Jaimee Lederman

Habitat Conservation Plans: Preserving Endangered Species and Delivering Transportation Projects

The development of transportation infrastructure requires a long planning, funding, and implementation cycle that often takes more than a decade for a particular project. Environmental mitigation is usually planned and implemented late in this process and on a project-by-project basis. Habitat conservation plans (HCPs), which provide an alternative model, are becoming increasingly popular. HCPs consist of an early assessment of regional mitigation needs and advanced planning for habitat- or landscape-level impacts from multiple infrastructure projects. This approach has potential benefits, which include reduced project delays, lower mitigation and transaction costs, and improved conditions for the affected species. This paper reviews the current status of HCPs and examines their use and place in the infrastructure planning process, as described by HCP developers in a national survey. The review and survey show that this model is growing in popularity and holds promise for further development as an approach to both habitat preservation and infrastructure development.

Experimentation and Innovation in Advance Mitigation: Lessons from California

Advance mitigation is a process through which the environmental impacts and required mitigation are assessed for one or more transportation projects early in project planning and development. The approach enables mitigation to be planned, commenced, and completed earlier; applies regionally or programmatically across multiple projects; and takes ecosystem- and landscape-level concerns into account. Although there have been efforts to develop programmatic mitigation initiatives and funding to support them, there is little documentation of their establishment, operation, or accomplishments. A study documents and analyzes 10 prominent California experiences with advance mitigation undertaken by the state department of transportation in coordination with regional councils, local governments and transportation agencies, and environmental groups. Each effort is profiled, including the origin of the mitigation effort; its location, scale, and cost; its specific connection to transportation projects; funding, revenue sources, or financial options used to support it; key institutional partners; and lessons learned from the experience. Californias initiatives offer some lessons: external conservation planning efforts can play a significant role in creating both momentum and structure for comprehensive mitigation planning; transportation-related advance mitigation is necessarily a highly interdependent undertaking, involving not only the state department of transportation and other transportation project sponsors but also federal and state natural resource agencies as well as local environmental groups; and the long-time horizons of advance mitigation planning and the complex nature of infrastructure development bring unavoidable uncertainty to such efforts and demand flexibility from mitigation partners in the process.

The growing role of transportation funding in regional habitat conservation planning

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Regional conservation initiatives struggle to meet funding needs when complying with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1996 and need money early to pay for required planning and to acquire land to mitigate the impact of development. Transportation agencies struggle to comply with the ESA and have increasingly been willing to fund regional habitat conservation plans (RHCPs) to do so. We review documents from 22 RHCPs and interview representatives of 16 RHCPs to understand how transportation agencies have contributed to funding RHCPs. We find that transportation agencies mitigate their impacts and provide early and consistent financing to facilitate the planning process, help RHCPs establish initial conservation preserves, and allow RHCPs to capitalize on lower land prices during downturns in the development market. We only sample RHCPs in a few states, however, and these examples may not comply with laws in others. Many of the cases studied are recent; time is needed to assess their long-term success. We recommend further study to assess applications to sectors beyond transportation and beyond the areas we studied. Takeaway for practice: Transportation agencies have struggled to meet environmental requirements and habitat conservation agencies have typically considered transportation agencies threats to the environment. Where adversarial relationships can be overcome, partnerships between transportation and conservation programs can effectively finance habitat conservation while facilitating capital investments in transportation systems.

Arguing over Transportation Sales Taxes: An Analysis of Equity Debates in Transportation Ballot Measures:

What’s a fair way to pay for urban transportation? Local option sales taxes (LOSTs) for transportation are an increasingly common mechanism for locally financing transportation in the context of declining federal and state funding. LOSTs are typically regressive, raising equity concerns. But their fairness also depends on who benefits from them, based on which projects are funded, where projects are located, and when investments occur. We examine how perceptions of these four dimensions of equity (income, geographic, temporal, and modal) are represented and debated in the ballot arguments for 38 LOST elections in California. We find that measure supporters use subtle language to imply that proposed expenditure plans achieve equity on all dimensions, promising “something for everyone.” Measure opponents, by contrast, typically attack specific perceived inequities in proposed expenditure plans. We find that tradeoffs among types of equity debated in ballot arguments frame winners and losers across multiple equity dimensions.

Lessons Learned from 40 Years of Local Option Transportation Sales Taxes in California

Jurisdictions across the United States have increasingly turned to local option sales taxes, or LOSTs, to fund transportation projects and programs. California is an enthusiastic adopter of these measures; since 1976, residents in over half of the state’s 58 counties have voted on 76 LOST measures. As of 2017, 24 counties, home to 88% of the state’s population, have LOST measures in place. Many counties have enacted multiple measures, with passage rates especially high among renewal and follow-on measures. This research is the first comprehensive analysis of LOST measures; drawing on measure expenditure plans to determine the range and frequency of transportation projects and services funded. This detailed review of expenditure plans across dozens of urban, suburban, and rural California counties offers insight on these measures and the projects and programs they fund. Overall, this study finds that LOSTs are heterogeneous, often including something for nearly every interest group. Almost all of the measures studied dedicate funding to a mix of transportation modes, including highways, public transit, local road maintenance, and active transportation. Expenditures on particular modes vary, reflecting transportation geography across counties. On average, 60% of LOST expenditures in California fund road projects and over 30% are allocated to public transit. Measures often dedicate a substantially larger share of revenue to transit relative to transit’s mode share. Finally, LOSTs typically appeal to diverse local interests by returning a portion of revenues to local jurisdictions to address local priority projects.

A private matter: the implications of privacy regulations for intelligent transportation systems

ABSTRACT The rapid development and deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) that utilize data on the movement of vehicles can greatly benefit transportation network operations and safety, but may test the limits of personal privacy. In this paper we survey the current state of legal and industry-led privacy protections related to ITS and find that the lack of existing standards, rules, and laws governing the collection, storage, and use of such information could both raise troubling privacy questions and potentially hinder implementation of useful ITS technologies. We then offer practical recommendations for addressing ITS-related privacy concerns though both privacy-by-design solutions (that build privacy protections into data collection systems), and privacy-by-policy solutions (that provide guidelines for data collection and treatment) including limiting the scope of data collection and use, assuring confidentially of data storage, and other ways to build trust and foster consumer consent.

Fault-y Reasoning Navigating the Liability Terrain in Intelligent Transportation Systems

Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) hold great promise to improve personal and commercial travel, but intelligently linking vehicles and travelers via increasingly interconnected real-time data systems creates a host of new and largely untested liability questions when things go wrong. In this article, we examine current policies, laws, and administrative codes guiding ITS liability by reviewing the scholarly literature and case law in the United States. We find (a) a patchwork of industry self-regulation, (b) a modicum of tort case law precedent that varies substantially across states, (c) many unresolved questions, and (d) little prospect of guiding federal legislation on the horizon. While the liability questions raised by driverless cars have received much attention, we conclude that ITS liability standards are likely to be settled incrementally in the near term on decidedly narrow grounds via case law on navigation and collision-avoidance systems, long before fully automated vehicles are deployed.