Wednesday, February 28, 2018

APA issues principles for autonomous vehicle policy

Earlier this year, the American Planning Association released its list of principles for autonomous vehicle policy.  They are available here.   I though they were a valuable starting point for thinking about how this new source of transportation will affect land use decisions.  I have copied the list of principles below. 

Principles for Autonomous Vehicle Policy

Autonomous vehicles are a disruptive, society-changing technology, not just for and placemaking, but for employment; social engagement; mobility; and a range of physical, social, and economic factors. APA recognizes that the benefits are many, but smart public policies and effective local planning are necessary.

AV Policy Principles

APA has developed a set of policy principles designed to make it easier for decision makers to integrate AVs within the fabric of their communities through planning, design, placemaking, and infrastructure investments.

Key Principle

Principle 1: APA believes autonomous vehicle (AV) technologies hold the potential to offer a range of critical benefits for communities. To reap these positive benefits, it is essential to pursue strategies based on a shared mobility model. AV policies should promote and facilitate a shared mobility approach. This principle should guide planning and design approaches for AVs.

Policy makers must work to ensure appropriate regulatory and financial structures are in place to adequately support the effective deployment and of this technology and related infrastructure decisions.

Guiding Strategies

Legislative and regulatory policies aimed at advancing AVs through planning must be grounded in the following guiding strategies:

Mobility, Connectivity, Access

Principle 2: APA supports development and provision of mass transit or transportation utilizing automated and autonomous vehicle technologies, especially in managing first-mile and last-mile issues while improving safety, reliability and economic performance.

Principle 3: APA supports local planning efforts to reclaim public rights-of-way from the expected reduced space needed for AV travel (e.g. less parking, narrower lanes) for purposes within the public realm to provide public benefits. Specific attention should be given to re-introducing bicycle and pedestrian-only public rights-of-way and spaces as a way of improving both placemaking opportunities and AV performance.

Principle 4: APA supports efforts to eliminate or sharply reduce municipal and off-street parking requirements with the growing incorporation of AVs into the national transportation system and permit the re-use of parking structures as active land uses.

Principle 5: APA calls on the professional design industry in concert with local communities to ensure the future built environment, including streetscapes, accounts for automated vehicles (less/reusable parking areas, more curb space for pickup/drop-off, self-activated charging stations, etc.).

Principle 6: APA supports the further use of ride-sharing, given the joint use of vehicles reduces environmental impacts including noise, emissions, impervious surfaces for streets and parking, etc.

Social and Environmental Equity

Principle 7: APA supports efforts to share autonomous mobility as a service rather than encourage ownership of each vehicle individually such that universal mobility is brought closer to reality and the potential for zero occupant vehicle miles is reduced.

Principle 8: APA supports the ongoing evolution and use of automated vehicle technology for passenger vehicles and freight, given the technology has the potential to improve economic welfare and safety and maintain or improve environmental conditions.

Principle 9: APA supports efforts to research and address equity issues created by AVs; equity concerns include the rural-urban divide and the increasing suburbanization of poverty and how these will be impacted or exacerbated by AV adoption.

Principle 10: APA supports the development of green technology (vehicle-to-infrastructure or V2I) for automated vehicle infrastructure, given the infrastructure is consistent with environmental protection and has minimal or no new impact on nearby development.

Principle 11: APA recognizes that significant adoption of automated and autonomous vehicles will occur over a time frame measured in decades and that adoption rate will be unevenly distributed geographically. However, the technologies and systems necessary to support such vehicles must be universally available as early as possible to support pioneers and early adopters.

Principle 12: APA recognizes that most urban transit agencies are operating in a failing — or failed — business model which needs to be dramatically revised because mass mobility remains the key to equity and access for substantial portions of the population, especially in urban and suburban areas.

Energy, Sustainability, and Research and Development

Principle 13: APA supports the development of automated and autonomous vehicles with a strong preference for using alternative energy and sustainable tire technology and materials such that there is an overall reduction in energy consumption even if projections positing an increase in Vehicle Miles Traveled are accurate.

Principle 14: APA supports the development of vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) technology for passenger and freight modes as well as the facilitated transfer of goods between modes for improved security, reduced costs, and other benefits.

Principle 15: APA supports research and development efforts focused on creating a more sustainable transportation network resulting from the possibility of more compact development, reduced pavement requirements, improved vehicle performance, modified roadway maintenance schedules and equipment, and any other factors that contribute to an overall more sustainable transportation system.

Safety and Security

Principle 16: APA supports the Vision Zero construct and encourages the development of policies and technologies, including Vehicle to Pedestrian (V2P) technologies, to reduce or eliminate fatal vehicle crashes for all users of the transportation systems, but especially pedestrians/cyclists.

Principle 17: APA supports efforts to secure infrastructure (technology and roadways) to ensure the safety of users as well as the reliability of systems. To this end, APA encourages the use of open source, non-proprietary technologies.

Principle 18: APA supports the further development of vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure technology to improve safety; however, information technology for security of personal identification information (PII) must be prioritized within the data security of vehicle operating systems.

Data and Decision Making

Principle 19: APA is supportive of strategies that create a policy environment friendly to innovation, while maintaining local control of public spaces and land use planning.

Principle 20: APA believes that having good and current data is crucial to decision-making by federal, state and local planning and transportation officials and encourages the development of a central data repository available to all.

Principle 21: APA supports a vibrant economy in part stimulated by research and technology and maintenance and operation of automated vehicle technology. Demand-responsive transportation networks are an example where "Big Data" can be used to promote personal mobility.

Principle 22: APA encourages the use of public-private partnerships (P3) for co-funding of technology and infrastructure to benefit the surface transportation system globally in ways that reduce or do not exacerbate the equity and affordability issues occasionally associated with P3.

Economics and Fiscal Planning

Principle 23: APA recommends that a thorough analysis of the fiscal mechanisms used currently to finance vehicle-related infrastructure investments which may be impacted by widespread adoption of AVs — parking structures, high-occupancy toll lanes, congestion-pricing, gasoline taxes, and similar strategies — to ascertain both long-term effectiveness as well as whether changes will affect the ability to repay current revenue-based borrowing.

Principle 24: APA encourages governmental entities at all levels to consider the effect of loss of current revenues derived from vehicle sales, service, ownership, fines and forfeitures, fees, and similar sources will have on budgets and begin to plan now for that eventuality. 

Principle 25: APA believes that AVs will create an ever-greater emphasis on the mobile economy where goods and services are delivered directly to the customer at the customer's place of choosing as well as while the customer is also mobile.

Principle 26: APA supports rethinking the role of public rights-of-way and considering them not so much as public space, but as a public utility which is priced accordingly.

Policy Recommendations

APA recommends the following near-term actions:

CREATE A STANDARDS ENTITY COMPOSED OF CROSS-SECTOR PARTNERS

Create a standards entity composed of industry, technology, university, and government partners to develop standards for interoperability and secure data communication.

INVEST FURTHER IN MASS TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE

Invest further in mass transportation and transit infrastructure to support a mobility-sharing economy potentially centered on AV technology that provides access to all with respect to income, gender, race, and other unforeseen discriminators while reducing historically inequitable transportation decisions.

ADOPT LOCAL ORDINANCES THAT GIVE COMMUNITIES FLEXIBILITY TO RESPOND TO AVS

Adopt local ordinances that enable communities to be responsive to autonomous vehicles while providing flexibility to reclaim abandoned infrastructure for public use. APA, working with partners, should consider developing a model ordinance for states and localities.

CREATE MODEL STATE ENABLING LEGISLATION

Emphasis should be placed on creating model state enabling legislation to authorize localities to control public infrastructure for public benefits and fully implement sustainable land use policies that fully exploit the opportunities presented by the shared mobility model of AV adoption.

ADVOCATE FOR MAINTAINING LOCAL CONTROL OF PUBLIC SPACES AND PLANNING PROCESSES

Actively advocate for maintaining local control over public spaces and planning processes, especially those public spaces that may no longer be dedicated to vehicular travel and parking.

DEVELOP DESIGN GUIDANCE STANDARDS WITH PARTNERS

Work with partner organizations to develop a common set of guidance for the design of future buildings, public spaces, facilities, roads, highways, bridges, and other infrastructure.

DEVELOP FLEXIBLE PARKING POLICIES

Develop flexible parking policies that can allow for the reduction or elimination of certain parking requirements as AV market penetration increases.

ADVANCE POLICIES THAT ENCOURAGE SHARED MOBILITY STRATEGIES

Continue as a profession to further policies that encourage ridesharing and shared mobility strategies that address first- and last-mile issues.

DEVELOP AV-SPECIFIC LEGISLATIVE POLICIES WITH STAKEHOLDERS THAT ADDRESS VARIOUS LEGAL ISSUES

Engage with all stakeholders to develop for adoption legislative policies for AVs related to certification, licensing, training, and tort liability.

SUPPORT FUNDING FROM ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS THAT ADVANCES AV RESEARCH

Support funding from public and private sectors as well as universities for ongoing research and analysis of the implications of AVs for urban placemaking and mobility planning.

CONSIDER AND PROMOTE AV SYSTEM STANDARDS

Convene an expert panel to consider and promulgate standards applicable to AV systems and networks that protect the privacy of all AV users.

STUDY THE FISCAL IMPLICATION OF AVS AT FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LEVELS

Study the fiscal implication to governments at all levels from the large-scale implementation of AV technology as it relates to the impacts on income streams currently derived from transportation taxes and fees; personal property taxation; parking fees and fines; and traffic violation fines, fees, and forfeitures to ensure that the public services and infrastructure currently funded by such revenues can continue to be funded consistent with the needs and opportunities of AV mobility.

These principles were approved by the APA Board of Directors on January 26, 2018.

February 28, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, February 26, 2018

Jonathan Rosenbloom on Contemporary Issues in Teaching Land Use: Question 7: How Do You Teach the Contract Transformation in Land Use Regulation?

[While updating the recently released ninth edition to the casebook Land Use and Sustainable Development Law, the four co-authors engaged in numerous spirited discussions about teaching land use. We wanted to open this discussion to others to get their comments and thoughts as we continue to rethink the teaching of this important subject. Each month on this blog, we will introduce a new topic relevant to teaching land use. The topics will loosely follow our casebook chapters, and we are now up to Chapter 3. We'll explore each topic through four blog posts, one from each of us. We hope you find the discussion enriching, and encourage you to contribute to the conversation in the comments section below or off-line.  -- John Nolon, Patricia Salkin, Stephen Miller, & Jonathan Rosenbloom.]

Contemporary Issues in Teaching Land Use

Question 7:  How Do You Teach the Contract Transformation in Land Use Regulation?

by Jonathan Rosenbloom

Stephen and John present two ways to approach the materials in Chapter 4 and the spectrum of potential coverage. The following falls in-line with either approach and can help illustrate what “contract transformation” can mean for developers, development, and communities.

On some level, Chapter 4 should baffle students. In that, by Chapter 4 students are familiar with and able to navigate zoning codes and what it means to build “as-of-right.” However, the tools set forth in Chapter 4 are, at times, an opportunity for staff, council, and developers to re-visit as-of-right zoning and question what would otherwise be a project built to code.

Students may find this mystifying. How can a city, for example, stop, alter, or a delay a developer from doing something as-of-right? Indeed, maybe it cannot. But how does a developer determine if a city acted ultra vires? Aside from resource-heavy litigation, there are not many ways. This, I think, begins to illustrate the importance and prominence of the tools in Chapter 4.

To illustrate this point, I might give my students a non-hypothetical, hypothetical in which a mixed-use building is constructed in the C-3 commercial district located in the “College Hill Neighborhood Overlay District” (see zoning map and code provisions, section 29-160) in Cedar Falls, IA (a quaint city of about 40,000 and home to University of Northern Iowa). As proposed the project includes commercial uses on the first floor and 83 residential units on the upper floors. The project is proposed without parking. The question is whether the parking meets the code.

Given the materials covered in the first three chapters, students should be able to figure out that pursuant to section 29-160(g)(2) of the code, C-3 districts in the overlay district do not require parking. Thus, parking for the project should satisfy the code.

Now, we can start to explore the importance of private contractual arrangements. Notwithstanding compliance with the zoning, this particular project was re-negotiated by city staff until the developer included 65 parking slots. The revised parking was approved by the planning and zoning commission.

Newspaper articles discussing the Council hearing report many fascinating quotes from those present. One, however, from the developer’s attorney is particularly on-point:

The fact is the code allows this project to occur without any parking. The applicant has tried to work with staff and tried to address some of the concerns of neighbors and this commission and has added 65 spaces to the project.

Council, however, denied the project finding the parking was still unsuitable. Overall, I think this problem provides a good opportunity to discuss the importance of the variety of tools in Chapter 4 that allow local governments and developers to negotiate to meet specific needs and concerns beyond the zoning code requirements. Further, it illustrates the dual tracks of zoning and the land use tools and the importance of negotiating in a system of “contract transformation.”

The ninth edition of Land Use and Sustainable Development Law, is now available for the 2017-18 academic year.  Feel free to contact any of the co-authors if you would like to discuss the book--or just teaching land use law in general.

Land Use Book Image

Previous posts in the Contemporary Issues in Teaching Land Use series

Question 1: Teaching the Crossroads Where Nuisance & Zoning Meet [Rosenbloom | Nolon | Salkin | Miller]

Question 2:  Teaching the 1916 NYC Zoning Ordinance and the Standard State Zoning Enabling Act [Rosenbloom | Nolon | Salkin | Miller]

Question 3:  Teaching the Economics of Land Use Regulation and Ethics [ Salkin | Nolon | Miller | Rosenbloom]

Question 4:  Teaching about the Comprehensive Land Use Plan [Salkin | Nolon | Miller | Rosenbloom] 

Question 5:  How to Create a Practical Context for Learning? [Nolon | Miller | Rosenbloom | Salkin]

Question 6:  Introducing the Common Law and the Power of the Pen [Salkin | Miller | Rosenbloom | Nolon]

Question 7:  How to Teach the Contract Transformation in Land Use Regulation?  [Miller | Nolon | Rosenbloom | Salkin] 

February 26, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, February 20, 2018

California CivicSpark program seeking applications

 

 
Presented by the Local Government Commission
 
Become A CivicSpark Partner!
 
CivicSpark, a Governor's Initiative AmeriCorps program, is now accepting project applications for the 2018-19 Service Year! The program is offering three thematic tracks: Climate (50 openings), Water (20 openings), and a new Opportunity Access track (20 openings) that will focus on affordable housing, alternative transportation, and rural broadband. 
 
Applications will be accepted in waves:
 
March 16th - First priority deadline
May 1st - Second priority deadline
 
Fellows will begin serving on projects mid-September 2018
 
If you are a local or state public agency, school or university, or a nonprofit and are interested in learning more about the program and having a Fellow support your agency’s work, register for one of our upcoming informational webinars. You can find more program details, including pricing and timing, on our website
 
"CivicSpark is a win-win-win! The Fellow receives experience and serves the community in a highly targeted way, and the Agency receives talented, energetic, and vetted young professionals. The community and many stakeholders benefit directly from this synergy.” - Sonoma County Water Agency Staff
 
Register for a Webinar to Learn More!
 
 Wed 2/28: 10am-11am
Fri 3/9: 9am-10am
Wed 3/14: 9:30am-10:30am 
 
CivicSpark is administered by the Local Government Commission in partnership with the Governor's Office of Planning and Research.  
 
Local Government Commission
 
980 9th Street, Suite 1700, Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-448-1198 • Fax: 916-448-8246

 

 

February 20, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, February 19, 2018

John Nolon on Contemporary Issues in Teaching Land Use: Question 7: How Do You Teach the Contract Transformation in Land Use Regulation?

[While updating the recently released ninth edition to the casebook Land Use and Sustainable Development Law, the four co-authors engaged in numerous spirited discussions about teaching land use. We wanted to open this discussion to others to get their comments and thoughts as we continue to rethink the teaching of this important subject. Each month on this blog, we will introduce a new topic relevant to teaching land use. The topics will loosely follow our casebook chapters, and we are now up to Chapter 3. We'll explore each topic through four blog posts, one from each of us. We hope you find the discussion enriching, and encourage you to contribute to the conversation in the comments section below or off-line.  -- John Nolon, Patricia Salkin, Stephen Miller, & Jonathan Rosenbloom.]

Contemporary Issues in Teaching Land Use

Question 7:  How Do You Teach the Contract Transformation in Land Use Regulation?

by John Nolon

I cover portions of Chapter 4 in five sessions, and struggle, like Stephen, to teach the basics as well as how they build on one another. The crescendo that he creates is extraordinarily exciting, fun to teach, and a great challenge for his students.  I am considering travelling his steeper path the next time I teach, rather than the narrower one that my practice-oriented approach has followed. My “crescendos,” as it were, are much smaller in scale and less dramatic in scope than his.  There is some merit, however, in the gentler rise and fall of the road my students and I travel. One point of these blogs regarding our Land Use casebook is to present these choices for you to consider.

The traditional practice-related topics covered in Chapter 4 include the subdivision of land, site plan approval, cluster development, innovative techniques such as clustering and planned unit developments, exactions, impact fees, access to infrastructure, vested rights, and developer agreements.  In New York, all of the land use board actions that these techniques involve require environmental impact review, with its separate forms and regulations.

One small crescendo in my approach is to explore how the different land use boards relate to each other when multiple approvals are required.  Another is the relationship between land use approval and local capital budgets, state and federal transportation funding, and water and sewer districts.  Yet another is the relationship between the subdivision and site plan regulatory standards that local boards enforce as administrative agencies and the separate and specific mandate of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, which makes such boards the stewards of the environment and requires them to master and enforce 35 pages of regulations issued by the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation of the State.  Still another is the interplay between the forms required by the State for environmental review and the local forms crafted to solicit information needed for site plan or subdivision approval.

Traversing these small hills and keeping track of where we have been and are going has occupied my approach to Chapter 4 for many years.  I see a steeper trajectory and potentially better view from the top in Stephen’s.  He presents a valuable framework for assembling and understanding the aggregated techniques that go into large-scale urban projects. This has significant appeal. His dramatic crescendo and my smaller assents represent just one of the dozens of teaching dilemmas presented by so relevant, complex, varied, and textured a subject as Land Use Law.

 

The ninth edition of Land Use and Sustainable Development Law, is now available for the 2017-18 academic year.  Feel free to contact any of the co-authors if you would like to discuss the book--or just teaching land use law in general.

Land Use Book Image

Previous posts in the Contemporary Issues in Teaching Land Use series

Question 1: Teaching the Crossroads Where Nuisance & Zoning Meet [Rosenbloom | Nolon | Salkin | Miller]

Question 2:  Teaching the 1916 NYC Zoning Ordinance and the Standard State Zoning Enabling Act [Rosenbloom | Nolon | Salkin | Miller]

Question 3:  Teaching the Economics of Land Use Regulation and Ethics [ Salkin | Nolon | Miller | Rosenbloom]

Question 4:  Teaching about the Comprehensive Land Use Plan [Salkin | Nolon | Miller | Rosenbloom] 

Question 5:  How to Create a Practical Context for Learning? [Nolon | Miller | Rosenbloom | Salkin]

Question 6:  Introducing the Common Law and the Power of the Pen [Salkin | Miller | Rosenbloom | Nolon]

Question 7:  How to Teach the Contract Transformation in Land Use Regulation?  [Miller | Nolon | Rosenbloom | Salkin] 

February 19, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, February 16, 2018

35th Annual Smith-Babcock-Williams Student Writing Competition

From Alan Weinstein:

The Planning & Law Division of the American Planning Association announces its 35th Annual Smith-Babcock-Williams Student Writing Competition. The Competition, which honors the memory of three leading figures in American city planning law (R. Marlin Smith, Richard Babcock, and Norman Williams) is open to law students and planning students writing on a question of significance in planning, planning law, land use law, local government law or environmental law. The winning entry will be awarded a prize of $2,000 and submitted for publication in The Urban Lawyer, the law journal of the American Bar Association's Section of State & Local Government Law. The Second Place paper will receive a prize of $400 and one Honorable Mention prize of $100 will also be awarded. The deadline for submission of entries is June 4, 2018 and winners will be announced by August 24, 2018. Please refer to the enclosed official rules for further details. Our past experience has shown that teachers in planning, planning law, land use law, local government law or environmental law are in an ideal position to stimulate student interest in research and writing and to encourage participation in the Competition. Each year, many of the entries appear to have been prepared initially for various courses or seminars. We hope you will add your support to the Smith-Babcock-Williams Student Writing Competition by encouraging your current and past students to submit entries. 

Download APA-PLD Student Writing Competition 2018

February 16, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, February 15, 2018

Arkansas Little Rock Symposium: The Law and Unnatural Disasters: Legal Adaptations to Climate Change

I'm excited to be part of this event for the next couple of days.  Congrats to the Arkansas Little Rock Law Review for all their work in putting this together.

Copy-of-Business-Conference-Flyer3

February 15, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (1)

Monday, February 12, 2018

Stephen R. Miller on Contemporary Issues in Teaching Land Use: Question 7: How Do You Teach the Contract Transformation in Land Use Regulation?

[While updating the recently released ninth edition to the casebook Land Use and Sustainable Development Law, the four co-authors engaged in numerous spirited discussions about teaching land use. We wanted to open this discussion to others to get their comments and thoughts as we continue to rethink the teaching of this important subject. Each month on this blog, we will introduce a new topic relevant to teaching land use. The topics will loosely follow our casebook chapters, and we are now up to Chapter 3. We'll explore each topic through four blog posts, one from each of us. We hope you find the discussion enriching, and encourage you to contribute to the conversation in the comments section below or off-line.  -- John Nolon, Patricia Salkin, Stephen Miller, & Jonathan Rosenbloom.]

Contemporary Issues in Teaching Land Use

Question 7:  How Do You Teach the Contract Transformation in Land Use Regulation?

by Stephen R. Miller

The first three chapters of our casebook introduce students to the basics of the modern land use regulatory system.  But we all know that the basics, while hard to master, only scratch the surface of what makes land use law difficult, and so interesting.  Much of that additional complexity is embedded in Chapter 4, which makes it a tricky, and hopefully exciting, chapter for classes to tackle.

As a class enters into this chapter, there are two ways to go.  On the one hand, professors can choose to pick a couple of specific subjects--subdivisions and impact fees, for instance--and teach just those several subjects each as separate entities.  The book fully supports that approach.  

On the other hand, the revisions to Chapter 4 also intend to permit an alternative method of teaching, which is to frame all of these land use controls as part of what Dan Selmi refers to as the "contract transformation in land use law."   We suggest that this approach will be particularly fruitful for those professors teaching in larger, urban areas where complex entitlements commonly are bundled into an overarching agreement.  In many larger states, this is typically done through a development agreement, while in some other states it might be bundled into the conditions of approval for a planned unit development.  Whatever the local mechanism of choice, one of the goals of Chapter 4's revision is to permit classes to discuss how large developments are typically not developed through a traditional zoning code, but instead involve highly-sophisticated negotiations that also require and demand bargaining.  This offers a chance to bring up concerns about "bargaining away the police power," takings, due process concerns, and multiple other important legal issues about the powers of government that subsequent chapters will explore in depth.

Professors that choose this second approach might also utilize documents from a local development that was developed with a DA.  I, personally, use documents from a large development in Boise called Harris Ranch, a large master-planned community with a development agreement, a specific plan, multiple HOAs, unique funding structures for infrastructure, and lots of other teaching documents that are publicly accessible.  

The beginning of Chapter 4 tries to frame this approach by noting follows:

It would not be uncommon for a modest development in a mid-sized city to require the following:

1. An annexation, especially if the development is in a “greenfield” site;

2. A rezone of the newly incorporated land;

3. A planned unit development, which permits the developer some leeway in the community design not permitted by general zoning regulations;

4. Impact fees, or some other means of financing infrastructure such as an assessment district, for roads, sewers, and even parks, schools, and fire houses;

5.  Subdivision of land into marketable lots

6.  A homeowner’s association (HOA), or another common interest community (CIC), with covenants, conditions, and restrictions that impose additional private land use controls that will not be enforced by local government but by a private homeowners’ association; and

7. A development agreement that often controls the phasing of the development and grants concessions beyond what regulations provide for both the developer and the local government.

Other common bargained-for components of a project may include:

1. A community benefits agreement, an agreement negotiated between the developer and neighborhood organizations—not the local government itself—to allay neighborhood externalities associated with the project;

2. Affordable housing, or “inclusionary zoning,” units in excess of those required by state or local code;

3. Private environmental measures, such as conservation easements or habitat mitigation agreements;

4. Financing tools from redevelopment, such as tax increment financing;

5. Financing from federal and state tax credit schemes, such as New Markets Tax Credits, Low Income Housing Tax Credits, and Historic Preservation Tax Credits held by community non-profit organizations closely allied with local government; and

6. Other, often controversial, incentives associated with economic development programs, which often include: use of eminent domain authority to assist the project sponsor with land assembly; local government assumption of responsibility for the private entity’s compliance with federal and state environmental regulation; waiver of permitting fees; and ancillary terms, such as local hiring agreements, almost all of which are typically conditioned on timely land use approvals of the proposed project.

However professors today choose to teach the subjects in Chapter 4, I believe it is important to make clear that while each control can be a stand-alone land use regulation, most are typically used in conjunction with other controls and their application is often "bargained for."  That, in turn, sets up nicely the turn to takings in Chapter 5, and how Nollan / Dolan / Koontz affect, and respond to, this transformation.

The ninth edition of Land Use and Sustainable Development Law, is now available for the 2017-18 academic year.  Feel free to contact any of the co-authors if you would like to discuss the book--or just teaching land use law in general.

Land Use Book Image

Previous posts in the Contemporary Issues in Teaching Land Use series

Question 1: Teaching the Crossroads Where Nuisance & Zoning Meet [Rosenbloom | Nolon | Salkin | Miller]

Question 2:  Teaching the 1916 NYC Zoning Ordinance and the Standard State Zoning Enabling Act [Rosenbloom | Nolon | Salkin | Miller]

Question 3:  Teaching the Economics of Land Use Regulation and Ethics [ Salkin | Nolon | Miller | Rosenbloom]

Question 4:  Teaching about the Comprehensive Land Use Plan [Salkin | Nolon | Miller | Rosenbloom] 

Question 5:  How to Create a Practical Context for Learning? [Nolon | Miller | Rosenbloom | Salkin]

Question 6:  Introducing the Common Law and the Power of the Pen [Salkin | Miller | Rosenbloom | Nolon]

 

February 12, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, February 9, 2018

Housing affordability in London - Talking Politics podcast

The Talking Politics podcast has a nice segment on housing affordability in London.  Worth a listen.  Access here.

February 9, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Yale Center for Private Law accepting applications for 2018-19 Fellow in Private Law

From Sadie Blanchard:

The Yale Law School Center for Private Law is now accepting applications for the 2018-19 Fellow in Private Law. The Fellowship in Private Law is a full-time, one-year residential appointment, with the possibility of reappointment. The Fellowship is designed for graduates of law or related Ph.D. programs who are interested in pursuing an academic career and whose research is related to any of the Center for Private Law's research areas, which include contracts (including commercial law, corporate finance, bankruptcy, and dispute resolution), property (including intellectual property), and torts. More information is available here.    

February 9, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, February 8, 2018

Mandelker: New Perspectives on Planned Unit Developments

Daniel Mandelker (Wash U Law) has just published New Perspectives on Planned Unit Developments.  Here is the abstract:

Planned unit developments, also called planned communities, are a major development type. Originally cluster housing projects with common open space, they can be planned today as infill in downtown areas or as a major master-planned community. They require discretionary review, are often dominant in the zoning process, and present a challenge to the zoning system. A threshold question is how municipalities should zone for planned unit developments, and this Article discusses conditional use, base zone, and rezoning alternatives.

This Article next discusses the zoning review process for these developments, which must operate fairly and produce acceptable decisions. Alternatives that can avoid or supplement discretionary review are considered next, and this Article concludes with a discussion of affordable housing as a social responsibility.

February 8, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, February 7, 2018

Low Carbon Land Use: Paris, Pittsburgh, and the IPCC: Post 6: The Land Use Stabilization Wedge: Transportation: A Series by John R. Nolon

This post is the sixth in a series that will continue over the coming months.

Low Carbon Land Use: Paris, Pittsburgh, and the IPCC.

The Land Use Stabilization Wedge: Transportation

by John R. Nolon Distinguished Professor of Law

Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University

The second slice of the land use stabilization wedge focuses on transportation, which accounts for over 70% of total demand for oil in the U.S. Americans drove over five million miles in 2014, 70% of that in personal vehicles, which contributes 20.5% of national CO2 emissions. Urban form and carbon emissions from vehicles are closely connected.  In a typical suburban neighborhood, for example, households may require up to 15 vehicle trips a day to commute to work, drive to school, and complete errands. This contrasts to many fewer vehicle trips daily where compact, mixed-use developments are required by local land use law.  Fewer trips translates into fewer vehicle miles travelled, which lowers CO2 emissions.

The Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC, Chapter 12, targets the shaping of human settlements as a key to climate change mitigation.  It focuses on “the patterns and spatial arrangement of land use, transportation systems, and urban design elements, including the physical urban extent, layout of streets and buildings, as well as the internal configuration of settlements.” Chapter 12 also notes that “areas with a high mix of land uses encourage a mix of residential and retail activity and thus increase the area’s vitality and the aesthetic interest of the neighbourhood.” Land use regulations can ensure attractive buildings, personal neighborhood scales, and amenable green infrastructure. 

These fine points are critical.  Promoting compact, mixed use development by itself may not reduce driving much, particularly if the walking and biking options are not enticing. There is a current debate raging in the urban planning literature on this point, with recent statistical analyses suggesting less correlation between compact, mixed-use development and driving than previously posited.  Common sense and on-the-ground experience, however, make it clear that this type of development, enhanced by livable design, conveniently located shops and amenities, safe passage, and supportive infrastructure, lures many drivers from their cars and lowers trips and miles travelled significantly.  Little can be done to reduce emissions from personal travel without this type of neighborhood development.

The successful development of transit stations and rail and bus lines is dependent upon land use densities and mixed use development. There must be a large enough number of commuters in a transit station area to provide a base level of ridership. In addition, ridership must be sufficiently diverse to ensure that people are traveling to work, to shop, to seek entertainment, and to go home at various times during the day, thereby increasing the cost efficiency of the transit system.

Local land use plans and zoning, which determine population density and building uses, control how much the population will increase over time in a certain area, and what transportation needs new people will have.  This, in turn, dictates the demand for various types of transportation services.  Locally, this planning is done at the neighborhood level and should be guided by objectives contained in the city-wide comprehensive plan.  To make transit systems feasible, land use planning among localities must be coordinated with regional transportation planning and development, which occurs under federal programs in urban areas at the metropolitan-area level.

Even where communities are not served by transit systems, local leaders can create compact, mixed use neighborhoods that reduce car trips and miles traveled.  Zoning controls can limit the size of housing units and combine retail, office, and residential land uses, putting services, shops, and jobs in closer proximity to homes.  Communities not yet served by transit can designate one or more priority growth districts and create overlay zones for them that allow greater densities and more land uses than permitted in the underlying zoning districts.  By clustering development strategically, these growing localities position themselves for future service by commuter rail or bus rapid transit, thereby becoming “transit ready.”

Suburban areas that adopt higher-density, mixed-use zoning will find it easier politically to adopt strong environmental protection ordinances applicable to the land outside high-density zones.  Where state law permits, density bonuses may be provided in denser suburban zones and cash contributions made by developers in exchange.  This money can be used to purchase development rights from landowners in sensitive environmental areas outside the higher-density zone, areas that mitigate climate change through biological sequestration.  This balance between development and conservation can be accomplished within transit-served urban areas as well – highlighting again zoning’s ability to create sustainable settlement patterns and to mitigate climate change.

The strategies described here are generally divided into urban, transit-served neighborhoods, or Transit Oriented Development and denser mixed-use suburban neighborhoods without transit, referred to as Transportation Efficient Development. One of the corollary benefits of concentrating development in these ways is the preservation of surrounding open spaces which enhances sequestration, another mitigation strategy that will be taken up in the next blog. See Climate Change, Zoning and Transportation Planning: Urbanization as a Response to Carbon Loading.

Material from this series will appear in Low Carbon Land Use: Paris, Pittsburgh, and the IPCC, an article to be published by the Arkansas Law Review.

Previous posts in this series are available here:

Post 1:  Paris, Pittsburgh, and the IPCC

Post 2:  Post-Paris Contagion

Post 3: Carbon Emissions: The Land Use Connection

Post 4:  Shaping Human Settlements

Post 5:  The Land Use Stabilization Wedge: Buildings

February 7, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (1)

Saturday, February 3, 2018

NYU Furman Center seeks Legal Research Fellow / Policy Director

From John Infranca:

Job descriptions are available online at http://furmancenter.org/about/jobs and below.

NYU Furman Center (New York, NY)

LEGAL RESEARCH FELLOW

The Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy at New York University invites applications for a post-graduate legal fellowship. The Furman Center, jointly housed at NYU’s School of Law and its Wagner Graduate School of Public Service, is a leading academic research center devoted to the public policy aspects of land use, real estate development, and housing. The Furman Center’s law fellowships are designed for promising legal scholars with a strong interest in housing, local government, real estate, or land use law. The Fellow’s time is shared equally between independent research on topics of his or her choice in preparation to enter the academic job market, and Furman Center research projects, conducted jointly with faculty members, graduate students, and staff. In recent years, legal fellows have worked on projects addressing the legal impediments to the development of micro and accessory dwelling units in New York and other cities; an empirical and legal analysis of the use of transferable development rights in New York City; the economics and legal issues surrounding mandatory inclusionary zoning; and a number of projects addressing fair housing requirements. The Law Fellow is invited to participate in faculty workshops, colloquia, and other scholarly forums at the NYU School of Law. This two-year fellowship typically begins summer/fall. The position comes with a salary and a generous array of benefits, which include medical, dental and vision.  Further information regarding benefits can be found here:  http://www.nyu.edu/employees/benefit/full-time/Professional-Research-Staff-Code-103.html. Note that this position is considered a Research Scholar at NYU School of Law.

Qualifications:  A J.D. degree, superior academic achievement, excellent writing skills, initiative, and a demonstrated interest in and commitment to scholarship are required.

Applicants should submit a cover letter, curriculum vitae, scholarly writing sample, law school transcripts (unofficial copies are acceptable), and the names and contact information of 3 references. Send application materials and questions to furmanjobs@nyu.edu. Please include “Legal Research Fellowship” in the subject line. Applications will be given consideration until the position is filled. Review of applications will begin immediately and will be evaluated on a rolling basis. Only candidates of interest will be contacted. 

EOE/AA/Minorities/Females/Vet/Disabled/Sexual Orientation/Gender Identity.

 

NYU Furman Center (New York, NY)

POLICY DIRECTOR

The Policy Director leads the effort to link the NYU Furman Center’s research with policy-relevant issues, ongoing public debates, and key stakeholders. He or she also serves as a key point of contact for policymakers and other stakeholders who rely on the Center’s work. The Policy Director serves as a member of the NYU Furman Center’s leadership team.

Primary Responsibilities:

Research Development and Management

●        Identify and monitor pressing policy discussions and debates--in New York City and nationally--to help shape the NYU Furman Center’s research agenda on affordable housing and urban policy issues.

●        Write and edit NYU Furman Center reports, briefs, presentations, talking points, and other products focused on policy analysis and reform.

●        Translate academic research--including the Center’s legal, data, and quantitative analysis--into materials accessible for non-academic audiences.

●        Serve as project manager for select research and policy projects.

●        Supervise and mentor policy staff and/or graduate student research assistants focused on the Center’s policy projects.

 

External Relations

●        Help to elevate the profile of the NYU Furman Center as a leader in the housing policy field.

●        Build and maintain relationships with public officials, private-sector stakeholders, and community groups, and solicit feedback to inform future research and policy work.

●        Oversee the planning and execution of the Center’s key events, including policy breakfasts, webinar briefings, symposia, and roundtables.

●        Represent the NYU Furman Center as a public-facing spokesperson for panels, presentations, and in the media.

●        Participate in the development of research proposals and fundraising strategy in coordination with Directors.

Qualifications:  A J.D., master’s degree in Public Policy/Administration, or an advanced degree in an equivalent field. Minimum of five years of relevant experience preferred, including management experience and a concentration in at least one of the following areas: urban policy, affordable housing, land use, or real estate. Strong writing and communication skills and ability to present quantitative findings are required. The candidate should also have strong organizational, analytical, and project-management abilities; and be comfortable working on a team. Knowledge of federal, state, and municipal housing programs or land use strongly preferred.

The position comes with a salary and a generous array of benefits, which include medical, dental, and vision. Further information regarding benefits can be found here:  http://www.nyu.edu/employees/benefit/full-time/Professional-Research-Staff-Code-103.html.

To Apply:  Applicants should submit a cover letter, resume, writing sample, law/grad school transcripts (unofficial copies are acceptable), and list of 3 references. Send application materials and questions to furmanjobs@nyu.edu. Please include “Policy Director Position” in the subject line. Review of applications will begin immediately. Only candidates of interest will be contacted.

EOE/AA/Minorities/Females/Vet/Disabled/Sexual Orientation/Gender Identity.

February 3, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, February 1, 2018

The SCHMOOZE Is On! Texas A&M Real Property Law Roundtable begins today

I am excited to be in Fort Worth for the next few days at the Texas A&M University School of Law’s 2nd Real Property Law Roundtable (aka, Real Property Law “Schmooze”).  The theme this year is "Bridging the Urban Versus Rural Divide."  Below is the current schedule of events:

8:30 a.m. – 8:45 a.m. -- Welcome and Introductions

Lisa T. Alexander

Faculty Co-Director, Program in Real Estate and Community Development Law Professor of Law, Texas A&M University School of Law
Joint Appointment with the Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning in the College of Architecture at Texas A&M University

Thomas W. Mitchell

Interim Dean, Co-Founder & Former Faculty Co-Director, Program in Real Estate and Community Development Law Professor of Law, Texas A&M University School of Law

8:45 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. –Session One – Urban and Rural Land Use and Local Government Law

Moderator: Timothy Mulvaney, Professor of Law & Associate Dean for Faculty Research and Development, Texas A&M University School of Law

Panelists:

Zachary Bray, University of Kentucky College of Law

Flawed and Fragile: State Restrictions on Local Monument Control

Audrey McFarlane, University of Baltimore School of Law

The Properties of Integration: Mixed Income Housing as Discrimination Management

Alan Romero, University of Wyoming College of Law; Director, Rural Law Center

Bridging the Urban Versus Rural Divide in Extraterritorial Land Use Regulation

10:15 a.m. – 11:45 a.m. –Session Two—Urban and Rural Housing Law and Policy

Moderator: Aric K. Short, Professor of Law & Director, Professionalism & Leadership Program, Texas A&M University School of Law

Panelists:

Lisa T. Alexander, Texas A&M University School of Law

Tiny Homes: Bringing Home the Right to Housing

Blake Hudson, University of Houston Law Center

Consenting to Disaster: The Urban Impacts of Rural Climate Change Denial Culture in the U.S. South

Brandon M. Weiss, University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) School of Law

Carrying Coals to Newcastle: A Locational Analysis of State Housing Subsidy Allocation Rules

12:00 p.m. – 1:15 p.m. – Luncheon and Keynote Presentation (Law School Lecture Hall) Distinguished Real Property Law Keynote Speaker:

Joseph William Singer, Bussey Professor of Law, Harvard Law School

Keynote Presentation:Things Invisible to See: State Action and Private Property

1:30 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. – Works in Progress Session Three –The Sharing Economy and Public and Private Property

Moderator: Gabriel Eckstein, Professor of Law & Director, Program in Natural Resources Systems, Texas A&M University School of Law

 Panelists:

Stephen R. Miller, University of Idaho College of Law / Jamila Jefferson - Jones, University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) School of Law

The Sharing Economy Coalesence: Smart Cities, Big Data, Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Real Property Governance Regimes

Vanessa Casado Pérez, Texas A&M University School of Law

Managing Public Property: Curbside Parking

Nadav Shoked, Northwestern Pritzker School of Law

Property Edges

3:00 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. – Break

3:30 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. – Works in Progress Session Four – Ruminations on Bridging the Urban Rural Divide

Moderator: Luz Herrera, Professor of Law & Associate Dean for Experiential Education, Texas A&M University School of Law

Panelists:

Lisa Pruitt, UC Davis School of Law

The Interdependence of Rural and Urban Economies and Livelihoods

Nestor Davidson, Fordham University School of Law

The Dilemma of Localism in an Era of Political Polarization

Rashmi Dyal-Chand, Northeastern University School of Law

Legal Scholarship for the Urban Core: From the Ground Up

 

 

February 1, 2018 | Permalink | Comments (1)