Click for next page ( 97


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 96
96 A P P E N D I X B High-Value Data Investments Environmental Factors: Water compliance" versus "out of compliance" with water quality Quality and Watersheds standards for downstream water bodies. Hydromodification measures: These measures are based Synopsis of Performance Measures on hydrological data and are used to model, estimate, mon- The performance measures identified below capture both itor, and manage the impact on water quality, water qual- traditional and "future thinking" metrics on water quality ity standards, impaired water bodies and TMDLs, etc. due and watershed health. Measures are used to model potential to the alteration of water bodies. These include tracking of impacts, gauge whether proposed projects would pass envi- stream widening/downcutting, physical habitat, dry and ronmental review, and, in general, assess compliance with the wet weather flows, flooding, and stream temperature. Clean Water Act, the National Environmental Policy Act Hydrological data are typically geospatial and derived from (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and other envi- in-situ monitoring. ronmental laws and regulations. Other less common measures are used for "beyond compli- Water quality parameters: Chemical, biological, and physi- ance" agency strategic planning and target setting, project alter- cal parameters are used to model, estimate, monitor, and native identification and project selection, project monitoring, manage impacts on water quality, water quality standards and adaptive management purposes. While some DOTs and compliance, impaired water bodies and Total Maximum MPOs have proactively engaged in efforts to measure these Daily Loads (TMDLs.) There are numerous metrics, span- kinds of parameters, doing so typically requires close collabora- ning data on nutrients, sediment, oxygen demand, biological tion with other agencies and entities that collect related data, as factors (e.g., macroinvertebrate and periphyton populations, well as additional primary data collection and analysis. These fish assemblages, single species indicators), hydrological indi- "beyond compliance" measures include the following: cators (see also hydromodification), petroleum hydrocar- bons, and others. Impact on priority water quality protection areas: Impact Depending on the potentially affected water bodies and of capacity enhancement projects on nonregulated water their designated uses, specific pollutant loads are moni- quality in priority water quality protection areas. tored to ensure adherence to legally binding water quality Disturbance of riparian, floodplain, or sensitive areas: standards. For example, the National Primary Drinking The change in quality, quantity, location, and functioning Water Regulations (NPDWRs) or primary standards are of areas adjacent to affected water bodies that strongly legally enforceable standards that apply to public drinking influence water quality. water systems. The NPDWRs relate to a list of specific con- Construction related impacts: Predicted impact on taminants and their maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) "beyond compliance" water quality during highway expan- in the following contaminant categories: Microorganisms, sion construction. Disinfectants, Disinfection Byproducts, Inorganic Chemi- Contaminants from highway runoff, stormwater, and cals, Organic Chemicals, and Radionuclides (1). other nonpoint sources: Estimate of water quality impacts A common "roll-up" measure used by DOTs and other from highway runoff and stormwater. agencies to gauge their water quality impacts for transporta- Changes in impervious surfaces: The estimated water tion construction sites is the percent of agency projects "in quality and watershed health impact due to the additional

OCR for page 96
97 impervious surfaces likely to occur in a drainage basin as a State and tribal water quality standards constitute the result of highway capacity projects. baseline of water quality standards in effect for Clean Consistency with water resource and watershed Water Act purposes. Any revisions determined to be less management/protection plans: Degree of highway capac- stringent must be approved by EPA prior to use in Clean ity project plan consistency with water resource and water- Water Act programs. These standards are available state- shed management plans. by-state and tribe-by-tribe and are compiled by EPA (5). Sources of Data for Current Measures Other Widely Used Sources of Data and Related Tools Primary Data Sources: Data on water quality parameters, including biological, chemical, and physical parameters, Watershed management plans. EPA provides grant fund- are largely collected and managed within state agencies, ing for watershed planning with watershed management including state DOTs and MPOs, state environmental plan requirements under Section 319 of the Clean Water agencies (those that oversee implementation of the Clean Act. However, not all watershed management plans are Water Act), natural resource agencies, and sometimes, developed under EPA funding, and because watershed state departments of health, depending on where state- management plans are developed at the local level, there is specific authority lies for water quality monitoring and no single repository for all of these plans. A large number related health-based requirements. Much of the data is of watershed management plans are available at the state geospatial, composed largely of GIS data layers and remote and local levels by searching on the Internet. Other water- sensing data. Water quality monitoring data is often also shed data, such as geographic location, USGS streamflow translated into geospatial for both predictive/modeling data, and relevant citizens groups, is available on EPA's and monitoring and ongoing management purposes. Local national "Surf Your Watershed" webpage, described below. and regional agencies such as counties also collect and Watershed data also is available through each EPA Region's manage related data. The U.S. Environmental Protection watershed webpage, a compilation of which is located on Agency implements Clean Water Act programs (and related this page: http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/links.html. data collection) in a handful of states that do not have del- National Water Quality Standards Database (WQSDB) egated authority to do so. National standards, criteria, and Release 9.0 (December 2007) EPA has developed a National datasets are used as well to serve as general references Water Quality Standards Database (WQSDB) to improve and the basis or starting points for many state and local public access to information on how the waters they care datasets and standards. Many of these national sources are about are being protected, and how actions in their water- listed below. shed can help or harm those waters. The on-line database The USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) is a consists of a compilation of "designated uses," used by each comprehensive digital spatial dataset that contains infor- state to describe the functions each water body is intended mation about surface water features such as lakes, ponds, to support fishing, swimming, drinking water source, or streams, rivers, springs, and wells. Some of the antici- some other use. For some states, tribes, and territories, tables pated end-user applications of the NHD are multiuse and maps of uses also are available. http://www.epa.gov/ hydrographic modeling and water-quality studies of fish wqsdatabase/ habitats. USGS also provides several analytical NHD Impervious Surface Analysis Tool: The Impervious Surface tools on line (2). Analysis Tool (ISAT) is used to calculate the percentage of 303(d) List of Impaired Waters and Associated TMDL impervious surface area of user-selected geographic areas Information: Under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water (e.g., watersheds, municipalities, subdivisions). The National Act, states, territories, and authorized tribes are required Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal to develop lists of waters which do not meet or are not Services Center and the University of Connecticut Nonpoint expected to meet applicable water quality standards. The Education for Municipal Officials (NEMO) Program devel- law requires that these jurisdictions establish priority oped this tool for coastal and natural resource managers. rankings for water on the lists and develop action plans, ISAT is available as an ArcView 3.x, ArcGIS 8.x or an called Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL), to improve ArcGIS 9.x extension. http://www.csc.noaa.gov/crs/cwq/ water quality. EPA has developed reporting guidance for isat.html integrated water quality reports, including TMDL sched- Nonpoint Source Pollution and Erosion Comparison Tool ule development and prioritization (3). A compilation of (N-SPECT): N-SPECT is a complex yet user-friendly geo- all state reports on 303(d) water bodies and TMDLs is graphic information system (GIS) extension that helps available at the EPA web site (4). coastal managers and local decision makers predict poten-

OCR for page 96
98 tial water-quality impacts from nonpoint source pollution that protect or enhance watershed health in a clear and and erosion. Users first enter information about their area definable way. (land cover, elevation, precipitation, and soil characteristics) Data on nonpoint-source pollution and related analyti- to create the baseline information. They can then add differ- cal tools: Data on point source dischargers is routinely ent land cover change scenarios (such as a development) to tracked and well documented under federal NPDES per- get information about potential changes in surface water mitting and related regulations and rules. Today, the big- runoff, nonpoint source pollution, and erosion. N-SPECT ger data challenge surrounds nonpoint sources which has been applied in coastal areas around the U.S., the many experts believe to be the bigger threat to water qual- Caribbean, Central America, and the South Pacific. It oper- ity in addition to being significantly harder to track and ates most effectively in medium-to-large watersheds having manage. Nonpoint source data and analytical modeling low-to-moderate topographic relief. http://www.csc.noaa. and decision-making tools are generally lacking, yet are of gov/crs/cwq/nspect.html great interest to parties that want to protect water quality EPA WATERS Expert Query Tool: The WATERS Expert to both attain and move beyond regulatory compliance. Query Tool is a web-based application that allows users Impervious surface information and related modeling to create queries to display or extract data concerning and predictive analytical tools: Data at the watershed and impaired and assessed waters and associated, approved subwatershed unit levels for impervious surfaces and how Total Maximum Daily Loads. For more information, see: highway capacity projects could or would affect impervious http://www.epa.gov/waters/tmdl/expert_query.html surfaces is needed but not readily available. This is a two- Other data and tools for general public use: part challenge: a) having the necessary data; and b) having EPA EnviroMapper for Water: The publicly available the tools and technologies to use the data to understand EnviroMapper for Water is a web-based Geographic highway impacts. Information System (GIS) application that dynamically Stormwater management data: There is a growing con- displays information about bodies of water in the United sensus that improved stormwater management is critical to States. It allows users to create customized maps that por- protecting water quality, particularly in urban areas or other tray the nation's surface waters along with a collection of areas with large percentages of impervious surfaces or other environmental data. Where completed, data are available factors that contribute to significant stormwater pollutant on Waters, Water Quality Standards, Assessed Waters, loads. Data and tools that go beyond TMDL best manage- Beaches, Sewage No Discharge Zones, and Nonpoint ment practices are needed to solve this problem because Source Projects. It could be used as an initial scanning tool existing tools and technologies are not achieving desired in lieu of having a more extensive plan or database with water quality protection or enhancement results. this information at hand. For more information, see: http://www.epa.gov/waters/enviromapper/index.html High-Value Data Investment Opportunities Surf Your Watershed geospatial-based system which includes watershed profiles, citizen-based groups at work The four data gap areas described above watershed data, in each watershed, river corridors and wetlands restora- nonpoint source pollution data, impervious surface data, tion efforts, a 303(d) list fact sheet for each watershed, and stormwater management data all pose strong oppor- links to USGS watershed information, etc. See: http:// tunities for high-value data investments that could make cfpub.epa.gov/surf/locate/index.cfm significant strides in water quality protection beyond what already is known and practiced. Although work is being done in each of these areas, specific work that links highway capac- Performance Data Gaps ity planning to data availability and realistic approaches for Watershed data and the connectivity between water qual- DOTs and MPOs in these areas is still needed. ity at particular highway-related locations with water- The other high-value data investment opportunity is to shed health: Watershed protection plans and related data develop local and statewide partnerships with other agencies about priority watershed protection areas/units, watershed and entities that collected relevant data and have a mutual health vulnerabilities, and watershed-level (or subwater- interest in protecting water quality and watershed health. In shed unit level) watershed health metrics that can clearly many if not most areas, data, tools, and even measures exist that be tied to highway capacity projects. Although these kinds can help to enable project selection, planning, mitigation, etc. of data are being worked on by some agencies and collab- that will substantially enhance water quality protection over the orations (e.g., see the Maryland 301 case study), most status quo DOT approach which often considers these factors agencies are struggling with having the right data and ana- late in the process and is limited to regulatory compliance. The lytical tools to plan and design highway capacity projects Ecosystem Enhancement Project in North Carolina (see case

OCR for page 96
99 study) is one example of a cross-agency partnership that has they are required to have for NEPA, ESA, or other regulatory resulted in the protection of several priority watershed areas compliance purposes. Instead, this data is more commonly while simultaneously resulting in significant reductions in the collected and maintained by federal, state, tribal, and local wait time for environmental review and permitting for state environmental, natural resource, or fish and wildlife agencies. transportation projects. Some private organizations such as The Nature Conservancy or local land trusts also collect and maintain some of this data. Environmental Factors Ecosystems, Biodiversity, Sources of Data for Current Measures and Habitat Primary data sources: Some landscape data is available at a Synopsis of Performance Measures national level. U.S. EPA and USGS offer GIS data layers for hydrology, land use, and wetlands; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Transportation systems affect ecosystems, biodiversity, and Service and NOAA Fisheries maintain lists of federally pro- habitat in a variety of ways, including road kill; loss and tected species. However, assessment of local and specific degradation of natural areas; air, water, soil, and noise pollu- environmental impacts typically requires up-to-date data tion; and introduction of invasive species. Although some that has been "ground-truthed," often at a local level. State DOTs are implementing improved planning approaches to and local entities often develop higher-scale landscape data address these issues, these impacts have traditionally not been to provide increased detail and accuracy. considered until the NEPA permitting process if they have been considered at all. Species listed for protection under the Endangered Species Other Widely Used Sources of Data Act (ESA) are one of the few performance measures consis- State Wildlife Action Plans: Under the State Wildlife tently tracked by DOTs that are related to ecosystems, bio- Grants (SWG) Program and the Wildlife Conservation and diversity, and habitat. Animal-vehicle collisions are often Restoration Program (WCRP), each state is encouraged to tracked as well. However, DOTs rarely track impact of trans- portation on habitat areas, consistency of transportation plans produce a Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy with wildlife, habitat and resource management plans, or (CWCS) or Wildlife Action Plan. Developed in consul- native plant community disturbance. There are notable exam- tation with local stakeholders and reviewed by a National ples, however, where states or DOTs have made ecosystems, Advisory Acceptance Team, the Plans set a vision and a biodiversity, and habitat a priority, including North Carolina, plan of action for wildlife conservation and funding in each Florida, California, Colorado, Maryland, and Washington. state. While fish and wildlife agencies have led the Wildlife More often, these issues arise in relation to specific transporta- Action Plan development process, the aim has been to cre- tion projects and their potential impacts. ate a comprehensive strategic vision for conserving the The key data needs for assessing transportation impacts to state's wildlife. A summary of state Wildlife Action Plans as ecosystems, biodiversity, and habitat include: well as links to contacts and more information on each state's plan is available at: http://www.teaming.com/pdf/ Landscape and ecosystem data: land use; natural areas; wet- StateWildlifeActionPlansReportwithState Summaries.pdf lands; lakes and streams; habitat size, quality, and location; Ecoregional Conservation Assessments: The Nature Con- native vegetation communities. This includes endangered or servancy has produced Ecoregional Conservation Assess- threatened ecosystems and high-quality ecosystems that are ments for much of the United States. These are designed worthy of protection. to identify an efficient network of lands where the viabil- Species data: Species of concern (federal and state listed ity of a region's biological diversity could be maximized by species) and their life-cycle habitat needs; invasive species abating major threats. Assessments are systematic and and degree of threat to native species. comprehensive analyses that represent a new, synthetic Road impacts data: road kills and chronic road kill sites; data source for thousands of species. Most assessments species movement/migration routes affected by roads and include a summary report describing the assessment process obstacles to movement (culverts, etc.); habitat fragmenta- and methods used, as well as a geodatabase, metadata, and tion due to roads; water, air, soil, and noise pollution; poten- schema graphic. tial contribution to further land use changes (typically from ESA Critical Habitat and Recovery Plans: The U.S. Fish and less developed to more developed). Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries have designated crit- ical habitats and developed recovery plans for many ESA Transportation agencies do not typically collect or main- listed species. These plans and critical habitat areas provide tain environmental and natural resource data beyond those data to help guide transportation planning and mitigation.

OCR for page 96
100 Natural Heritage Programs: Natural Heritage Programs this understanding, they can more accurately identify the are located in each state and are variously housed in state areas in most need of protection, and better predict and wildlife or natural resource agencies, universities, or as stand- assess cumulative resource impacts. A Regional Ecosystem alone entities. These programs maintain data and infor- Framework also can streamline infrastructure development mation on rare and endangered species and threatened by identifying ecologically significant areas, potentially ecosystems. They operate under the umbrella organization impacted resources, regions to avoid, and mitigation NatureServe, which offers a decision-support system for opportunities before new projects are initiated. land use planning and resource management called Vista GIS data sharing agreements and web-based GIS data that 1) identifies conservation elements; 2) summarizes access: Transportation planners can benefit from having conservation value; 3) generates conservation solutions; direct access to GIS and other data held by environmental, 4) evaluates land use scenarios; and 5) explores sites and natural resource, and fish and wildlife agencies and enti- creates mitigation plans. Vista uses ESRI's ArcMAP 9.1 GIS ties. Because this data tends to be dynamically updated, mapping technology. acquiring static data layers is only partially beneficial. Some states and interagency partnerships have developed GIS data sharing agreements among agencies that allow direct Performance Data Gaps access to current GIS data over the web. This provides trans- Data on landscapes, species, and road impacts are incon- portation planners with up-to-date information. Examples sistently maintained across the country. Significant quanti- include the Oregon Explorer web site (7), which provides ties of data related to ecosystems, biodiversity, and habitat a natural resources digital library. New York State has a are collected, but the collection, assessment, maintenance, statewide GIS Data Sharing Cooperative. and distribution of that data is highly fragmented. In any given state or location, this data could be collected and Environmental Factors maintained by literally dozens of federal, state, local, tribal, Wetlands academic, and private entities. Moreover, the datasets are likely to be kept in multiple formats and be appropriate for Synopsis of Performance Measures the limited set of purposes for which it was collected. Wetlands measures in widespread use by DOTs today focus on tracking quantity not quality of wetlands. Performance High-Value Data Investment Opportunities reporting confirms that throughout the nation an estimated 1,100 to 2,400 acres of wetlands are impacted annually as a Interagency collaboration/integrated planning: Collecting result of federally funded highway projects (8). Two wetland- and maintaining ecosystem, biodiversity, and habitat data is related performance measures are commonly tracked by state largely beyond the mandate, scope, and expertise of trans- DOTs to support management of their wetland mitigation portation agencies. In addition, numerous other entities programs. U.S. DOT reports that 92 percent of DOTs provide already maintain much of this data. To address this issue, a the following information to FHWA annually (9): number of DOTs have moved to an interagency and collab- orative approach to transportation planning. By forming Wetland Losses Measure: Tracks total annual statewide partnerships with environmental, natural resource, and fish wetland acreage losses as a result of transportation project and wildlife agencies and other entities, DOTs can leverage construction. the data and knowledge of those entities to reduce conflicts Wetland Replacement Measure: Tracks total annual and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of transporta- statewide wetland acreage replaced in compensatory miti- tion planning. Through partnerships, DOTs also can seek gation as a result of transportation project construction. assistance from those entities in collecting data that would be tailored to transportation needs. Use of wetland losses and replacement acreage measures, Interagency collaboration is promoted in Eco-logical (6) as in combination, provide a useful statewide gauge of the quan- a mechanism for developing an ecosystem approach to tity of impacts to wetlands associated with transportation infrastructure development, which recommends creating a projects. They do not, however, provide a good indication of Regional Ecosystem Framework. This consists of an "over- the ecological consequences for wetlands of losses or replace- lay" of maps of agencies' individual plans, accompanied by ments. Ecological impacts depend not just on acreages, but descriptions of conservation goals in the defined region(s). also on 1) the location, types, and quality of wetlands lost; and A Regional Ecosystem Framework is intended to help agen- 2) the location, types, and long-term success of mitigation cies develop a joint understanding of the locations and sites. Data on these variables is more complex to gather than potential impacts of proposed infrastructure actions. With basic acreage data. It is fragmentary in reach and located

OCR for page 96
101 among many agencies, while new methods are constantly minimize mitigation costs and strengthen stewardship of evolving to improve data availability. Use of wetland quality- the environment. related data, particularly by DOTs, is in its infancy. Data on Success of Wetland Mitigation Sites As many as 50 percent of wetland mitigation sites are unsuccessful. Federal regulations require monitoring of mitigation sites, Sources of Data for Current Measures however, states' monitoring practices vary and few states Primary Data Source: Data are collected by state trans- track mitigation site performance beyond a site-specific scale. portation agency environmental personnel from review and collation of information available in internal project High-Value Data Investment Opportunities records and other sources, particularly Section 404 permit program-related field surveys. Data reported to FHWA Develop Remote-Sensing-Based Data for Collecting, Ana- on or around the close of each federal fiscal year, but may lyzing, and Presenting Wetland Quality Data on a Regional easily be reported on a calendar year basis. or Statewide Scale Wetland quality data is traditionally developed using time intensive field surveys and is there- fore carried out only for site-specific locations on an as- Other Widely Used Sources of Data needed basis. Remote sensing is a widespread technology National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) A nationwide col- that relies on various types of imagery (often taken via lection of digital wetlands data maintained by U.S. Fish and satellite) to enable creation of data where gathering tradi- Wildlife Service and available for public use. Data is dis- tional data would be impossibly time consuming. played on base maps that cover more than 90 percent of the Several states, including Minnesota (10) are experiment- lower 48 states. It generally shows the location, size, and ing with use of remotely sensed data as a technique for function of wetlands. The maps are prepared from analy- gauging wetland quality across large regions. DOTs, as well sis of high-altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based as many other organizations, could use this information to on vegetation, visible hydrology, and geography. streamline their wetland-related activities and enhance State-Level Wetlands Inventories Some states have created their stewardship of the environment. Work is needed to their own state-level wetland inventories, e.g., the Wisconsin develop methods for collecting, analyzing, and presenting Department of Natural Resources' Wisconsin Wetland data. Key data development needs include: Inventory or the Michigan Department of Environmental Development of partnerships between DOTs and others Quality Michigan Wetland Inventory that often supplement to use remote sensing imagery to assess wetlands based NWI information. on plant community structure and diversity, as deter- mined by the pixel diversity of images detected from multispectral remote imagery; Performance Data Gaps Development of expertise within DOTs in the funda- Data on Wetland Quality Traditional regulatory mentals of remote sensing (platforms, physical basis, approaches for mitigating wetland impacts of transporta- visual interpretation, automated image interpretation); tion projects (and the performance measures described Collection of appropriate photogrammetry (air and above) place an emphasis on mitigating the quantity of satellite photography); wetlands affected. A growing consensus is emerging, how- Use of digital image processing (multispectral analysis, ever, that case-by-case mitigation of "local symptoms" image rectification, enhancement, pattern recognition) rather than mitigation that addresses watershed-wide issues software to translate imagery is failing to halt environmental degradation. Federal trans- Raster analysis (data analysis, overlay, spatial character- portation legislation now favors offsite banking mitigation, ization); and where per unit ecological benefits are usually higher than Approaches for presenting information in ways that are onsite mitigation. useful to project developers at DOTs and their resource A watershed-wide approach to mitigation acknowledges agency partners. that some wetlands have greater ecological value than others. DOTs, however, typically do not have easy access to data Remote sensing imagery offers a credible baseline of infor- on the ecological value of wetlands in the vicinity of planned mation to evaluate alternatives early in the process [of NEPA], projects that would enable them to adopt watershed-wide and eliminating unnecessary and costly detailed analysis. planning strategies. Consideration of statewide wetland quality data early in project development would offer DOTs Develop Data for Tracking Statewide Effectiveness of additional flexibility to select project alignments that both Wetland Mitigation Sites. North Carolina DOT's moni-

OCR for page 96
102 toring program provides an example of site-specific data MSATs. While the focus of DOT measurement activities reporting (11). Washington State DOT is now reporting should be on tracking air toxics emissions associated with statewide mitigation success rates and might offer a model mobile sources and capacity expansion plans, it is increas- for development of suitable measures. Key data develop- ingly important for DOTs to track (and in special circum- ment needs include: stances, collaborate on) environmental agency efforts to Selection of appropriate biological and hydrological monitor ambient air toxics concentrations. measurement metrics for measuring success over a Proximity of Vulnerable Populations Potentially Affected mitigation site's lifespan; by MSATs: Tracks the amount and location of potentially Securing resources to cover costs of collecting data; vulnerable populations (e.g., housing units, schools, hos- Development of easy-to-use but accurate yardsticks that pitals, nursing homes) proximate to highways or major provide a gradient between "success" and "failure," based roadways. Proximity of sensitive receptors to highways on analysis of many variables; and and major roadways can be an important planning factor Data storage and reporting mechanisms. since air toxics concentrations tend to tail off rapidly within 300 meters of roadways. Wetland mitigation site success rate data offers an emerg- ing tool for evaluating DOTs' progress as effective environ- In many areas, ambient monitoring of air toxics concen- mental stewards. trations is not currently available and such monitoring may not be feasible for state or local environmental agencies to Environmental Factors collect given current priorities and resources. In these situ- Environmental Health ations, emission inventories and modeling are the primary source of information on local or regional air quality status Synopsis of Performance Measures related to MSATs. The proliferation of air toxics monitor- Environmental health typically refers to the impact on ing activities (including near-roadway studies), however, human health and well being due to physical, chemical, bio- are increasing the availability of data for analysis and logical, and other components of the surrounding environ- benchmarking of local and regional air toxics air quality ment. While other environmental and safety factors addressed status. in this report have potential to affect public health, this envi- Even when information on ambient concentrations of air ronmental health factor focuses on air toxics a factor that toxics (monitored or modeled) is available, challenges exist has received increasing attention in highway capacity expan- with translating this information to assess public exposure sion projects in recent years. Mobile source air toxics (MSAT) and associated human health risks. While many MSATs have are a byproduct of vehicle emissions and are a known or documented cancerous and noncancerous health effects, it suspected contributor to numerous cancer and noncancer can be difficult to determine program or project-specific risks human health problems. The U.S. Environmental Protection from this information. Even while understanding of MSAT Agency (EPA) has identified six priority MSATs: acetaldehyde, health effects is evolving, however, information on the effi- acrolein, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, diesel particulate matter, and cacy of various near-road air toxics mitigation measures is formaldehyde. growing, as illustrated by the Watt Avenue, Sacramento, Cal- Because the science on air toxics is still evolving, there are ifornia case study highlights. no established criteria for determining when MSAT emissions should be considered a significant issue in the NEPA context. Sources of Data for Current Measures The FHWA issued interim guidance for NEPA documenta- tion related to air toxics in February 2006 (12) which advises Primary Data Sources: MSATs are a relatively new and DOTs to limit project-specific assessments of MSATs to situ- emerging area for data collection, analysis and performance ations where projects are expected to result in meaningful dif- measurement in the context of transportation planning ferences in MSAT emissions between project alternatives or and projects. Data on air toxics emissions and increasingly increases in potential public exposure to MSATs. Despite cur- on ambient concentrations of MSATs are collected by EPA rent data limitations in many areas, DOTs can benefit from and state and local environmental agencies. The availabil- tracking performance measures in the following areas to better ity of information on human health risk varies for each anticipate and respond to air toxics issues and concerns that MSAT. Scientific studies are used to develop Unit Risk Fac- may arise related to highway capacity expansion projects: tors that can translate ambient concentrations into cancer- related health risk estimates. Reference Concentrations Concentrations of Six Priority MSATs: Tracks monitored also are commonly set to assess when noncancer health and/or modeled air quality status related to six priority effects may occur.

OCR for page 96
103 Information on the proximity of sensitive receptors in trans- ducted in California by parties, including UC Davis and portation corridors is collected by some transportation and by the Air Resources Board and Caltrans. While the findings environment agencies and is often a component of geographic from these and other site-specific near-roadway studies may information systems (GIS) supporting transportation, land not be easily transferable to other locations, it is anticipated use, and environmental planning. that findings from these studies will increasingly inform public comments on DOT planning and projects across the U.S. Data from these site-specific studies can be used to Potential Sources of Data inform qualitative risk assessment by DOTs, as well as to National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) and Emissions inform assessment of potential mitigation measures that Inventories EPA conducted National Air Toxics Assess- could be proposed to address potential air toxics "hot spots" ments (NATA) in 1996 and 1999 to evaluate the distribu- near vulnerable populations. tion of air toxics across the United States (13). The NATA data were used to compile national emissions inventories Performance Data Gaps on air toxics, estimate air toxics levels across the nation, estimate population exposures, and characterize public Data on Ambient Air Toxics Concentrations The avail- health risks. EPA also seeks to estimate the national levels ability of data from air toxics monitoring is limited in of air toxics through its National Emissions Inventories many areas of the U.S. While some states, such as Califor- (NEI) (14). NEI includes estimates of HAP emissions from nia, have extensive air toxics monitoring programs and mobile sources. EPA has developed compilations of NEI networks of sampling sites, many other parts of the U.S. data for 1996, 1999, and 2002, and is working to provide have limited monitoring data. Even if there is a monitor- additional compilations every three years. State and local ing station located in an urban area, its proximity to a agencies also may assemble air toxics emission inventories particular transportation corridor and other confound- on a periodic basis. Information from air toxics emissions ing factors (e.g., meteorology, effects of stationary sources inventories and modeling efforts can be highly useful to of MSATs) can severely limit the usefulness of available identify transportation corridors and areas where ambient monitoring data. air toxics concentrations may be of particular concern when Data on Impact of Vehicle Fuel Mix Changes on Air considering the proximity of sensitive receptors and/or the Toxics There appears to be substantial uncertainty regard- air quality status relative to other urban areas in the U.S. ing how changes over the next few decades in fuel mix and National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) Network vehicle types will impact the prevalence of different MSATs. EPA launched a national air toxics data monitoring effort While experts anticipate that cleaner vehicles and cleaner in 2004, which is referred to as the National Air Toxics fuels will substantially decrease mobile-source air toxics Trends Station (NATTS) program. The NATTS program emissions, changes in fuel mix may result in significant currently is comprised of 25 monitoring sites in urban areas increases in certain individual MSATs even while overall across the U.S. and generates data regularly on ambient air toxic emissions are declining. concentrations of 21 air toxics, including the six priority Data on Human Health Risks Associated with Exposure MSATs. The EPA-sponsored Urban Air Toxics Monitoring to MSATs While the prevalence of studies on cancer Program (UATMP) is another important source of ambi- and noncancer health effects of exposure to various MSATs ent air toxics monitoring data, which currently includes air is increasing, many uncertainties remain. In 2007, the toxics monitoring data for 59 sampling sites in urban areas Health Effects Institute released a report on the state of (15). Some state and local environmental agencies also research on exposure and health effects associated with make their own air toxics monitoring data available on-line. MSATs (16). Community-Scale Near-Roadway Air Toxics Studies Information from an increasing array of site-specific High-Value Data Investment Opportunities studies of near-roadway air toxics concentrations and associated health effects are becoming available. EPA's Develop Local Partnerships to Monitor MSAT Concen- community-scale air toxics monitoring grant program is trations Exploring partnerships with state and local envi- providing funding to state and local agencies to conduct ronmental agencies and EPA can enable cost-effective air toxics monitoring to better assess air toxics concentra- ambient monitoring of near-road air toxics concentrations tions and health risks from sources such as roadways, rail in key areas of concern. In many cases, data already may yards and ports. FHWA also is supporting pilot studies on exist through emerging sampling and trends sites. For transportation-related air toxics issues in Nevada, North urban areas where no monitoring exists, partnerships with Carolina, and Michigan. Several other studies are being con- state and local environmental agencies can be used to lever-

OCR for page 96
104 age EPA resources for monitoring through the NATTS pro- on travel demand strategies; while others focus on fuel effi- gram or the Community-Scale Air Toxics Monitoring grant ciency, introduction of alternative fuels, and vehicle tech- program. There also is an opportunity to expand on the nologies to reduce consumption of carbon-based fuels. Most work being done by UC Davis to study the efficacy of vari- notably, California has passed legislation creating light-duty ous cost-effective measures to mitigate near-road exposure vehicle GHG standards to take effect beginning in 2009 and to MSATs through additional pilot studies. phased in through 2016. The emission standards apply to the Conduct Meta-Analysis of Site-Specific MSAT Studies full fuel cycle and will result in a 34 percent reduction in The proliferation of pilot projects to assess the preva- GHG emissions from passenger cars and light-duty trucks lence and health effects of MSATs, including the FHWA- and a 25 percent reduction in emissions from light-duty trucks. sponsored studies, are providing increasing opportunities Roughly a dozen other states, including most of the North- to look across existing and emerging studies to assess pat- east states as well as Florida, have adopted California's GHG terns and the extent to which findings may be transferable. standards along with the California Low-Emission Vehicle In the future, it may not be necessary to invest in near-road (LEV) standards for criteria pollutants and precursors. The air toxics monitoring in areas where cost-effective "best standards have not yet been implemented, however, due to practice" mitigation measures can be proposed to address legal challenges. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency public concerns related to air toxics "hotspots." is developing a draft rule regarding GHG emissions through Improve Data on MSAT Exposure and Health Effects The fuels and technologies. Health Effects Institute's November 2007 review of the Measures of greenhouse gas emissions can be generated at literature on MSAT exposure and health effects makes a a system level by measuring fuel consumption and calculat- series of recommendations for improving the state of ing the levels of carbon dioxide and other GHGs emitted by knowledge. While many of these recommendations are the burning of carbon-based fuels. At the project level, rough outside the purview of DOTs, dialogue and partnerships measures of emissions can be derived based on estimates of with public health and environment agencies can help to vehicle miles of travel (VMT) and fuel economy. Much of this advance some of these efforts to improve understanding of information currently is available. More accurate estimates MSAT health. would incorporate information on average speeds, drive cycles, and vehicle types as well. Generating this information requires Environmental Factors more complex assumptions and/or use of more advanced Climate Change models or microsimulation. Synopsis of Performance Measures Impacts of Climate Change on Transportation Climate change measures are only beginning to be intro- duced as part of state DOT and MPO decision making, and Measures of risk to climate change require the integration of there is not yet a consistent approach to climate change data multiple factors regarding the location and condition of infra- and model projections. Climate change considerations for structure, the probability of impact, and the degree of severity transportation include two distinct areas that require differ- of individual and cumulative impacts of climate factors. Typi- ent information and measures: cal climate factors include changes in: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transportation Mea- Temperature (average annual temperature and daily sures: Assesses the actual or projected levels of greenhouse extremes); gas emissions from existing or proposed transportation Precipitation (average annual precipitation and intensity projects; and of individual rainfall events); Impacts of Climate Change on Transportation Measures: Sea level rise; Assesses the risk and vulnerability of transportation systems Storm surge; and facilities to the effects of climate change. Severe storm activity (including frequency of severe storms as well as the intensity of individual storm events); Coastal and inland erosion; Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transportation Ice and snow melt; and A growing number of states and regional governments are Permafrost condition (range, thawing). beginning to track and calculate greenhouse gas (GHG) emis- sions from mobile sources. Over 35 states have set Climate The climate factors relevant to a DOT vary according to the Action Plans that include either goals or specific targets for region involved. To assess risk to transportation infrastruc- reducing transportation GHG emissions. Some plans focus ture and services, data on these climate factors is incorporated

OCR for page 96
105 with information about facility condition, location, and level Impacts of Climate Change on Transportation of significance to mobility and service continuity. Region-level projections for changes in climate condi- tions Several global circulation models (GCMs), recog- Sources of Data for Current Measures nized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Primary Data Source, Greenhouse Gases from Mobile (IPCC) are available that provide global projections of Sources: Fuel consumption data is available through annual climate change. These models are used by researchers to reports generated by the Energy Information Agency of the generate projections at national and regional scales. As mod- U.S. Department of Energy, as well as from individual state eling science progresses, the ability to generate regional- reports. VMT data is tracked by individual DOTs, and level climate scenarios is advancing. A combination of trend VMT projections are developed by both state DOTs and information with potential climate scenarios can provide regional planning agencies through travel demand model- useful ranges of potential impacts that can be used for ing. Fleet composition and vehicle fuel economy data is transportation decisions. However, the current state of maintained by the U.S. Department of Transportation, and science involves levels of uncertainty that preclude specific by individual states. projections at more localized scales. Primary Data Source, Impacts of Climate Change on Standardized data on locations and elevations of infra- Transportation: Information on both the location and structure Information is often not readily available regard- condition of infrastructure facilities (highways, airports, ing both land elevations and actual infrastructure elevations, transit facilities) is maintained by a variety of state and local or is not yet available in geospatial format. This information transportation agencies. Private-sector owner/operators is critical in coastal areas and other sensitive locations. maintain data on location and condition of ports, rail- Standardized geospatially based data on environmental roads, and freight facilities. Trend information on temper- trends While data on environmental trends is collected ature, precipitation, and storm activity is maintained by and available from science and resource agencies, it is often the National Climatic Data Center of U.S. NOAA, as well not readily usable by transportation agencies. Improved as by state Offices of Climatology. Climate model projec- packaging of data in terms of scale, geographic/political tions are conducted by NOAA research offices, including boundaries, and geospatial coding would greatly improve the Center for National Climatic and Atmospheric Research the usefulness of environmental trend data. (NCAR); NASA; and other federal agencies. Federal cli- mate research across federal agencies is coordinated by the High-Value Data Investment Opportunities U.S. Climate Change Science Program. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transportation: Improve Life-Cycle Modeling and Travel Activity Other Widely Used Sources of Data Behavior Models Conditions and Performance Report The U.S. Federal Two primary areas of data improvement are required to Highway Administration issues annual reports on the con- enhance GHG emissions tracking and benefits analysis. dition of surface infrastructure through its Federal High- way Statistics, Conditions and Performance, and Highway Life-cycle models: Life-cycle models of GHG emissions still Economics Reporting Systems Reports. Other modal agen- require improvements to understand the tradeoffs avail- cies issue parallel reports. able in fuel policies. Travel behavior: The effectiveness and cost effectiveness of Performance Data Gaps travel activity behavior pattern measures, especially with There are several data gaps that need to be addressed to accu- regard to externalities, is still not well understood. Better rately assess performance on climate change. grasping of the implications of these two areas is critical to best reducing GHGs from transportation. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transportation Impacts of Climate Change on Transportation: Alternative fuels emissions data While current direct Develop Geospatial Data Integrating Transportation (tailpipe) emissions are well understood, the shift toward Information with Environmental Trends and Climate nonpetroleum fuels (e.g., ethanol, biofuels) has led to Change Projections increasing uncertainty due to fuel life-cycle emissions. While models are available to estimate these emissions, the A geospatially based platform to integrate transportation growing role of alternative fuels will continue to increase and climate information would support DOTs in identifying uncertainty in this area. infrastructure at risk and selecting and prioritizing adaptation

OCR for page 96
106 and investment strategies. These integrated datasets would engineers, operations and emergency management person- include the following: nel, land use planners, and environmental/science agency partners. Transportation Data Community Factors Land Use Location of transportation facilities, including roads, rail- roads, airports, ports, and intermodal facilities; Synopsis of Performance Measures Location of emergency evacuation routes; One broad category of land use measures involves the land Land and facility elevations; and "consumed" by a project or program of projects either directly Location of protective structures (levees, dikes). as a result of the project's footprints, or the indirect impacts of induced growth/development associated with the project. At a Environmental Trend Data project level, it is common to measure direct impacts of the Precipitation levels (seasonal averages and patterns of intense project, and for major capacity investments the estimation of rainfall events); indirect impacts is becoming more common. Land use mea- Temperature (seasonal averages; extreme highs and lows); sures also are commonly used at a regional level in long-range Relative sea level rise; planning, especially the amount of land consumed for urban Storm surge heights; and development as a result of a given transportation land use sce- Location and duration of flooding events. nario or plan. Land consumed by or lost to a project or its indi- rect impacts can be broken down by the specific type of land Climate Scenario Projections (model-based scenarios of (e.g., agriculture, forest, wetland, vacant, developed). ranges of potential climate change based on assumptions of Direct impacts are relatively easy to evaluate and simply emission levels) require information on the land use or land cover for the proj- ect area, as well as the project footprint. Indirect impacts are Precipitation levels (seasonal averages and patterns of intense much more challenging, as they require a method of forecast- rainfall events); ing the specific growth impacts of a project (general location Temperature (seasonal averages; extreme highs and lows); and density of development). Land use forecasting models Relative sea level rise (integrating subsidence and sea level and methods, however, are better suited for examining gen- rise resulting from thermal expansion and ice melt); and eral trends in development patterns rather than predicting the Severe storm frequency and intensity. precise spatial impacts. Furthermore, simple forecasts of "land consumed" do not evaluate the underlying value of the land Storm Surge and Flooding Scenarios for ecological or human purposes, and people may place dif- ferent values on any given type of land use. Because of the dif- Storm surge heights at various levels of storm/hurricane ficulty inherent in forecasting indirect land use impacts and intensity; and the subjectivity of whether many land use impacts are consid- Areas of inundation at various levels of extreme ered "good" or "bad," land use impacts are often evaluated precipitation. from a qualitative rather than a quantitative perspective. An alternative set of land use performance measures eval- Development and analysis of this data will require interdisci- uates the consistency of the project with local and/or regional plinary partnerships between transportation and environmen- land use plans and policies for example, whether the project tal agencies. The following steps should be taken to advance this serves a designated growth area, or is likely to induce growth area of measurement to support more robust risk analysis and consistent with local and/or regional objectives for growth. If planning, and to track agency success in ensuring reliable per- growth policy areas have been designated, quantifiable mea- formance and protecting transportation assets: sures can be defined to determine whether the project is inside or outside such an area (although this does not address the Develop partnerships between DOTs and regional plan- question of whether the project will actually induce growth in ning agencies with environmental agencies and climate the desired policy area). Otherwise, the assessment of these researchers to develop agreement on data requirements, measures typically is done from a qualitative, descriptive standards, and geospatial integration standpoint. Develop probabilistic risk assessment methodologies to incorporate risk, vulnerability, and uncertainty into siting, Sources of Data for Current Measures design, and investment decisions Develop approaches for presenting information in ways Local jurisdictions (e.g., counties and cities) typically maintain that are useful to planners, project developers and design data on both existing and planned land use by category. Such

OCR for page 96
107 data were traditionally kept in the form of a hard-copy map, where local jurisdictions do not conduct land use planning or but now are maintained by most jurisdictions in electronic maintain comprehensive land use plan data. As previously format. In an increasing number of metropolitan areas, the noted, however, aggregating data into a consistent format MPO or other regional planning agency has aggregated local across multiple jurisdictions can sometimes be a challenge. land use data into a regional database for regional planning For tracking land use changes over time, systems are needed purposes, although this database may or may not be updated to ensure that land use databases are routinely updated to regularly. Existing and planned land use data is most often reflect new construction or other changes in use. A small but maintained at a polygon level. Local jurisdictions (and some- growing number of areas have comprehensive tracking sys- times regional agencies) also maintain parcel-level data, used tems that allow factors such as land conversion and the type, for tax assessment purposes, which include information on density, etc. of uses at a small area level to be monitored on a existing land use (type of use, square footage, value, etc.) timely basis. Without such a system in place, it can be diffi- Land use data are often inconsistently categorized across juris- cult to evaluate actual growth patterns (e.g., amount inside dictions (e.g., different density or use categories), and may not versus outside policy areas) on a timely basis. be available in rural areas, especially those lacking compre- As previously noted, land use forecasting methods gener- hensive plans or zoning. Therefore, aggregating data across a ally involve quite a bit of uncertainty. Furthermore, robust project study area can sometimes be a challenge. models can be time-consuming and resource-intensive to Environmental databases of land cover (e.g., forest, grass- develop. While the state of the practice is improving, there land, cultivated, urbanized), wetlands, natural areas, and other are inherent uncertainties related to the difficulty in pre- natural features represent an additional source of land use dicting human behavior which, combined with the level of data to augment the local sources which consider primarily effort required for comprehensive data collection and model human and urbanized uses. [The term `land use' typically development, mean that forecasting of land use impacts is refers to the purpose for which humans are using the land and likely to remain an imprecise activity in the foreseeable can be distinguished from the term `land cover', which empha- future. sizes the natural or artificial coverage of the land (forest, grass- land, wetland, agriculture, etc. with "urbanized" typically one High-Value Data Investment Opportunities all-encompassing category).] These data are typically main- tained by a state or national environmental agency. Examples At a metropolitan area level, efforts to integrate local land use include the National Land Cover Map and hydrography (sur- data into a regional view have proven extremely valuable for face water and streams) by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). regional planning efforts as well as project or corridor planning Wetlands and other environmental data are discussed under efforts that span multiple jurisdictions. Further data integra- separate topic areas. tion efforts should be encouraged, along with systems to main- Orthophotography (aerial photos corrected for terrain and tain regional databases with real-time updates from local spatial location) represents an additional source of land use jurisdictions. Because land use data collected and maintained data, which may be used on its own for visual inspection, or at the county and city level are usually collected at different res- processed to identify different types of land uses and land olutions using different classification schemes, agreement on a cover. Orthophotography also is available from the USGS. common generalized regional land use classification scheme Land use forecasting models are a source of data on future would be of great value. Innovative institutional arrangements land use. Most models (such as UrbanSim, MEPLAN, and to build interjurisdictional and interagency partnerships for TRANUS) operate at a relatively coarse level (e.g., population data collection and integration could be pursued in order to and employment by regional subdistrict or traffic analysis achieve success in this area. zone), although tools such as UPLAN have been developed to Data integration should include geospatial tracking of build- disaggregate land use forecasts to a more detailed level for ing permit data to support monitoring of land use changes over policy analysis purposes. Scenario planning models such as time. Satellite imagery can be used for routine verification of INDEX, CommunityViz, and PLACE3S can be used to develop land use changes. Portland Metro's Regional Land Information land use measures for different future scenarios, and a num- System (RLIS) is an example of a regional data integration sys- ber of custom models or planning tools have been developed tem that includes existing land use, building permits, planned throughout the country (e.g., LUCIS in Florida). land use, and other data at a parcel level. RLIS has been used to compare actual with planned population and employment growth in designated growth centers, and to track the density Performance Data Gaps and location of new development in the region. Data on existing land use are generally quite good, except in Remote sensing, based on aerial or satellite imagery, is a some localities (primarily rural areas or smaller communities) promising source of data on existing land use/land cover,

OCR for page 96
108 especially describing the physical features of the use. Remote itative. These questions are typically answered to meet the sensing has been used to develop land use databases in areas requirements: where local data are inadequate or an inordinate amount of effort would be required to aggregate databases. It also may Will the project have adverse or beneficial effects on his- be used to develop metrics of the design of the built environ- toric or cultural resources? ment, such as building coverage, parking lot coverage, set- Will the project have substantial impacts to Indian trust backs, transportation facility widths, etc. that may relate to resources or sacred sites? transportation and/or environmental impacts. How will any adverse effects be mitigated? A final area for leveraging existing data is public/private sector agreements that enable access to privately maintained Sources of Data for Current Measures land use data (such as real estate records.) Models for ensur- ing protection from disclosure of proprietary data and for Primary Data Source: Data used by DOTs for this creating value propositions that enable this type of data process is available through the National Register Infor- sharing would be of value. mation System (18). This on-line database lists all prop- erties on the register and provides street addresses and Community Factors links to any other pertinent information. Another source Archeological and of information is the State Historic Preservation Office Historical Sites (SHPO). These offices manage the process of surveying, evaluating and nominating historic buildings, sites, struc- Synopsis of Performance Measures tures, districts and objects for the National Register. Beyond this basic function, SHPOs vary in the type of Federal agencies are required to preserve and enhance cul- tural resources, including historic and archeological sites of information they provide. significance. Transportation officials are required to work with federal and state agencies to identify historic proper- Other Widely Used Sources of Data ties that could be affected by a transportation project, and Department of Defense Agencies Some department of explore what those effects are likely to be. A discussion of the likely effects on historic sites is a requirement in the defense agencies manage historic properties under Sec- environmental documentation. The level of detail of this tion 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and discussion must be on a scale related to the importance of some have developed GIS databases to be able to map these the properties, and the expected impact of the project on sites. The U.S. Army Air Force has developed a Cultural those properties. Resources Geospatial Data Integration, Air Combat Com- To meet these regulations, most DOTs address impacts to mand which is a model GIS that will be implemented historic, cultural, and archeological resources through the through the Internet. NEPA process, where it is required (17). In addition to NEPA, GIS-Based Cultural Resource Databases An increas- Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires ing number of DOTs with cultural resources databases that federal agencies identify sites in a project area that are are utilizing them in a GIS format, enabling them to map listed in, or are eligible for, the National Register of Historic the locations of the sites and conduct spatial analysis. Places, determine how any sites may be affected by the pro- Historic site data layers can be combined with environ- posed project, explore alternatives to lessen any negative mental layers to conduct locational analyses on more impacts, and work with the State Historic Preservation Offi- than one factor in this framework. Pennsylvania, Wyoming, cers and/or the Tribal Historic Preservation Officers to reach and New Mexico are three examples of states with cul- an agreement about employing measures to mitigate the antic- tural and historic resources GIS databases and mapping ipated effects. Under this legislation, federal agencies are capabilities. required to allow the Advisory Council on Historic Preserva- Historic Property Screening Tools (HPST) The Historic tion an opportunity to comment on all projects affecting his- Property Screening Tool (HPST) was developed through a toric properties either listed in, or determined eligible for National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) listing, in the National Register. project. HPST is a database management tool for cultural resource inventory information and historic contexts. The tool records National Register eligibility decisions and guides Measures the user through the National Register decision-making The measures used by DOTs to fulfill the requirements in the criteria. The HPST requires that agencies adapt to a specific NEPA and Section 106 process are typically binary and qual- and consistent reporting structure.

OCR for page 96
109 ElectronicCulturalResources Evaluation Library (ECRL) Community Factors Social Also developed through NCHRP, ECRL improves accessibil- ity to National Register evaluation documents and historic Synopsis of Performance Measures contexts. The use of ECRL provides a portal where agen- Most of the performance measures included in the "Social" cies can store their documentation and access documents factor have not been traditionally measured in transportation from other agencies. planning. Some are difficult to measure or find data for; some Archeological Predictive Models Locations of archeo- have just been considered qualitatively; some have only been logical sites are often unknown prior to project construc- considered in other types of planning studies. The following tion. Discovery of a significant archeological site can stall five measures are included in the "Social" factor: a project for months or more, incurring great cost and inconvenience for agencies, taxpayers and residents. Community Cohesion: Project's impact (either positive However, models can be used to predict the probability or negative) on the sense of community that exists at the of finding an archeological site on the basis of the rela- neighborhood level, and on the physical attributes that tionships between known sites and a variety of environ- define and bound the neighborhood. mental factors. These models are specific to a certain Noise: Impact of noise from construction or ongoing region, based on topography, vegetation, climate, other operation of the project. environmental factors, and known characteristics of Visual Quality: Overall visibility of the project, and its ancient populations. Minnesota DOT had developed consistency with the surrounding visual landscape. Mn/Model, a good example of an archeological predic- Emergency Response Time: Project's impact on ability of tive model. police, fire, and EMTs to respond to emergencies. Citizen concerns and priorities addressed by a project: Performance Data Gaps Transportation-related issues of greatest concern to citizens. Since this process traditionally does not happen until the With the exception of noise impacts, which are a required project has been planned and programmed, the identification consideration in the NEPA process, these measures currently of impacts to historic sites can bring an already programmed are not reported in any systematic way nationwide. Federal project to a standstill, causing significant delay, an increase in requirements for public participation and input have lead to costs, and lead to negative relations with stakeholder groups, "citizen concerns and priorities addressed by a project" being tribal agencies, and communities. The key to incorporating considered in some form during project planning in recent these decisions into the process at an earlier stage is easy years, though often more as part of the process rather than a access to comprehensive and accurate data with locations and separate measure. significance of sites. Standardizing this system through tools Community cohesion impacts are not measured consis- such as the HPST or ECRL would create consistency among tently across jurisdictions, and often not at all. They are gen- states and projects. Linking this to a GIS is the next step. erally incorporated into the public outreach process through Finally, utilizing cultural resource data layers in conjunction delineation of neighborhoods, identification of key destina- with environmental data layers for alternative review during tions, and primary pedestrian routes. Community cohesion the long-range planning and preprogram studies phase would impacts are usually shown as a compilation of individual fac- provide the most value. tors (such as homes relocated or change in pedestrian travel times), but rarely as a single combined factor. Similarly, mar- ket research techniques have been used to assign priority High-Value Data Investment Opportunities scores to different projects or improvement types, based on Develop Comprehensive GIS-based Tool to Incorporate citizens' stated priorities. Environmental, Land Use, Transportation, and Cultural Noise impacts are part of environmental review as required Resource Data Many agencies are utilizing this technol- by NEPA and FHWA. FHWA requires noise analysis for all ogy, but have not integrated the analysis process. Florida's Federal-aid highway projects. Current noise levels are ana- Efficient Transportation Decision-Making Process (ETDM) lyzed through field surveys as well as the use of the FHWA combines collaboration and review among agencies Traffic Noise Model (TNM). TNM also is used to forecast (including the Division of Historical Resources) with an future noise (20). Internet-accessible GIS application called the Environ- Emergency response time is increasing in importance after mental Screening Tool (EST). GIS analyses, approved by SAFETEA-LU and increased funding and focus on safety and each resource agency, are performed for each project to security. SAFETEA-LU has made Strategic Highway Safety identify potential impacts to resources (19). Plans (SHSPs) a requirement for all state DOTs, and man-

OCR for page 96
110 dates that such plans be "data-driven, four to five-year com- Pavement data from agency maintaining roadway of interest prehensive plan that integrates the `4 Es': engineering, educa- or HPMS dataset. tion, enforcement, and emergency medical services (EMS)" Field surveys of noise levels for sites of interest. (21). Emergency response time is a component of highway FHWA Traffic Noise Model. safety, and any capacity project that improves response times would likely be the result of a need identified in the SHSP. Visual Quality Existing response times are measured through existing EMS data or through the use of travel demand models. Future GIS data on locations of homes, land use, ground cover, response times would be measured using a travel demand elevation (contours), and location of "major landmarks." model, or may be estimated based on the removal of a known Site-specific data collection on predetermined visual qual- bottleneck or barrier, such as a railroad grade crossing. An ities of interest, such as color, texture, or reflectivity. example of GIS-based data sources include FDOT's Sociocul- tural Effects analysis, which uses the Environmental Screen- Emergency Response Time ing Tool, part of the ETDM process, to look at EMS locations. Visual quality has not typically been measured in a trans- GIS data on district (tract, block, etc.) boundaries; street portation planning context, and there is little precedent. Some network (GIS or traffic model); and emergency vehicle areas, particularly tourist destinations or areas where partic- dispatch locations. Existing EMS data from local EMS agencies. These data ular aesthetics are of special importance have methods for assessing visual impacts. These generally follow a method can include EMS dispatch locations and response times. Travel demand models and GIS-based tools. Future whereby scores are assigned to existing or proposed structures response times would be measured using a travel demand based on their adherence to some accepted visual standards of model, or may be estimated based on the removal of a known color, texture, reflectivity, and other physical qualities. bottleneck or barrier, such as a railroad grade crossing. An example of GIS-based data sources include FDOT's Socio- Sources of Data for Current Measures cultural Effects analysis, which uses the Environmental Screening Tool (EST), part of the ETDM process, to look at Community Cohesion EMS dispatch locations. The EST is a web-based GIS tool Census, state, or regional population and housing data and integrated to an extensive statewide GIS database of over 300 corresponding GIS files. MPOs and states usually have layers, allowing all stakeholder agencies to perform their their own socioeconomic datasets. Most agencies prefer to analyses through a centralized location. It uses existing GIS use locally produced data when available, and supplement web publishing technology to create a virtual project analy- them with national datasets. Further, state and regional sis environment accessible to the dozens of separate resource agencies that collect these data also tend to provide fore- agencies that participate in Florida's ETDM process. casts. These datasets are usually available on-line. Business location data from proprietary sources. Citizen Concerns and Priorities Land-use datasets or tax assessment datasets are often avail- Addressed by a Project able from local planning agencies or tax assessors. These Surveys, interviews, and other outreach; and provide locations of commercial and residential properties. Market research techniques are sometimes used to assign Neighborhood association meeting records. priority scores to different projects or improvement types, Walking trip data and model results. Walking trip data may based on citizens' stated priorities (22). be collected by a city transportation or planning department. Performance Data Gaps Noise Much data, particularly at the project-specific level, would Volume, speed, and vehicle types on roadway being studied. have to be collected for a specific study site to get a meaning- These data come from state DOT and local or regional trans- ful result for measures such as noise, visual quality, citizen con- portation agency traffic counts; speed sensors; travel surveys; cerns and priorities, and community cohesion. Other specific, license plate surveys; or study specific data collection. typical data gaps include: Type and location of existing sound barriers from the agency maintaining the roadway of interest. Current and forecasted pedestrian movements are often Locations of homes and population from land-use datasets, not included in traditional travel demand models or in aerial maps, or site-specific data collection. transportation agencies' standard data collection.

OCR for page 96
111 Information on business locations, community "cen- examples include: access to jobs and markets; person-hours ters," or residential areas can be difficult to find at early of delay; noise levels; air quality; and sidewalk connectivity. stages and without in-depth site visits. Sometimes land-use It also is important to consider that project benefits and datasets may be available, but this is not consistent nation- costs do not always correspond to the location of the improve- wide. Further, these datasets may not be up-to-date. ment itself. The use of "select link" analysis will aid in deter- Actual existing response times from EMS data are often mining who is actually using a particular section of road, not readily available to planners. which is key to assessing the distribution of positive or nega- tive impacts. A select link analysis is performed as part of the travel demand modeling process, and identifies the origins High-Value Data Investment Opportunities and destinations of all users, current or predicted, of a partic- Land-use datasets are not only useful for many of the Social ular roadway segment. For example, widening an existing measures identified above, but are increasingly important expressway in a low-income urban community will result in in every level of transportation planning and modeling. negative impacts to that community: potential acquisition of Increased investment by state, county, MPO, and local right-of-way and demolition of buildings; increased noise; governments in up-to-date land-use datasets will yield potentially increased pollution; and decreased community increased efficiency and accuracy in transportation plan- cohesion, among other possible issues. However, a travel ning, modeling, and performance reporting. Generally, demand model has shown substantial travel-time savings for land use data, when available, is maintained by local munic- users of the facility and increased access to job centers. A ipalities, counties, or MPOs. At the very least, these govern- select-link analysis done during travel demand modeling can ments often have assessors' records or zoning maps already help determine the number of users from that particular low- in place and in GIS format; collecting and assembling income community, their average travel-time savings with the these datasets into a land-use dataset for application to widened highway, and their improved access to job centers. transportation studies is a fairly low-cost method in well- populated areas. For statewide or sparsely populated areas, Sources of Data for Current Measures various remote sensing technologies which are more costly may be required. Environmental justice measures will start with data and Coordination with local EMS agencies, and inclusion of results from measures in other factors. The most important those agencies in stakeholder outreach, is a low-cost way data specific to environmental justice are those that deter- of obtaining actual existing response times. Further, mine where groups of interest reside: input of these agencies can help identify transportation investments that can improve EMS response times. MPOs and states usually have their own standards and socioeconomic datasets. Most agencies prefer to use locally produced data when available, and supplement them with Community Factors national datasets. Further, state and regional agencies that Environmental Justice collect these data also tend to provide forecasts. These Synopsis of Performance Measures datasets are usually available on-line. The Census Transportation Planning Package (CTPP) is Environmental justice measures attempt to examine the dis- a useful tool for identifying existing travel patterns by race, tributed effects of proposed transportation projects on dif- ethnicity, and income group as part of an existing condi- ferent population groups that cut across racial, ethnic, and tions analysis (23). income groups. As such, an environmental justice measure Census data are commonly used to provide demographic is not a standalone measure to be developed and examined information by Census tract or block. in a vacuum, but rather it entails looking at the results of GIS software and layers are often joined with the available numerous measures, throughout all the factor areas, to eval- socioeconomic data to identify environmental justice areas uate how the benefits and costs of a project social, financial, of interest geographically. or otherwise differ between different groups. Travel demand models are used usually at the city or In order to be applicable to this type of analysis, an indica- regional level to support the application of other measures, tor need only be measurable over a discrete geographic space. such as travel-time reduction, to specifically identified This "second level" measure will be highly dependent on the groups or geographic areas. A select-link analysis of an use of GIS analysis tools to spatially link the results of other improved roadway, for example, can identify if users from measures to the demographics of interest. There are count- geographically identified environmental justice zones of less measures that could be developed in this way, and some interest are benefiting from the improvement.

OCR for page 96
112 Performance Data Gaps Community perceptions can be helpful in weighting vari- ous types of benefits and costs to be consistent with the val- Using GIS to identify Environmental Justice zones of interest ues of those impacted. Before-and-after studies to evaluate is fairly straightforward if using Census data, and can be done whether predicted impacts actually took place after imple- at a fairly localized level (down to the Census Block Group menting a particular transportation improvement can help level). This is suitable for looking at localized impacts, such refine or modify existing data collection practices and analyt- as construction impacts or air quality issues stemming from ical methodologies. Similarly, it also is important to gather congestion. information from planning documents and local surveys on The more sophisticated components of Environmental previous impact-producing projects that have been recently Justice analysis, such as travel impacts (select link analysis or completed. Feeding these data back into state or regional CTPP origin-destination analysis) represent the more labor- socioeconomic datasets can improve accuracy for future and time-intensive aspects of the analysis, as most existing studies. travel demand models do not explicitly integrate all types of Environmental Justice analysis necessarily consists of a socioeconomic data necessary to examine Environmental qualitative analysis component, but must be supported by Justice-related travel impacts. Some relevant data, such as high-quality socioeconomic and geographic data. Web-based population, employment, and population by income, are typ- GIS tools such as Florida's Environmental Screening Tool ically included at the travel analysis zone (TAZ) level in a (EST) offer an ideal venue for examining applicable quanti- model. Other potential divisions of interest, such as racial, tative data in a way that allows each stakeholder agency to ethnic, or mobility impaired groups, are usually not included. look at the same data in the context of their particular exper- These data may be divided geographically in ways that do not tise, and then craft a thoughtful response based on all avail- easily correspond to the TAZ divisions in a model. Integrat- able information, quantitative or otherwise. The EST is a ing additional Environmental Justice-related geographic data web-based GIS tool integrated to an extensive statewide GIS into the ongoing travel demand modeling process would save database of over 300 layers, allowing all stakeholder agencies considerable time and effort. to perform their analyses through a centralized location. It Another potential data gap is caused by the time lapse in uses existing GIS web publishing technology to create a vir- available Census data. Implementation of the American Com- tual project analysis environment accessible to the dozens of munity Survey as a replacement for the Long Form of the separate resource agencies that participate in Florida's ETDM decennial Census will result in more timely socioeconomic process. data, but many regions may wish to collect and maintain their own data sets. If a region or state currently has no equivalent Appendix B References to the Census datasets, establishing one would be a major 1. See: http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/index.html. undertaking; such data, however, are invaluable to public 2. http://nhd.usgs.gov/index.html. agency and private-sector analyses above and beyond trans- 3. http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/2008_ir_memorandum.html. portation studies. 4. http://iaspub.epa.gov/waters/national_rept.control. 5. http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards/wqslibrary/index.html. 6. Eco-logical: An Ecosystem Approach to Developing Infrastructure High-Value Data Investment Opportunities Projects. U.S. DOT, Research and Innovative Technology Admin- istration. Cambridge, Massachusetts. DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-06-01 Increased communication and interaction between trans- 7. http://www.oregonexplorer.info/ portation agencies and agencies responsible for socioeconomic 8. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/wetland/scanrpt/intro.htm. data collection and forecasting would benefit the accuracy and 9. http://www.bts.gov/programs/statistical_policy_and_research/ level of detail of socioeconomic datasets. This may help to source_and_accuracy_compendium/wetland_impact.html. refine existing statewide or regional datasets using knowledge 10. http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/wetlands/cwamms.html. 11. http://www.ncdot.org/doh/preconstruct/pe/neu/Monitoring/. gained through transportation studies. Transportation agen- 12. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/airtoxic/020306guid cies may get a more "hands-on" feel for conditions in a par- mem.htm ticular area, and through the course of a planning study may 13. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata1999/index.html. examine numerous different socioeconomic datasets, which 14. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/). may be further supplemented by surveys. Surveys can be used 15. Information on monitoring efforts can be found at http://www. epa.gov/ttn/amtic/ airtoxpg.html. Data from air toxics monitoring to gather data on: activities, as well as an increasing number of State and local air toxics Local socioeconomic conditions; monitoring networks, is available in EPA's Air Quality System data- base: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/. Local travel patterns by socioeconomic group; and 16. Health Effects Institute. Mobile-Source Air Toxics: A Critical Review Conditions or perceived conditions related to noise and of the Literature on Exposure and Health Effects. Special Report 16, congestion. 2007. http://pubs.healtheffects.org/view.php?id=282.

OCR for page 96
113 17. Section 4(f ) of the Department of Transportation Act prohibits 19. For more information: http://etdmpub.fla-etat.org/est/. FHWA and other federal transportation agencies from using 20. For more information: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/ land from a historic site of national, state, or local significance noise/faq_nois.htm. unless there is no feasible and prudent alternative to use of the 21. For more information: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/shsp land, and actions are taken to reduce all possible harm to the guidance.htm. site. The Section 4(f ) evaluation is a requirement in the NEPA 22. For more information: http://www.csu.edu.au/research/crsr/PDF- documentation. files/Stolp.pdf. 18. For more information: http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/research/ 23. For more information: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/ nris.htm. ejustice/effect/crosstabs.html.

OCR for page 96