D. Social and Economic AssessmentThis section <strong>of</strong> the data collection report briefly describes minoritygroups and low-income populations within the project area. This reportwas completed with guidance provided by Executive Order 12898regarding Environmental Justice. The Environmental ProtectionAgency’s Office <strong>of</strong> Environmental Justice <strong>of</strong>fers the following definition:Methodology“The fair treatment and meaningful involvement <strong>of</strong> all peopleregardless <strong>of</strong> race, color, national origin, or income with respectto the development, implementation, and enforcement <strong>of</strong>environmental laws, regulations and policies. Fair treatmentmeans that no group <strong>of</strong> people, including racial, ethnic, orsocioeconomic group should bear a disproportionate share <strong>of</strong> thenegative environmental consequences resulting from industrial,municipal, and commercial operations or the execution <strong>of</strong>federal, state, local and tribal programs and policies.”The effort described in this section outlines available “Census BlockGroup” data so that these Environmental Justice goals can be met byidentifying the areas within the project area, where low income andethnic minority groups are present in significantly higher proportionsthan exhibited by the United States as a whole. Also, areas (blockgroups) that have a significant proportion <strong>of</strong> minors (17 years and under)and elderly (65 years or older) are identified. By identifying blockgroups (hereafter referred to as “significant block groups”) within theproject area which have low median household incomes and highpercentages <strong>of</strong> ethnic minorities, minors and elderly people, this studyserves as a planning tool for avoiding adverse impacts to these groups.In order to identify the sensitive block groups within the project area, aGeographic Information System (GIS) was used. Electronic spatial anddatabase files were obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau and theArizona Department <strong>of</strong> Economic Security, pertaining to the projectarea. “Tiger File” maps were obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau, inan electronic, CD ROM format. These map coverages wereincorporated into a GIS, and show the boundaries <strong>of</strong> the Census blockgroups as well as roads, streams and other geographic features. Also,U.S. Census Bureau - STF3A database files were obtained from theArizona Department <strong>of</strong> Economic Security. The STF3A files includethat data collected during the 1990 Census and provide a variety <strong>of</strong>socioeconomic data on each block group within the project area. TheTiger Maps were tied to the STF3A files within the GIS, to serve as atool for socioeconomic analysis.Significance CriteriaIn order to determine the significant block groups within the projectarea, or those meeting Environmental Justice criteria, a set <strong>of</strong>significance criteria were developed specifically for use during theADMP evaluation. The ADMP review committee may choose to changethese criteria to meet the needs <strong>of</strong> this project as the EnvironmentalJustice executive order does not outline specific criteria to be used forthis type <strong>of</strong> project. Therefore, in this study, for a block group to beconsidered a low income block group (or “significant” by definition inthis document), it must have a 1990 median household income <strong>of</strong>$15,000 (the <strong>of</strong>ficial 1990 poverty rate) or less. In order for a blockgroup to be considered a “significant” ethnic minority block group, itmust have proportions <strong>of</strong> ethnic minority groups that are at least 10%greater than that tabulated for the United States in the 1990 decennialcensus. Using this formula, the following are the specific ethnicminority thresholds used during this evaluation; 1) African American -22.1% or greater, 2) American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut - 10.8% or greater,3) Asian, Pacific Islander - 12.9% or greater, 4) Persons <strong>of</strong> HispanicOrigin - 19.0% or greater, and 5) Other race - 13.9% or greater. Finally,in determining block groups that are significant in terms <strong>of</strong> age,“significance” criteria for age cohorts <strong>of</strong> 17 years or younger and 65years or older were developed. A block group is considered to besignificant for age if the percentage <strong>of</strong> these age cohorts is at least 10%greater than that tabulated for the United States in the 1990 decennialcensus. The following are the specific age cohort thresholds; Ages 0 -5 = 18.9% or greater, Ages 5 - 17 = 26.7% or greater and Ages 65 + =22.6% or greater.In the first section <strong>of</strong> this analysis, entitled “Community Pr<strong>of</strong>iles”, thecommunities which make up the project area are described in terms <strong>of</strong>population growth, land area, median household income and ethnicdiversity. These socioeconomic attributes for these communities arecompared to those <strong>of</strong> the State <strong>of</strong> Arizona and for the United States.This section is intended as background material, and to establish a betterunderstanding <strong>of</strong> the socioeconomic context within which the projectarea. In the second section <strong>of</strong> this analysis, entitled “Low Income andEthnic Minority Populations”, significant Census block groups areidentified and discussed.Community Pr<strong>of</strong>ilesThe project area consists <strong>of</strong> portions <strong>of</strong> south-western Phoenix and thecities <strong>of</strong> Tolleson, Avondale and Goodyear, a small portion <strong>of</strong> thenorthern section <strong>of</strong> the Gila River Indian Community and someunincorporated areas <strong>of</strong> <strong>Maricopa</strong> county. Table V-1 summarizes thepopulation growth and land areas for these communities.DIBBLE & ASSOCIATES 55 DURANGO ADMPDATA COLLECTION REPORT
Table V-1. Project Area Population And Land Area<strong>Maricopa</strong> <strong>County</strong> Phoenix Tolleson Avondale Goodyear1999 population 2,913,475 1,240,775 4,685 32,270 17,0851990 population 2,122,101 983,403 4,434 16,169 6,258Population Growth37.3% 26.17% 5.7% 99.6% 173.0%Rate 1990 - 19991996 Land Area9,226.0 419.9 5.0 22.1 117.57(Sq. Mi.)Sources: 1999 population estimates and 1996 Land Area - <strong>Maricopa</strong> Association <strong>of</strong> Governments. 1990 population - U.S. Census Bureau.Table V-2. Median Household Income And Ethnic DiversityUnitedArizona <strong>Maricopa</strong> <strong>County</strong> Phoenix Tolleson Avondale GoodyearStatesMedian Household$30,056 $27,540 $30,797 $29,291 $25,496 $24,292 $32,708Income# and % White 199,686,07080.3%2,967,68281.0%1,801,57084.9%803,69181.7%1,72839.0%9,46858.6%4,47771.5%# and %Black29,986,06012.1%110,0623.0%74,2953.5%51,2375.2%40.1%7774.8%4527.2%# and %American Indian,Eskimo or Aleut1,959,2340.8%204,5895.6%38,3091.8%18,3371.9%220.5%2281.4%1632.6%# and %Asian or PacificIslander7,273,6622.9%54,1271.5%35,2081.7%# and % Persons <strong>of</strong>Hispanic Origin*22,354,0599.0%680,62818.6%340,11716.0%194,11819.7%3,39376.5%8,28751.3%4,70875.2%# and %Other Race9,804,8473.9%328,7688.9%172,7198.1%94,1489.6%2,68060.4%5,46033.8%1,08117.3%Source: US Census Bureau - STF3A files, 1990*Persons <strong>of</strong> Hispanic Origin accounts for Hispanic people <strong>of</strong> all races (e.g. White, Black, Asian, etc.). Therefore, this category represents a double count and is the reason that a summation <strong>of</strong> all the races is greater than 100% <strong>of</strong>the population.15,9901.6%00.0%2361.5%851.4%DIBBLE & ASSOCIATES 56 DURANGO ADMPDATA COLLECTION REPORT
Change language