## Facts

- Federal and state transportation officials proposed the “Presidential Parkway,” a 2.4-mile highway connecting the I-75/I-85 “stub” in downtown Atlanta to Ponce de Leon Avenue near the Olmsted Park network and the Druid Hills Historic District.
- The Georgia Department of Transportation had earlier acquired about 219 acres for prior highway proposals; the cleared land remained largely vacant.
- The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) acted as lead agency and prepared a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under NEPA addressing impacts, mitigation, and alternatives.
- The EIS included a discussion of § 4(f) and evaluated, among others, “Decatur Parkway” and “Moreland Avenue” alternatives that also implicated protected parkland and historic resources.
- The Department of the Interior criticized the draft and final EIS § 4(f) alternatives discussion as inadequate and objected to granting § 4(f) approval.
- The Department of Transportation commented that the EIS adequately addressed project effects and mitigation.
- FHWA approved the final EIS and, through a designee of the Secretary of Transportation, granted § 4(f) approval for the project.

## Issues

1. Whether FHWA satisfied NEPA’s procedural requirements by taking a sufficient “hard look” at environmental consequences and reasonable alternatives in the EIS.
2. Whether FHWA’s § 4(f) / 23 U.S.C. § 138 approval was lawful, including (a) a rational determination that no feasible and prudent alternative avoided use of protected resources, and (b) inclusion of all possible planning to minimize harm.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of injunctive relief and upheld FHWA’s project approval.
- The court held the EIS met NEPA’s procedural requirements and contained enough analysis to support informed decisionmaking and public participation.
- The court held FHWA’s § 4(f) determinations were not arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law because FHWA gave rational explanations for rejecting alternatives and identified mitigation measures to minimize harm.
- Disagreement by the Department of the Interior did not invalidate the EIS or the § 4(f) approval where the administrative record supported FHWA’s conclusions.

## Legal Principles

- NEPA is procedural; it requires informed consideration of environmental consequences and alternatives, not a particular substantive outcome.
- Courts review NEPA compliance and § 4(f) determinations under an APA arbitrary-and-capricious standard and do not substitute judicial policy preferences for agency technical judgments.
- An EIS need not be flawless; it must reasonably identify impacts, alternatives (including no-build), and mitigation to permit informed review.
- Under § 4(f), approval of a project using protected parkland or historic sites is permitted only if (1) there is no feasible and prudent alternative, and (2) the project includes all possible planning to minimize harm; the agency must articulate a rational basis for these findings.

## Conclusion

The Eleventh Circuit allowed construction of the Presidential Parkway to proceed, concluding that FHWA satisfied NEPA’s procedural obligations and reasonably supported its § 4(f) findings that alternatives were not feasible and prudent and that mitigation reflected all possible planning to minimize harm.


Druid Hills Civic Ass’n, Inc. v. Fed. Highway Admin., 772 F.2d 700 (11th Cir. 1985)