lessons learned report 1 2008

8/14/2019 Lessons Learned Report 1 2008

1/16

Filling The Gap. Define it! Prioritize it! Analyze it! Evaluate it! Document it!

Lessons Learned

Baltimore Region Environmental and Transportation Project

Prepared for:

The Environmental Protection Agency

2009

All Rights Reserved


2/16

Lessons Learned The Baltimore Region Environmental Justice in Transportation Project

2

Table of Contents

Table.....................................................................................................................................................................2

Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................................................3

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................3

The Project.......................................................................................................................................................4

Lessons Learned .............................................................................................................................................4

Methodology.......................................................................................................................................................6

Source of Information........................................................................................................................................7

Acronyms Used..................................................................................................................................................8

Output .................................................................................................................................................................9

Literature Review...........................................................................................................................................9

Community Guide .......................................................................................................................................10Environmental Justice Toolkit....................................................................................................................10

Environmental Justice Toolkit Technical Documentation......................................................................10

Outcome ............................................................................................................................................................13

Results................................................................................................................................................................14

Impact on Management and Policy ...............................................................................................................14

Limitations and Next Steps.............................................................................................................................15

Bibliography .....................................................................................................................................................16

Figure

Figure 1 Lessons Learned Methodology .............................................................................................................6

Figure 2 : Public Participation and Analysis Framework...........................................................................11

Figure 3: Measuring Equity ............................................................................................................................13

Figure 4: Potential Triage Committee Members.........................................................................................15

Table

Table 1: EJ Impact Analysis Tools Used In Baltimore...................................................................................5


3/16


3

Acknowledgments

Support the Baltimore Region Environmental Justice and Transportation Project, through aCooperative Agreement with Morgan State University. The research effort focused on theconcerns of local residents, transit dependant and community leaders in four Baltimore Citycommunities: Kirk Ave., Cherry Hill, Highwayto-Nowhere, and Lexington Market.

The project team acknowledges Victor McMahan, Environmental Protection Agency, GloriaShepard Federal Highway Administration, Tony Brown, Maryland Transit Administration

and Harvey Bloom, Baltimore Metropolitan Commission. As well we are grateful to thecommunity groups for their fine work, the support they gave to this research, as well as theirwillingness to continue to share their experience with us and with other communities. Wewish them the best as they strive to participate in planning decisions to ensure accessible,affordable and reliable transportation for people with disabilities, low incomes and others intheir communities.

Introduction

The development of this toolkit is based on several notions. They are: 1) low income and minority


4/16


4

communities are still in need of effective channels for working within the system, 2) findingsolutions to issues that are central and urgent to the tenants of environmental justice (EJ) promotes abetter a better understanding of the decision making process facilitates public participation andleads to change, 3) the resolution of EJ issues will involve an intertwined and iterative analysisprocess that focuses on collaboration rather than agitation and 4) that the complexity of equityimpact analysis overlaps with and is dependent on a complexity of the intertwined issue of ecology,

housing, public health and governance. Because of the community focus, participation, andattention to replication, the Baltimore project has developed a strong platform and a viableframework that has the potential to contribute to improving the transportation decision makingprocess in support of air quality, housing and transportation goals not only in the Baltimore Regionbut in other similar regions across the country. The project team gratefully acknowledge the threecommunity groups for their committed effort, untiring support they gave to this research, as well astheir willingness to share their experience with us and with other communities.

The Project

The Baltimore Region Environmental Justice in Transportation project (BREJTP) is a communitydriven bottom up collaborative research effort funded by the Federal Highway Administration(FHA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop a systematic process for thatintegrates environmental justice into the existing transportation decision making process.

Since 2003 the Baltimore Region Environmental Justice and Transportation Project (BREJT Project)has been listening to low-income minority communities describe the impact that transportation hason their environment and in their lives. Our primary mission has been to encourage governmentand communities to better work together to achieve environmentally sound solutions whenaddressing community identified environmental problems. The goal of this toolkit is to produce avehicle for addressing community based concerns through an informed public involvement processthat is credibly responsive to public input particularly from low income and minority taxpayers. TheBREJT Projects objective is to use a variety of planning tools to inform and empower communities

about environmental concerns utilizing community stakeholders to identify local concerns andpotential remedies.

Lessons Learned

The tools used in the four BREJT case studies, Kirk Avenue, Cherry Hill, Lexington Market andHighway to Nowhere combine lessons learned and several levels of analysis techniques todemonstrate how issues associated with environmental justice in transportation (EJT) issues can besystematically evaluated using a store of traditional transportation planning impact measures andanalytical tools. As such, in the Kirk Avenue case study the MTA bus depot concerns focus on thelocation and operation of a bus depot in an older, inner-city working-class neighborhood along KirkAvenue.

The Cherry Hill case study evaluates a history of public transit service changes, service reductionsand poor service delivery in a predominately African American, and low-income community with alarge number of residents who living in public housing.

While the Lexington Market case study analyzes the reaction to changes in transit service in anhistoric shopping destination frequented by lower-income residents from surrounding communities


5/16


5

in central Baltimore.

The Highway to Nowhere case study concerns communities in the U.S. Route 40 Corridor throughWest Baltimore regarding plans for a proposed Red Line and efforts to create transit-orienteddevelopment around an existing commuter rail station (West Baltimore MARC), fearing communitydisruption, destruction and dislocation as occurred in the partially abandoned I-170 which divided

West Baltimore in the 1960s.

Important lessons were learned from using the above tools to evaluate the concerns of localresidents, low income African Americans, transit dependent populations and community leaders inthe BREJT project.

Table 1 illustrates the mix of analytical tools used to frame and evaluate the EJ impact analysis ofissues used in the BREJT Project and to guide the development of this toolkit.

Table 1: EJ Impact Analysis Tools Used In Baltimore

Kirk Avenue Measures of Impact - Proximity of depot to homes, number of bus using

the facility that provide service to urban communities, public health riskfactors associated with noise and pollution and impact on median sales

price of homes. Analytical Procedures - buffer analysis, noise, transit

operations, inventory public health risk factor and comparisons of

property values surrounding other bus facilities.

Cherry Hill Measure of Impact - accessibility to employment center, mobility of

transit dependant population particularly seniors with disabilities.

Analytical Procedures - Transit accessibility and population

demographic analysis.

Lexington Market Measures of Impact - Analytical Procedures -Upon review of the

situation, initial concerns about serious congestion and health effects

due to prolonged exposure to vehicle activity - as framed in the

community discussionsappeared less severe than initially portrayed.

Highway To Nowhere Measures of Impact evaluate the impact of commuter traffic and local

congestion on the local areas. Analytical Procedures - ADT, select link,

population demographic, mobile source emissions, transit service and

accessibility analysis.


6/16


6

Figure 1 Lessons Learned

Methodology

The Baltimore Region Environmental Justice in Transportation (BREJT) project used a case study approach

In the case study communities we found a common desire for a better living environment, a more

responsive government, and the demise of blight and decay. We also discover that planning tools

are not fully employed to evaluate EJ issues which suggest the need for the propagation of EJ

enforceable service and planning standards.

The clear message that when individuals, neighborhoods and communities are motivated, well

organized, and better educated on transportation issues and improvement options a sense of

community ownership is created that can better influence project selection outcomes that reinforce

regional growth with healthier neighborhoods and stable communities

That Environmental Justice Analysis informs the transportation planning process through the

introduction of a community based public participation framework that encourages low income

and minority communities to use performance measures and analytical tools

That small area analysis when used by community organizers and planning professionals for acommon purpose of improve accessibility and mobility can result in a more equitable way of

assessing environmental justice and transportation issues at the local level has region wide benefits.

That the low-income neighborhoods communities and the transportation maintenance facilities

they attract may need better protections to ensure equitable treatment

Busses traveling through communities and passing near schools increase noise and exhaust

pollution. Further decreases property value leading to vacant homes that disenfranchises.

Thirty years after the Highway to Now-where was constructed there is still a community memory

of the destruction and a palpable bitterness about what was done

The public rightly felt that it had been marginalized by the decision-making process, and that

commercial interests (such as a parking lot adjacent to the Market) were given preference over

there well being. Upon review of the situation, initial concerns about serious congestion and health

effects due to prolonged exposure to vehicle activity-as framed in the community discussions-

appeared less severe than initially portrayed

Transportation investment such as light rail systems can be a blessing or a curse. Unequal access

to light rail does has limited utility for business and community use in general and it is particularly

difficult for seniors and disabled populations.

Low Income Residents have a higher incidence of congested related illness. Seniors have

difficulty riding certain buses due to over- crowding.


7/16


7

to gather data to help better understand in real time the risk and burdens in the Environmental Justice and

Transportation Decision Making Process. The overall methodology and approach to each case studyinvolved a series of steps which revolved around the cooperation and participation of communitystakeholders and various agencies. These steps included: a.) Problem definition (e.g. howwidespread), b) Framing impacts (e.g., critical variables and measures), c) Selection and applicationof analytical techniques (e.g., spatial level of analysis), and d) Resolution and feedback (e.g.,

evaluation of the tools that might be employed, or have been employed). To accomplish the analysisof community driven issues, BREJT was structured into three sequential phases:

Phase I Community Outreach: Designed to determine what the key issues and concernsare to candidate subgroups, as well as identify methods for reaching the correct segments.

Phase II Develop Environmental Justice in Transportation Tool Kit: to develop anenvironmental justice in transportation planning guide that supports interactive exchanges

between the MPO, community residents, and transportation agencies.

Phase III Dissemination of Findings and Possible New Tools: Encouraging the propagation and dissemination of the improved procedures through academic curriculum,technology transfer, and peer exchange. There is also the possibility that tools are not

identified in Phase II that will need to be developed in a future phase.

Building upon the findings in Phase I, Phase II of the project developed and organized the EJ &Transportation Toolkit. In Phase III the most relevant accessibility and air quality related issues inhighly impacted and representative environmental justice communities in the Baltimore regionwere disseminated on http://www.brejtp.org

Source of Information

Existing data Follow up interviews or surveys.

Focus groups designed to foster interaction among key stakeholders, and to allow theseinterchanges to raise knowledge and perceptions about less obvious contributing concerns or aboutpotential solutions.

Sketch planning methods, i.e., ad hoc techniques that provide a reasonable approximation of theeffect or result with the data and tools at hand, such as with a spreadsheet that has default values

for certain parameters and instructs the user on what data to supply.

Regional travel forecasting model to estimate either how widespread the particular effect is acrossthe regional network, or if there are changes in travel mode, route, destination or other effects that

result in a geographic redistribution of benefits.

Traffic simulation tools, particularly to evaluate the effects on traffic flow and congestion ofactions or events that influence travel levels in corridors or on local street networks.

Geographic information system (GIS) tools to spatially locate and deal with the overlay oftransportation issues or improvements on particular population market segments.


8/16


8

Acronyms Used

BMC Baltimore Metropolitan Council

BREJT Baltimore Region Environmental Justice in Transportation

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

EJT Environmental Justice in TransportationEJTK Environmental Justice in Transportation Toolkit

GIS Geographic Information System

MTA Maryland Transit Administration

Activities

In 2004, a series of 8 listening sessions and a community dialogue were held in communitiesthroughout the Baltimore region. These events offered the public a chance to share their concernsabout transportation in the region.

In 2006, over 50 people gathered to kick off Phase II of the project. At this event, participants chosethe top three areas of concern in the Baltimore region - access to quality transit service, air qualityand congestion, and public involvement in the planning process - and potential communities wherethese concerns exist.

The next step of the process was to fully explore these concerns by developing several case studies.The following locations were selected:

Kirk Avenue Cherry Hill West Baltimore (Highway to Nowhere) Lexington Market

In March 2007, after much work by community groups and research by the team, the case studieswere presented to attendees of a community workshop.

The BREJT Project held a final Community Workshop on Saturday, October 25, 2008. The event,hosted by the BREJT team is an important step in sustaining this regional initiative. The highlight ofthe workshop was the release of a Community Guide (PDF: 9,927 KB) intended to provideinformation to communities on what EJ is and how to bring issues to the attention of local officialsand Metropolitan Planning Organizations, such as the Baltimore Regional Transportation Board.

Also of note was the presence and participation of so many community members that havecontributed to the understanding and advancement of EJ in the Baltimore region. The toolkit will beavailable electronically to provide easy access to planners as well as citizens.


9/16


9

Output

The primary project outputs are the discussed in this section. The six phases shown below are usedin the public participation framework and drill down analysis process to tease out what happened,who was involved and what the community wants. Using the drill down process shown below the

project focused on the transportation impacts of public health, accessibility and travel demand onlow income and minority communities with the intent to identify policies that move communitybased EJ concern toward viable solutions.

1.) Each phase used in this approach is meant to be inclusive of both the EJ communities and thetransportation agency of responsibility.

Phase 1 - Community-Driven Intergovernmental Engagement and Cooperation

Phase 2 - Community Assessment and Citizen Input (Identify the Local Problems)

Phase 3 - Information Gathering and Analysis (Due Diligence)

Phase 4 - Developing a Community Profile (Analytical)

Phase 5 - Drill Down to Evaluate the EJT Issues (Evaluation)

Phase 6 - Being Heard (Communicating)

2.) In applying the above phases we developed a local EJ network of concerned low income andminority residents and their advocates and a public participation framework model. The publicparticipation model (Figure 1) is one of three core environmental justice-planning components. Theother two components are performance measures and analytical tools. These components combineto provide environmental justice evaluation methods and procedures that maybe be used to confirmor negate issues identified in low-income communities. In particular the public participationframework is designed as the starting point for vetting issues and developing analysis strategies forinterrogating environmental justice and transportation issues through a triage-type activity that hasmultiple screening levels and explicit feedback loops.

3.) Develop a compendium of the technical memoranda prepared into EJ toolkit that specifically bestevaluate issues first at the unit and zonal level. Develop a better understanding of the breath of EJIssues and how to best Frame the Analysis, Measure impacts and challenges of major issues developa better understanding of analytic tools and considerations evaluating and by extension selectinganalytical tools and analysis procedures for evaluating EJ issues. Advance analytical procedures byapplying a store of performance measures and analytical procedures that are available forEnvironmental Justice and Transportation decision making.

4.) As a result of the BREJT projects listening sessions and community dialogue where over 120individuals participated in an all-day workshop to share perceptions with elected officials, nationalexperts, and academic specialists. We fined tuned a process for measuring equity Figure 1).

Literature Review

The document discusses the need for guidance is both aided and made uncertain by the growing


10/16


11/16


11

presented a profile, beginning with a brief Description of the setting and the concerns, followed byan inventory of the Investigations undertaken in support of the concerns, and then a presentation ofthe Findings resulting from the analysis and review of the key questions. A final section in eachprofile will summarize the Conclusions and recommendations resulting from the analysis.

The guide is developed using the lens of low-income and minority groups to serve as a planning

guide resource for community activist, transportation professionals, civil servants, and publicservants who have responsibility for spending and advocating for an equitable distribution offederal funding. The strength of this guide lies in its intent to foster a better understanding ofEnvironmental Justice and Transportation particularly in low-income and minority communities byproviding a better understanding of core transportation planning process mechanisms.

Figure 2 : Public Participation and Analysis Framework


12/16


12

The diagram in Figure 1 shows the framework for an EJ analysis process.

Step 1, as tends to be the case, issues and concerns related to social and environmental justiceoriginate within the community.

Step 2, when the community perceives that they are experiencing discrimination in the delivery of apublic good or service they will likely be in need of additional information and/or analysis. Anindividual or community group may first take their concerns to the service provider, such as atransit agency, local planning department, or metropolitan planning organization.

Step 3, when the evidence regarding discriminatory practices is not entirely clear, further evaluationcan be used to assess the concerns of the community.

Step 4, this secondary problem screening and analysis step uses a formal process and follows theidentification of issues at the community level. The next step in the process will be to communicateconcerns to organizational heads with influence.

Step 5, in all cases this will involve studying potential solutions or alternatives that have beenidentified by an individual, neighborhood, advocacy group or a planning professional. In somecases this may involve having solutions or alternatives already in hand. In other cases thesesolutions may not be known yet but rather need further exploration. The communications step isimportant because it dictates whether the ensuing process will be contentious or not. This point theprocess is referred to as the Triage Process. Decisions will be made about how the concern or issuewill be treated, especially in relation to its urgency and extent.

Step 6, d If it is determined that the concern should be addressed relatively soon, actions mayinclude toolkit analysis, mediation, or legal action as appropriate.

Step 7, otherwise, the standard MPO planning review process can be used.

Step 8 or a particular action or remedy could be arrived at by consensus.

Step 9, evaluation of each of these three paths should then occur to determine whether the outcomesof the process are deemed acceptable.

In summary if the acceptability of an outcome remains in question, the EJ analysis frameworkshould lead back to the Triage Process (step 5) where it can be re-evaluated along with any newinformation generated during steps 6. 7., or 8. Otherwise the process can continue on to thePlanning Board or other decision-making body (step 10).


13/16


13

Figure 3: Measuring Equity

Outcome

1. issues are better identified and addressed using the enhanced community involvement andtechnical analysis procedures and techniques in the EJT Toolkit, which can be integrated into anyregional (or state) transportation planning process.

2.) Improved ability to measure and track environmental, health and community well-beingimpacts and progress in the Baltimore region.

CommunityIssues Community Driven Public Participation

Goal Objectives Performance Measures

Job Access Economic VitalityandCompetitiveness

EncourageEmploymentOpportunities; UrbanCommunities

Work opportunities within 15, 30 and 45minutes by car and transit door-to-door. Percentof transit-dependent riders who can access jobswith 45 minutes by fixed route of transit

Maintenance Safety and Security(Motorized andNon)

Stop the Use of OldEquipment in LowIncomeNeighborhoods

Percent and characteristic of out-of-service busescoming into an area.Pedestrian/bicycle injuries & fatalitiesVehicle Crashes, Age of Fleet

Increased

Accessibility

Increase

Accessibility andMobility Options

Access to Jobs Proximity to transit

Level of ServiceAccessibility to health care facilitiesAccessibility to educational facilities

Reduce Air andNoise Pollution

ProtectEnvironment,Conserve Energyand ImproveQuality of Life

Clean Environment Air pollution concentrations; Incidence rates ofRespiratory disorders, Number of Householdsexposed to noise. Asthma rates in communitiesadjacent to large transportation facilities,

ImprovedTransit RouteStructure

EnhanceConnectivity andIntegration AcrossModes for People

and Freight

Access to shoppingand services

Number of fatalitiesLocations improved per million passenger miles

NeedAssessment

Manage andPreserve ExistingTransportationSystem

Advocate for projectfunding to improvelocal conditions.

Condition of roads and streetsCondition of side walksRatio of uncongested travel time betweenorigins and destinations

Funding Equity LocalRegionalStatewide

Fairness in TransitFunding

Per Capita Transportation expendituresPer Capita Operating ExpensesNumber of fatalitiesIdentity of user who benefitLocations improved per million passenger miles


14/16


14

3.) Improved ability to reduce and identify critical mobile source related air pollutants and reducethe impacts from transportation facilities as well as improve transportation services tocommunities of concern in the Baltimore region.

Results

1.) Phase I output, which included community listening sessions and a community workshop,verified the need for community input into transportation decisions affecting the communities ofconcern. The subsequent review of the literature and best practices verified the need for a practicaltoolkit to effectively address community EJ concerns and transportation and air quality planningrequirements.

2.) The project identified service delivery distributional gaps and supported the need for the PhaseII EJT toolkit - systematic guidance and techniques to undertake a comprehensive EJ andtransportation program.

3.) The U.S. Department of Transportation has joined with EPA to support and expand Phase II ofthe Baltimore project. More specifically, DOTs Transportation Equity Research Program (TERP)

funding and technical assistance will be used to support the EJ case studies, toolkit developmentand replication.

4.) As well, community groups and not-for-profit organizations have embraced the development ofthe EJ toolkit to further advance the work pioneered by the:

Atlanta Transportation Benefits and Burdens Study

NCHRP Project 8-36(11): Technical Methods to Support Analyses of Environmental JusticeIssues

NCHRP Report 532: Effective Methods for Environmental Justice Assessment

5.) Low income community groups in each case study are proactively engaging federal, state,

regional and local planning processes.

6.) State, regional and local planning agencies as a pretext for long and short range plans andprojects to improve system efficiencies put in place transportation, environmental and land useconcepts with more focus on environmental justice and underserved populations.

7.) Low income and minority communities in Baltimore are exploring the use of Title VI complaintsto force compliance of Environmental Justice Executive orders.

Impact on Management and Policy

During the course of this project in the Baltimore region there have been notable increases in the

efforts of state, regional and local agencies to comply with the requirements of Title VI. In doing sothey are reacting to the importance of actively reaching out to low-income and minoritycommunities to ask for their input and encourage their participation in the planning process. As anactive participant in the development of the toolkit, the Baltimore Metropolitan Planning ha beenconducting the activities listed below and they are working to sustain this work effort by implementthe BREJT recommended Triage committee, Figure 3.

Updating community outreach mailing lists


15/16


15

Advising transportation planners on outreach activities

Holding regularly scheduled listening sessions and public hearings

Reviewing the annual transportation planning work plan

Reviewing the annual Transportation Improvement Program update

Evaluation of Environmental Justice Issues

PublicHealth

Institution

StateDOT

MPO

Non - Profit

CommunityGroup

BusinessGroup

Urban

Academic

Institution

LocalGovernment

TriageCommittee

Figure 4: Potential Triage Committee Members

At the state, regional level and local level, this increased effort suggest that administrative rules arerequired to ensure that agencies look beyond merely identifying the location of low income andminority communities by actively looking for environmental justice problems by comparing thebenefits (such as travel time saved or accessibility to jobs) from a regional transportation plan to thecosts (amount of taxes paid by each income group) and by looking at how the burdens (such asdeteriorated air quality and excessive noise) are distributed across income, ethnic, and age groups.

Limitations and Next Steps

Although the study effectively introduced case studies that were informative of an overalltransportation and environmental injustice relationships the link to policy are missed. This researchcan be strengthened if general policy conclusions and key findings can be made that could berelevant to broader policy initiative associated with issues identified in each of the study area andelsewhere in the region. The economic impact aspect of transportation systems (land and homevalues, business impacts, etc) are discussed but are not effectively integrated in the toolkit. Noeffective measure or indicator is broadly discussed in this study. Some of these economic indicatorsof the impact of transportation decisions on, say property values, could be an indicator of economic

stress and inequity, but not well specified. As well we will continue to encourage MPO, transitagencies and local governments to adopt public participation frameworks and apply analyticalprocedures differently for evaluating EJ issue by targeting the replication by conduct small areaanalysis to continue to raise the level of EJ awareness in low income and minority communities inPittsburg, Minneapolis, Detroit, Baltimore, Albany and Oakland.


16/16

lessons learned report 1 2008

Documents