Health Impact Assessment FOR Glendale Riverwalk Development Glendale, Colorado Spring 2012
RIVERWALK DEVELOPMENT 1-million square foot new entertainment, retail, restaurant district proposed just east of CO Blvd and north of Cherry Creek
PARTNERS & CONTRIBUTORS:
HEALTH Health is the state of a person’s: – Physical – Mental – Social well-being It is not just the absence of disease or infirmity . Source: World Health Organization
Obesity Trends* Am ong U.S. Adults BRFSS, 1 9 9 0 , 2 0 0 0 , 2 0 1 0 ( * BMI ≥ 3 0 , or about 3 0 lbs. overw eight for 5 ’4 ” person) 2 0 0 0 1 9 9 0 2 0 1 0 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%– 29% ≥30% No Data <10% 10%–14%
HEALTH Increasing Health Concerns with Obesity: • Chronic Disease • Type II diabetes • High Blood Pressure • High Cholesterol • Cardiovascular Disease
HEALTH According to the World Health Organization, health status is determined by a range of factors. The factors listed in the outer three semicircles are known as the “environmental and social determinants of health” and are generally considered to be the root determinants of health and disease.
WHY assess the built environment? The Built Environment is Policy in Concrete: Source: Richard J Jackson MD, Designing Healthy Communities: Uniting the Missions and Perspectives of Public Health and Urban Planning Webinar, October 12, 2011
DEFINITION Definition of Health Impact Assessment A combination of procedures, methods and tools that systematically judges the potential, and sometimes unintended, effects of a policy, plan, program or project on the health of a population and the distribution of those effects within the population. HIA identifies appropriate actions to manage those effects. International Association for Impact Assessment, 2006
INTRODUCTION HIA PROCESS Determines the need and appropriateness of HIA Determines which health issues to evaluate, evidence basis for these impacts, methods for analysis, and a workplan Provides: 1) A profile of existing health conditions 2) Evaluation of potential health impacts Recommendations Development of the HIA report and the communication of findings and recommendations Tracks the impacts of new policy/plan/project on populations in the community
WHY HIA? • Increase transparency in the policy decision-making process • Support community engagement in the decision-making process • Serve vulnerable populations who typically may not have a ‘seat at the table’ • Shift decision-making from an economic to an overall quality of life framework • Identify the trade-offs involved with a project or policy
HISTORY of HIA A Brief History of HIA 1969 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires study of environmental & health effects; emphasis was environment 1980s World Health Organization encourages Health Promotion/Healthy Public Policy in 1986 Ottawa Charter 1990s - England recommends analysis of impacts of policy on health inequities - WHO publishes Gothenburg Consensus Paper on HIA - First HIA in U.S. (San Francisco Living Wage policy) 2000s - World Bank requires HIA of all large projects - HIA on proposed Alaska North Slope Oil Lease 2010s - HIA used around the world - More common in U.S. (about 100 completed) - HIA Practice Standards Released
HIAs ACROSS THE COUNTY
HIAs ACROSS COLORADO
OBJECTIVES OF GLENDALE HIA • Assess possible impacts on, and recommendations for, active transit in Glendale as it relates to the new Glendale Riverwalk. • Create healthier options to access Glendale’s Riverwalk. • Increase physical activity among residents and workers. • Utilize the location of the Riverwalk to make enhancements throughout the community. • Develop a useful guide for future improvements.
PARTNERS & CONTRIBUTORS:
GLENDALE, CO
GLENDALE, CO
RIVERWALK DEVELOPMENT New development will add year-round activities to Glendale, and bring about significant changes in walkability, bikeability, access to public transportation, vehicular traffic, access and connectivity, and economic development opportunities.
SCOPING: ACTIVE TRANSIT Scoping Pathway Diagram: Selected Health Determinants: 1. Automobile Traffic 2. Access and connectivity 3. Personal Safety 4. Walkability 5. Bikeability 6. Public Transit
SCOPING Important to conduct a literature review to determine the evidence base that supports the recommendations
ASSESSMENT: Various data sources
DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 4,184 Size: 0.6 square miles Households: 2,630 Renters: 92% Median Income: $32,500 Families in Poverty: 24.2% Median Age: 27.7
AT RISK POPULATIONS Certain demographic groups face significant barriers to getting enough physical activity. • Seniors – 4.2% of Glendale Population; Growing • Children – 18% of population • Low Income Population – 24% of Families in Glendale are below the Poverty line • Minorities – 31% of Glendale residents are foreign born – 16 different languages spoken in Glendale • People with Disabilities – 17% of Glendale Residents are disabled – 64% of Glendale Seniors are disabled
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS WALKABILITY BICYCLING TRANSIT PERSONAL ECONOMIC ACCESS TRAFFIC SAFETY DEVELOPMENT
WALKABILITY Walkable Communities: • Have pedestrian amenities • Have connected, direct routes • Have a variety of destinations • Provide access to convenient transit
WALKABILITY Key Findings: 84% of streets have attached sidewalks • Detached sidewalks are more pleasant 42% of Glendale Streets have both residential and non-residential uses Only 7% of streets have on-street parking • Provides a buffer for pedestrians 50% of streets have shaded walking areas • Shade=protection from UV rays
WALKABILITY Wayfinding Recommendations: • Create buffers between sidewalk and street ways • Add missing sidewalk segments • Add on street parking • Encourage way-finding with signs, maps, and landscape cues to direct pedestrians Sidewalk Buffers
BICYCLING KEY FINDINGS • No marked bike lanes, sharrows or route indicators in Glendale • About 2% bike to work • Community feed back indicated conflicts on Cherry Creek path
BICYCLING Recommendations: • Place bike lanes and sharrows on key streets • Provide bike facilities at the Riverwalk and throughout Glendale • Separate bicycle and pedestrian users along the Cherry Creek Trail
TRANSIT Distance reachable in 29 minutes on public transit: Key Findings: • 17% of Glendale residents do not have a car • 11% of residents commute via transit • All residents live within ¼ mile of bus stop • Only 4% of Glendale residents work in Glendale
TRANSIT Recommendations: • Prioritize infrastructure improvements near transit stops • Improve the safety and attractiveness of bus stops • Provide informational signage/kiosks near transit stops • Incentivize employers to subsidize employees who commute to work via mass transit, bicycle or foot • Work with RTD to improve bus service to employment centers
ACCESS Key Findings: • Large surface parking lots inhibit connectivity • Avg. block length is 620 feet (desired is 300-400) • More than 1/3 of street segments missing a portion of sidewalk • Poorly placed/sized sidewalks
ACCESS Recommendations: • Complete sidewalk network, grid pattern • Create bicycle/pedestrian corridor between Riverwalk & Infinity Park • Provide pedestrian and bicycle pathways through parking lots • Fill in surface lots with new development • Improve connectivity with Cherry Creek Bike Path
TRAFFIC Key Findings: • Average street width is 55 feet – ideal is around 28 feet (excepting high traffic volume streets) • Wider streets result in increased vehicle speed • Top challenge to walking and biking in the survey was traffic volume/speed
Automobile Collisions with TRAFFIC Pedestrians or Bicyclists Automobile Collisions
TRAFFIC Benefits of Roundabouts
ECONOMIC BENEFITS Walkable and bikeable communities can lead to… • More retail activity and increased sales tax revenues – particularly for small businesses • Reductions in property vacancies • Higher property values
NEXT STEPS FOR GLENDALE HIA • Obtain public comment on HIA draft report • Share findings • Implement recommendations: – During planning & design – After construction – When undertaking other planning efforts • Monitor post-development • Enjoy a happier, healthier Glendale
LESSONS LEARNED • Partners and collaboration are crucial • Data collection challenges (cost, timeframe, local level) • Strive for better multi-cultural community engagement
Recommend
More recommend
