CHAPTER 9

Sustainability and Environmental Considerations

Context

Transportation infrastructure has both positive and negative impacts on the environment and the communities surrounding it. For example, individuals and businesses may be displaced to construct infrastructure, but the benefits of the infrastructure to communities have varying degrees of value. Also, public transportation can decrease emissions per individual passenger because any mode of public transit will generally have a higher passenger density than a private vehicle. Historically, transportation planning and infrastructure development practices in the United States did not necessarily create access for all, and certain communities were more negatively impacted than others. These negative impacts are well documented (U.S. Department of Transportation 2023; Thomas et al. 2022).

Weather Vulnerability and Resilience

Ground Transportation Vulnerability

Ground transportation is vulnerable to climate change in a number of ways:

• Extreme weather events: Extreme weather events can have a significant impact on transportation infrastructure and services, leading to disruptions and increased repair costs. Examples of extreme weather events include
  • – Heavy rain, which can cause flooding that washes out roads, rails, and bridges, making them unsafe or unusable for travel;
  • – Wildfires, which may damage infrastructure or reduce visibility due to smoke; and
  • – Heavy snowfall, which can cause infrastructure closures and transportation delays.
• Sea level rise: The rise in sea level can have a significant impact on ground transportation and infrastructure, particularly in coastal regions. Coastal highways, rails, and bridges may become inundated with water, making them unsafe for travel. In addition, saltwater intrusion from the sea can damage transportation infrastructure, leading to increased repair costs and reduced transportation capacity.
• Increased temperatures: Higher temperatures can cause pavement to soften and expand. This can create rutting and potholes, particularly in high-traffic areas, and can place stress on bridge joints. Heat waves can also limit construction activities, particularly in areas with high humidity, and may lead to increased energy consumption and emissions through the increased demand for air conditioning and cooling systems in vehicles.

Since airports are essential to regional transportation plans, the regional planning commission frequently collaborates with airports to produce regional plans and policies. Understanding how ground transportation networks are impacted by climate change may also help the airport detect

Air Quality

Emissions

While ground access modes provide convenience and comfort for travelers utilizing airports, they also produce emissions that can have a negative impact on the environment. The transportation sector accounted for approximately 27 percent of the total emissions in 2020 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2022). With the increasing demand for air travel, airport ground access modes are an important category of transportation emissions to reduce. Each mode of transportation has a different level of emissions and thus a different impact on the environment, as described in the following sections.

Micromobility

This mode of transportation is typically human or battery powered, which gives micromobility the potential to provide an alternative to cars and other motorized vehicles. In fact, 37 percent of the total shared micromobility trips taken in North America replace car trips (North American Bikeshare & Scootershare Association 2022). Human-powered modes have no emissions since they are powered by the rider’s own energy. Battery-powered modes primarily depend on the source of electrical energy used to charge them. Electricity generated from renewable sources has low to no associated emissions. Furthermore, when looking at the life cycle of shared micromobility, there is a concern for battery disposal and waste and the net effect of emissions.

Connected and Automated Vehicles

These vehicles have the potential to reduce emissions in several ways. Since they are connected and automated, connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) can improve traffic flows and reduce congestion, which can lead to fewer emissions caused by vehicles idling in traffic. Additionally, CAVs can be equipped with sensors that measure air quality, enabling vehicles to take alternate routes that minimize emissions.

Conventional Buses

Buses can provide an efficient, low-emissions alternative to personal automobiles. Diesel engines, which power the majority of the global bus fleet, generate high nitrogen oxide (NO_x) emissions. As stated previously, the electrification of buses can help to reduce these emissions. Nordelöf et al. (2019) compared emissions between all-electric, hydrogenated vegetable oil, and diesel fuel vehicles and found that electric buses had the best potential to reduce airborne pollutants, depending on the source of the electricity. BloombergNEF’s (2018) report noted that emissions from the operation of battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) were about 39 percent lower on a per kilometer basis than those from average internal combustion vehicles.

Bus Rapid Transit

Bus rapid transit (BRT) systems usually have lower emissions per passenger compared to conventional bus systems due to their efficient use of resources like fuel and electricity. Similar to the conventional bus system, BRT systems transport more people than personal automobiles, thereby reducing the number of cars on the road and associated emissions. However, the actual emissions from the BRT system depend on the specific technology and infrastructure used, as well as the bus’s power source.

Personal Rapid Transit

Personal rapid transit (PRT) systems typically use small automated vehicles (AVs) that run on electricity, use dedicated guideways, and travel directly to their destination without stopping. Thus, they can be more energy efficient compared to the traditional public transit system. In general, the

greenhouse gas emissions from transportation systems (American Public Transportation Association 2018):

• Emissions per vehicle mile: This metric refers to the amount of emissions that are released into the atmosphere for each mile traveled by a vehicle. Emissions per vehicle mile primarily measures vehicle efficiency, and it is affected by the efficiency and type of fuel used by the vehicle.
• Emissions per revenue vehicle hour: This metric measures the amount of emissions emitted by a vehicle per hour of revenue service. Revenue service refers to the time during which a vehicle is actively transporting passengers or goods and earning revenue for the operator. This metric is commonly used in the context of public transportation; it considers the usage, age, and technology of the vehicle as well as the route, schedule, and traffic patterns of the service to provide a more accurate depiction of the environmental impact. This metric primarily measures operational efficiency, and it is affected by deadheading and congestion.
• Emissions per passenger-mile: This metric measures the amount of emissions emitted by a transportation mode per mile traveled by a passenger. It considers the number of passengers being transported, service productivity, and distance traveled, and it is affected by changes in ridership and load factors. This metric is the most used since it can be calculated for private or individual vehicles and public transit systems alike.

Steps are being taken to reduce the emissions associated with ground access modes. Many airports are investing in electric buses and shuttles to reduce emissions and installing EV-charging stations.

National Environmental Policy Act

Purpose

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is a unique environmental law that focuses on processes and procedures as opposed to standards and regulation. The purpose of NEPA is fourfold, as depicted in Figure 78 and the following numbered list:

1. Obtain input from the general public and public agencies with special expertise or jurisdiction over affected resources (e.g., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, local air quality agency, and local surface transportation agencies) about impacts of concern.
2. Inform the public, agencies that have jurisdiction to make decisions on the project, and the governing decision-maker (FAA, FTA, Federal Railroad Administration, etc.) about the consequences of the proposed projects.
3. When possible, work to avoid and minimize impacts.
4. Balance environmental impacts with transportation needs when making the decision.

NEPA integrates special purpose laws—including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and Migratory Bird Treaty Act—into a process that helps to balance the requirements of the special purpose laws and avoid conflicts that might have arisen if these laws were considered independently. The larger the project, the more it benefits from this coordination process.

How NEPA Works

The NEPA process is not triggered by projects themselves but by federal decisions on the projects. In an airport context, this would include any FAA grant money received to fund a project, FAA approval of a change to an Airport Layout Plan (ALP), or FAA approval of passenger facility charges (PFCs). For a cross-agency collaborative project—like an air-rail connection at an airport—it is likely that the grant money, and where it is coming from, will be the trigger for NEPA. In the case of multiple agencies working to complete the NEPA process, a joint NEPA process would be undertaken as a result of the One Federal Decision legislation, typically with the agency with the greatest jurisdiction taking the lead (e.g., on an airport, this would be the FAA). The NEPA process must be completed before the decisions are made; in the case of grant funding, NEPA must be completed before the decision to grant funds is made. In the case of a change to the ALP, FAA grants conditional approval before NEPA and unconditional approval only after NEPA is complete.

The NEPA process involves three classes of actions that project evaluation and examinations can be based on:

• Categorical Exclusion (CatEx),
• Environmental Assessment (EA), and
• Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

The great majority of projects fall in the CatEx category; this means that, because they are in a category of project that typically does not cause significant environmental impacts, they are excluded from detailed evaluation in NEPA, and a form must be filled out to demonstrate the lack of significant impacts. Every agency has their own CatEx list of projects. EISs are required for projects with significant impacts that cannot be mitigated, rare for the FAA. Projects that are not on the CatEx list and do not require an EIS will be evaluated by an EA. If a project is on the CatEx list but resources are present that may be significantly impacted by the project (also referred to by the FAA as “extraordinary circumstances”), sometimes federal agencies will require an EA.

Figure 79 displays a flowchart on how to determine between CatEx or EA as the class of action.

The timeline for the NEPA process is dependent on the class of action followed. A CatEx has no associated timeline, but it is the quickest process of all three because (a) there are typically few

Table 31. Important NEPA Terms

or no impacts to be evaluated, and (b) it is internal to the federal agency, thus it does not require information and review periods to be provided to the public or other agencies. The timeline for the process as set by law is 1 year for an EA, and for an EIS it is 2 years. Table 31 reviews some important terms that need to be understood when following the NEPA process.

When thinking about connected actions compared to independent utilities, consider whether a project would take place on its own, regardless of whether another project went through. Is there any benefit even if other actions are not taken?

For example, consider an air-rail connecting station where moving a parking garage to make way for the station could be considered a connected action or an independent utility. Would the parking garage be moved if the rail station were not built? Are there other benefits to moving the parking garage independent of building a rail station with terminal connection? If there is no benefit to moving the parking garage independent of building a rail station with terminal connection, then moving the parking garage is a connected action and must be examined within the rail station NEPA process.

Impact on Communities

Air Quality

Ground transportation is a major source of air pollution, particularly in urban areas with a high concentration of vehicles and poor air circulation. Additionally, congestion may pose greater risks to commuters and residents alike who are on or near arterial roads compared to freeways. This may be due to the lower travel speeds of the vehicles on arterial roads, leading to less vehicle-induced dispersion (Zhang and Batterman 2013). The emission of pollutants such as CO, PM, and NO_x contribute to air pollution and associated health issues, as outlined in Table 32. The use of fossil fuels in vehicles is the main source of these emissions, and repeated, chronic exposure can lead to an increase in long-term health effects. This is important for airport access roadways with frequent congestion and high vehicular traffic, especially for residents living near the airport access roadways and frequent commuters (e.g., employees).

While we know sources of air pollution, it is difficult to quantify the health impacts of poor air quality at granular scales. Observations on air quality for regulatory purposes are typically analyzed at broader local contexts, such as at ∼7.5 miles (12 kilometers), at ∼22 miles (36 kilometers), and at the county level. However, those scales limit the ability to examine relationships between population and health susceptibility, “both of which can spatially vary substantively within a city at smaller scales” (Kheirbek et al. 2016). This is applicable to the airport setting since the pollution generated from an airport via access roadways may be missed in a larger analysis, or it may be difficult to ascertain an airport’s effects using a broader study of air quality.

A 2021 study on air quality impacts deduced that disparities in health impacts associated with air quality vary more by race and ethnicity than by income, with a range difference in average exposure 2.4 times higher between people of color (POCs) and whites than the range in average exposure for POCs among income levels (Tessum et al. 2021). Even as overall exposure has decreased, a legacy of racist housing policy and other factors have caused racial and ethnic disparities to persist. Industrial, light-duty gasoline, construction, and heavy-duty diesel vehicles are often among the largest sources of disparity (Tessum et al. 2021).

The following items are potential actions to document and improve air quality issues that may arise from airport access roads as well as provide a more equitable resolution for those harmed:

• Perform a localized air quality study to determine emissions resulting from airport access roadways and their sources (e.g., industrial, light-duty gasoline, construction, heavy-duty diesel, and passenger vehicles).
• Engage with the surrounding community to determine perceived air quality issues from residents.

• Study airport access roadway improvements during the master planning process to determine whether roadway capacity needs to be increased, roadway efficiencies need to be introduced, or measures need to be taken to reduce negative air quality impacts.
• Strategize to develop a multimodal concept, and plan for the airport to reduce vehicular traffic to the airport.

Noise Pollution

Transit noise is described as using the “source-path-receiver” concept (Federal Transit Administration 2006). The source produces noise at varying decibel (dB) levels, depending on the type of source (e.g., transportation mode) and how it operates (e.g., speed). The “receiver” is the noise-sensitive land use that is exposed to noise from the source, such as a community close to the airport. The “path” is the area between the source and the receiver, where geography, intervening structures, and distance all help to minimize noise. At the receiver, the effects of environmental noise are evaluated. Because not all receivers have the same sensitivity to noise, different types of receivers have different noise requirements.

Noise Metrics

Analysts primarily employ the equivalent sound level (L_eq), day-night sound level (L_dn), and sound exposure level (SEL) noise metrics to evaluate the noise implications of traffic and transit projects. The metric used varies depending on what impact needs to be measured (California High-Speed Rail Authority 2022a).

• L_eq: The equivalent sound level is a measure of the average sound level over a period of time, including the variations of sound levels during that period. The peak hour of this sound measure is utilized for all traffic and light rail–noise evaluations at daytime facilities, including schools and libraries.
• L_dn: This metric is used to assess the impact of noise on people, considering both the level of noise and time of day. It is defined as the average sound level over a 24-hour period, with a 10-dB correction applied to sound levels occurring between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. to account for the sensitivity to noise at night. It is the main noise-level descriptor for rail noise in residential land uses.
• SEL: The sound exposure level is the amount of sound energy exposed to a person over a certain period of time. L_eq and L_dn are both calculated using SEL as an intermediate value.
• Weighted sound pressure level (L_max): This metric is used to assess the highest sound level during a single noise event when the sound level varies over time, such as a passing vehicle. L_max is commonly used in local and state ordinances for noise from private land uses and to assess the impact of construction.

Noise Sources

Noise pollution from airport ground access modes is a growing concern for communities located near airports. As the demand for air travel increases, airports are seeing a significant increase in the number of passengers and associated ground transportation. Traffic is a major source of noise, particularly in areas where there is a substantial number of road vehicles as well as railway vehicles in use. In addition to being unpleasant, noise contributes to health problems such as stress, sleep disturbances, cardiovascular disease, and hearing loss. Understanding the different sources of ground transportation noise and their unique characteristics is essential to develop effective strategies for reducing the noise and its impacts, especially to diverse lower-income communities surrounding the airports. The main sources of vehicular noise are as follows (Sinha and Labi 2007):

• Vehicle/air interaction: This noise is generated from the friction between vehicle body and air as the vehicle moves through the air. This type of noise is particularly noticeable at higher speeds and can have a significant impact in urban areas.

• Tire/pavement (rail wheels/track): This type of noise is generated by the tire thread blocks and vibrations as tires roll over the road. Typically, this noise is more noticeable on concrete pavements than on asphalt pavements. In rail transportation, noise is often produced by friction between steel wheels and the tracks, especially in curve sections.
• Vehicle engines: This type of noise is the primary source of noise from ground transportation at airports. It is the result of excessive noise emitted from the internal combustion process in engines. As these vehicles idle in airport parking lots and approaches to terminals, they create a significant amount of noise, which can also be amplified by the echo effect of buildings and other structures.
• Vehicle exhaust system: Vehicle exhaust systems increase noise levels, especially when noise-control equipment (i.e., mufflers) is not working properly. Exhaust noise levels closely resemble those of engine noise, and they are correlated with increased speeds, frequent speed changes, and bigger cars.
• Vehicle horns: Urban traffic noise may be significantly and gratingly increased by vehicle horns, especially in traffic cultures where frequent horn blowing is customary.
• Vehicle brakes: Brakes also generate noise due to high-pitched squealing or grinding sounds, especially for large vehicles.

Factors that influence the level of noise generated include

• Type and size of vehicles,
• Length of guideway exposed to the receiver,
• Nature of the traffic stream (speed, volume, etc.),
• Distance between noise source and receiver, and
• Existence and nature of any shielding features between noise source and receiver.

Waterway transportation is also being recognized as a potential threat to many marine animals due to the underwater noise that this mode generates (Veirs et al. 2016). Boats generate sound levels that range from fewer than 80 A-weighted decibels (dBA) to approximately 110 dBA for larger ones, at frequency levels ranging from 100 hertz to 100,000 hertz. These sounds are 20 to 30 dBA higher than deep ocean ambient noise, which can disrupt the ultrasounds emitted by orcas when locating their prey.

The federal regulations on motorboat noises as per 36 CFR § 3.15 are

State regulations vary between states; however, some states have adopted the federal regulations.

Noise Impact Criteria

The parameters for measuring noise impact are based on a comparison of existing and anticipated outdoor noise levels of the airport ground access mode under consideration. They consider both absolute criteria and relative criteria. Absolute criteria consider activity interference brought on by the transit project alone. Relative criteria consider the discomfort brought on by the transit project’s change in the noisy environment. The noise criteria and descriptors are determined by land use, as shown in Table 33.

The FTA has established noise impact criteria levels that consider existing noise levels and the projected noise increase due to the transit project. The level of impact ranges from no impact to severe impact, as depicted in Figure 80 and the following list:

• No impact: Transit-generated noise is not likely to cause community annoyance. Noise projections in this range are considered acceptable by the FTA, and mitigation is not required.

• Moderate impact: Project-generated noise in this range is considered to cause impact at the threshold of measurable annoyance. Moderate impacts serve as an alert to project planners for potential adverse impacts and complaints from the community. Mitigation should be considered at this level of impact based on project specifics and details concerning the affected properties.
• Severe impact: Project-generated noise in this range is likely to cause a high level of community annoyance. The project sponsor should first evaluate alternative locations or alignments to determine whether it is feasible to avoid severe impacts altogether. In densely populated urban areas, evaluation of alternative locations may reveal a trade-off of affected groups, particularly for surface rail alignments. If it is not practical to avoid severe impacts by changing the location of the project, mitigation measures must be considered.

Depending on the proposed or existing ground access modes at an airport, a noise assessment should be completed for each proposed or existing mode to determine which would have less impact on the airport and the communities.

To minimize the impact of transportation noise, it is important to consider effective measures and strategies to reduce the level of noise generated by these systems. Examples of mitigation measures include

• Implementing noise-reducing technologies in vehicles, such as quieter engines and tires;
• Implementing operational procedures that minimize noise, such as restricting engine idling and using designated noise-free parking areas for vehicles;
• Designing infrastructure to reduce noise exposure, such as building sound barriers and using soundproofing materials in buildings;
• Promoting quieter alternatives for transportation;
• Reducing tire noise with open-graded asphalt pavement material; and
• Enforcing sufficient right-of-way distances.

Light Pollution

Airports are significant users of artificial light; they illuminate local nights, which contributes to light pollution (Land Over Landings 2019). Light pollution is an undesirable byproduct of outdoor illumination caused by inefficient lamps and luminaires or other excessive amounts of brightness at night (McColgan 2004). Light pollution can take the form of glare, sky glow, light trespass, or clutter, which can negatively affect human health and the environment:

• Glare: This occurs when there is a bright light that causes visual discomfort or impairs vision.
• Sky glow: This refers to the brightening of the night sky caused by the collective glow of all artificial lights. Sky glow makes it difficult to observe stars and other celestial objects, and it can also interfere with the natural cycle of plants and animals.
• Light trespass: This occurs when artificial light spills over into areas where it is not intended or needed.
• Clutter: This refers to an excessive or confusing display of lights.

Road

The illumination of highways and streets, coupled with car lights, is one of the most significant sources of light energy emitted into the environment. Light pollution from airport ground access roadways can impact wildlife, as well as residents and drivers alike (Electric Power Research Institute and Lighting Research Institute 2000):

• Residents: Light that crosses a residential property border may be considered undesirable. Unwanted light entering a home through windows, such as those in bedrooms, is a concern that is frequently brought up. Direct viewing of bright light sources is usually uncomfortable, especially in areas where a low level of ambient light is preferred.

• Drivers: Bright light sources may seriously affect a driver’s visibility because of disability glare. In addition, visual confusion created by extraneous light sources can affect a driver’s ability to locate and recognize signal lights.

Vehicles

Road vehicle headlights have generally seen a steady rise of light emissions due to technological advancements. Currently, the maximum intensity permitted along the axis of a single headlamp in high beam is 75,000 candelas in the United States (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 2018). High-intensity discharge xenon, light-emitting diodes (LEDs), and—in very limited fashion—laser light sources are replacing halogen bulbs as a result of recent technology advancements, all of which may achieve larger visible outputs (Gaston and Holt 2018). There is no indication that headlight technology advancements will prevent emissions from rising in the future, unless road vehicle technology develops to a point where headlights are rendered unnecessary.

Emissions from headlights are typically pulsed due to the passage of vehicles. The pattern of the pulse is determined by vehicle speed, traffic volume, and time of day. The shorter the pulse of light received at a spot along the roadside, the faster the vehicles are going, and vice versa. Airport access roads tend to be areas with slower-moving vehicles and higher traffic volumes, which results in longer headlight displays.

Reducing headlight pollution mainly depends on vehicle manufacturers utilizing warmer-colored bulbs and drivers using high beams only when there is no approaching traffic in dark regions. The airport can minimize the impact of headlight pollution to the surrounding residents by erecting structures, such as walls, that prevent light trespassing.

Infrastructure

The design of safe roads must include adequate illumination for the roads. However, light from streetlights can trespass onto private property or natural areas, and light can be directed upward directly from existing light fixtures or reflect off the road surface, all of which contribute to sky glow.

Streetlight technology has undergone a change similar to road lights, which has sparked intense public debate about the consequences for human health and wellness, aesthetics, and broader environmental effects. Particularly, the deployment of LED street lighting with higher correlated color temperature values has faced popular criticism in some locations (Gaston and Holt 2018).

Reduction of light pollution among road infrastructure can be achieved through various methods, with two prominent ones being the type of light and placement and an adaptive lighting system:

• Light type and placement: Light pollution among airport ground access can be reduced by using LED lighting fixtures that are designed to direct light downward and away from light-sensitive areas, such as neighboring communities. Ensure that the lighting fixtures are properly shielded to reduce glare and light trespassing.
• Adaptive lighting: This is an intelligent lighting system that uses sensors and other detection devices to adjust the brightness of road lighting based on the presence or absence of vehicles, pedestrians, and weather (Federal Highway Administration 2014).

By implementing these two methods, road lighting pollution can be reduced while still maintaining adequate levels of safety and security. These solutions also offer added benefits of reducing energy consumption, resulting in a more sustainable and environmentally friendly approach to road lighting.

Rail

Similar to roads, light pollution from rail may come from the trains or infrastructure. Infrastructure lights include lighting fixtures attached to rail poles and span wires above the

Other intangible barriers also exist that airports must overcome to obtain meaningful community engagement, such as

• Internal thought processes (e.g., “we’ve always done it this way”);
• Reliance on one-size-fits-all methods; and
• Lack of organizational accountability.

The effects of these barriers can be felt by community members and participants, reflected as a criticism of transit communication. One criticism is that strategic communication effects are not routinely evaluated against clear metrics for success but rather to “come to general conclusions about whether they reached out to a large enough, or targeted enough, audience” (Forinash 2020).

Rather than focusing on a targeted or wide enough audience, setting clear and measurable goals for communicating with communities can yield more successful community engagement. Knowing a community and the best methods for receiving and delivering information are key to effective public engagement. Similarly, communication and transparency are particularly vital in disadvantaged communities due to a lack of trust in the government as well as a lack of awareness among the general public of the community benefits of transit improvement projects (Forinash 2020).

Public Participation

In October 2022, U.S. DOT released guidance in Promising Practices for Meaningful Public Involvement in Transportation Decision-Making that provides resources for transportation planners to employ meaningful public involvement practices in decision-making processes. According to the guidance material, meaningful public involvement is defined “as a process that proactively seeks full representation from the community, considers public comments and feedback, and incorporates that feedback into a project, program, or plan when possible” (U.S. Department of Transportation 2022b). The document provides a framework for creating a meaningful public involvement plan and building organizational capacity to support and institutionalize best practices. It describes the features of meaningful public involvement as

• Understanding community demographics,
• Building durable community relationships,
• Understanding community wants and needs,
• Involving broad representation of community,
• Using community-preferred engagement techniques, and
• Documenting and sharing the community’s impact on decisions.

For other transportation modes that have planned and designed projects, additional communication and engagement with the community is warranted to broaden the community input that can be received. TCRP Research Report 208: Strategic Communications to Improve Support for Transit-Priority Projects: Report and Toolkit (Forinash 2020) stated that the following strategic communication practices are more likely to lead to successful project outcomes:

• Identify key stakeholders early in the project planning process.
• Develop a coordinated strategic communication plan that targets stakeholder groups.
• Commit to strategic communications throughout a project life cycle, particularly through the direct dedication of staff and resources to communication efforts.
• Adapt communication practices according to audience contexts and observed efficacy.
• Meaningfully engage with key stakeholder groups, often in hyperlocal contexts.

Developing a public involvement plan involves building trust and meeting community members where they are. As many underserved populations have historically been excluded from

Table 34. Resources by Mode

Homeless and Unhoused Communities in Mass Transit

Shelter is a basic human need that many lack. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 584,462 people experienced homelessness in January 2022. The limited capacity of shelters and other social service agencies to meet the needs of a rapidly growing unhoused population has forced individuals experiencing homelessness to find shelter in various public spaces, including transit vehicles, bus stops, and transit stations. Many of them also use transit to reach destinations such as workplaces, shelters, and community service centers. With affordable housing scarce in some metropolitan areas and the scale of the homelessness crisis often surpassing the capacities of existing safety nets, transit operators face these pressing issues by themselves and might have to implement policy measures beyond transportation in order to address them (Ding et al. 2022):

• ACRP Research Report 254: Strategies to Address Homelessness at Airports (Fordham et al. 2023) provides a step-by-step process to address homelessness that varies depending on the airport:
  • – Learning the fundamentals. Homelessness is a broad yet complex issue, and understanding the root causes helps with solving the issue. It is important for airports to build informed awareness, even when this issue is not an airport’s core mission.
  • – Assessing current conditions. The current regional socioeconomic conditions vary depending on the airport and can be responded to with different resources. Airports can use existing data to assess the trends and create efforts that will empower airport stakeholders to make informed decisions.
  • – Identifying and working with partners. Partnerships provide aid to this complex issue and are an effective way of giving people experiencing homelessness access to information, tools, and resources.
  • – Planning a response. Depending on the scale of homelessness in a region, the nature of situations and incidents, partnerships, and funding available for the airport’s response to homelessness will be different. Having a response plan helps the airport identify specific actions and assign responsibility for the implementation.
  • – Outlining staff and stakeholder responsibilities. Defining roles and responsibilities allows the airport’s response to be structured and clear, especially when different departments have to get involved (law enforcement officers, airport operations staff, etc.).
  • – Developing and implementing a training program. Training helps airport staff provide aid and connect individuals with effective responses. Creating awareness among airport employees is essential for responding to this issue.
  • – Developing an engagement protocol. Depending on the needs of each individual, there are different ways to engage with them. Airport staff should be able to refer to protocols best suited for the situation.
  • – Tracking progress. To determine whether their efforts to address homelessness issues are working as intended, airports are encouraged to track progress of their programs, compare them with their program objectives, and consider how their programs can be sustained over time.
• TCRP Synthesis 121: Transit Agency Practices in Interacting with People Who Are Homeless (Boyle 2016) suggests different approaches that have benefited the responses of the airports in different cases:
  • – Consistent enforcement. This includes the enforcement of a code of conduct in order to provide a safe environment for the traveling public, as well as being consistent with the application and enforcement of these rules.
  • – Partnerships with homelessness agencies and community leaders. These partnerships include social service agencies, local police departments, and cities. These organizations’ goals include aiding the unhoused and encouraging dialogue with cities or counties that have resources to address this issue.

• • – Commit resources for outreach to people who are homeless. Because of the warmth and air conditioning typically provided by transportation systems, they becomes a de facto shelter to get warm in the winter and to cool down in the summer, causing these facilities to house many people experiencing homelessness. Dedicated outreach teams can aid in establishing relationships with clients, and this can help service-resistant users accept services.
  • – Respect the humanity of individuals who are homeless. Treating everyone with respect allows staff to connect individuals with appropriate resources—customers get the message that they are not violent or unwanted, and thus they agree to receive help.
  • – Training, hiring, and internal discussion. Staff who are close to the transit system should receive training to keep them aware of issues related to homelessness that could impact transit.
  • – No free fares. The inclusion of fare policies such as low-income passes and reduced-price passes for social service agencies allows for equity in transit systems, but free fares have been identified as an exacerbator of potential issues.

According to a survey conducted by the UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies (Loukaitou-Sideris et al. 2020), most transit agencies (86 percent) partner with one or more organizations. Roughly 7 out of 10 transit authorities have partnered with local law enforcement, 6 out of 10 have partnered with public social service organizations, and about half of the surveyed participants have a partnership with a nonprofit organization or private foundation working on addressing homelessness.

In 2020, Chicago Transit Authority’s Blue Line at Chicago O’Hare International Airport (ORD) experienced a homelessness crisis. Therefore, this transit authority partnered with initiatives like the Haymarket Center Outreach Program, a nonprofit with an office along the Blue Line to connect people to social services, and other programs to aid unhoused persons who have been staying at the airport. Another strategy implemented at this airport by the Chicago Transit Authority is having Chicago police officers check for “proof of airport business,” either boarding passes or employee badges, to anyone arriving at the airport via the Blue Line between 10 p.m. and 4 a.m. CDT. At Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD), a group of airport staff, identified as Travelers Aid, connect persons experiencing homelessness to services tailored to individual needs. If Travelers Aid employees are concerned for a person’s well-being or if the situation escalates, IAD law enforcement is called for assistance (Fordham et al. 2023).