Healthy Communities & Equity …in Urban/Transportation Planning September 8, 2022
What is a Healthy Community? “A healthy community is one in which local groups from all parts of the community work together to prevent disease and make healthy living options accessible.” Source: Center for Disease Control and Prevention (https://blogs.cdc.gov/publichealthmatters/2015/09/a-healthycommunity-is-a-prepared-community/)
This Session will… • Address a variety of currently less foreseen equity issues in transportation planning. • Provide insightful thoughts regarding the challenges of healthy communities and equity. • Provide presentations addressing: • Trail development given land use and equity. • A survey of FDOT, MPOs, and Transit Agencies (in Florida) • Urban/transportation planning for vulnerable communities based on modeling.
Challenges in Creating Healthy Communities and Equity • Gentrification/Fragmentation • Lack of Community Engagement • Lack or Provision of Personal Choice or Opportunity • Capitalism & Class • Your Thoughts? Source: The Foundation for Tomorrow
Healthy Communities – Big Strides Older Ways • Emissions • Environmental Impacts Newer Ways • Food Desserts (Less) • Transit Resources • Bike/Ped Trail Access • Healthcare Access • Healthcare Facility Outcomes
Photo Credit: Shailah Thornton
Your Speakers
• Noël P. Comeaux, AICP, PMP: Director of Policy and Planning for the NEFRC which addresses Healthcare Access, Resiliency, Economic Development, and Land Use. This is based on his 25 years’ experience consulting (recently Healthy Communities, LLC) in sustainable goods movement, bike/ped planning, healthcare access, and federal policy/funding.
• Curtis Ostrodka, AICP, LEED AP: Director of Smart Communities for VHB with almost 20 years’ experience in urban and environmental planning, including future-ready smart cities, advanced air mobility, community redevelopment and healthy community design.
• Daniel Crotty, AICP: Transit and Mobility Practice Leader for SEPI, Inc. focused on developing the firm's new Transit and Mobility practice. He specializes in publicly managed transportation systems on a national level.
• Ned Baier, AICP: Planning Manager for Volkert based on more than 35 years’ experience in urban planning, local government, and MPO transportation planning.
Contact Information & APA Hi story Noël P. Comeaux • American Institute of Certified Planners • Project Management Professional • COO, Healthy Communities, LLC • Director, Policy and Planning • Northeast Florida Regional Commission • 703-926-4618 APA Support • Past Membership Chair, Transp. Plan. Div. • Past-Chair, Transp. Plan. Div. • State of Transportation Planning • Co-Chair, Division Council Policy Committee • Current Surface Transportation Policy • Current Surface Transportation PolicyFreight
Transportation & Equity …in Trail Development
September 8, 2022
Equity AssessmentNeeds • Identifies Transportation Needs of Underserved Communities: • Low Income Households • People with Disabilities • Minorities • People Who are Too Old or Young to Drive • People Who Have Limited English Proficiency
Transportation Equity Needs Assessment • Transportation equity is a civil and human right • “… equal access to transportation means providing all individuals … [an] equal opportunity to succeed.” • Title VI Environmental Justice • Civil Rights Act of 1964 • Executive Order 12898 (1994) • Executive Order 13985 (2021)
Equity Action Plan 2022 • Wealth Creation • Power of Community • Equity Screening Component • Meaningful Public Participation • Enforce Legislation • Civil Rights Act of 1964 • NEPA 1960 • Interventions • Disadvantaged Communities • Discretionary Grant Applications • Number of Projects • Expand Access • Multimodal Transportation • Mobility • Access • Affordability
• Self-Guided Walking Tour • Explains African American Influence on St. Petersburg, FL • Focuses on the 22nd Street Corridor, nicknamed the “Deuces” • Community divided by I-275 • Story of African American Communities • Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yma-iAPj22c&t=4s African American Heritage Trail
Transportation Equity Needs Assessment • Elements of the Transportation Equity Toolkit: • Community Characteristics • Access to Opportunity • Environment • Safety • Active Transportation • Public Transportation • Investments and Burdens
Transportation Equity Needs Assessment • Elements of the Transportation Equity Toolkit: • Identify Communities of Concern • Tools: GIS • Data: Socioeconomic Data • Conduct Inventory and Mobility Needs Assessment • Tools: GIS • Modeling, Field Work, Public Involvement … • Use the Toolkit to Involve the Communities
Collier and Lee County Projects • Golden Gate Walkability Study • Winkler Canal Trail Feasibility Study • Village of Estero Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan • Lee County Rails-to-Trails Feasibility Study
Golden WalkabilityGateStudy • Assessed Pedestrian Network • Inventory of the Multi-Modal Network • Bicycle and Pedestrian Crash Data • Walking Audit • Safety within School Zones • Overall Score: E • Directness • Continuity • Street Crossings • Visual Interest and Amenities • Security (e.g., lighting)
Winkler FeasibilityCanalStudy • Evaluated AlternativesTwo • Identified: • Income for Households • Minority Populations • Environmental Hazards • Cultural Impacts
Village of Estero Bicycle and MasterPedestrianPlan • Projects Identified: • 73.5 miles of new or improved sidewalks, bikeways and trails • Plan Analyzed: • Transit Connectivity • Connectivity to Schools • Crash Data
Lee MPO RailsTrail Study • AssessmentEnvironmental • CPTED • Team is evaluating language with DEI Lens • Evaluation Criteria Included: • Low Income Households Served • Proximity to Essential Businesses and Schools • User Experience
Healthy Mobility Curt Ostrodka, AICP, LEED AP SeptemberAPA-FL 8, 2022
A data-informed approach to Healthy Community Design
Recognition of clear linkage between health and built environment, particularly mobility × No consensus on how to obtain discrete health data × No models readily available × No universal design standards
Model Inputs
Healthy Community Design Principles OpenData GIS + +
Density, housing mix and stability, vacancyhousingzoning,industries,pollutingbrownfields,foodretailoptions,ageandquality,
TransportationInfrastructure InstitutionsDestinationsand Land Use Others DeterminantsSocial
Parks and districtsbanking,culturalcommunityhealthcare,playgrounds,schools,gardens,institutions,libraries,businessandjobs
Existing Conditions Indicators
Sidewalk miles, highway miles, bike lanes, parking, transit, block length, commute walkability,mode,vehicle miles traveled, street width, safety
Tree cover, internet access, noise, air impermeablequality,surface, water quality, accessibilityuniversal
Income, employment, race and ethnicity, discrimination, social vulnerability, rent burden, public expenditures, school quality, educational attainment, age, food security, civic participation, language and literacy
Identify communitycontributeimprovementsphysicalthattobetterhealth
Analyze land use, urban design, and mobility factors that communityaffect health
Healthy Mobility Model Goals
Establish baseline health assessment and trends for a community
Forecast conditionsoutcomescommunitylikelyhealthor
Transportation Studies - look specifically at transportation access factors and indicators like walkability, micro-mobility, traffic, air quality and more
Interventions/Alternatives Assessment – determine which built environment changes would be most positively associated with better health outcomes.
Alternatives can be compared to one another and ranked
Neighborhood Studies - assess built environment and social factors most connected with health to target solutions.
Prioritization - factor community health considerations into decision making on budgeting and prioritization
How can the Healthy Mobility Model be used? a baseline health profile in conjunction with existing conditions work
Establish
p l a n h i l l s b o r o u g h . o r g
Case Study: Hillsborough TPO Community Health Risk Assessment
Poor Mental Health 14.7 12.3 13.6
Physical Inactivity 27 26.5 26
Crude Prevalence (% of Overall Population)
Poor Physical Health 13.5 10.3 12.5
Sources: CDC, Division of Population Health. PLACES Data [online]. 2021. URL: https://www.cdc.gov/PLACES.; CDC, Division of Population Health. BRFSS Prevalence & Trends Data [online]. BRFSS Prevalence & Trends Data: Home | DPH | CDC.
Chronic Disease Hillsborough1 Florida National
High Blood Pressure 30.9 33.5 32.6
Asthma 8.1 7.3 8.9
Coronary Heart Disease 5.7 7.6 6.2 Diabetes 11.8 11.8 11
High Cholesterol 30.4 33.4 33.6 Obesity 30.4 28.4 31.3
Prevalence of Health Conditions by Geography
• Combined risk takes the percent change from the county average of the 6 chronic diseases and adds them together for a combined score.
Health Risk Assessment by Census Tract
• The combined score is distributed along a normal curve.
• Tracts categorized as of “concern” are 1.5-2.5 standard deviations below the combined average score, with tracts identified as “poor” with combined scores lower than that.
p l a n h i l l s b o r o u g h . o r g
• Tracts categorized as “good” are greater than 1.5 standard deviations above the average combined score
JusticeEnvironmental(EJ)Areas
• EJ neighborhoods with below average health outcomes include East and West Tampa, Drew Park, Town N’ Country, Progress Village, Sulphur Springs and Ruskin.
p l a n h i l l s b o r o u g h . o r g
• EJ Areas as defined in the Plan Hillsborough Nondiscrimination and Equity Plan, are block groups in the top 10th percentile of lowincome households or racial/ethnic minority populations.
Health Risk Assessment
Environmental Justice Area Health Risk Assessment
Good 0 0% 10 2% 10 1%
Number of Tracts Share Populationof Number of Tracts Share Populationof Number of Tracts Share Populationof
Below Average 38 36% 22 4% 57 12% Concern 13 9% 6 2% 22 4% Poor 2 1% 6 0% 4 1% Total 100 100% 213 100% 313 100%
• Approximately 46% of the population in census tracts with EJ areas are categorized as below average, concern or poor in terms of health risk , and only 16% of the population in these tracts have above average health outcomes.
p l a n h i l l s b o r o u g h . o r g
EJ Areas Non-EJ Areas Hillsborough County
Above Average 13 16% 83 31% 96 27% Average 34 38% 86 29% 126 31%
• By comparison, only 6% of the population in tracts that do not contain EJ areas have below average health risk, and 33% of the population in these tracts have above average or higher health outcomes.
• US 301 (C3R)
• W. Platt Street/ W. Cleveland Street (C5)
p l a n h i l l s b o r o u g h . o r g
• Lithia Pinecrest Road (C2)
Study Areas
• E. Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard (C4)
• Hillsborough Avenue (C3C)
p l a n h i l l s b o r o u g h . o r g Health Indicators Average Prevalence PressureBloodHigh Asthma CHD Diabetes CholesterolHigh Obesity PhysicalNoActivity MentalPoorHealth PhysicalPoorHealth AreasStudy E MLK Jr (C4) 42.3% 11.2% 7.7% 17.6% 30.7% 39.8% 37.7% 20.6% 19.7% Hillsborough (C3C) 27.4% 8.1% 4.8% 9.4% 28.1% 28.7% 24.6% 15.4% 12.4% Lithia Pinecrest (C2) 27.3% 8.2% 4.6% 8.0% 29.7% 27.1% 20.7% 14.5% 11.6% US 301 (C3R) 32.7% 8.1% 6.6% 10.8% 31.3% 28.4% 25.5% 14.2% 13.2% W Platt/ W Cleveland (C5) 25.1% 8.6% 4.2% 8.2% 24.7% 26.6% 22.1% 16.5% 11.0% County 30.9% 8.1% 5.7% 11.8% 30.4% 30.4% 27.0% 14.7% 13.5% State 33.5% 7.3% 7.6% 11.8% 33.4% 28.4% 26.5% 10.3% 12.3%
Urban Design/Environment and Health
• Urban Design and Access: street intersection density and walkability associated with improved health outcomes , no significance for bikeways or greenways
Distribution of EJ Area PM 2.5 Concentrations
• Environmental Exposure: High traffic proximity and poor air quality associated with poor health outcomes across the board . High shares of people living in pre 1960 housing (lead paint indicator) also associated with poor health outcomes.
p l a n h i l l s b o r o u g h . o r g
• Transportation: a higher share of car commuters, long commutes, high crash areas, and high shares of population with no access to a vehicle associated with most poor health outcomes
• While controlling for socioeconomic factors, elements of the local environment are associated with patterns of disease burden
› Increased transportation cost burden is related to poorer health outcomes
› Unequal distribution of wealth and resources is related to poorer health outcomes in Hillsborough County
› Street intersection density is associated with better health outcomes across a number of categories, especially those related to physical activity.
› A higher share of car commuters equates with poorer health outcomes related to diseases associated with physical activity. However, the presence of active facilities such as bike lanes or greenways, did not show significance.
› Higher traffic proximity and poor air quality was associated with poor health outcomes across the board.
p l a n h i l l s b o r o u g h . o r g
Key Takeaways
› Reduce Traffic Proximity and Air Pollution: In more urban context classifications (C4 and C5) prioritize treatments that reduce traffic proximity and air pollution, as these areas bear the brunt of the car centric metro area while they have lower shares of the population using cars.
p l a n h i l l s b o r o u g h . o r g
Prioritization of Complete Street Treatments
› Incentivize Non-Car Commutes: High transportation cost burden is tied to poorer health outcomes, and cost burden is highest in more rural areas. Bolstering public systems or carpooling options in rural areas could help improve health outcomes.
› Improve Active Facilities Ratios: Increase pedestrian street intersection density and active facilities
› Improve Safety: Urban context classifications have a higher rate of all types of crashes, bicycle and pedestrian crashes, and serious and fatal injury crashes, which were tied to poor physical health outcomes.
CurtQuestions?Ostrodka, AICP, LEED AP Director of Smart costrodka@vhb.comCommunities
