National Academies Press: OpenBook

Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources (2010)

Chapter: Annotated References

« Previous: Acronyms
Page 19
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 19
Page 20
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 20
Page 21
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 21
Page 22
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 22
Page 23
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 23
Page 24
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 24
Page 25
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 25
Page 26
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 26
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 27
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 28
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 29
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 30
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 31
Page 32
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 32
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 33
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"Annotated References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14411.
×
Page 34

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

19 TRIS PUBLICATIONS AASHTO Task Force on Environmental Design, Visualiza- tion in Transportation: A Guide for Transportation Agen- cies, July 2003 Visualization is a simulated representation of proposed transportation improvements and their associated impacts on the surroundings in a manner sufficient to convey to the layperson the full extent of the improvement. http://www.trbvis.org/MAIN/RESOURCES_files/AASH TOVisGuideJuly2003_1.pdf. Alter, R., M. Lewiecki, M. Renz-Whitmore, and D.W. Albright, “Accountable Public Involvement: Partnership App- roach to Proposed Transportation Project,” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board No. 2077, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008, pp. 46–53. Bernalillo County, New Mexico, undertook an initia- tive to improve public involvement in guiding trans- portation and recreation decision making through quan- titative tracking of participation among stakeholder groups. A methodology was developed and a demon- stration project selected to implement the methodology. The proposed methodology was to identify the demo- graphic characteristics of the community affected by the proposed project. Outreach program performance would be measured by ascertaining whether persons who commented on the proposed project were repre- sentative of the population served. For the purpose of the demonstration, three demographic characteristics were identified as represented in the community affected by the demonstration project but historically underrep- resented in Bernalillo County public meetings. Public involvement of persons whose primary language was Spanish, persons with disabilities, and youths were tracked. Successfully engaging persons with these char- acteristics required partner organizations that could engage them. A partnership approach was adopted to reach out to the community served. The public involvement partner- ship was formed with a variety of governmental, pri- vate, and nongovernmental organizations. There was an increase in the diversity of the public involved in dis- cussing the demonstration project. A benchmark was established for public involvement in future phases of the demonstration project. Building accountability into public outreach can improve the level of commu- nity participation in proposed transportation projects. An effective means of delivering an accountable out- reach program is through partnerships. In the Bernalillo County experience, partner organizations should be as diverse as the public to be served. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.3141/2077-07. ANNOTATED REFERENCES Aparicio, A., Assessing Public Involvement Effectiveness in Long-Term Planning, Paper #07-0728, presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Jan. 21–25, 2007, Washington, D.C. The recent experience of the Spanish Ministry of Trans- portation in developing a new Transportation Plan intended to use public involvement as a key element to recover legit- imacy for long-term planning and to gain support to sus- tainable transportation objectives. The public involve- ment procedure reinforced the role of planning; however, ironically, also resulted in a more conservative document in terms of the relevance of environmental goals and the emphasis on management versus infrastructure develop- ment policies. Conservationist groups were particularly disappointed about the outcome of the process. Although there was a strong emphasis in creating multiple, well- balanced panels for discussion, consensus building lacked the time to reinforce the position of more progressive approaches compared with “business as usual” positions. Furthermore, it proved to be impossible for key environ- mental questions to be carefully examined at this stage, and they were postponed to modal plans. Overall, the process served to legitimate and reinforce long-term planning as a useful tool for transportation policy development. How- ever, there is a significant way ahead for making public involvement more influential. Linking goals to clearly specified and regularly monitored objectives would keep public involvement alive along the planning cycle. A more clear link between general transportation policy goals and stakeholders’ daily interests, such as quality of service, environmental quality, or access to develop- ment opportunities should keep alive and improve the dia- log among technicians, decision makers, and the public, and put additional pressure in the transportation sector to gather further evidence and develop a better understanding about these complex links. Barnes, G. and S. Erickson, Developing a Simple System for Public Involvement Conflict Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota Department of Trans- portation, 2006 This report describes a project to develop a simple system for managing conflict in transportation project public involvement. This work was focused on finding simple methods for managing less challenging projects and was aimed toward those who may do public involvement only occasionally. The conflict management framework is derived from a distillation of expert opinion, based on dis- cussions of specific projects by Minnesota transportation public involvement experts. The framework is comprised of two components. The first is a simple organizational scheme for categorizing conflict to assist in determining the appropriate management strategy. The second part is

the management strategies themselves. Key among these are principles for managing stakeholder relations so as to preclude the occurrence of conflict to the extent possible. http://www.lrrb.org/PDF/200624.pdf. Barnes, G. and P. Langworthy, Increasing the Value of Public Involvement in Transportation Project Planning, Uni- versity of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota Department of Transportation, 2004 The purpose of this project was to understand why public involvement in transportation project planning goes badly, and to determine how the process could be modified to reduce negative outcomes. The project examines these issues by studying public involvement efforts. It exam- ines how the potential for conflict can be anticipated. A local project had characteristics of having been well run with good intentions, of having been plagued by conflict, and of being documented in a neighborhood newspaper. It was the primary source of reasons why public involve- ment can turn out badly and was contrasted with three other projects that were more successful with their public involvement. A new model is proposed in this report. It proposes that conflict can derive from any or all of five independent dimensions, each with its own level of inten- sity or intractability: size and distribution of local benefits or costs; disagreement about the nature and importance of local impacts; ability to accurately define and engage rel- evant stakeholders; perceived legitimacy of the project; and degree of ideological issues. There are two key con- clusions. First, situations with serious conflict are different from the typical public involvement effort; they require dif- ferent tools and tactics built around the specific nature of the conflict. The second major finding is that “conflict” is not a standard problem to answer with a single solution, but each conflict does not have to be approached individually. http://www.lrrb.gen.mn.us/PDF/200420.pdf. Black, R.N., Public Participation in Diverse Communities: Tools for Consensus Building, Paper #06-2580, presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Jan. 22–26, 2006, Washington, D.C. Transportation departments typically follow a traditional model for public participation that includes public notices; open house meetings to present the project, design, and timeline; and a complement of fact sheets and color-coded maps to inform the message. This one-size-fits-all approach to public participation is ineffective in culturally diverse communities. What makes diverse communities unique to transportation departments’ public participation efforts? Culturally diverse communities have a different history with transportation policies. In the 1960s, before trans- portation policies emphasized public participation and context-sensitive solutions, many culturally diverse com- munities experienced public works projects such as high- way construction that physically divided low-income communities and displaced homes. For instance, when the Dan Ryan Expressway was built in Chicago in 1968, 20 hundreds of homes and churches were demolished to make way for the new interstate. The surrounding communities were not involved in the planning of the design and viewed the new highway as a segregation tool. Although trans- portation planning efforts have come a long way since the 1960s, many culturally diverse communities remember the impact of highway construction on their neighborhoods, and have developed resentment and distrust toward trans- portation officials. Therefore, transportation departments with projects affecting culturally diverse communities need to develop different, more proactive approaches to public participation. This paper discusses innovative approaches to public participation in culturally diverse com- munities that have proven effective. It provides a roadmap for project success by exploring a major highway construc- tion project in Illinois that was initially opposed by the community and then, after significant retooling, gained support from the community. The tools for successful public involvement in culturally diverse communities include forming a project team that is diverse in ideas and culture, involving an expert in public and community rela- tions, creating user-friendly project information materials, forming a community taskforce to provide feedback on your ideas and demonstrate your commitment to involve- ment, engaging local community papers as a valuable resource to reach diverse communities, and addressing the need for jobs and contracts early in the planning stages to establish realistic expectations. Bryson, J.M. and A.R. Carroll, Public Participation Field- book, Regents of the University of Minnesota, 2007 This Fieldbook introduces the theory and practice of working with others in intra-organizational, inter- organizational, and community settings. The general focus is on how an organization or community can use participation to achieve the common good or create pub- lic value as a result of a change effort. Examples include a policy change or a new or modified program, project, service, or other initiative. The idea for the Fieldbook emerged from the desires of communities and students to learn how to engage people in decision making. The liter- ature on participation tends to be either theoretical or nuts-and-bolts, but not both, and is often inadequate for our purposes. The authors are great fans of both the power and practicality of good theory. The great philosopher Bertrand Russell said, “Abstraction is the source of all power.” Also, psychologist Kurt Lewin said, “There is nothing quite so practical as a good theory.” (Many regard Lewin as the founder of small-group research and inventor of action research.) But theory without guidance on how to apply it to specific situations can be impotent. In other words, if one cannot figure out how to apply the theory, it cannot be very powerful or practical. The question that kept being asked was, “What should a practitioner do—and why, with whom, how, when, and where?” Little in the literature provides satisfactory answers to all of the ques- tions. Although individual practitioners bring slices of

21 personal experience and preferences that provide anec- dotal guidance, it is not clear how and why to apply the advice to other situations. These valuable bits and pieces of theory and practical advice need a useful synthesis or integration. This Fieldbook provides a synthesis of much of the theory, concepts, design guidance, tools, and other resources it is believed that participation process designers and implementers need to succeed. Practitioners will not need everything in the Fieldbook all the time, but they will have a resource that covers the bases and will help them think through what they need in specific circumstances. The Fieldbook is not meant to be a substitute for important works from the scholarly literature or for years of experi- ence; it is meant to be a bridge between theory and practice. http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/resourcesand tourism/DB8422.html. Burbidge, S.K., T. Knowlton, and A. Matheson, Jr., Wasatch Choices 2040: A New Paradigm for Public Involvement and Scenario Development in Transportation Planning, 2007 Wasatch Choices 2040 was a partnership between Envi- sion Utah and the two major metropolitan planning orga- nizations (MPOs) along Utah’s Wasatch Front. The pur- pose of the partnership was to involve the public through a scenario planning process and to consider the role of land use in developing the region’s long-range trans- portation plan. Through 13 public workshops and 5 open houses held in 2005, members of the public expressed their preferences for transportation and land use in their communities. The input from the public informed the development of regional growth principles that have since been adopted by elected officials and will guide trans- portation and land use decisions in Wasatch Front com- munities. In addition, results from the public process were used to create four regional transportation and land use scenarios that ultimately led to the creation of a regional vision. Each scenario was tested by using the CentreSim forecasting model, and a vision scenario was created to depict one version of how the Wasatch Front could develop if guided by regional growth principles. Modeling of the regional vision demonstrates that it performs significantly better than the existing long-range plan for several quality- of-life measures, including traffic congestion. This process proved groundbreaking by reminding both land use and transportation professionals that futures cannot be planned in isolation. Transportation affects land use just as much as land use affects transportation. It is a circular relationship that must be accounted for. This process focuses on bring- ing all interests to the table concurrently to plan for a better future. http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/1994-19. Byrd, L. and S. David, Public Involvement in Long-Range Transportation Planning: Benchmarking Study Identifies Best Practices, TR News, No. 220, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2002 This publication features articles on innovative and timely research and development activities in all modes of transportation. Brief news items of interest to the trans- portation community are also included, along with profiles of transportation professionals, meeting announcements, summaries of new publications, and news of TRB activities. http://gulliver.trb.org/publications/trnews/trnews220.pdf. Casper, C.T. and F. Orr, Metropolitan Planning Organization Use of Google Earth as a Visualization Tool to Aid Public Involvement and Integration of NEPA with Transportation Planning, Paper #07-0678, presented at the 86th Annual Meet- ing of the Transportation Research Board, Jan. 21–25, 2007, Washington, D.C. The Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments (PPACG) is responsible for preparing a long-range regional transporta- tion plan, carrying out short-range transportation planning activities, and prioritizing and approving, through the trans- portation improvement program, expenditure of federal funds for transportation-related projects in the region. The 2005 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) man- dates that MPOs both utilize the Internet to publish their plans along with using visualization techniques to distrib- ute data and information more effectively. Public involve- ment is a vital component of the transportation planning process. To make information more easily available to the general public, PPACG, with CH2M HILL, is planning on providing long-range regional transportation plan and trans- portation improvement program data in Google Earth® for- mat on the PPACG website. A free, easy-to-use interface and access to high-resolution aerial imagery have made Google Earth® the most successful of the “virtual globe” viewing applications. Its popularity and ease of use make Google Earth® a natural medium for communicating transportation information to the public. The data and infor- mation are divided into four general categories: projects, roadway and traffic information, environmental constraints, and demographics. Topics discussed include the method- ologies employed, technical obstacles and how they were overcome, the final delivery model, agency and public receptivity, and lessons learned. The overall conclusion is that Google Earth® is a powerful data visualization and data access application and can serve as an unparalleled information dissemination tool. Creighton, J.L., The Public Participation Handbook: Making Better Decisions Through Citizen Involvement, March 2005 Internationally renowned facilitator and public participation consultant Creighton offers a practical guide to designing and facilitating public participation in environmental and public policy decision making. Written for government offi- cials, public and community leaders, and professional facilitators, The Public Participation Handbook is a toolkit for designing a participation process, selecting tech- niques to encourage participation, facilitating successful public meetings, working with the media, and evaluating the program. The book is also filled with practical advice, checklists, worksheets, and illustrative examples.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/product-description/ 0787973076/ref=dp_proddesc_0?ie=UTF8&n=283155& s=books Dalton, D. and P.J. Harter, Better Decisions through Consul- tation and Collaboration Involving the public in government decision making makes sense for three key reasons: This guide will help you answer these questions. The Conflict Prevention and Reso- lution Center developed this manual to assist EPA man- agers and staff who are developing or managing policies, plans, regulations, or programs at the national, regional, or local levels to achieve EPA’s Public Involvement Policy goals. Although not specifically aimed at facility-level per- mitting, enforcement, or remediation, many lessons are transferable to these situations. This document is a resource guide on public involvement best practices and strategies for EPA staff who are tasked with designing and/or imple- menting public involvement processes for various EPA activities. The discussions and advice in this document are intended solely as guidance. As indicated by the use of non- mandatory language such as “may” and “should,” it offers recommendations and suggestions for EPA staff. This doc- ument does not substitute for any statutory authorities or regulations. This document is not an EPA regulation and therefore cannot impose legally binding requirements on EPA, states, or the regulated community. EPA retains the discretion to adopt approaches that differ from this guid- ance. Interested parties are free to raise questions about this guidance and the appropriateness of applying it in a partic- ular situation. EPA may change this document in the future, as appropriate. This manual focuses on the preparation for involving stakeholders in decision-making processes because, in our experience, building a strong foundation at the outset ensures a more productive and efficient out- come. Indeed, a 2008 National Academy of Sciences study concluded that stakeholder involvement processes can improve the quality of policies and help them become implemented. “Public participation should be fully incor- porated into environmental assessment and decision- making processes, and it should be recognized by govern- ment agencies and other organizers of the processes as a requisite of effective action, not merely a formal proce- dural requirement.” Involving stakeholders takes time and planning to produce meaningful results. Without this commitment, you may waste time and money and the stakeholders may end up more alienated than if you had not consulted them at all. A stakeholder involvement process is not an end in itself: it is a means to a better, more widely accepted decision. http://www.epa.gov/ncei/collaboration/ betterdecisions.pdf. Dietz, T. and P.C. Stern, Public Participation in Environ- mental Assessment and Decision Making, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2008 Federal agencies have taken steps to include the public in a wide range of environmental decisions. Although some 22 form of public participation is often required by law, agencies usually have broad discretion about the extent of that involvement. Approaches vary widely, from holding public information gathering meetings, to forming advisory groups, to actively including citizens in making and imple- menting decisions. Proponents of public participation argue that those who must live with the outcome of an environ- mental decision should have some influence on it. Critics maintain that public participation slows decision making and can lower its quality by including people unfamiliar with the science involved. This book concludes that, when done correctly, public participation improves the quality of federal agencies’ decisions about the environment. Well- managed public involvement also increases the legitimacy of decisions in the eyes of those affected by them, which makes it more likely that the decisions will be imple- mented effectively. This book recommends that agencies recognize public participation as valuable to their objec- tives, not just as a formality required by the law. It details principles and approaches agencies can use to success- fully involve the public. http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php? record_id=12434. Done, R.S. and J. Semmens, Making a Good First Impression: Improving Predesign and Environmental Public Information and Public Involvement, presented at the 87th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Jan. 13–17, 2008, Washington, D.C. Current federal transportation legislation creates consider- able responsibility for state departments of transportation (DOTs) and MPOs to provide public information and pub- lic involvement to a diverse community and to obtain feed- back that satisfies legal mandate and results in improved planning and project development. The four main domains of public participation are informing people, involving peo- ple, getting feedback, and applying special techniques. The growing population in Arizona requires a constant roadway construction and maintenance effort that naturally includes public participation during planning and implementation. Using data collected from internal and external respondents, this study examines the current public information and pub- lic involvement structures and functions as well as opportu- nities for improving these structures and functions. Eagle, K. and B. Stich, “Planning to Include the Public. Trans- portation Policy Implementation with Effective Citizen Involvement,” Public Works Management & Policy, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2005 The following research is a Virginia case study evaluating planning processes as they implement the following legisla- tion: NEPA (the National Environmental Policy Act), 1969; ISTEA (Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act), 1991; and TEA-21 (Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century), 1998. Specifically, the implementation of the legislation requiring citizen participation will be reviewed in an effort to evaluate how the policy process and citizen participation relate to each other and to the legislation to

23 determine how the process relates to the desired outcomes for involvement. Federal Highway Administration, A Citizen’s Guide to Trans- portation Decisionmaking, Washington, D.C. The FHWA and FTA wrote this guide to provide answers to these and other transportation-related questions. This guide will help you understand how transportation decisions are made at the local, state, and national levels, and that the bet- ter citizens understand the transportation decision-making process, the more certain it is that the transportation system will be safe, efficient, and responsive to public needs and concerns about their communities and the natural environ- ment. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/citizen/. Federal Highway Administration, Community Impact Assess- ment, A Quick Reference for Transportation, Washington, D.C., 1996 It was “written as a quick primer for transportation pro- fessionals and analysts who assess the impacts of pro- posed transportation actions on communities” by doing the following: • Outlining the community impact assessment process, • Highlighting critical areas that must be examined, • Identifying basic tools and information sources, and • Stimulating the thought process related to individuals projects. It was prepared because the consequences of transporta- tion investments on communities had often been ignored or introduced near the end of a planning process. At best, this reduced them to reactive consideration. The goals of this booklet were to do the following: • Increase awareness of the effects of transportation actions on the human environment, • Emphasize that community impacts deserve serious attention in project planning and development com- mensurate with that given the natural environment, and • Provide some tips for facilitating public involvement in the decision-making process. It provides “nuts and bolts” guidance and instruction in accomplishing the following objectives: • Defining the project, • Developing a community profile, • Collecting data, • Analyzing community impacts, • Selecting analysis tools, • Identifying solutions, • Using public involvement, and • Documenting findings. Federal Highway Administration, How to Engage Low- Literacy and Limited-English-Proficiency Populations in Transportation Decisionmaking, Washington, D.C., 2006 This publication provides guidance on what special approaches are needed to outreach to low-literacy and limited-English-proficiency populations, and what are the best ways to contact low-literacy and limited-English- proficiency populations. www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/lowlim/ webbook.pdf. Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Adminis- tration, Public Involvement Techniques for Transportation Decision-Making, Washington, D.C., 2002 This is a reference that makes a wide variety of public involvement techniques available to transportation agen- cies. It includes the 14 techniques originally published in Innovations in Public Involvement for Transportation Planning. There are four chapters with subsections that group techniques thematically by function. Each chapter ends with a final subsection called “Taking Initial Steps.” To assist practitioners in coordinating a full public involvement program, each technique is cross-referenced to other related techniques. The organizing principle for each technique is a series of questions, such as “Why is it useful?” or”What are the drawbacks?” For the trans- portation community, involving the public in planning and project development poses a major challenge. Many people are skeptical about whether they can truly influ- ence the outcome of a transportation project, whether highway or transit. Others feel that transportation plans, whether at the statewide or metropolitan level, are too abstract and long-term to warrant attention. Often the public finds both metropolitan and statewide transpor- tation improvement programs incomprehensible. How then does a transportation agency grab and hold people’s interest in a project or plan, convince them that active involvement is worthwhile, and provide the means for them to have direct and meaningful impact on its deci- sions? This guide gives agencies access to a wide variety of tools to involve the public in developing specific plans, programs, or projects through their public involve- ment processes. http://www.planning.dot.gov/Pitool/toc- foreword.asp. Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Adminis- tration, Transportation & Environmental Justice, Case Stud- ies, Washington, D.C., 2000 This report presents 10 case studies that illuminate effec- tive practices on how to better promote environmental justice principles. They profile how various transportation agencies have integrated environmental justice consider- ations in their activities to improve transportation deci- sion making. The case studies detail both analytical and procedural issues relevant to a diverse community includ- ing FHWA, FTA, state DOTs, MPOs, transit providers, other partnering government agencies, community orga- nizations, environmental interest, and environmental jus- tice advocacy groups, businesses, academic institutions, and the public. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/ejustice/ case/index.htm.

Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administra- tion, Transportation & Environmental Justice, Effective Prac- tices, Washington, D.C., 2002 This report provides 38 effective practices that were used successfully by state DOTs, MPOs, and transit service providers to engage Environmental Justice populations. Many of the examples illustrate that successful initiatives often promote public participation, partnerships, and col- laborative relationships with other governmental agencies, as well as interested advocacy groups or community-based organizations. The effective practices highlight efforts that were undertaken during planning, public involvement, proj- ect development, right-of-way, construction, and opera- tions and maintenance phases of projects. http://ntl.bts. gov/lib/12000/12100/12173/booklet.pdf. Florida DOT, Public Involvement Handbook, Oct. 2003 For the transportation community, involving the public in planning and project development poses a major challenge. Many people are skeptical about their ability to influence the transportation decision-making process. Others may feel that transportation plans are too abstract and so far into the future that participating now yields little affect. The challenge to the transportation agency and public involve- ment practitioners is to devise a way to interest the public in the decision-making process. The challenge also is to convince the public that their active involvement and par- ticipation in the transportation decision-making process provides them with an opportunity to have meaningful impacts on decisions affecting their communities. The Florida DOT (FDOT) Public Involvement Handbook pro- vides public involvement practitioners with techniques and methods to encourage meaningful public participation in the development of a transportation system that meets the needs of Florida residents and visitors. This Handbook is compliant with the FDOT public involvement policy and all other legal foundations for public involvement as a means of providing access to the transportation decision- making process. This Handbook is intended to provide clear guidance for developing and implementing effective public involvement activities that meet and may exceed federal and state requirements to involve the public in transportation decision making. It describes a variety of methods and techniques to involve the public in the devel- opment of transportation plans, programs, and projects, and helps public involvement practitioners design effective pub- lic involvement plans that become roadmaps to reach those affected by transportation actions. http://www.dot.state. fl.us/EMO/pubs/public_involvement/pubinvolve.htm. Garrick, N.W., P. Miniutti, M. Westa, J. Luo, and M. Bishop, Effective Visualization Techniques for the Public Presentation of Transportation Projects, New England Transportation Consor- tium, University of Connecticut, Storrs, 2005 The purpose of this project was to look at ways to develop more coherent and effective approaches for presenting transportation projects to the public. A detailed review of 24 recent research on visual perception and visualization was conducted. Site visits to two consulting firms and one state DOT were also conducted. Mail-in surveys were sent to the six New England DOTs and these survey results were compared with a previous nationwide survey conducted in 1998. The study results showed that image composite continues to be the most popular visualization technique used by both DOTs and consulting firms. Animation, which is the most effective visualization technique, is expected to be used more frequently as the cost and time of production are reduced. It was also found that visual- ization techniques are mainly used in the public involve- ment process in the New England DOTs; they are rarely used in design and design development. This is expected to change as Context-Sensitive Design takes hold in the DOTs. As this occurs, expect that visualization will be more frequently incorporated, not only in the public involvement stage but also at all stages of design. Because transportation design and public involvement are parallel processes, DOTs will find that the usage of visualization in design will be invaluable in helping transportation designers evaluate and refine their design. http://docs.trb. org/01005985.pdf. Gifford, G.L., Meaningful Participation: An Activist’s Guide to Collaborative Policy-Making, C Effects Publications, Jan. 2002 The adversarial model of policymaking—where some interests win and some lose—has stopped many a bad decision and a number of good ones. Yet, who really wins if a controversial ruling leaves a community divided and bitter? Costly legal battles often follow controversy, con- suming precious human and financial resources. Across the country and around the world, government officials and even private businesses are exploring ways to engage both supporters and critics. They are flocking to a new policymaking approach called citizen engagement or pub- lic participation. Workshops and handbooks have been written to train professionals in public participation. Con- sultants are advising business and government. This hand- book is designed for the public, or at least that segment of the public that engages in policymaking as volunteers or staff of non-governmental organizations. It may also be of value to individual citizens acting alone, although these unaffiliated individuals are not the primary audience. This handbook does not teach how to organize. It does not dis- cuss media campaigns or the best lobbying techniques. It does not seek to provide an answer to every situation that might arise. Instead, it outlines a few basic principals that underlie effective public participation. With these tools, you will be able to recognize and advocate for meaningful engagement. If you are already experienced in collaborative policymaking, this handbook can serve as a vehicle for reflection on your current practice. In the handbook, you will find a few useful “process” tools to improve your participation. You will also find questions to help you negotiate the thorny spaces of when to col-

25 laborate and when not. Underlying this handbook is a belief that if you have a better understanding of the prin- cipals of collaborative policymaking you will be more effective and able to adapt more rapidly to changing situa- tions. Its goal is to help you become an equal partner with government and business in creating a meaningful process of public deliberation—to which we all aspire. http:// www.amazon.com/Meaningful-Participation-Activists- Collaborative-Policy-Making/dp/0970785704/ref=sr_1_ 41?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1233432761&sr=1-41. Hartell, A.M., Is Inadequate Transportation a Barrier to Com- munity Involvement? Evidence from the Social Capital Bench- mark Survey, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008 Since the publication of Robert Putnam’s influential “Bowling Alone,” the concept of social capital has cap- tured the attention of researchers in many disciplines. Policymakers and community advocates have pressed to include social capital in discussions about public policy, including transportation policy and planning. Using data from a national survey conducted in 2000, the study described in this paper investigated whether inadequate transportation is a barrier to people’s involvement in their communities. The analysis uses a binary logistical model and finds that respondents who were female, who were nonwhite, who had household incomes less than $30,000, and who had long commutes to work had increased odds of citing transportation as a barrier. However, only 17% of the sample analyzed reported that transportation was a bar- rier. Most respondents cited other barriers along with transportation, most commonly inflexible work schedules or inadequate child care. Although some types of improve- ments to transportation systems and transit service could improve access to community activities, the overall results suggest that if transportation improvements seek to disman- tle barriers to community involvement they will need to be combined with policies and programs that address other types of barriers to achieve a measurable positive effect. Travel demand management programs and better coordi- nated transit service programs are two approaches to dis- mantling transportation barriers to community involvement. Innes, J.E. and D.E. Booher, Reframing Public Participation: Strategies for the 21st Century, University of California at Berkeley, March 2005 This article makes the case that legally required participa- tion methods in the United States not only do not meet most basic goals for public participation, but are also counterproductive, causing anger and mistrust. Both the- ory and practice are dominated by ambivalence about the idea of participation itself. Both struggle with dilemmas that make the problems seem insoluble, such as the conflict between the individual and collective interest or between the ideal of democracy and the reality that many voices are never heard. Cases are used to draw on an emerging set of practices of collaborative public engagement from around the world to demonstrate how alternative methods can better meet public participation goals and how they make moot most of the dilemmas of more conventional prac- tice. Research shows that collaborative participation can solve complex, contentious problems such as budget deci- sion making and create an improved climate for future action when bitter disputes divide a community. Authen- tic dialogue, networks, and institutional capacity are the key elements. The authors propose that participation be understood as a multi-way set of interactions among citi- zens and other players who together produce outcomes. Next steps involve developing an alternative practice framework, creating forums and arenas, adapting agency decision processes, and providing training and financial support. http://repositories.cdlib.org/iurd/rs/RP-2005-01/. Kobza, K.P., Public Involvement in Transportation: How Web-based Systems Can Make Your Next Experience More Constructive So, you have been charged with widening a road. Or you plan on designing a new rail system. Or you have been hired to oversee the building of a monumental bridge. After months (or even years) of preparation, careful analysis, and painstaking details, you are ready. Your plans and dreams have culminated into the perfect solution, and you are cer- tain that everyone will be delighted with the long-term improvements. It sounds so great on paper . . . And then you tell the public. Those grand plans that appeared so per- fect on paper are oftentimes met with resistance from the public, and that resistance is typically the result of miscon- ceptions, inaccurate information, and a lack of communi- cation. What if you could change all that? What if you had a simple means of engaging citizens, of involving them in your decisions, of soliciting and receiving feedback; of educating the public . . . of actually building trust and cre- ating an environment of true collaboration? Help is avail- able with web-based technologies. These systems present real opportunities to both constructively engage citizens and efficiently manage the process. Most importantly, these systems help you achieve results. http://www.public comment.com/docs/Transportation2005.pdf. Kramer, J., K.M. Williams, and K.E. Seggerman, Assessing the Public Involvement Practices of the Florida Department of Transportation, 2008 This paper presents findings of a comprehensive assess- ment of public involvement practices of FDOT. Objec- tives of the study were to document the current state of the practice and any best practices, identify training needs in public involvement, and identify considerations for the future development of public involvement performance measures. The assessment was conducted through a com- bination of in-depth personal interviews with FDOT staff and a review of agency documents. Findings are pre- sented regarding the public involvement practices of FDOT at all phases of transportation decision making and across the various divisions of the FDOT Central Office,

and each FDOT District—including each functional unit within the District and its role in public involvement. The study indicates that FDOT has made significant strides in its public involvement practices and is committed to involving the public in a meaningful way. Most of those interviewed viewed public involvement as an integral part of their job. There was evidence that methods other than formal meetings are being applied to more effectively involve the public and to convey project information. It was also clear that there are several continuing chal- lenges and training needs. The paper concludes with an overview of suggestions aimed at further strengthening FDOT’s public involvement process, such as expanding opportunities for information sharing on public involve- ment practices across the FDOT districts, creating for- mal public involvement evaluation methods, and steps to increase communication and coordination across functional units and agencies on issues of importance to the public. Lorenz, J., M. DeMent, R. Arthur, and S. Tolleson, Help- ing Stakeholders Understand Transportation Impacts and Trade-offs in Highway Planning: Lessons Learned from Developing Simulation-Based Public Involvement Tool, Paper #06-2090, presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Jan. 22–25, 2006, Washington, D.C. In 2004, the Kansas DOT (KDOT) began long-range planning for a rapidly developing 30-mile highway corri- dor along the western edge of metropolitan Kansas City. The K7 Corridor Management Plan will determine future facility types and locations; address access and right-of- way issues and preservation; and produce memoranda of understanding between KDOT and local governments about future actions and investments each will undertake to improve the corridor. One KDOT challenge involved reconciling divergent agendas of two counties and seven cities to build consensus for long-term, coordinated state and local decisions and investments. Consequently, KDOT and its consultant team created the Right Turns Transportation Planning Exercise to help local decision makers “see” the effects and consequences of their differ- ing visions for corridor land use and transportation needs. This planning simulation enables stakeholders to explore trade-offs and constraints that planners wrestle with every day through planning education; facilitated values/needs discussions; and simulated planning sessions using aerial maps and game pieces that show costs, capacity, and real- world examples of facility types. Valuable in itself, Right Turns also provided important lessons regarding how public involvement practitioners can better open a dialog about local transportation needs and values; identify action- able stakeholder transportation preferences; help stakehold- ers see the relationship between their preferences and impacts on local communities and transportation networks; and create a realistic understanding of costs, benefits, and trade-offs. 26 Lowry, M.B. and T.L. Nyerges, “Internet Portal for Participa- tion of Large Groups in Transportation Programming Deci- sions,” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Trans- portation Research Board, No. 2077, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008, pp. 156–165 An Internet portal for public participation in transportation programming decisions is described. The Internet portal supports participation of large groups (e.g., 100 or more people) through cutting-edge online deliberation tools and a strategic process that fosters meaningful public involve- ment. The portal is described in the context of a five-step process that has been designed for a particular program- ming decision situation called a local option transporta- tion tax. A transportation agency could develop a similar process for other programming decisions, such as the cre- ation of a transportation improvement program. The por- tal can be used by an agency to create a program or merely as a focus-group activity or polling exercise. Various tools used by the portal and the five-step process are described with the help of selected screenshots of the user interface. http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2077-20. Lowry, M.B., R.K. Young, P.E. Rutherford, G. Scott, and T. Zhong, New Model for Public Involvement in Transporta- tion Improvement Programming, Paper #07-0665, presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Jan. 21–25, Washington, D.C. Public involvement in transportation improvement pro- gramming is an increasing trend as well as a recommenda- tion of federal legislation. Although most transportation planning agencies have not actively involved the public during this stage of the planning process, there are many benefits to doing so, such as gaining support from the pub- lic for the funded project list, increasing the credibility of agencies, reducing project costs, and avoiding construction delays. Effective public involvement during the program- ming step incorporates inclusive participation, two-way communications, transparent processes, and serious treat- ment of the public’s input. This paper presents a model for public involvement in the programming process with all these features. The model uses a web-based portal applica- tion with a Public Participation Geographic Information System (PPGIS) and is composed of five steps: describing values and concerns, determining criteria, reviewing projects, evaluating scenarios, and creating reports. Chal- lenges agencies may encounter in implementing such a sys- tem are also covered in this paper. McAndrews, C., J.M. Florez-Diaz, and E. Deakin, “Views of the Street: Using Community Surveys and Focus Groups to Inform Context-Sensitive Design,” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1981, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2006 Urban transportation planners need community involve- ment to design the urban transportation system for its users

27 and for those who experience its spillovers and externali- ties, positive and negative. The people in the urban trans- portation system include travelers, residents of nearby neighborhoods, transit service providers, and others. These groups often overlap. This paper discusses methods and findings from an effort to involve residents in the planning for the redesign and revitalization of San Pablo Avenue, an urban arterial running along the eastern edge of the San Francisco Bay, California. The viewpoints of residents of neighborhoods of Oakland, Emeryville, Berkeley, Albany, Richmond, and El Cerrito, California, the six cities along the southern portion of the avenue, were gathered through resident surveys and focus groups. These residents experi- ence the avenue as travelers and also as its neighbors, whose everyday lives are influenced by activities on the street. Resident surveys and focus groups show that even on a major arterial serving multiple jurisdictions, local res- idents account for a major share of shopping and personal business along the arterial, and local trips are a major por- tion of the pedestrian traffic, transit ridership, and auto use in the corridor. Further, residents have intimate knowl- edge of the way the street functions and malfunctions and can offer useful suggestions for street redesign, operational improvements, land use changes, and related social pro- grams. The paper shows that context-sensitive design needs to respond not only to the physical environment but also to social and economic conditions, including neighbor- hood concerns and aspirations. http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/ 1981-15. Meyers, J., C. Dulic, C. Luz, and S. Warren, Spending Resources to Maximize Participation: Using an Innovative Media Campaign as a Substitute for an Initial Public Meeting, Seventh Transportation Research Board Conference on the Application of Transportation Planning Methods, 2002 This volume contains papers and abstracts presented during the Seventh TRB Conference on the Application of Trans- portation Planning Methods, held at the Park Plaza Hotel in Boston, Massachusetts, on March 7–11, 1999. The confer- ence was organized and sponsored by the Transportation Planning Applications Committee (A1C07) of TRB, the Executive Office of Transportation and Construction of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and the Boston MPO. Richard Marshment of the University of Oklahoma served as Conference Chair, and Karl Quackenbush of the Central Transportation Planning Staff chaired the Local Arrange- ments Committee. http://docs.trb.org/00939750.pdf. Minnesota DOT, Increasing the Value of Public Involvement in Transportation Project Planning, March 2004 The purpose of this project was to understand why public involvement in transportation project planning goes badly, and to determine how the process could be modified to reduce negative outcomes. The project examines these issues by studying public involvement efforts. The proj- ect reviews how the potential for conflict can be antici- pated. A local project had characteristics of having been well run with good intentions, of having been plagued by conflict, and of being documented in a neighborhood newspaper. It was the primary source of reasons why pub- lic involvement can turn out badly and was contrasted with three other projects that were more successful with their public involvement. A new model is proposed in this report, proposing that conflict can derive from any or all of five independent dimensions, each with its own level of intensity or intractability: • Size and distribution of local benefits or costs • Disagreement about the nature and importance of local impacts • Ability to accurately define and engage relevant stake- holders • Perceived legitimacy of the project • Degree of ideological issues. There are two key conclusions. First, situations with seri- ous conflict are different from the typical public involve- ment effort; they require different tools and tactics built around the specific nature of the conflict. The second major finding is that “conflict” is not a standard problem to answer with a single solution, but each conflict does not have to be approached individually. http://www.lrrb. org/pdf/200420.pdf. Minnesota DOT, Developing a Simple System for Public Involvement Conflict Management This report describes a project to develop a simple system for managing conflict in transportation project public involvement. This work was focused on finding simple methods for managing less challenging projects and was aimed toward those who may do public involvement only occasionally. The conflict management framework is derived from a distillation of expert opinion, based on dis- cussions of specific projects by Minnesota transportation public involvement experts. The framework is comprised of two components. The first is a simple organizational scheme for categorizing conflict to assist in determining the appropriate management strategy. The second part is the management strategies themselves. Key among these are principles for managing stakeholder relations so as to preclude the occurrence of conflict to the extent possible. http://www.lrrb.org/pdf/200624.pdf. Mullen, J., Getting the Message Out: Outreach Techniques that Enlighten and Enliven Today’s Smaller Communities, Eighth National Conference on Transportation Planning for Small and Medium-Sized Communities, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2002 Today’s smaller communities require dynamic and cost- effective outreach techniques that allow for a tailored com- munity approach while keeping pace with new or changing methods of communication. A one-size-fits-all approach does not work. A plan is required that employs flexi- ble, expandable, and adaptable outreach techniques with

information presented in a way that is both distinctive and easy to understand. Conventional outreach techniques for smaller communities have usually included rather simple, streamlined methods of communication. During a public outreach program, advisory committees, newsletters and websites set the stage for delivering the desired message. These forums and tools establish the basis for more advanced methods of communication. Using innovation and a flexible approach, smaller communities will be able to take advantage of a plethora of outreach opportunities that go beyond the norm. Designing and implementing public information, education, and involvement programs for today’s transportation planning process can be done in several ways—all independent of, and complementary to, each other. Forums for creating consistent community out- reach range from establishing on-site information centers that encourage the participation of various public groups, to identifying potential conflict and bringing key players to the table to proactively resolve any issues. With the recently adopted Year 2025 Regional Transportation Plan, the South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization (SJTPO) continues to place an importance on meaningful community outreach and public involvement for smaller communities around southern New Jersey. The success resulting from these efforts will become apparent once communities have developed an appreciation of not only the message that is being communicated, but also of the method in which that message is received. This paper doc- uments the public outreach process, provides interesting examples of outreach techniques, tools, and approaches; and suggests procedural methods that are expected to have similar successful applications in other small to mid-sized communities. The following cites examples of successful outreach techniques established during the SJTPO Public Outreach Program, and includes a discussion of how the program will generate both local awareness and coopera- tion among smaller communities for years to come. Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington, Governments are from Saturn . . . Citizens are from Jupiter: Strategies for Reconnecting Citizens and Government, June 1998 In recent years, the work of local government has been handicapped by declining citizen confidence and involve- ment in government. Whether the lost trust has resulted primarily from government’s own failures, or is a reflec- tion of dramatically changing times, action is needed. It is time to remind ourselves and others about what govern- ment is, what it does for us, and what our mutual respon- sibilities are to make government work for all of us. Word about government successes must be heralded without whitewashing the problems that must be addressed. What changes are needed to reconnect citizens with govern- ment and to make government work in the new informa- tion age must be honestly looked at. This publication briefly explores evidence and sources of this growing distrust, and highlights valuable benefits that government provides. 28 The publication focuses on examples of a variety of suc- cessful strategies that communities have used to reconnect citizens with government, to rehabilitate government’s tar- nished image, and to restore civility to the ongoing debate on public policy. Special acknowledgment is given to Susan Enger, MRSC Planning Consultant, who researched and wrote this publication. http://www.mrsc.org/Publications/ textsrcg.aspx#E22E10. Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington: Effec- tive Public Participation and Communication, Sept. 2000 In Washington State’s culture of open government, the process of policymaking is every bit as important as the product of that process. Effective policymaking cannot occur without solid public participation. Open communi- cations are essential to making that process work. This report contains a collection of tips acquired through experi- ence while participating in both successful and unsuccess- ful processes. http://www.mrsc.org/Subjects/Governance/ legislative/communication.aspx. O’Connor, R., M. Schwartz, J. Schaad, and D. Boyd, State of the Practice: White Paper on Public Involvement, Trans- portation Research Board, Transportation in the New Millen- nium, Washington, D.C., 2000 This white paper, authored by members of the TRB Com- mittee on Public Involvement, provides an overview of developments in the evolution of the process of two-way communication between citizens and government by which transportation agencies and other officials give notice and information to the public and use public input as a factor in decision making. In the past decade, a radical transforma- tion has occurred in the way transportation decisions are made. A new decision model has emerged and continues to be refined. The model assumes that public input into the assessment of transportation needs and solutions is a key factor in most transportation decision making. This para- digm shift, and several factors that have contributed to it, are discussed including the Intermodal Surface Transporta- tion Efficiency Act of 1991. http://www.nationalacademies. org/trb/publications/millennium/00108.pdf. Ostlund, S. and K. Brown, Guidelines for Graphic Represen- tation to Facilitate Public Involvement, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State Research and Special Programs Administration, 2003 The goal of this research is to develop a methodology for displaying and combining different aspects of intermodal thought so that laypersons may be able to partake in the discussion in a meaningful way. To meet this goal, we gathered research and developed step-by-step guidelines for creating and organizing a web-based forum (Part Two) and designed accompanying graphics to increase the lev- els of public involvement and understanding of inter- modal issues in a community; in particular, the integra- tion of pedestrian and bicycle paths with other modes of transportation (Part One). To achieve the goal of devel-

29 oping the graphics, the city of Starkville, Mississippi, was studied; however, the website and its application can be applied to other towns, hence it serves as a prototypical site. http://www.ie.msstate.edu/ncit/Research/Ostlund%20final %20report.htm. Prevost, D.L., “Geography of Public Participation: Using Geographic Information Systems to Evaluate Public Out- reach Program of Transportation Planning Studies,” Trans- portation Research Record: Journal of the Transporta- tion Research Board No. 1981, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2006, pp. 84–91 How effective are public involvement programs in reach- ing a representative and sufficient sampling of public input for a planning study? Although evaluations of public involvement programs are traditionally qualitative, this paper shows how geographic information systems (GIS) can provide an appropriate and productive means of quan- titatively evaluating the effectiveness of an agency’s out- reach program. This study used both mailing list and com- ment data from the Dulles Corridor Rapid Transit Project Environmental Impact Statement of the Virginia Depart- ment of Rail and Public Transportation to evaluate the agency’s outreach program. The data were analyzed to determine the project’s effectiveness in informing and receiving feedback from potential stakeholders. The analy- sis showed that 50% of the mailing list members lived within 1⁄2 mi of the proposed project. “Inclusion rates” were calculated, with household participation rates in census block groups near the project ranging from 0 to 82%. The Tyson’s Corner segment of the project, where the proposed rail line would be closest to residences, on average had the highest inclusion rates, with 16.5% of households within 1⁄2 mi of the proposed stations participating. Of the six block groups meeting the project’s environmental justice thresh- olds, half had an inclusion rate below 5%. Analysis of those commenting showed that those closest to the project were most likely to comment on the study and to express oppo- sition to the project in their comments. This study rein- forces many traditional stereotypes in public participation; however, more importantly, it demonstrates a method by which deficiencies in outreach efforts can be identified and measures taken to improve participation. By using the GIS- generated maps, agencies can readily identify geographic areas that may be affected by the project, yet have low participation rates, and use this information to develop additional outreach tools to target these populations. http:// dx.doi.org/10.3141/1981-14. Puentes, R. and L. Bailey, Improving Metropolitan Deci- sion Making in Transportation, The Brookings Institute, Oct. 2003 Metropolitan areas, the engines of the American economy, require greater control over the transportation spending so crucial to their dynamism. As Congress debates the reau- thorization of the federal transportation spending bill (TEA-21), the reforms of previous bills—devolving deci- sion making to metropolitan areas and away from statewide agencies—need to be broadened. This brief examines recent metropolitan-level spending and finds that local control pro- duces a more balanced and holistic transportation network. It also argues for specific policy recommendations to boost that performance while increasing accountability. http:// www.brookings.edu/reports/2003/10transportation_ puentes.aspx. Reed, J. and M. Bosley, Public Involvement: Do You Have a ‘Policy’ or a ‘Plan’? Eighth Transportation Research Board Conference on the Application of Transportation Planning Methods, 2002 This paper outlines the difference between meeting the requirement to have a Public Involvement Policy and hav- ing a Public Involvement Plan. In light of the increased emphasis on Public Involvement and Environmental Jus- tice it is becoming more and more important for agencies to be proactive with regard to Public Involvement. Web- ster’s defines the verb “plan” as “to devise or project the realization or achievement of a program.” If we as trans- portation professionals are really interested in achieving the goal of public involvement, then we had better devise public involvement plans, not just policies. The goal of this paper is to stimulate discussion and illustrate the process of self-assessment, goal setting, and benchmark- ing as well as best practices in the area of public involve- ment. It discusses the cyclical pattern of reassessment that can annually shape the direction of future plans with regard to how they better address the needs of an area by assessing what techniques have been successful and unsuccessful in the past year. Sanoff, H., Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning, Wiley, Dec. 1999. Offers professionals coverage of the basic principles and methods of community participation coupled with inci- sive case studies illustrating how each principle and method is applied and executed. http://www.amazon.com/ Community-Participation-Methods-Design-Planning/dp/ 0471355453/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=123 3432320&sr=1-13. Schively, C., M. Beekman, C. Carlson, and J. Reed, Enhancing Transportation: The Effects of Public Involvement in Planning and Design Processes, University of Minnesota, Sept. 2007 This research examines the nature and effects of inclu- sive and effective participation in the planning and design of transportation facilities. http://www.cts.umn. edu/Publications/ResearchReports/reportdetail.html? id=1532. Schreiber, K., G. Binger, and D. Church, Higher-Density Plans: Tools for Community Engagement, Norman Y. Mineta International Institute for Surface Transportation Policy

Studies, Department of Transportation Research and Special Programs Administration, California Department of Trans- portation, Sacramento, 2004. Provides information that local, regional, and state agen- cies, planning professionals, and project and plan propo- nents can use to develop and implement the type of collaborative efforts that involve residents in planning the futures of their communities. http://transweb.sjsu.edu/ mtiportal/research/publications/documents/03-02/mti_ 03-02.pdf Schutz, J.B., Use of Public Input to Develop Measures of Effectiveness, Transportation Research Board, Seventh National Conference on Transportation Planning for Small and Medium-Sized Communities, Washington, D.C., 2000 It is no longer the job of the planner just to get input from the public on their reactions to work done by technical staffs. Instead the public must be involved at the earliest stages of a project or study and the involvement must be meaningful. This paper describes how an extensive list of questions was developed and presented to members of the public to get their input into the development of measures of effective- ness for use on four planning studies conducted in rural and small communities. The list of questions was originally developed from a longer list of Measures of Effectiveness used in urban planning studies and was reduced in size to leave only those Measures of Effectiveness that were applicable to rural and small communities. The Measures of Effectiveness are classified into five categories, transporta- tion performance, financial/economic performance, social impacts, land use/economic development impacts, and environmental impacts. The paper will describe how the list of questions was modified during subsequent applications, how input from the public was merged with input from pub- lic officials, and how the Measures of Effectiveness were used in distinctly different studies. Those studies include a corridor study on an Interstate, a national pilot project for merging NEPA and planning, a feasibility study, and a regional plan update. The use of this method of developing Measures of Effectiveness will be compared with other methods. Those filling out the questionnaire included local and state elected officials. Many people expressed appreci- ation for being asked what their ‘values’ were at the begin- ning of the studies. The reader of this paper will benefit by learning of what kinds of Measures of Effectiveness are appropriate for studies in rural and small urban com- munities, how public input can be collected at an early stage in the study to help develop study criteria, and how this information can be applied in a variety of situa- tions. http://pubsindex.trb.org/view.aspx?id=803634. Sierra Club, The Road to Better Transportation Projects: Public Involvement and the NEPA Process This report is about a landmark law requiring the federal government to examine alternatives and seek to minimize 30 harmful effects of federally funded projects, such as high- ways, which have the potential to damage our health, environment, and quality of life. http://www.sierraclub. org/sprawl/nepa/sprawl_report.pdf. Sinha, K.C. and S. Labi, Transportation Decision Making: Principles of Project Evaluation and Programming, Wiley, May 2007 This book provides a holistic approach to decision making in transportation project development and program- ming, which can help transportation professionals to opti- mize their investment choices. http://www.amazon.com/ Transportation-Decision-Making-Principles-Programming/ dp/0471747327/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid= 1233433240&sr=1-8. The Harwood Institute, Standards of Excellence in Civic Engagement, How Public Agencies Can Learn from the Com- munity, Use What They Learn, and Demonstrate that Public Knowledge Matters, 2005 Standards of Excellence in Civic Engagement is a roadmap for public agency practitioners to ensure that their agency is truly in the business of civic engagement. This tool pro- vides the four key standards every agency must meet to achieve excellence in civic engagement; benchmarks for knowing these standards are being met; and pay-offs for why it is worth achieving them. This tool will also help agencies answer key questions such as: • Have staff been properly prepared for what they might learn through civic engagement, and are they prepared to deal with the implications? • Have the appropriate conversations been framed, given the position in the policy process? • Have realistic public expectations been set, given the capacities that exist to take action? • Are the necessary voices around the table to gain useful knowledge and make discoveries? • Has it been decided how to use what is learned and make sure people know their voices are useful? http://www.theharwoodinstitute.org/ht/a/GetDocument Action/i/6131. Transportation/Land Use Connections Program: Foster Public Involvement in Transportation Choices and Great Places, TLC Clearinghouse, Washington, D.C. Transportation initiatives, land use planning, and develop- ment projects benefit significantly from meaningful com- munity input and support. Every land use and transportation decision has a range of stakeholders, including property owners, residents, business owners, and government staff and elected officials. Some stakeholders are already actively involved in decision making, while others need to be invited into the process. Involving stakeholders early in the plan- ning process helps to identify community concerns and

31 opportunities that can help shape the project, and discuss the goals and strategies being advanced through the project. Successfully integrating public involvement into a project can be challenging. There is no hard and fast solution for public involvement. Examples of public involvement can include charrettes and visioning exercises that can help res- idents provide input, visualize different scenarios, and shape the end project. This Clearinghouse highlights resources on public involvement techniques and examples of projects that successfully engaged the public. These resources are intended to provide a model for successful efforts and pit- falls to avoid while undertaking transportation and land use planning projects. http://www.mwcog.org/transportation/ activities/tlc/clearinghouse/strategies/involvement.asp. U.S. Government Accountability Office, Highway Public- Private Partnerships: Securing Potential Benefits and Protecting the Public Interest Could Result from More Rigorous Up-front Analysis. Testimony, Washington, D.C., July 24, 2008. This is a testimony by JayEtta Z. Hecker, Director of Physical Infrastructure Issues, before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Energy. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/ getrpt?GAO-08-1052T. U.S. EPA Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation, Share- holder Involvement & Public Participation at the USEPA, Washington, D.C., Jan. 2001. This report has taken a fresh look at EPA public involve- ment initiatives by reviewing formal evaluations and informal summaries from across the Agency that identify, describe, and/or evaluate agency stakeholder involvement and public participation activities. http://www.epa.gov/ publicinvolvement/pdf/sipp.pdf. Ward, B.G., Measuring the Effectiveness of Community Impact Assessment: Recommended Core Measures, University of South Florida, Tampa; Florida Department of Transporta- tion; Federal Highway Administration, 2005 Summarizes research findings, suggests methods for eval- uating Community Impact Assessment (CIA), how these measures may be applied, and provides recommendations on how CIA may be incorporated into environmental streamlining. http://www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/ Completed_Proj/Summary_PTO/FDOT_BC353_28_rpt. pdf. Wisconsin DOT Transportation Synthesis Report, Best Prac- tices for Public Involvement in Transportation Projects This report reviews the practices of several states recog- nized for effective public involvement campaigns, looks at articles and websites devoted to various traditional and high technology tools, and identifies guidelines and tips found on transportation sites and in journal articles. http:// on.dot.wi.gov/wisdotresearch/database/tsrs/tsrpublic involvement.pdf. Zetlin, A. and S. Ojar, “The Public: Key to Successful Projects,” Public Roads, Vol. 67, No. 3, 2003. Over the past 20 years, something amazing has hap- pened in the New York metropolitan area—and across the country. Stakeholders are being asked to become partners with government agencies in developing and conducting transportation projects. This level of public involvement was not always the case. Until the early 1970s, federal, state, and municipal agencies planned roadway construction with little input from the com- munities affected by the work. But today all that has changed. By involving stakeholders in the decision- making process, New York City has emerged as a national leader in conducting public involvement pro- grams. The city plans and constructs transportation pro- jects from start to finish with the public’s input. The result? Everyone can live with and be proud of the roads in New York. How does the outreach process really work? An effec- tive public involvement program requires a strategic out- reach plan and lots of teamwork. Before the program can begin, the outreach plan needs to include the following steps: identifying the target audience(s), determining what information is needed and when, and deciding on the communication methods that will be used to deliver the information. In 2001, to rehabilitate the Williamsburg and Manhattan bridges, the New York City DOT fielded a team consisting of an engineering consultant and a communica- tions firm. Together, the two companies were tasked with reconstructing the Williamsburg and Manhattan bridges, educating the public about how the project would affect them, and addressing stakeholders’ concerns. http://www. tfhrc.gov/pubrds/03nov/08.htm. Zhong, T., R.K. Young, and G.S. Rutherford, A Model for Public Involvement in Transportation Improvement Pro- gramming Using Participatory Geographic Information Sys- tems, Aug. 25, 2007 Effective public involvement during the programming step incorporates inclusive participation, two-way com- munications, transparent processes, and serious treatment of the public’s input. This paper presents a model for pub- lic involvement in the programming process with all these features using a web-based portal application with a Pub- lic Participation Geographic Information System. The process is composed of the following five steps: describ- ing values and concerns, determining criteria, reviewing projects, evaluating scenarios, and creating reports. Chal- lenges agencies may encounter in implementing such a system are also covered in this paper. http://www.science direct.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V9K- 4RWHX5V-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig= search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version= 1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=a319f19bbcb6b7e fff2a14d27bd0e037.

WEBSITES City of Portland, Oregon, Office of Neighborhood Involve- ment: Public Involvement Task Force Report. In the spring of 2003, Commissioners Francesconi, Saltz- man, and Leonard commissioned the Public Involvement Standards Task Force to review and revise, as appropri- ate, the city’s adopted Public Involvement Principles and identify gaps and inconsistencies in the implementation of the city government’s public involvement processes. http://www.portlandonline.com/oni/index.cfm?c=29118. Education for Sustainable Development Toolkit. Public Involvement Article by Marianne Chrystalbridge with Tools and Case Studies. http://www.esdtoolkit.org/ discussion/participation.htm. Environmental Protection Agency: Analyzing Environmental Evaluations. Stakeholder Involvement Evaluation and Research and Evaluating the Use of Partnerships to Address Environ- mental Justice Issues. http://www.epa.gov/evaluate/about_ innovations3.htm. Environmental Protection Agency: Public Involvement Activ- ities Questionnaires http://www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/feedback/index. html. Environmental Protection Agency: Public Involvement Tech- niques. Links page to descriptions for techniques in Public Involvement. http://www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/ techniques.htm. Federal Highway Administration/Federal Transit Adminis- tration: Public Involvement Techniques. This is a reference work that makes a wide variety of pub- lic involvement techniques available to transportation agencies. It includes the 14 techniques originally pub- lished in Innovations in Public Involvement for Trans- portation Planning. http://www.planning.dot.gov/Pitool/ toc-foreword.asp. International Association for Public Participation: Knowl- edge Network. Resource Database. http://www.iap2.civicore.com/index. cfm?fuseaction=resources.main. International Association for Public Participation: Public Participation Toolkit. Techniques to Share Information. http://iap2.org/ associations/4748/files/06Dec_Toolbox.pdf. International Association for Public Participation: Spectrum of Public Participation. Levels of Public Impact. http://iap2.org/associations/4748/ files/IAP2%20Spectrum_vertical.pdf. 32 Local Government Commission: Public Involvement. Provides a guidebook discussing techniques and case studies to improve participation in land use planning that discusses the importance of public involvement in the planning process and offers a variety of visual/graphic techniques for facilitating such involvement. http://www. lgc.org/issues/communitydesign/public_participation.html. National Charrette Institute: Resources. NCI Tools and Resources Free for Download. http://www. charretteinstitute.org/resources/. Sacramento State Center for Collaborative Policy: Collabo- rative Public Involvement. Outline to effective Collaborative Public Involvement. http://www.csus.edu/ccp/publicinvolvement/. The Harwood Institute for Public Innovation. A non-profit, non-partisan organization that seeks nothing less than to spark fundamental change and authentic hope in American public life. http://www.theharwoodinstitute. org/ht/d/Home/pid/176. Transportation Research Board: Visualization in Transporta- tion Committee. The scope of the Committee is to foster and disseminate collaborative exchange and research that enhances the useable knowledge of visualization methods and tech- nologies for their potential in addressing critical trans- portation issues of today, as well as promoting innovative approaches to society’s transportation needs of the future. http://www.trbvis.org/MAIN/TRBVIS_HOME.html. U.S. Census Bureau: American FactFinder. This provides a search feature of the Census Bureau’s web- site that helps users locate data quickly and easily from the 1997 Economic Census, the ACS, the 1990 Census, the Census 2000 Dress Rehearsal, and Census 2000. Access to thematic maps and reference maps that include roads and boundary information is available via FactFinder. http:// factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html?_lang=en. U.S. Department of Transportation: Useful Online Publica- tions and Websites for Community Impact Assessment. This website provides useful Online Publications and Websites for Community Impact Assessment. http://www. planning.dot.gov/Documents/Resources/usefulOnline.htm #publicInvolve. METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION WEBSITES Brevard MPO: Public Involvement. Public Involvement Website. Guideline for public involve- ment activities to be conducted by the Brevard MPO. The PIP contains the goals and policies of the MPO for actively engaging the public in the transportation planning process. The PIP is reviewed and updated at least every three years. http://www.brevardmpo.com/PIP.htm.

33 Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission: Public Involvement. Public Involvement Website. Our goal is to satisfy the broadest constituency possible by fostering cooperation among member governments, private sector organizations, and the general public. To do so, we work closely with a wide variety of groups, including the Pennsylvania and New Jersey DOTs, community affairs and environmental protec- tion agencies in these two states, the federal government, and regional transportation providers. http://www.dvrpc. org/publicaffairs/publicinvolvement.htm. Metropolitan Washington COG: Public Involvement. Public Involvement Process. On December 19, 2007, TRB adopted a new Participation Plan that outlines pub- lic involvement activities for constituencies with different levels of understanding and interest in the TRB process. The new Participation Plan calls for TRB to be more strategic in targeting its activities to serve the needs of three different constituencies. The Participation Plan focuses on tailoring outreach and involvement activities to the “involved” public, the “informed” public, and the “interested” public. http://www.mwcog.org/transportation/ involved/process.asp. New York Metropolitan Transportation Council. NYMTC Website. The New York Metropolitan Trans- portation Council (NYMTC) is an association of govern- ments, transportation providers, and environmental agen- cies that is the MPO for New York City, Long Island, and the lower Hudson River Valley. http://www.nymtc.org/. STATE DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION WEBSITES FDOT: Efficient Transportation Decision Making. As part of the Efficient Transportation Decision Making (ETDM) process, FDOT has implemented an Internet- accessible interactive database tool called the Environ- mental Screening Tool (EST). EST provides data for proj- ect analysis and assists in conducting more detailed public involvement activities. http://etdmpub.fla-etat.org/est/. Idaho DOT: A Guide to Public Involvement for Programs, Planning and Projects. The knowledge generated through the public involvement process is vital if the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) is to develop effective and efficient transportation projects. ITD can make better decisions by attending to public involvement planning, integrating public involve- ment activities into the development process, and docu- menting these activities. http://itd.idaho.gov/manuals/ Online_Manuals/Current_Manuals/PIG/Guidebook.pdf. Minnesota DOT: Public & Stakeholder Participation—Hear Every Voice. Guidance to involving and engaging the public. http:// www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/publicinvolvement/. Montana DOT: MDT’s Guide to Public Involvement. The Transportation Planning Division of the Montana DOT (MDT) is involved in a variety of programs and efforts that require constant interaction with our customers. This guide describes the various methods the Division uses to involve the public in Division activities, and also includes a chart that provides the names of staff people responsible for various Division programs. It should also be noted that the Division develops customized public involvement methods for special efforts. http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/6000/ 6400/6456/pubinvhb.pdf. POVERTY AND CULTURAL PUBLICATIONS Payne, R., A Framework for Understanding Poverty, aha! Process, Inc., Highlands, Tex., 2005 People in poverty face challenges virtually unknown to those in middle class or wealth—challenges from both obvious and hidden sources. The reality of being poor brings out a survival mentality and turns attention away from opportunities taken for granted by everyone else. If you work with people in poverty, some understanding of how different their world is from yours will be invaluable. Whatever your background, this book gives you practical, real-world support and guidance to improve your effec- tiveness in working with people from all socioeconomic backgrounds. Payne, R., P.E. Devol, T.D. Smith, and T. Dreussi, Bridges Out of Poverty: Strategies for Professionals and Communi- ties, aha! Process, Inc., Highlands, Tex., 2001 If you did not grow up in poverty, you may be unaware of the “hidden rules” that govern many aspects of life for the poor. People in poverty are often in survival mode, where the future holds no promise, and support systems taken for granted in middle class and wealth are nonexistent. If you work with people from poverty, only a deeper understanding of their challenges and strengths will help you partner with them to create opportunities for success. Payne, R. and D. Krabill, Hidden Rules of Class, aha! Process, Inc., Highlands, Tex., 2002 Individuals and organizations bring three things to the table: resources, connection (relationships), and hidden rules. The successful fit of the individual into the organiza- tion is largely determined by how well these three elements from the individual mesh with those of the organization. This book identifies and articulates a number of issues that are alive in the workplace, but are seldom articu- lated. It looks at how issues of class determine one’s ability to survive or move to a different level in the workplace.

Morrison, T. and W. Conaway, Kiss, Bow, or Shake Hands, Adams Media, Avon, Mass., 2006 Most experts in cultural orientation consider U.S. citizens to be close minded. This book was designed as a guide to doing business in more than 60 countries. Each country is described in terms of the following sections: • What is your cultural IQ (cultural knowledge); • Tips on doing business (business-related highlights); • Country background (history, type of government, language, and the perspectives from the country’s viewpoint); • Know before you go (natural and human hazards); • Cultural orientation (cognitive styles, negotiation strate- gies, and value systems); • Business practices (punctuality, appointments, local time, negotiating, and business entertaining); and • Protocol (greetings, titles/forms of address, gestures, gifts, and dress). Axtell, R.E., Gestures, the Do’s and Taboos of Body Language Around the World, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., White Plains, N.Y., 1998 This book addresses gestures and cross-cultural commu- nications and discusses the following topics: • The power of gestures, • The most popular gestures, • Special types of gestures, • Gestures head to toe, • The ultimate gesture, • The innocent abroad’s shortlist, and • Country by country listings. Axtell, R.E., Do’s and Taboos Around the World, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., White Plains, N.Y., 1994 34 This book was created for American businessmen and busi- nesswomen who regularly venture abroad seeking new commerce. It provides information relative to the following: • Protocol, customs, and etiquette; • Hand gestures and body language; • A quick guide to the ways of the world; • Gift giving and receiving; • American jargon and baffling idioms; and • Tips for incoming visitors to the United States. POVERTY AND CULTURAL WEBSITES United Kingdom Department of Transport, Social Inclusion— Minority, Ethnic and Faith Communities’ Transport Issues This website addresses the specific travel needs of minor- ity, ethnic, and faith community groups. The Department of Transport identified specific problems that were being experienced by minority, ethnic, and faith groups when using the public transportation system. They examined ways in which these problems could be addressed by dis- cussing the problems with hundreds of people and organi- zations that had an interest in public transport. The outcome of the work was a guidance pack and an accompanying video that are intended to be used by transport planners and operators to improve accessibility of transport for all. http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/inclusion/. University of Washington, Harborview Medical Center in Seattle, Washington This website provides culture-specific pages on 13 different African, Asian, and Hispanic ethnic groups. It has prepared a cultural profile of each ethnic group that includes infor- mation about country of origin, language, interpersonal rela- tionships, marriage, family, kinship, religious beliefs and practices, and community structure, in additional to medical considerations. http://ethnomed.org/.

Next: Appendix A - Interview Guide »
Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Synthesis 407: Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources explores information about staff and agency experiences in the application of successful and cost-effective strategies and implementation techniques used to engage the public in the development of transportation plans and projects. The report also examines unsuccessful strategies.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!