Assessing and Comparing Environmental Performance of Major Transit Investments (2012)

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.

K-1 Appendix K – Stakeholders Interviewed and Interview Guides  K.1 Contacts for State-of-Practice Survey Table K.1 lists stakeholders interviewed by organization type. The stakeholders represented 20 separate organizations in total. Table K.1 Contacts for State-of-Practice Survey Organization Name Title/Position Transit Agencies New York City Metropolitan Transportation Authority (NYCMTA) Naomi Renek MTA Grant Management Projjal Dutta MTA Strategic Initiatives Thomas Abdullah NYC Transit Environmental Engineering Angelo Elmi NYC Transit Environmental Engineering Emil Dul NYC Transit Environmental Engineering Jack Dean MTA Planning Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) (Philadelphia) Marion Coker Manager, Strategic Business Planning and Sustainability Erik Johannson Senior Planner, Strategic Business Planning and Sustainability Chicago Regional Transit Authority Mark Minor Project Manager, Regional Coordination Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (CMTA) (Austin) Todd Hemingson Vice President, Strategic Planning and Development Sacramento Regional Transit District (SRTA) Paul Marx Director, Office of Planning Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Oxo Slayer Transportation Planner, SVRT Program Office San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) Timothy Papandreou Assistant Department Director, Transportation Planning and Development

K-2 Table K.1 Contacts for State-of-Practice Survey Organization Name Title/Position Transit Agencies (continued) TriMet Jessica Tump Planner (Project Planning), Capital Projects Alan Lehto Director (Project Planning), Capital Projects Eric Hesse Strategic Planning Analyst, Office of the General Manager American Public Transportation Association (APTA) Robert Padgette Director of Policy Development and Research Federal Transit Administration (FTA) – Office of the Administrator Richard Steinmann Senior Advisor to the Administrator FTA – Office of Budget and Policy Tina Hodges Program Analyst FTA – Office of Planning and Environment Elizabeth Day Director, Project Planning Dwayne Weeks Community Planner Antoinette Quagliata Environmental Protection Specialist Joe Ossi Environmental Protection Specialist Other Government Agency Columbia River Crossing (Oregon DOT) Richard Brandman Project Manager Florida DOT, Environmental Management Office Peter McGilvray Environmental Resource Manager Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) Bob Dean Planning Director Metropolitan Transportation Commission Lisa Klein Environmental Protection Agency Office of Smart Growth John Thomas Transportation – Land Use Expert Faith Cole Environmental Protection Specialist Advocacy Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) Deron Lovaas Director, Smart Growth Program Justin Horner Jennifer Sass Chesapeake Bay Foundation Lee Epstein Director, Land Programs Institute for Transport and Development Policy (ITDP) Michael Replogle Global Policy Director Academic Simon Fraser University Anthony Perl Professor of Urban Studies and Political Science and Director of Urban Studies Program Oregon State University Gail Achterman Director, Institute for Natural Resources Jimmy Kagan Information Program Manager, INR Note: Environmental Protection Specialist with the FTA Office of Planning and Environment, on rotation to the EPA Smart Growth Office until December 2010.

K-3  K.2 Stakeholder Interview Guides Separate interview guides were developed for transit agencies and for other stakeholders interviewed. These guides were used as a loose topic guide for the interviews, and the actual discussion flow was generally customized to the respondent. In most cases, guides were provided to respondents in advance of the interview. Transit Agencies (Interviewer: This survey tool is intended as a topic guide rather than a strict question and answer session. Participants are encouraged to share information about their experience with performance measures at any point and regarding any topic, even if not addressed directly.) Thank you for your participation in Transit Cooperative Research Program Project H-41, Assessing and Comparing Environmental Performance of Major Transit Investments. Through this project we are identifying measures that could be used in FTA’s New Starts process or by project sponsors to evaluate the environmental performance of proposed transit investments. We are interested in how transit agencies and others have evaluated the environmental performance of transit investments. We are interested in situations where you may have gone beyond the basic reporting required for the NEPA process and used environmental performance as a way of justifying a project or making comparisons among various transit and/or highway alternatives. Do you have experience with environmental performance measures, as opposed to only impacts and mitigation? Are there other staff we should speak with, either in your department or another? [If needed] Environmental performance, as defined for our project, may include: • Energy use and GHG emissions; • Air quality and pollutant emissions; • Community quality of life (noise, light, aesthetics, etc.); • Public health; • Ecology/habitat (including water quality); • Land use/smart growth/sprawl; and • Other performance measures as defined by the project sponsor. [If needed] The results of this interview will be included in our synopsis of current and emerging practices used to measure and compare environmental performance. We would like to discuss:

K-4 • Specific measures that you have used or proposed; • How these measures have been used in planning and evaluation; • Methodologies; • Level of effort (data gathering, calculation, etc.) and cost; • Satisfaction with the measures and lessons learned; and • Your thoughts on future environmental performance measurement. Respondent Name: Organization/Type of Organization: Title/Department: Contact Information: Experience with FTA/New Starts/Transportation/Performance Measures: Performance Measures – General 1. Has your agency justified a proposed transit project based in part on its environmental benefits? If so, what types of benefits? (If examples are needed: energy, GHG, air quality, public health, ecology/habitat, community benefits, land use.) 2. Has your agency used measures of environmental performance to compare different project or investment alternatives? (Including different transit alternatives, or transit versus highway.) If so, which ones? Which did you consider to be the most important or useful measures? 3. Why were these measures or metrics selected? By what process? 4. How were the measures and results used? − To satisfy NEPA requirements; − To screen alternatives and select a preferred alternative; − To document the environmental benefits of transit in order to build or justify support for the project; and − Other (explain). 5. Did you use the measures to make comparisons across modes, or just for comparing transit alternatives?

K-5 Performance Measures – Detail 6. Did you consider the impacts of construction activities, or just the impacts of the transit project’s operations? 7. [If energy/GHG] Did you look at life-cycle impacts (e.g., from fuel production and transport) or just vehicle energy use and tailpipe emissions? 8. Did you consider secondary impacts, such as those related to changes in land use and growth patterns? If so, how? Pre- Versus Post-Project Evaluation 9. In cases where you projected environmental performance, have you gone back to assess whether the project performed as expected? 10. Has your agency conducted any assessment of the environmental performance of existing transit projects or services? If so, which projects or services, and what envi- ronmental measures were examined? Methodology 11. What data sources and methodologies did you use to assess each of the metrics you identified above? 12. What was the approximate cost and/or level of effort (hours of staff time) to document particular environmental measures? (If respondent is not sure, ask for a qualitative assessment – little, moderate, a lot of time/effort.) Satisfaction and Lessons Learned 13. Would you use the same performance measures and/or calculation methods again? What would you change? 14. Are there other performance measures you considered, or would like to use, but don’t have the data, methods, or resources to estimate? 15. Are there any other obstacles you face in evaluating environmental performance meas- ures or implementing this type of evaluation (not required, performance measurement is not a familiar/accepted concept at the agency, etc.)? Other Resources 16. Does your organization have plans to measure the environmental performance of tran- sit projects in the future? 17. What research or information would be most valuable to you in measuring the environmental performance of your transit investments?

K-6 18. Given your knowledge of the FTA New Starts evaluation process, are there specific environmental evaluation criteria and metrics you would recommend to be part of the program? Are there any you would recommend not be included? 19. Please provide a copy of any studies that you have performed, or resources you have relied on for information. Nontransit Agencies Thank you for your participation in Transit Cooperative Research Program Project H-41, Assessing and Comparing Environmental Performance of Major Transit Investments. Through this project we are identifying measures that could be used in FTA’s New Starts process or by project sponsors to evaluate the environmental performance of proposed transit investments. We are interested in how transit agencies and others have evaluated the environmental performance of transit investments. We are interested in situations where you may have gone beyond the basic reporting required for the NEPA process and used environmental performance as a way of justifying a project or making comparisons among various transit and/or highway alternatives. Do you have experience with environmental performance measures, as opposed to only impacts and mitigation? Are there other staff we should speak with, either in your department or another? (Note) Environmental performance, as defined for our project, may include: • Energy use and GHG emissions; • Air quality and pollutant emissions; • Community quality of life (noise, light, aesthetics, etc.); • Public health; • Ecology/habitat (including water quality); • Land use/smart growth/sprawl; and • Other performance measures as defined by the project sponsor. Respondent Name: Organization/Type of Organization: Title/Department: Contact Information: Experience with FTA/New Starts/Transportation/Performance Measures:

K-7 Performance Measures – General 1. Have [you, your agency, your organization] evaluated the environmental performance of transit – either in general, or for particular projects? If so, what types of performance did you examine? (If examples are needed: energy, GHG, air quality, public health, ecology/habitat, community benefits, land use.) What specific measures did you use? Why were these measures developed and how have they been used? What measures have you found most useful? 2. Have [you, your agency, your organization] developed proposed measures of the envi- ronmental performance of transit? If so, which ones? For what purpose? Performance Measures – Detail 3. Did you consider life-cycle impacts, including construction, vehicle and fuel production, or other impacts? Or just impacts from vehicle operations? 4. Did you consider secondary impacts, such as those related to changes in land use and growth patterns? If so, how? Pre- Versus Post-Project Evaluation 5. Have you made any comparisons of actual versus projected environmental performance of transit projects? Methodology 6. What data sources and methodologies did you use to assess each of the metrics you identified above? Satisfaction and Lessons Learned 7. Was information on environmental performance measures shared with or used by other agencies/organizations? In what way? (e.g., transit metrics used by MPO in developing long-range plan, or by advocacy groups to support project). 8. Would you use the same performance measures and/or methods again? What would you change? 9. Are there other performance measures you considered, or would like to use, but don’t have the data, methods, or resources to estimate? 10. Are there any other obstacles you face in evaluating environmental performance meas- ures or implementing this type of evaluation? (For example, is the concept of perfor- mance measurement endorsed or accepted by the local/regional transit agency/ agencies you work with?)

K-8 Other Resources 11. Does your organization have plans to measure the environmental performance of tran- sit projects in the future? 12. What do you feel are the most significant environmental benefits and disbenefits of transit investments? 13. What research or information would be most valuable to you in measuring the environmental performance of transit? 14. Given your knowledge of the FTA New Starts evaluation process, are there specific environmental evaluation criteria and metrics you would recommend to be part of the program? Are there any you recommend avoiding? Why? 15. Please provide a copy of any studies that you have performed, or resources you have relied on for information. 16. Is there anyone else we should talk to about environmental performance measurement for transit?