Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/03/2011

Home

�gsftk�'g;answers cumulatll a a ist we sffa first subscribers T s feat re wil fle g ailgE = arse!ectE tin hi raet ceatannowic cj;times;A erea Ef onlh s closed, the nswers.wi(l ( sa yeti c r an=o lines:arc hroAghtheA'PA;ZoningPracticewebzpages Y to find a wide range of necessary resources. Assessment involves establishing baseline conditions, impacts, alternatives, and mitiga- tion for the proposed action in order to report and evaluate the likely health outcomes —such as unnecessary exposure to air pollution and particulate matter —and their effects, such as increased respiratory disease and asthma, on the targeted population(s). Assessing the avail- able information, research, and resources will allow HIA practitioners to evaluate risks and benefits in light of the specific details of the individual HIA. The assessment should also clearly identify who may be affected and how they will be affected. During the reporting phase, the find- ings from the HIA should be developed in such a way so as to facilitate health -based recommendations to aid the decision -mak- ing process with respect to the proposed action. Recommendations should also include a viable plan for implementation. Involvement and input from the various stakeholders in the process is crucial. Fi- nally, the monitoring phase allows for con- tinuing evaluation by engaged stakeholders and others in order to track the outcomes of a decision and its implementation. HISTORY AND GROWTH OF HIA USE HIA in the U.S. evolved from ElAs required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) or state -enacted "mini-NEPAs" in response to the need for a more inter- disciplinary approach to health inequities. Historically, ElAs were criticized for failing to take into consideration the effects of projects on health generally, rather than evaluating only toxic exposures and sources of biophysical concerns unrelated to a "com- .associate`ed terra Alban' 3eComm ttE udean a prehensive and systematic approach to hu- man health impacts" (Bhatia and Wernham zoo8). However, by the late 198os, the term "environment" grew to include social, cultural, and human health considerations, which in turn led to the growth of interest in the health outcomes of development proj- ects and other land -use decisions. In 1999, the World Health Organization produced the Gothenburg Consensus Paper, which intro- duced and clearly outlined the concept of HIA and eventually led to the development and implementation of HIA as a method for evaluating the potential effects of changes to the built environment. Today, HIAs may be linked to ElAs or they may be conducted as independent processes. While ElAs do occasionally include health risk assessments, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency does conduct formal health -effects forecasting as part of legally mandated cost -benefit analyses, HIAs are not routinely required or performed in any setting in the U.S. More- over, as contrasted with EIA preparation by engineers and land -use or environmental consulting firms, HIA preparation is typically performed by public health professionals. The use of HIA, therefore, has relied on vol- untary inclusion of such assessment into the development projector plan, rather than the required processes of EIA under NEPA. HIA vs. EIA Discussions surrounding the potential bene- fits from the increased use of HIA have raised questions about whether such assessments can, and should, be mandatory and whether the means are available for incorporating HIA into existing legislative, regulatory, or admin- istrative procedures (Ko zo11). While some proponents agree that conducting an HIA during the course of a required EIA could save time and money, others are concerned that the inclusion of an HIA into an EIA will dimin- ish the importance and relevance of the pub- lic health issues and could lead to legal chal- lenges. Opponents of HIA have also argued i:A health impact assessment; ofthis'-stretch ofth e Buford j lighwayinAtlanta evaluated the health effects redeveloping the roadwayto reduce the number of lanes add sidewalks, crosswalks;;;,;_; and on:streetparkirig, all` with -the goal'of makingthe area less dangerous for people bit 4fo ot. orbike: ZONINGPRACTICE io.ai AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION J page 3