s Planning Magazine is part of the Dillingham Comprehensive Plan! She’s excited that someone actually read it and found it helpful!

Here’s a link to the Creating Jobs Over Coffee article in the Dillingham Comprehensive Plan: http://www.agnewbeck.com/pdf/bristolbay/Dillingham_Comp_Plan/APA_BusinessIncubator.pdf


3
Mar 10

Environmental Justice Analysis for Toll Roads: The Past, Present & Future

Last month, Sarah Stroman and Brandy Huston of the Environmental Affairs Division of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and Jolanda Prozzi of the Center for Transportation Research at the University Texas at Austin gave a presentation about Environmental Justice and Texas Toll Roads to the Heart of Texas Chapter of WTS.

The Past

Sarah presented on the legal framework of environmental justice analysis.  You can watch Sarah’s portion of the presentation here:

The Present

Brandy presented on the current state of TxDOT guidance.  One very interesting portion of her talk was a list of major elements of environmental justice analysis.  Brandy asked a series of questions that I’ve outlined below.

Major Elements of Environmental Justice Analysis

1. Users and Options

  • Who is using the facility?
  • What are their choices?
  • How do you figure out who is using the facility?
  • Are there free, parallel access roads?
  • What are the non-toll routes?

2. Accessibility, Policies and Collection Methods

  • Where is the excess toll revenue going?
  • What kind of projects are being funding with the toll revenue?
  • How easy is it to get a toll tag?
  • Does a toll tag require a credit card?
  • What are the payment options other than a toll tag?
  • How far do people have to go to get a tag?
  • What are the payment choices?
  • How much more does it cost if users don’t have a toll tag?

3. Economic Analysis

Today, TxDOT uses a simple reasonable scenario analysis to determine economic impact.

  1. How often is someone likely to use the facility?
  2. How many times per year?
  3. How much would a reasonable scenario cost (i.e. likely times to use the facility x number of times per year)?
  4. What percentage of income would the reasonable scenario be for a person of low-income versus a person of medium income?

You can watch Brandy’s portion of the presentation here:

The Future

Finally, Jolanda presented her research on the Appraisal of Available Analytical Tools To Assess Environmental Justice Impacts of Toll Road Projects.  I was pleasantly surprised to learn that Texas is a leader in analysis of potential environmental justice concerns followed closely by Washington DOT.  Learn more about the methods used by the different states in Jolanda’s portion of the presentation here:

Does your company block YouTube? If so, check out the PowerPoint of the presentation here.

Environmental Justice and Toll Roads

View more presentations from kcarney.

If you’re interested in a quick estimate of environmental justice groups in an area, check out Cubit’s free EJ Estimator.

Environmental Justice Estimator

Environmental Justice Estimator

A big thank you to Sarah, Brandy, Jolanda and the Heart of Texas Chapter of WTS for letting us record the presentation and make it available.

What? You’re not a member of WTS? Learn more about the Heart of Texas Chapter of WTS here.

If there’s any portion of the presentation that you’d like to discuss further, leave me a comment below.