Thank you Steve Gurganus, a resident in the Glenwood-Brooklyn neighborhood, for authoring this story.

High-speed rail, and all projects that involve federal money that may result in a natural or human environmental impact, require some level of environmental evaluation, even if minimal.  The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) is the federal law that establishes this requirement.  State funded projects are covered by a similar law (SEPA).  

In the high-speed rail proposal, there is a Draft Environmental Impact Assessment (DEIS), which indicates that the project is expected to have legally significant impacts of some type. The EIS must include a "hard look" at *all* potentially significant natural and human environmental impacts.  Any stakeholder group, and sometimes individuals, may request a copy of the EIS to review, as well as supporting documentation such as the Community Impact Assessment (CIA).  Sometimes the documents are located in a public location for review, but increasingly they are being posted to the internet.

The CIA must evaluate all of the socio-economic impacts of the project on all affected communities, not just historical. The CIA study area should include neighborhoods and communities subject to impacts.  Where part of a neighborhood will be impacted, the CIA study area should include the entire neighborhood. The NEPA document is subject to challenge (but only procedurally) where the requisite "hard look" is not done.  That means the agency may have to do more study before they can move forward.

Historical (Sec 106 & Sec 4(f)) impacts are only one part. Those impacts require concurrence from the State Historic Preservation Officer as to impacts and avoidance, minimization, mitigation, and enhancement measures, to offset an "Adverse Impact" determination. Community impacts must nevertheless be considered during the NEPA process, and although most community impacts are regulated in the "court of public opinion" as opposed to state or federal agencies, it is the court of public opinion that often most affects project decision making.

It is possible or likely that a vertical noise wall will be considered for this project. There are various (very expensive) tunneling options, including "cut and cover" that can greatly minimize impacts.  Furthermore, there are also numerous engineering solutions to address accessibility over or under a rail line.  Impacts unable to be avoided, minimized, or mitigated, may otherwise be offset by other community-wide enhancement initiatives.

Also, NEPA and Presidential Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice *require* a determination regarding potentially disproportionally high and adverse impacts to low income and minority populations, neighborhoods, and communities. This should include a benefits-burdens evaluation. Where minority or low income (and Limited English Proficiency) populations are present, and when impacts are possible or likely, then public involvement activities are supposed to be conducted early, enhanced, and be ongoing, to ensure meaningful participation on part of those populations in the transportation decision making process.

Ideally, NEPA is a tool to provide information and opportunity to move forward collaboratively with a project, and include modifications along the way to make it the best project possible.  Sometimes though, the impacts are too severe, and the project too controversial to move forward.

Certainly, from a urban, community, and neighborhood planning perspective, multi-modal travel opportunities are a positive benefit.  Almost always of course, someone or some group, bear a greater share of the impacts of most projects.  The EIS and supporting documentation are hugely important, as is the public involvement and public hearing process.

The time to get involved is at any point of public communication, whether through workshops, town meetings, or public hearings such as the one that is upcoming.  Showing up at the hearing, and providing written comment, is one of the most important ways to affect project decision making.  There are obviously other political and legal routes as well.