Environmental Justice in NEPA: Detailed Presentation

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena:

Project Highlights

January 2013

See template

General instructions for speakers:

• The speaker's notes on some slides provide more details than appropriate for a presentation. They are meant to provide enough information so that a speaker unfamiliar with the cases can understand the context and respond to questions.
• When delivering the material, consider adjusting the notes of the more detailed slides into your own words, using the key points listed as a guide.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Purpose and Agenda

• Provide an overview of EJ and recent FHWA guidance
• Introduce 10 recent transportation projects addressing EJ in NEPA
• Present effective practices in EJ analysis

None

• Transportation practitioners struggle with identifying and assessing environmental justice (EJ) impacts as part of project reviews conducted under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
• The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) sponsored the development of 10 case studies focused on addressing EJ as part of the review of transportation projects under NEPA
• The case studies are meant to serve as a reference of effective practices for practitioners
• The purposes of this presentation are to: (1) provide an overview of EJ and recent FHWA guidance on how to address EJ as part of the NEPA review, (2) introduce the case studies, and (3) highlight the effective practices used in the cases to address EJ

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Supporting Reference Materials

Visit FHWA's EJ Website for:

• Detailed case studies
• Project report
• Presentation slides
• Extensive reference material

Screenshot of the FHWA EJ Website with URL incorporated:

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/environmental_justice/

There is extensive help for practitioners available through the FHWA's EJ website (URL shown), including:

• 10 detailed case studies of the projects featured in this presentation
• A report summarizing the cases, effective practices, and methods
• Guidance on addressing EJ, including the 2011 FHWA "Guidance on Environmental Justice and NEPA"

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

What is Environmental Justice?

• Populations addressed by EJ:
  • Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Asian, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
  • Low-income

None

Key Point: EJ addresses minority and low-income populations.

• According to the 1994 Executive Order (EO) 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, EJ addresses minority and low-income populations
• Minority populations are defined by the 1997 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Policy Directive 15, "Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity" and include these groups: Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Asian, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
• The U.S. DOT considers any person whose household income (or in the case of a community or group, whose median household income) is at or below the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services poverty guidelines to be of low-income

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

What is Environmental Justice?

Three principles of US DOT's EJ strategy:

• Avoid, minimize, or mitigate disproportionately high and adverse effects
• Ensure full and fair participation in transportation decision-making
• Prevent the denial of, reduction in, or significant delay of benefits

None

The Revised DOT Environmental Justice Strategy was issued in March of 2012. The revised strategy continues to reflect DOT's commitment to EJ principles and to integrating those principles into DOT programs, policies and activities. The three basic principles of the DOT's strategy to address EJ are:

• Avoid, minimize, or mitigate disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects, including social and economic effects, on minority and low-income populations
• Ensure the full and fair participation by all potentially affected communities in the transportation decision-making process
• Prevent the denial of, reduction in or significant delay in the receipt of benefits by minority and low-income populations

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Guidance on Addressing EJ in NEPA from FHWA

FHWA's 2011 "Guidance on Environmental Justice in NEPA" addresses:

1. Identifying existing minority and low-income populations
2. Explaining coordination, access to information, and participation
3. Identifying disproportionately high and adverse effects
4. Proceeding when there are disproportionately high and adverse effects
5. Judicial review

Effective practices from the featured projects focus on #1, #2, and #3

In 2011, FHWA issued "Guidance on Environmental Justice in NEPA". The guidance addresses five topical areas:

1. Identifying existing minority and low-income populations
2. Explaining coordination, access to information, and participation
3. Identifying disproportionately high and adverse effects
4. Proceeding when there are disproportionately high and adverse effects
5. Judicial review

Most of the effective practices from the featured projects are focused on the first three of these. Let's explore these in more detail before introducing the projects.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Identifying Existing Minority and Low-Income Populations

1. Gather data, identify groups or clusters of minority or low-income persons
2. Provide demographic information on the general population
3.  
   1. No minority or low-income populations in the study area -> no EJ analysis
   2. Minority or low-income populations in the study area -> EJ analysis
4.  
   1. No adverse effects on EJ populations -> document determination
   2. Potential adverse effects on EJ populations -> further analysis

Key Point: The first step of an EJ analysis is to identify low-income and minority populations, using Census data and other sources. If there are no EJ populations identified in the study area, then this is documented and no further analysis is needed. If low-income or minority populations are identified, the analysis continues.

There were EJ (low-income and/or minority) populations identified in the study area for each of the featured projects. Census data were used as a primary means of identifying these populations along with many other sources.

The 2011 FHWA Guidance recommends using Census information and other relevant information sources to; gather data and identify minority or low-income persons in the EJ study area and notes that small clusters or dispersed populations should not be overlooked.

1. In the NEPA document, provide demographic information on the general population in the project study area. Social characteristics should include identification of the ethnicity, age, mobility and income level of the population. These data elements, while not all required for an EJ analysis, are important to provide context for understanding area demographics.
2. When there are no minority or low-income populations in the study area, no EJ analysis is required.
3. When minority or low-income populations are present, but it has been determined that there will be no adverse effects on identified EJ populations by the proposed project [based on the EJ analysis], the NEPA document should reflect that determination...
4. When there are minority and low-income populations in the study area that may be adversely impacted, FHWA provides further guidance for determining whether there is a disproportionately high and adverse impact on the population.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Coordination, Access to Information, and Participation

• Document efforts to ensure meaningful opportunities for public participation
• Document the degree of involvement
• Include views about the project and mitigation
• Describe steps to resolve any controversy

Key Point: Enhanced public involvement to ensure meaningful participation of low-income and minority populations in the environmental review process informs every aspect of the EJ analysis, from identifying populations and understanding what is important to communities, to characterizing impacts and developing appropriate mitigation measures. The featured projects provide a wealth of information about both how to reach low-income and minority populations and how to use the information and input gathered from them.

Additional Information:

In the 2011 guidance, FHWA recommends that the NEPA document:

• Document efforts to ensure meaningful opportunities for public participation
• Document the degree to which the affected groups of minority and/or low-income populations have been involved in the decision-making process related to the alternative selection, impact analysis, and mitigation
• Include public views about the project and any proposed mitigation
• Describe what steps are being taken to resolve any controversy that exists

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Identifying Disproportionately High and Adverse Effects

The adverse effect is predominantly borne by an EJ population or is appreciably more severe or greater in magnitude on the EJ population than on other populations.

1. Summarize EJ considerations, including beneficial and adverse effects
2. Compare the impacts on the EJ populations to impacts on the overall population
3. For impacts, consider mitigation, following protocol and enhancing communities
4. No disproportionately high and adverse effects considering mitigation and benefits -> document
5. Adverse effects remain after mitigation -> Determine if they are disproportionately high and adverse -> follow guidance

Key Point: If an impact is disproportionately high and adverse, it means the adverse effect is predominantly borne by an EJ population or is appreciably more severe or greater in magnitude on the EJ population than on other populations. This determination is made with any mitigation and off-setting benefits taken into account. The featured projects demonstrate that this aspect of the EJ analysis is a challenge.

The 10 featured projects confirm that determining when a project has a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low-income or minority populations remains one of the more challenging aspects of the EJ analysis.

As per FHWA Order 6640.23, a disproportionately high and adverse effect on a minority or low-income population means the adverse effect is predominantly borne by such population or is appreciably more severe or greater in magnitude on the minority or low-income population than the adverse effect suffered by the non-minority or non-low-income population.

1. EJ considerations should be summarized in the appropriate section of the NEPA document. References to other sections in the NEPA document can be cited. The beneficial and adverse effects on the overall population and on minority and low-income populations in particular, need to be addressed.
2. Compare the impacts on the minority and/or low-income populations with respect to the impacts on the overall population within the project area. Fair distribution of the beneficial and adverse effects of the proposed action is the desired outcome.
3. Under NEPA, consideration must be given to mitigation for all adverse effects regardless of the type of population affected. Discuss what measures are being considered for alternatives to avoid or mitigate the adverse effects. Follow the protocol of avoidance first, then minimization, and finally measures to offset or rectify the adverse effects. Using opportunities to enhance and increase sustainability in communities and neighborhoods is desirable. Any activity that demonstrates sensitivity to special needs should be highlighted, such as accommodations for transit dependency or addressing the need for translators.
4. If there are no disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority and/or low-income populations once mitigation and benefits are considered, that determination should be stated in the document and the EJ evaluation is complete.
5. If the effects remain adverse after mitigation is considered, then a determination must be made whether those effects are disproportionately high and adverse with respect to minority and/or low-income populations. If the effects on minority and/or low-income populations are disproportionately high and adverse even with mitigation and benefits to those populations taken into account, the next section of guidance must be followed.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Featured Projects and Effective Practices

• 10 projects
• Brief summary and context
• Description of effective practices

None

The next set of slides introduces 10 recent transportation projects that addressed EJ in NEPA reviews. For each project, one slide introduces the basic context and the next highlights what was done effectively. Detailed information about these projects and practices is available on the FHWA EJ Website.

The featured projects confirm that there is no uniform approach to addressing EJ. The approach and the depth of analysis are dependent on the nature of the proposed transportation project and how it would affect the community. Thoroughly analyzing issues of EJ combines enhanced public involvement and comparison of the distribution and scale of impacts and benefits.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #1: Removal of Los Primos Supermarket - Analyzing Impacts and Identifying Alternatives: Alston Avenue Project, Durham, North Carolina

Project Profile

• Study: EA of a 1-mile corridor widening project in Durham, NC
• Community: Black/African American, growing Hispanic/Latino population, low-income, with high numbers of car-less households
• Key issue: Potential loss of the Los Primos Supermarket
• Outcome: Preferred alternative minimized impacts on the community by avoiding the Los Primos Supermarket

Los Primos Supermarket:

Key Point: The impacts of the Alston Avenue widening project in Durham, North Carolina on the surrounding Hispanic/Latino community were associated with the potential loss of the Los Primos Supermarket. To understand the impacts, the DOT had to work with other local agencies, update demographic information throughout the project study, reach out directly to the community, and conduct a detailed pedestrian-shed analysis for the supermarket. In the end, the DOT was able to avoid the Los Primos property and minimize community impacts.

Alston Avenue in Durham, North Carolina, runs through a historically Black/African American community with a growing Hispanic/Latino population. When the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposed to widen an approximately 1-mile stretch of the corridor, an initial community impact assessment (CIA) was conducted. At that time, input received through public outreach did not lead the NCDOT to determine that the removal of Los Primos Supermarket would be an adverse impact on the community. As the study continued and the agency received additional input from the City of Durham and community groups, NCDOT determined that a closer look at potential implications of the loss of the Los Primos Supermarket was needed.

The NCDOT conducted a series of supplemental studies and additional outreach to further describe the services provided by Los Primos, determine whether a new grocery store at a nearby location could provide the same services, and characterize the potential impacts of removing or relocating Los Primos on the surrounding low-income, minority community with high numbers of car-less households.

The additional outreach and studies included verbal surveys conducted at the supermarket and other community service centers, interviews of community leaders, and a detailed comparison of the Los Primos site and an alternative supermarket location to examine factors like accessibility by walking and transit and surrounding crime.

The NCDOT continued to work with the community and the City of Durham and eventually developed an alternative that would minimize impacts to the Los Primos Supermarket.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #1: Removal of Los Primos Supermarket - Analyzing Impacts and Identifying Alternatives: Alston Avenue Project, Durham, North Carolina

Effective Practices

• Update information throughout the study
• Ensure that all perspectives are heard
• Work closely with other jurisdictional agencies and partners
• Base the determination of impacts on complete analysis
• Have the staff working closely with the community make a recommendation regarding impacts and next steps

Thematic map of vehicle-less households in the Durham project area:

Alternative supermarket location (former Winn-Dixie):

Key Point: In this case, the DOT did not initially recognize the impact of the loss of Los Primos Supermarket on the surrounding community. There were several strategies that were important for their ultimate understanding of the issue: updating information about the changing community throughout the study, working with other local agencies familiar with the community, reaching out using direct approaches like interviews, and conducting a thorough analysis.

The community impact assessment was updated as needed to reflect changing community characteristics and new project information. In North Carolina, the CIA is treated as an ongoing analysis. For the Alston Avenue project, the NCDOT prepare a CIA early in the study process, and supplemented it as further information was gathered about the community and public input was received. This approach resulted in several supplements to the initial study, but also enabled decision makers to be fully informed. Since that time, North Carolina has updated their approach. Now a "Community Characteristics Report" is drafted early in project development to inform subsequent public involvement, analysis, and determination of impacts.

In particular, it was important to update demographic data and information about community characteristics. The initial CIA for this project was conducted in 2003. Project construction is not expected until 2014. Over the course of the study, the project team updated demographic data and information describing community characteristics multiple times. This was important as there was a trend of an increasing Hispanic/Latino population in the study area. As the Hispanic/Latino population increased, so did the importance of community resources and services, such as Los Primos Supermarket, that directly served that population.

Ensure that all perspectives are heard. The NCDOT made a focused effort to reach out to all populations that could be impacted by the Alston Avenue project. This extensive coordination did a lot to head-off potential EJ issues early in the study and build the trust of agency actions in the community.

Despite this outreach, the NCDOT had not received the message from those participating in public-involvement activities that potential impacts to Los Primos Supermarket would be adverse. NCDOT recognized that participation in public meetings from the Hispanic/Latino segment of the low-income/minority community surrounding the project was very minimal. Instead of accepting the feedback the agency was receiving as comprehensive, NCDOT reached out directly to those who might be impacted - through interviews with community leaders, use of increased limited English proficiency (LEP) resources, and a community survey given at the affected resource. The feedback through those activities provided a much different - and more complete - perspective about the importance of Los Primos Supermarket and elevated the need to avoid and minimize impacts to it.

Work closely with other jurisdictional agencies and partners. The DOT worked closely with both FHWA and the City of Durham through each step of the environmental study. Keeping FHWA "plugged in" was critical for approval of final project decisions and the call of whether impacts to the EJ community were disproportionately high and adverse.

The City of Durham was able to provide local insight about the needs and values of the community. In addition, they provided extensive input into design modifications that would make the project sensitive to the community needs and context, and acted as an advocate for the Hispanic/Latino segment of the population when that population did not fully participate in outreach activities.

Finally, the Alston Avenue area is a focus for many City departments that work on economic development, infrastructure, community building, appearance, historic preservation, and other community improvement activities. The discussions generated by the EJ issue within the City increased dialogue among City departments; such as, Economic and Workforce Development, Neighborhood Improvement Services, and Planning. It was important for NCDOT to work with the City to be a part of these discussions and ensure that the resulting project decision was consistent with their efforts and goals.

For any potential EJ issue, base the determination of impacts on complete analysis. In the early stages of the environmental analysis, the NCDOT did not recognize potential impacts to the Los Primos Supermarket as an adverse impact to an EJ resource. While the issue was raised by the City of Durham, feedback from the public did not elevate the issue at the time and much attention was focused on other issues.

The effective practices noted: ongoing coordination with the City of Durham, ensuring that demographic data and community context information is updated, and ensuring all perspectives are being heard; helped NCDOT to recognize that there may be an issue. NCDOT commissioned a detailed study of the potential impact, including surveys, a thorough site-comparison analysis, outreach through community leaders, and getting input "on the street" using LEP resources. The analysis demonstrated that removal of Los Primos Supermarket would result in a disproportionately high and adverse impact to the low-income and Hispanic/Latino community in the project study area.

Have the staff working closely with the community make a recommendation regarding impacts and next steps. The first CIA completed for the Alston Avenue project was informational and did not include a recommendation as to whether potential impacts to the EJ community would be disproportionately high and adverse. Over the course of the study, the NCDOT made changes overall in how CIAs were conducted and reported. In the supplements to the initial CIA, a "call" was made as to whether impacts were disproportionately high and adverse, and recommendations for next steps were documented. This is a positive shift in that it puts the judgment of impacts in the hands of the individuals who are most familiar with the project and the surrounding community.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #2: Balancing the Environment and Economic Development: Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project, Port of Long Beach, California

Project Profile:

• Study: EIS for the combination and upgrade of two marine container terminals at the Port of Long Beach, CA
• Community: Most Census block groups in the study area exceeded 80-percent minority, and 10-percent low income
• Key issues: Construction noise and cumulative impacts on air quality and health risk
• Outcome: Mitigation grant program for cumulative impacts, broad public support

Port of Long Beach:

Key Point: Cumulative impacts associated with health risks and air quality were key issues of concern to the low-income and minority communities surrounding the Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project in the Port of Long Beach (POLB).

The Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project in the POLB, California, combines and upgrades the POLB's two aging, irregularly shaped marine container terminals to create one rectangular-shaped facility that would operate more efficiently, improve the environment, support the economy, and create thousands of new jobs. As part of the NEPA process, the POLB and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) conducted an EJ analysis to study the potential for the Middle Harbor Project construction and operations to result in disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on low-income and minority populations.

The population in most of the Census block groups within the project study area exceeds 80-percent minority, and exceeds 10 percent low income. Disproportionately high and adverse impacts on EJ communities were related to construction noise, and cumulative impacts on air quality and health risk.

The POLB funded a Community Mitigation Grant Program that funds projects that would improve air quality in the region overall, ultimately contributing to mitigation of impacts identified in the EJ analysis for the Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project and cumulative impacts from other ongoing port projects and operations.

Despite associated impacts, the project received broad support and was approved on April 13, 2009. Project construction started in Spring 2011.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #2: Balancing the Environment and Economic Development: Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project, Port of Long Beach, California

Effective Practices

• Communicate project benefits to gain public support
• Closely coordinate with jurisdictional agencies and knowledgeable organizations on difficult issues
• Address cumulative impacts

Preferential eligibility zones for the port mitigation grant programs in Long-Beach, California

Key Point: The project team used a deliberative communications strategy to spread public awareness about the benefits of the port project. This resulted in strong public support for the project. To address issues of concern, the project team worked with knowledgeable agencies and organizations to understand impacts, then established a program to address cumulative impacts through funding community improvement projects.

Communicate project benefits to gain public support. Early on in the environmental review process, the POLB Communications Division devised a marketing plan with focused strategies and tactics based on the level of education needed amongst various target audiences, and focused key objectives to help concentrate outreach efforts. Through the intensive outreach activities to educate area residents and businesses, neighborhood groups, environmental activists, and port tenants, among other groups, the project was approved unanimously by the Board of Harbor Commissions on April 13, 2009, with overwhelming public support and testimony. The Long Beach City Council, which had just years earlier had denied the approval of another major development project at the POLB, also voted unanimously to let the project proceed.

Additionally, the POLB also learned through the Middle Harbor outreach efforts, that the community is becoming more sophisticated and more interested in port projects. As a result of the Middle Harbor Project, the POLB is doing more outreach on other development projects, and have learned the value and need to be thorough in outreach activities, including "getting the word out" about POLB projects and activities, trying to reach as many people as possible.

Closely coordinate with jurisdictional agencies and knowledgeable organizations on difficult issues. In the case of the Middle Harbor Redevelopment project, cumulative air quality impacts were of particular concern. The POLB coordinates many of their programs with California Air Resources Board (CARB), the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and others. POLB also provides information for and participates in most of the regional planning studies conducted by CARB, SCAQMD, EPA, and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). This close coordination supported the use of a CARB study for the analysis of cumulative impacts to air quality.

Address cumulative impacts. By addressing cumulative impacts through a mitigation program that would improve overall air quality and reduce health risks, the POLB received widespread community support despite the impacts associated with project construction.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #3: Effective Outreach and Analysis Strategies for a Regional Study Area: North I-25 Project, Denver to Fort Collins Area, Colorado

Project Profile:

• Study: EIS for multi-modal improvements to an interstate corridor
• Community: Regional area with pockets of minority (Hispanic/Latino and Hmong) and low-income groups
• Key issues: Very large, regional study area with a widespread affected population, political debate on the immigration policy
• Outcome: Equal distribution of impacts and benefits across EJ and non-EJ groups

The North I-25 project area:

Key Point: There were two main challenges associated with the North I-25 project in Colorado. First, the study area was very large (spread over 61 miles), so it was difficult to address local concerns. Second, political issues regarding immigration laws made Hispanic/Latino stakeholders reluctant to participate in public involvement opportunities.

The North I-25 project area, located in northern Colorado between Fort Collins and Denver, spreads over 61 miles north to south and 20 to 30 miles east to west, affecting 45 counties and communities. The project area is home to various EJ groups including a Hmong community (an Asian ethnic group from southern China and Southeast Asia) and Hispanic/Latino ethnic communities that required special outreach efforts. Given the large extent of the project area, each community had its own concerns and issues. Through consensus building and collaborative decision making, a preferred alternative that addressed the concerns of local stakeholders was identified. Each project alternative (known as packages) proposed multi-modal improvements involving bus, rail, and highway improvements on different alignments.

Clear project benefits included enhanced regional connections between communities, improvements in mobility and access to specific community facilities, improved safety and emergency vehicle access, and improved mobility to transportation-disadvantaged populations.

Mitigation would reduce impacts, but impacts to noise, visual quality/aesthetics, traffic circulation, and air quality would still occur for all EJ and non-EJ groups. When considered in totality, impacts and benefits from the Preferred Alternative would be distributed equally across minority and low-income as well as non-minority and low-income; and disproportionately high and adverse effects to minority and low-income populations would not occur.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #3: Effective Outreach and Analysis Strategies for a Regional Study Area: North I-25 Project, Denver to Fort Collins Area, Colorado

Effective Practices

• Use extensive public outreach to garner support
• Look beyond traditional data sources
• Communicate impacts and benefits and gather feedback
• Be sensitive to local and political issues
• Consider context when determining adverse impacts
• Consider benefits and mitigation in the overall harm assessment
• Consider community facilities in mobility needs and impact assessment
• Speak the local languages
• Go to the people

None

Key Point: The project team used an extensive public involvement campaign including data gathering and small group meetings at the local level (despite the size of the study area). The team was sensitive to issues that would keep the community from participating and sought input through other methods including the identification and use of local leaders who could gather and report feedback.

Use extensive public outreach to garner support. Extensive outreach was conducted to obtain consensus on a Preferred Alternative among the 45 communities and agencies (including Colorado DOT and FHWA). Extensive public outreach was conducted because of the need for broad community support and limited financial resources available for transportation improvements in the region. Broad community support set the stage for local agency participation, partnerships, and commitment to implementation.

Look beyond traditional data sources. The analysis looked beyond traditional sources of data. Input on what is important to the EJ communities was gathered early in the process and used to determine what would be perceived as a disproportionately high and adverse impact - and to design a better project. The local agencies and communities were involved in data gathering at the local level. Different types of techniques were used to gain input and provide more information about the project from surveys, small meetings, setting up project information booths at cultural events, presenting to city councils, and public meetings and hearings.

Communicate impacts and benefits and gather feedback. Through meetings and newsletters, the project team was able to both provide information on what the project impacts and benefits were to the community and also learn from the community what they thought was an impact and benefit. This feedback helped the team identify issues that were important to EJ communities and benefits that would outweigh impacts.

Be sensitive to local and political issues that may keep minority or low-income populations from participating. The Colorado DOT identified that community concern about a new State immigration law may have been keeping the immigrant communities from actively engaging in the public process. As a result, Colorado DOT tried to proactively reach out to the community through local leaders to obtain feedback on the project alternatives. Since communities shied away from a public forum, other methods of public outreach were considered; such as, small meetings in the neighborhoods, dissemination of information through newsletters, postings at local businesses and gathering spaces, and identification of local leaders who could collect general feedback.

Determination of adverse impacts is context sensitive. The project team used the perception of the EJ community when determining what constitutes an adverse impact. Relocation is typically considered to be an adverse impact that uproots individuals and families from their communities. Agencies look for ways to reduce relocation impacts of projects to avoid the social and financial cost. However, as in the case of this project, being relocated from an existing location near a freeway or rail line may be perceived as a positive impact by a community. Therefore, how a community perceives an impact is best judged by that community.

Consider benefits and mitigation in the overall harm assessment. Consider the totality of impacts and benefits - that is, carefully identify benefits and mitigation and include those in the analysis of whether there are disproportionately high and adverse impacts.

Consider community facilities in mobility needs. When identifying mobility needs, consider where it is that a particular community member needs to go - employment, community centers, etc. Since car ownership is low within low-income populations, these populations rely more heavily on other modes of transportation. They use public transit for all their access needs from going to work, to a place of worship, a health center and schools. Public transit facilities need to connect residential areas to employment centers, and community venues. Conceptual design for public transit stations considered the needs of people with disabilities, such as people in wheelchairs and people who are blind but walk with a guide dog or white cane.

Consider impacts to community facilities. Feedback received during outreach to EJ communities was that they were concerned about impacts to community facilities frequented by them. Consider impacts to schools, places of worship, parks, health centers, and businesses frequented by an EJ community. Impacts to these communities through relocation or change in access, would affect the community that relies on these facilities. Look beyond impacts to residential areas. Pay special attention to community facilities and how these many be affected within a disadvantaged community.

Speak the local languages. All materials for the project were translated in Spanish. In addition, for the Hmong community, materials were translated in Hmong. It is important to identify the languages spoken by the community and provide language services at meetings for greater participation by the minority community.

Go to the people. Do not expect them to come to you. The project team held small meetings within the EJ communities and went to local cultural events to provide information about the project. The project implemented an extensive public outreach program that included technical committees to agency coordination committees to smaller group meetings within EJ communities. Conducting smaller meetings within the communities ensured greater participation by the community.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #4: Bagley Pedestrian Bridge - "Connecting Neighbors": Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project, Detroit, Michigan

Key Point: The Bagley Pedestrian Bridge was part of a larger interstate improvement project. The pedestrian bridge was designed to mitigate impacts from the original construction of the interstate, which divided the minority Mexicantown community.

Project Profile:

• Study: EA for an interstate bridge project that included a pedestrian bridge component in Detroit, MI
• Community: largely Hispanic/Latino Mexicantown community
• Key issues: Mitigating impacts to Mexicantown from original interstate construction
• Outcome: Bagley Pedestrian Bridge and associated enhancement projects mitigate past impacts and bring the Mexicantown community together

View with the Gateway Project, and the Bagley Pedestrian Bridge in Detroit, MI

The largely minority Mexicantown community in Detroit, Michigan, was physically divided in 1970, when a section of freeway along I-75 was completed. During preparation of the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the I-75 Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project (Gateway Project) in the 1990s, the Michigan Department of Transportation (MIDOT) and the FHWA identified reconnecting East and West Mexicantown across I-75 as a "need" to be addressed. As Bagley Street is one of the main links between East and West Mexicantown, support for a pedestrian bridge spanning I-75 at this location was embraced by the community. The Mexicantown community was engaged throughout every phase of the Gateway Project, including the design of the Bagley Pedestrian Bridge and associated public art projects. Successful completion of the Bagley Pedestrian Bridge Project signified positive changes to come for the Mexicantown community and linked the east and west sides of the neighborhood once again. The public ceremony for the brand new landmark and tourist attraction was marked by the joining of U.S. and Mexican government representatives, along with visitors from across the State and Mexicantown residents, to unveil the two stunning new works of art that grace the bridge's eastern plaza.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #4: Bagley Pedestrian Bridge - "Connecting Neighbors": Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project, Detroit, Michigan

Effective Practices

• Engage the affected community early and on an ongoing basis
• Maintain consistent project staff
• Consider the use of an ombudsman
• Integrate enhancement projects to engage and benefit the community

Artwork associated with the Bagley Pedestrian Bridge

Key Point: Effective practices were associated with both the pedestrian bridge and the larger interstate improvement project. Early and ongoing public communication, consistent involvement of DOT project staff, and the use of an ombudsman helped with the overall project. Important elements of the pedestrian bridge included seeking public input on the location and design of the bridge, the incorporation of public artwork designed through a public process, and an opening ceremony that celebrated the community.

Engage the affected community early and on an ongoing basis. As part of the community-outreach effort, it was critical for the project team to continue building upon relationships and developing community trust for future phases of the project (i.e., construction phases) and future MIDOT projects and programs. This was done through collaboration with stakeholders and the community as early in the planning and design phases as possible, throughout the project process, and during the construction phase. The project team also identified that the public-art aspect of the project was a great opportunity to involve the public.

Maintain consistent project staff to the extent feasible. For various reasons, primarily design modifications to the Gateway Project, there were six Re-evaluations following the 1997 EA. The project endured challenges that come with implementing a massive transportation project with a private bridge owner, during three U.S. presidential administrations, three Michigan gubernatorial administrations, and four Detroit mayoral administrations, and design modifications to address stricter security criteria following the 9/11 terrorist attack. Project leaders in MIDOT and the community remained constant and consistent over the 16-year project history and contributed toward the success of the outreach program and, ultimately, the project.

Consider the use of an ombudsman. The MIDOT team utilized an ombudsman throughout the public-outreach effort, and during the last and major phase of construction. The Gateway project ombudsman was essential, particularly when there were issues that needed resolution with the community, because the ombudsman understood spoken Spanish, and was accessible to and trusted by the community. Of equal importance to project-related communications, was that the ombudsman understood the community as well as MIDOT.

Integration of a public-art component can help to engage and benefit the community. MIDOT learned the value of looking for ways to enhance the community as part of major transportation projects. The Bagley Pedestrian Bridge and associated art work helped to build community trust in MIDOT, engage the community in the decision-making process, and give the community a sense of ownership in the project. MIDOT also learned to identify opportunities to integrate public art into the project early in the project to secure funds. Because the public-art component of the pedestrian bridge project was not envisioned as part of the project in the EA, it was not eligible for Federal funding as part of the Gateway Project implementation plan. The final outcome was that MIDOT's Metro Region office provided $50,000 of State matching funds from the Region program along with a $50,000 Federal Enhancement Grant in order to fund the art project.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #5: Regional Tolling Analysis Informs NEPA Assessment of Cumulative Impacts on Low-Income Populations: Long-Range Transportation Plan, Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas

Project Profile

• Study: Cumulative impacts of tolling on a regional basis in a long range plan, Dallas-Fort Worth, TX
• Community: Regional community with a mix of EJ and non-EJ areas
• Key issues: Cumulative impacts of tolling on low-income individuals
• Outcome: Results of the regional analysis supplement the cumulative impacts assessment in NEPA

Tolled facility in Texas

Key Point: The metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the Dallas-Fort Worth area studies the cumulative EJ impacts of tolled highways in the region's long-range plan.

The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), the MPO for the Dallas-Fort Worth area, studied the EJ impacts of the tolled highways and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV)/managed lanes in the region's long-range plan. The Regional Tolling Analysis (RTA) was an outgrowth of the Mobility 2030 plan, which was adopted in 2007, and was updated as part of the most recent metropolitan long-range transportation plan, Mobility 2035, adopted in 2011. A first of its kind in Texas, the RTA used information gathered from the travel demand model to evaluate impacts of proposed transportation projects with a pricing component (e.g., toll roads) on EJ populations throughout the NCTCOG metropolitan planning area.

Because the projects involved tolling, low-income populations were the primary focus of the study. Using 16 dimensions of system analysis, the RTA found that any cumulative burdens were outweighed by cumulative benefits, and there would be no disproportionately high and adverse cumulative impacts on EJ populations. Information gained during the RTA is also included in individual environmental documents for roadway projects that have a tolling element. This supplements but does not replace the complete EJ analysis and associated public involvement conducted as part of the environmental review of projects.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #5: Regional Tolling Analysis Informs NEPA Assessment of Cumulative Impacts on Low-Income Populations: Long-Range Transportation Plan, Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas

Effective Practices

• Combine Census and travel demand data for regional analysis
• Use analysis from long range planning to inform cumulative EJ impacts in NEPA

Travel survey zones used for the cumulative impact analysis of tolling:

Key Point: Census data was combined with the region's travel demand model to perform the analysis. The analysis resulted in an understanding of cumulative impacts informing NEPA studies, but does not replace public involvement and the study of direct and indirect impacts at the project level.

By combining Census information and the travel demand model, NCTCOG created a powerful tool for analysis of socio-cultural impacts and EJ.

Graphic 1: Travel survey zones used for the analysis of environmental justice impacts during long range planning.

By combining Census information and the travel demand model, NCTCOG created a powerful tool for analysis of socio-cultural impacts and EJ. The tool was able to generate a detailed map of the region's EJ population that could be used to evaluate impacts on 16 different dimensions. By considering the potential impacts of all projects in the long range plan together, the NCTCOG was able to get a good sense of the cumulative impacts of tolling.

The RTA is a powerful tool during planning and programming, but is also useful in later phases of the infrastructure construction process-particularly during NEPA. In effect, the time required to deliver the social justice components of the cumulative impact analysis in NEPA is substantially reduced. This shift helps streamline NEPA and deliver projects more quickly.

The RTA completes much of the data-oriented work well before the NEPA process even begins. In addition, considering impacts at the system level, can result in a more accurate and thorough examination of potential cumulative impacts of all planned projects as a whole.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #6: Building a Foundation for Meaningful and Active Participation: I-70 East Project, Denver Area, Colorado

Project Profile

• Study: EIS for improvements to an interstate corridor near Denver, CO
• Community: 40 percent Hispanic/Latino, 30 percent Black/African American, 5 percent other minority populations, 21 percent of households were low-income
• Key issues: Legacy of distrust for the DOT and potential impacts related to noise, air quality, relocations, health
• Outcome: Meaningful participation and renewed trust

I-70 East project public-outreach boundaries

Key Point: The original construction of interstate 70 in Colorado split an EJ community. The DOT undertook an extensive public involvement process as part of the improvement project to overcome distrust and ensure meaningful participation.

The construction of I-70 near Denver, Colorado, in the 1960s, and the resulting split of predominantly minority and low-income surrounding neighborhoods, left a legacy of distrust for the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). When CDOT set out to improve the I-70 East corridor in 2003, they knew they had to work proactively and collaboratively with these same communities to build their trust and ensure their active and meaningful participation in the environmental study. The outreach conducted for the project set new ground for CDOT. The emphasis of the outreach process was on gaining maximum participation from the local communities. This also meant educating the communities about technical areas such as noise and transportation design and how they affect lives. The environmental review also included an extensive air-quality analysis, analysis of health-related impacts, and the evaluation of a community-based alternative.

The public-outreach process conducted for I-70 East resulted in meaningful participation from EJ communities and helped to re-build trust in CDOT. The draft EIS was made available to the public for comment in 2009. As of June 2012, a recirculated draft EIS was being considered to study additional alternatives in greater detail and obtain public input.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #6: Building a Foundation for Meaningful and Active Participation: I-70 East Project, Denver Area, Colorado

Effective Practices

• Use a "micro to macro" outreach strategy
• Educate communities about EJ and the environmental process
• Educate staff about EJ and the community
• Maintain a consistent face for the project
• Build trust through a consistent message
• Use a high-touch/low-touch approach to understand your audience
• Conduct meetings for maximum participation
• Establish a community-outreach process feedback loop
• Be responsive to addressing impact-areas of concern

Public meeting held for the I-70East project

Micro to macro strategy:

Puzzle used to educate the public about alternative packaging:

Key Point: Effective practices are focused on engaging the community. Hands-on outreach in the community was used in an effort to both educate the public about the environmental process and the project, and obtain their input.

Use a micro to macro outreach strategy. A variety of techniques were used to ensure meaningful involvement from the community. The outreach process was designed to be personal and extensive. It began on a one-on-one level and then expanded to bring together the many interests in the corridor. The process started with door-to-door surveys in affected neighborhoods (which were also predominantly low-income and minority) then expanded into block meetings, neighborhood meetings, and corridor-wide meetings.

Educate communities about EJ and the environmental process. After the scoping phase, six working groups were established to provide an opportunity for residents, businesses, stakeholders, and property owners to continue their participation and learn more about how the scientists, engineers, and planners would evaluate specific resources. Working groups were composed of members of the community who expressed interest in joining the groups at neighborhood and corridor-wide meetings held in predominantly EJ communities or signed up on the project website.

The working groups were used to solicit input, establish dialogue about specific issues, and educate the members about the resources that would be considered in the EIS. Innovative exercises were incorporated into the meetings, such as monitors on local streets to get readings on traffic noise, puzzles that helped participants gain an understanding of alternative packaging, and an exercise designed to help participants understand how the various alternatives would be screened by comparing the process to buying a car. Issues from each working group were then communicated back to project management.

Educate staff about EJ and the community. All lead-agency representatives and consultants who would be engaged with the public at any of the meetings were asked to commit to walking the neighborhoods to gain familiarity with the community. Also, they had to participate in door-to-door surveys for a day. Engineers and lead-agency representatives speaking to the public were trained to reduce the use of acronyms and use terminologies easily understandable to the public-for example, using the word "ramp" instead of "interchange."

Maintain a consistent face for the project. To build trust in the community and build rapport, key members assigned to the project were asked to commit their time and come out to all meetings consistently. These people became the face of the project from start to finish.

Build trust through a consistent message. To facilitate the initial phase of the community- outreach process, individuals living within the community were hired to assist with outreach efforts, including door-to-door outreach, block meetings, and neighborhood meetings. These individuals leveraged their existing relationships and community understanding to gain credibility and trust, and encouraged their neighbors to get involved in the project. All individuals were required to go through an extensive one-day training program to understand the project and their roles better. Each individual was provided a script regarding the project to ensure that everyone working in community outreach provided a consistent message. This training was also required for any member of the project team involved in community outreach.

Use a high-touch/low-touch approach to understand your audience. The outreach team employed various techniques to reach out to the representative communities. Because of the prevalence of low-income and minority populations, a "high-touch" approach was employed. A high-touch approach means that meeting reminders and project information are provided in more than one way. Whereas, for some non-EJ populations, an email blast or a flyer (low-touch approaches) may do; for the EJ population in the study area, it was determined best to post project or project-meeting information at various locations, such as recreational centers, churches, barber shops, beauty salons, etc., to encourage dissemination of information through word of mouth.

Conduct meetings for maximum participation. Careful consideration was given to the design and lay-out of meetings. For corridor-level meetings, a "snake" formation was developed. This involved attendees signing in, being handed a package of project information, having a concierge explain the purpose of the meeting, and being helped with food service and escorted to a table for a discussion of the issues. At the table, attendees would be surrounded by neighbors and friends, and the facilitator would listen to their input and combine everything that was said. Community outreach staff members were dressed in orange T-shirts with name tags and could be pulled aside to ask for assistance. Staff members would also clean the tables so that the community could focus solely on the issues discussion.

Establish a community-outreach process feedback loop. Representatives from local jurisdictions, as well as business owners and members of the public including representatives from EJ communities, attended a Community Outreach Process Forum. The purpose of the forum was to solicit insights and suggestions on how to improve the community-outreach process. As a result of the forum, the study team began posting working-group minutes on the project website.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #7: Mitigating Impacts on the Pleasant Hill Neighborhood: I-16/I-75 Interchange Project, Macon, Georgia

Project Profile

• Study: EA for an interchange project in Macon, GA
• Community: Pleasant Hill, predominantly Black/African American, historic
• Key issues: Pleasant Hill was bisected by I-75, has declined, and could be impacted again
• Outcome: Community-supported Community Mitigation Plan addresses direct and cumulative impacts

I-75 through Pleasant Hill

The community of Pleasant Hill in Macon, Georgia, was bisected by the construction of I-75 in the early 1960s. Forty years later, proposed improvements to the I-16/I-75 interchange had the potential to adversely impact Pleasant Hill once again. Thanks to the engagement of this historical Black/African-American community during the study of proposed improvements, with strong support from FHWA and the Georgia DOT (GDOT), potential adverse impacts of the selected alternative were minimized, and a mitigation plan was developed and incorporated into the project with a written commitment from all parties to its implementation.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #7: Mitigating Impacts on the Pleasant Hill Neighborhood: I-16/I-75 Interchange Project, Macon, Georgia

Effective Practices

• Use a variety of information sources and types
• Strong community leadership can foster the public-involvement process
• FHWA collaboration and involvement can support innovation
• Work with the State DOT and the community to identify and ensure implementation of appropriate mitigation
• Identify strategies to address all impacts

I-16/I-75 interchange project in Macon, Georgia and surrounding neighborhoods

Key Point: Closely working with both the affected community and FHWA led to an innovative approach to mitigation of both direct and cumulative impacts. It helped that the community recognized the need for the project and focused on how to make it work for them, rather than on stopping the project itself.

Use a variety of sources and types of information to identify and characterize EJ populations. In addition to the use of Census data, various other tools were used to better understand the circumstances of the communities and, in particular, that of Pleasant Hill. Field surveys were conducted to identify community facilities and land use, and confirm presence of minority and low-income populations. Visual surveys were done to confirm housing vacancy rates and conditions as well as potential visual impacts. A pedestrian/windshield survey showed that streets were in poor condition. Interviews with local officials combined with public outreach meetings also allowed better understanding of the circumstances faced by communities. In addition, historic documents (transportation planning documents and aerial photography) and interviews with past residents of Pleasant Hill provided important information on past impacts of the construction of I-75 on the community.

Strong community leadership can foster the public-involvement process. The presence of a strong community representation, with understanding of both the neighborhood reality and past transportation projects, stimulated GDOT's engagement with the community. It also facilitated the public-participation process and communication between GDOT and the community. It was, in part, thanks to this strong community leadership that GDOT was able to engage with the community further than it had engaged with communities on previous projects.

FHWA collaboration and involvement can support innovation. A key collaborative role in addressing EJ concerns in the I-16/I-75 Interchange project was how closely FHWA and GDOT worded together. FHWA strongly supported community concerns and recognized the relevance of past impacts from I-75 on the community. FHWA's presence in community meetings and frequent interaction with the project team gave GDOT and the community the confidence and stimulus to correct prior impacts from a past State project. GDOT engaged with the community of Pleasant Hill to a greater extent than it was used to.

Work with the State DOT and the community to identify and ensure implementation of appropriate mitigation. Representatives of the Pleasant Hill neighborhood recognized early on that the proposed modifications to the I-16/I‑75 Interchange would improve traffic safety, and focused on the minimization and mitigation of impacts rather than on opposing the project itself. The mitigation plan was developed with input from the neighborhood in several meetings, where neighborhood representatives had the opportunity to provide feedback on draft mitigation plans proposed by GDOT and FHWA and suggest alternative measures. The initial 1999-project concept went through several rounds of modifications thanks to this process, and several elements from the neighborhood's own plan were incorporated into the mitigation plan. To ensure that the mitigation plan would be implemented and the final EA would transmit this assurance, the Pleasant Hill Historic District and Community Mitigation Plan was included as an appendix to the final EA and signed by representatives of FHWA, GDOT, and the Pleasant Hill Neighborhood Investment Group (PHNIG).

Identify strategies to address all impacts. The project team made sure to develop mitigation measures to address not just direct and indirect impacts but also impacts cumulative to the construction of I-75 decades before the project. As stated in the EA: "In mitigating impacts of the current I-16/I-75 Interchange Improvement project on the Pleasant Hill neighborhood, efforts will be made to address impacts caused by the original construction of I-75 through the neighborhood. Though the mitigation efforts today cannot undo past damage to the community, the proposed project will attempt to counter those impacts that can be reasonably addressed." (p. 121)

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #8: Preserving Community Cohesion through Southend Park Neighborhood Redevelopment: Newtown Pike Extension Project, Lexington, Kentucky

Project Profile

• Study: EIS for the extension of a major artery in the Lexington, Kentucky area
• Community: Davistown - one of the oldest Black/African-American communities in the Lexington, Kentucky area
• Key issues: Anticipated indirect impacts of increased land value and redevelopment pressures were expected to force out residences
• Outcome: Community participation leads to a Community Land Trust

Newtown Pike Extension project

Key Point: The Newtown Pike Extension project was expected to indirectly increase area land values, effectively forcing out minority and low-income residents. A Community Land Trust was developed to mitigate impacts.

Davistown is one of the oldest Black/African-American communities in the Lexington, Kentucky area. During the preparation of the EIS for the Newtown Pike Extension project, it was determined that indirect impacts associated with the project would be expected to increase the land value in Davistown and surrounding neighborhoods, and would effectively force out low-income residents through increased redevelopment pressures. Davistown residents had been adversely affected by decades of discussions around a potential Newtown Pike Extension through their neighborhood, resulting in a sense of distrust at the outset of the environmental study. The project team hired a community liaison and included community members on project advisory and steering committees to gain the trust of the community as well as their participation in decision making. With community participation, an innovative mitigation option was developed based on the use of a Community Land Trust to provide long-term, sustainable, and affordable housing to community residents so that they could remain in the area even as land values increase.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #8: Preserving Community Cohesion through Southend Park Neighborhood Redevelopment: Newtown Pike Extension Project, Lexington, Kentucky

Effective Practices

• Use multiple and varied methods for collecting community data
• Build trust to truly engage the affected community
• Use community service providers to help engage the community
• Overcome obstacles with help from project "Champions"
• Properly identify and characterize social ties
• Mitigate adverse impacts through tailored solutions

Homes on DeRoode Street in Davistown, Kentucky

Key Point: The DOT found that working with the community through a neighborhood liaison and other service providers in the community was essential for building trust. Understanding potential impacts required carefully getting to know the affected community, including the importance of social ties. Mitigating impacts required a tailored solution with input from FHWA and the community.

Use multiple and varied methods for collecting community data. Various surveys were conducted at different times during project design and implementation that proved valuable for decision making. Surveys conducted for the Community Impact Assessment and the Southend Park Urban Village Plan were key to adequately characterize the communities impacted and their residents.

An important source of information on the community for the project team was the continuous interaction provided through a community liaison hired in 2002. The liaison was identified through the public outreach process. Meetings with the liaison were held every 3^rd Thursday of the month at the Carver Neighborhood Center, just outside the Southend Park area, often with dinner provided to facilitate informal interaction and provide an incentive for community participation.

Build trust to truly engage the affected community. A variety of public-involvement tools were used at various stages of the planning and design process to make sure that the affected community not only understood plans and decisions made but participated in developing those plans and making those decisions. As the Corridor Plan was being developed, for example, four public meetings were held to educate the public about the road and the planning process, and to solicit input from the residents on their vision for the future. The Nathaniel United Methodist Mission was instrumental at this stage in reaching out to Davistown residents, and making sure that all those that sought the Mission were aware of the project and of the importance of their involvement. The Southend Park Urban Village Plan relied on a series of focus-group meetings and a door-to-door survey of neighborhood residents to collect their views on mitigation options.

In 2002 a neighborhood liaison was brought into the project to help with communication between the project team and the Southend Park residents. The project team faced a sense of distrust from people of the Southend Park area. This might have been partially the result of decades of neglect from public authorities, but might have also been partially the result of even more decades of discussion with inaction on the Newtown Pike Extension. The constant threat of the Newtown Pike Extension had created a climate of uncertainty that deterred property owners and city agencies from investing in the Davistown neighborhood. Between 1980 and 2000 the number of housing units in Davistown decreased 45 percent. There seems to be consensus among the project team and community members alike that if no action had been taken, the Southend Park area would have disappeared in the near future, against their will. The project team understood that to engage the community in discussions of mitigation options would require establishing trust in communication between the project team and the community and that a liaison could facilitate this process. A liaison that is able to take the time to listen to the community and understand their concerns and is not perceived as having interests other than the successful mediation of the process can help facilitate communication and community engagement.

Use community service providers to help engage the community. During the process of engagement of the community with the project, care should be taken to avoid displacement of existing service providers. Temporary community liaisons and communication structures can prove valuable in facilitating community participation and communication between the project team and affected communities. However, these tools are temporary, and displacement of existing service providers could disrupt community support services that would otherwise be valuable resources to the community in the long run.

Overcome obstacles with help from project "Champions". Adequately engaging communities and mitigating adverse impacts during the long process of design and implementation of transportation projects requires devoted personnel and considerable resources. Unexpected issues and challenges arise daily and can drag the process through unnecessary lengths of time. The Newtown Pike Extension benefited during several periods from "champions" of the project, personnel capable of moving the project forward through legal and procedural requirements. These "champions" were ideally housed in the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet: as the State transportation department, they were best positioned to interact with local governments, the community, and Federal authorities.

Properly identify and characterize social ties. Neighborhoods are often used as the geographic area of reference for identification of EJ populations and for characterization of disproportionately high and adverse impacts. The project team found that the interactions and interdependence between neighbors are an important factor in determining the geographic extent of impacts and in understanding the impacts of displacement to the social cohesion of communities and the importance of keeping communities together. In the case of the Newtown Pike Extension, the project team found it important to take the analysis a step further and understand the characteristics of a community within the Davistown neighborhood: the area called Davis Bottom, lower Davistown or Southend Park area. This area had been identified in transportation plans as being a minority and low-income population.

To understand the extent of interdependence within neighborhoods or within areas of neighborhoods, the Newtown Pike Extension project team conducted a CIA in 2003 and surveyed the Southend Park area in 2005. These studies generated information about the area not available through Census data, whether because some of the data was not collected at the geographic level needed to characterize sub areas of the neighborhood (e.g., poverty data for the Southend Park area) or because the type of data needed to understand community cohesion and define community boundaries is not typically collected by Census instruments.

This care with properly identifying and characterizing interdependent communities allowed the project team to better understand the extent to which the Newtown Pike Extension would have disproportionately high and adverse impacts on the Southend Park area when compared to other communities.

Mitigating adverse impacts may require tailored solutions. The project team understood that Southend Park residents had the desire to remain in the area, and that they lived in a tight community, interdependent on each other for their daily needs. The main challenge in offering the community a feasible option to remain in the area was to guarantee affordable housing. The choice of a land trust was a way of achieving housing affordability. By not owning the land, only the house, the housing costs would be reduced for residents. Use of the land would be guaranteed by a renewable 99-year lease. The choice did find some resistance by residents. The idea of not owning the land, particularly for resident owners that had previously owned their land, was not an easy idea to accept. However, residents have had a voice and a role in helping develop the redevelopment plan to address their concerns and gradually increased their acceptance of the proposed mitigation.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #9: Extraordinary Outreach Guides Project Decisions and Avoids Environmental Justice Issues: Business 40 project, Winston-Salem, North Carolina

Project Profile

• Study: Early stages of an EIS to widen a 1-mile section of Business 40 through a Central Business District
• Community: Mix of affluent and largely White areas, Black/African American areas, and low-income areas
• Key issues: Community input on a partial closure of Business 40 for 2 years or full closure for 6 years
• Outcome: Unexpected support for a 2-year full closure

Project map of Business 40 in Winston-Salem, NC

Key Point: The Business 40 improvement project required an early decision about closure options for project construction. This decision was made through an unprecedented public outreach approach.

The North Carolina DOT (NCDOT) is proposing to improve a 1-mile section of Business 40 through downtown Winston-Salem. The project area is located in the heart of Winston-Salem and includes a large portion of downtown as well as the central neighborhoods that define the core area of this metropolitan region. Core neighborhoods include a mix of affluent and largely white populations, low-income populations, and minority populations. Other ongoing traffic improvements in the area have required a series of traffic detours and delays, and resulted in a sense of frustration for many residents. Extraordinary public involvement efforts, including a door-to-door survey through all neighborhoods with potential to be directly impacted by the project, were used early in the environmental study to understand public perspectives and build a foundation for project decisions. This outreach led to a largely supported decision to close this section of Business 40 for a period of 2 years during construction in lieu of a 6-year partial closure.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #9: Extraordinary Outreach Guides Project Decisions and Avoids Environmental Justice Issues: Business 40 project, Winston-Salem, North Carolina

Effective Practices

• Seek and apply information from similar situations
• Use experienced public involvement professionals
• train and prepare all staff who will interact with the public
• Do the leg-work to understand a community's values, perspective, and preferences
• Make the public comfortable and willing to provide input
• Establish and check lines of communication within the agency
• Assign a dedicated project manager
• Consider details like contract vehicles

Door-to-door surveys for the Business 40 project

Business 40 survey team on the street

Business 40 corridor-wide meeting:

Key Point: The public outreach approach included a carefully planned door-to-door survey within areas directly adjacent to the project. Neighborhood and corridor-wide meetings were designed to invite participation instead of browsing. The project team learned from lessons on other projects through an ACTT conference and the use of public involvement professionals.

Seek and apply information from similar situations. The initial public outreach and the resulting decision to close Business 40 for two years during construction may have been different without an Accelerated Construction Technology Transfer (ACTT) conference convened at the outset of the project. ACTT conferences are sponsored by FHWA and are meant to bring together a panel of experts who have dealt with a similar challenging project issue. Hearing effective practices from experts who had applied them in similar situations provided critical help for the NCDOT to conduct this project in a new and extraordinary way that diverged from the agency's standard operating procedures.

Use experienced public involvement professionals to design and guide the public involvement process and to serve as the main interface with the public. The reality is that not everyone is "a people person." A skilled transportation engineer may not be the best person to put in the position of explaining a transportation project to the public, or to gather feedback from them. The success of the outreach effort conducted in support of the Business 40 project was due largely to the level of experience of the outreach team. With an effort of this scale, there were always moving pieces. The outreach team always had to be ready for something to go wrong. Because of their experience, the outreach team was able to position themselves, prepare for, and minimize any issues that arose.

Spend the time needed to train and prepare all staff who will interact with the public. At times, it was important that other specialists interact with the public. In these cases the specialists were guided by the outreach team in their interactions. The purpose was to ensure that all members of the project team who interacted with public have and share a consistent, concise, and clear message. For the extensive door-to-door survey conducted through all neighborhoods directly impacted by the project, the individuals hired from the community were also trained in the messages to be conveyed, courtesies in their interactions, and the methods for recording feedback received.

Do not assume that you understand the community's values, perspective, and preferences. Project decisions cannot be made based on the assumptions of a community's values, perspective, and preferences. These things cannot be learned behind a computer - through the collection of Census data, identification of community resources, and review of land use plans. Even talking to community leaders is not enough - it requires going out into the community with a broad and deep reach, to listen directly to the public. This principle was proven in the early outreach conducted for Business 40. The expectation was that the public would favor a 6-year partial closure of the roadway for construction over a 2-year complete closure. The results of hands-on outreach proved that this was not the case.

Use approaches and strategies aimed at making the public comfortable and willing to provide input. The project team went to extensive effort to make the public comfortable and willing to provide input to the project. Many of these strategies are called out in the detailed case studies. Some of these included: giving the public advance notice that a survey would be conducted, using the same bright color for all project materials, training all staff who interacted with the public, treating the public with respect and courtesy, and using a variety of methods for outreach.

Open and ongoing communication among branches of the project team is critical. One of the triggers for the extraordinary public involvement supporting the Business 40 project was the familiarity of the Division Engineer with the project area and his ability to communicate a need to NCDOT headquarters and have it supported. Without that awareness and communication, a different approach may have been used, the 6-year construction design approach may have been taken, and discontent on the part of the public could have caused slow-downs. This line of communication and support was an effective practice. There were instances of and lessons learned around lack of communication. The outreach team maintained a database of feedback received from the public during the survey and meeting process. That database was shared with NCDOT on a weekly basis, but the right people within the agency were not receiving and making use of this great data. The issue was corrected, but demonstrates the importance of setting up and checking lines of communication within the agency and the various branches that will serve the project.

Having a dedicated agency project manager on site is important for this level of outreach. The project had an extensive level of outreach and a very large project team on the ground during the first year of the project. NCDOT's project manager was located out of its headquarters an hour and a half away. The project manager was responsible for many other projects. This created challenges for a fast-paced, dynamic process such as this one. Having a dedicated on-site project manager would have made the process much more efficient and effective.

The contract vehicle is important. One effective practice that may often go overlooked was the contract vehicle used to support the public involvement process. NCDOT arranged for a task order contract with the consultants providing outreach support. It provides the flexibility to change course quickly without having to scope out everything years in advance. Money is approved by the Board of Transportation without a detailed scope. Then small scopes can be written, estimates negotiated, and the firms given notice to proceed quickly as the need arises.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #10: Building a Safer, More Reliable Bridge and Roadway while Avoiding Environmental Justice Impacts: SR-520: I-5 to Medina, Seattle Area, Washington

Project Profile

• Study: EIS for the SR 520 corridor across Lake Washington, including the Evergreen Point Bridge
• Community: Small areas of low-income populations and Native American tribes
• Key issues: Impacts of tolling, impacts to cultural and natural resources of importance to Native American tribes
• Outcome: Extensive tolling analysis with mitigation, government-to-government coordination with tribes to understand and avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts

Views of SR 520

Key Point: The SR 520 project is in a largely affluent area with pockets of minority and low-income populations. Potential impacts of tolling on low-income populations and impacts on resources important to Native American Tribes were of particular importance.

The SR 520: I-5 to Medina Project in Seattle, Washington, addresses the two key issues facing the SR 520 corridor: (1) bridge structures that are vulnerable to catastrophic failure, and (2) traffic demand that exceeds capacity. As part of the NEPA process, the Washington State DOT (WSDOT) and the FHWA conducted an extensive EJ analysis to study the potential of disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority and low-income populations from: replacing the floating bridge and expanding the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges, rebuilding the bridges over SR 520, expanding the capacity of SR 520 (from 4 to 6 lanes), and tolling. Most of the Census block groups within the study area have relatively low concentrations of minority and low-income populations, with the exception of a few block groups with relatively high concentrations of minority and low-income populations. Key EJ issues were related to tolling and impacts on resources important to Native American tribes. From the beginning of the environmental analysis and decision-making process, the WSDOT and FHWA developed and implemented an ongoing program to engage the public, provide information about the project, and reach out to all potentially affected members of the public, including low-income and minority populations and those with limited English proficiency. WSDOT coordinated with tribes through a government-to-government relationship. A Record of Decision was issued in 2011.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Case #10: Building a Safer, More Reliable Bridge and Roadway while Avoiding Environmental Justice Impacts: SR-520: I-5 to Medina, Seattle Area, Washington

Effective Practices

• Expand the study area as needed to include a travelshed
• Address issues and concerns identified during public outreach
• Use early findings to inform ongoing work
• Government-to-government coordination with Native American tribes is critical to understanding potential project impacts and appropriate mitigation

Foster Island

Key Points: Through public outreach, the project team learned that the cost burden of tolling on low-income populations was a concern. A detailed analysis of the equity of tolling was conducted and improvements to transit services were made to help minimize impacts. The project team also worked closely with area tribes in a government-to-government relationship in order to obtain input on avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating impacts to important resources.

Consider the need to expand the study area to include travelshed users in the EJ analysis. The 2006 Draft EIS (DEIS) and 2010 Supplemental Draft (SDEIS) recognized that tolls associated with the build alternatives for the I-5 to Medina Project could negatively affect low-income individuals. While these tolls would have to be paid by all users of the new bridge except for vehicles in the HOV lanes (transit, emergency vehicles, and carpools with three or more people), they would represent a proportionally greater expense burden for low-income individuals than for non-low income individuals.

WSDOT conducted research on the equity of tolling for the project, and was initially unable to find any studies on the equity of tolling facilities like the one proposed for the Evergreen Point Bridge, although the research revealed that many studies exist on the equity of high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes.

As part of the SDEIS, analysts determined the need to expand its study area of analysis for purposes of EJ. To identify SR 520 users who would be affected by tolling, EJ analysts examined the communities from which trips on the Evergreen Point Bridge originated (that is, the Evergreen Point Bridge travelshed). Extensive outreach was conducted to gather opinions regarding tolling from the public in this travelshed. This analysis was key to determining potential impacts on travelshed users and potential measures to mitigate and/or minimize the burden that tolls would present on low-income and LEP populations.

Consider addressing issues and concerns identified during public outreach as part of the EJ analysis. WSDOT learned about concerns regarding tolling through the public-outreach activities including the ability of low-income individuals to afford the tolls, which would limit their ability to cross the bridge; hindrance of the ability for social-service organizations that work with minority and low-income populations, given their limited budgets, to provide services for their clients with tolling; and need for assurances that transit services would be improved and expanded because transit is an important optional form of transportation for those minority and low-income populations.

These concerns about tolling impacts of EJ populations helped to shape the depth and breadth of the analysis regarding the tolling component of the project. Specifically, because of the input provided by social-service organizations and advocates for low-income populations regarding the equity of tolling: (1) the EJ analysis addressed the topic of equity of tolling in great detail, and even included research as to how this topic has been addressed in other parts of the country for comparable programs; (2) additional outreach specific to tolling effects to the Evergreen Point Bridge travelshed study area was included as part of the Final EIS (FEIS).

The tolling analyses conducted for the project as part of the various environmental documents, from the 2006 DEIS to the 2011 FEIS, was critical. Further, the analysis contributed to the development of mitigation measures to help address the impacts of tolling on low-income individuals.

Utilize outcomes of outreach and research conducted for a project to inform outreach to low-income and minority populations for later project phases. WSDOT has capitalized on information gained through the earlier public outreach and environmental analysis to inform its ongoing public-outreach program for the SR 520 program. For example, based on the demographic profile of the travelshed study area, WSDOT is also translating information about electronic tolling into multiple languages.

As part of an Urban Partnership Agreement, WSDOT and King County Metro Transit began taking action to provide an affordable alternative to paying tolls. This included expanding transit service and ridesharing service on a number of routes in and near the SR 520 corridor, working with community-based agencies that serve low-income users of the SR 520 travelshed to train them on helping their clients find affordable alternatives to paying tolls, including vanpools and ridesharing; and offering free crossing of the Evergreen Point Bridge between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. (which does not benefit all affected users, but would benefit service or shift workers).

Government-to-government coordination with Native American tribes is critical to understanding potential project impacts and appropriate mitigation. The important cultural and fishery resources within the I-5 to Medina project study area created a need for very close coordination with area tribes. Working with tribes through a government-to-government relationship was critical for the project team to understand and characterize potential impacts of the project on the tribes and to define and come to agreement on measures that would avoid, minimize, and mitigate those impacts.

Environmental Justice and NEPA in the Transportation Arena: Project Highlights

Conclusions

What the highlighted projects confirm:

• There is no uniform approach to addressing EJ in NEPA
• The depth and breadth of analysis is context-specific
• Meaningful participation of EJ populations is always essential

Visit FHWA's EJ Website for further information (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/environmental_justice/)

None

The effective practices from the 10 NEPA projects highlighted in this presentation can be used by transportation practitioners trying to identify; understand; and avoid, minimize, or mitigate EJ impacts as part of their transportation projects.

While the projects confirm that there is no uniform approach to addressing EJ issues, they also support a conclusion that early, extensive, and far-reaching engagement of minority and low-income populations as part of the NEPA review process is essential. Determining whether impacts are disproportionately high and adverse remains a difficult aspect of the environmental review process. While the community context and resources impacted varied across the cases, the common denominator to all successes was working closely with the public to understand and address their needs.

For more information please visit FHWA's EJ Website.