The Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) was chosen by the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the California Department of Transportation to pilot a new program, Partnership for Integrated Planning (PIP), which aimed to: streamline planning and the project-delivery process; avoid environmental impacts; foster collaboration among planning, transportation, and environmental agencies; and engage the public at the beginning of long-term transportation planning.

Merced County provides a challenging test case through rapid population growth, cultural diversity, high unemployment, and increasing conflicts between stewardship of sensitive habitats and prime farmland and demands for transportation improvements and housing.

The Partnership for Integrated Planning (PIP) included the development of geographic information system (GIS) tools for modeling growth and environmental impacts to produce real-time maps and tables resulting from policy choices at public meetings. PIP engaged all regionally relevant planning, natural resource, and regulatory agencies in data-sharing exercises to integrate data important to each agency into the scenario testing and planning process. Most importantly, the Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG), which is the coordinating partner in PIP, led an extensive outreach program to engage the community in PIP.

To project land-use changes, we adapted UPlan, a rule-based land-use model developed at the University of California at Davis. UPlan incorporates user-controlled policy inputs ranging from general plan map choices, housing densities, and household labor rates to the ranking of environmental amenities. These are combined with user-settable infrastructure growth attractors to distribute population-growth estimates into spatially explicit land-use scenarios. UPlan stores all user-specified assumptions so many scenarios may be tested against one another in a transparent fashion. We evaluated information needs by asking planning agencies which features (such as roads and urban service boundaries) they considered attractions and discouragement factors for growth. Resource agencies were asked what environmental factors should discourage or constrain growth. All agencies were asked to provide all available and relevant data.

This shared information resulted in an Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) map and a Prime Agricultural Lands map. These two maps were evaluated at a workshop attended by resource agencies’ representatives, elected officials, and city and county planners. Contributors included over 20 federal, state, and non-governmental organizations.

Like most public agencies, MCAG has historically solicited public input for regional transportation planning from a few community workshops. For example, in 2001 the agency held seven workshops for its previous plan. Under PIP, MCAG held 20-32 meetings each quarter, for a total of 100+ public meetings in 18 months. In addition, MCAG replaced the previous narrow focus on transportation by asking county residents to develop a vision for land use, natural resources, and transportation throughout their community. MCAG mastered the use of UPlan and accompanying environmental data and improved substantially on both throughout the course of these public meetings.

Historically, transportation-plan approval has run into considerable public and agency opposition. Federal officials in the last decade have attempted to streamline the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, which is California’s NEPA equivalent), and other permitting procedures. A goal of PIP was to find a method for responsibly arriving at a consensus plan with less conflict, particularly in the environmental-review phase. The Regional Transportation Plan was approved by the MCAG Governing Board and received no opposition during the CEQA Environmental Impact Report (EIR) public-comment period.

Results of the Partnership for Integrated Planning model include:

* 800 percent increase in public participation in the transportation-planning process * 89 percent of participants said they enjoyed the PIP project * 89.1 percent of participants said they learned more about transportation issues * 30 percent increase in awareness of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) among all county residents * New issues brought to the surface from county groups who had not previously participated in the process * Better relationships were built at both the county and city level among civic organizations, agencies, and residents * RTP was approved by the MCAG Governing Board and received no opposition during public-comment periods * Development of an Environmentally Sensitive Areas map based on shared information from a variety of resource- agency databases * Development of a Prime Agricultural Lands map based on input and information from a variety of agricultural interests

Further research is needed on the portability of this information and this tool-centered collaborative approach. Adjacent counties with similar needs are prime candidates for study. In addition, future projects should include measures of the social and political planning decision network structures existing before and after the conduct of such projects.

The Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) was chosen by the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the California Department of Transportation to pilot a new program, Partnership for Integrated Planning (PIP), which aimed to: streamline planning and the project-delivery process; avoid environmental impacts; foster collaboration among planning, transportation, and environmental agencies; and engage the public at the beginning of long-term transportation planning. Merced County provides a challenging test case through rapid population growth, cultural diversity, high unemployment, and increasing conflicts between stewardship of sensitive habitats and prime farmland and demands for transportation improvements and housing. The Partnership for Integrated Planning (PIP) included the development of geographic information system (GIS) tools for modeling growth and environmental impacts to produce real-time maps and tables resulting from policy choices at public meetings. PIP engaged all regionally relevant planning, natural resource, and regulatory agencies in data-sharing exercises to integrate data important to each agency into the scenario testing and planning process. Most importantly, the Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG), which is the coordinating partner in PIP, led an extensive outreach program to engage the community in PIP. To project land-use changes, we adapted UPlan, a rule-based land-use model developed at the University of California at Davis. UPlan incorporates user-controlled policy inputs ranging from general plan map choices, housing densities, and household labor rates to the ranking of environmental amenities. These are combined with user-settable infrastructure growth attractors to distribute population-growth estimates into spatially explicit land-use scenarios. UPlan stores all user-specified assumptions so many scenarios may be tested against one another in a transparent fashion. We evaluated information needs by asking planning agencies which features (such as roads and urban service boundaries) they considered attractions and discouragement factors for growth. Resource agencies were asked what environmental factors should discourage or constrain growth. All agencies were asked to provide all available and relevant data. This shared information resulted in an Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) map and a Prime Agricultural Lands map. These two maps were evaluated at a workshop attended by resource agencies’ representatives, elected officials, and city and county planners. Contributors included over 20 federal, state, and non-governmental organizations. Like most public agencies, MCAG has historically solicited public input for regional transportation planning from a few community workshops. For example, in 2001 the agency held seven workshops for its previous plan. Under PIP, MCAG held 20-32 meetings each quarter, for a total of 100+ public meetings in 18 months. In addition, MCAG replaced the previous narrow focus on transportation by asking county residents to develop a vision for land use, natural resources, and transportation throughout their community. MCAG mastered the use of UPlan and accompanying environmental data and improved substantially on both throughout the course of these public meetings. Historically, transportation-plan approval has run into considerable public and agency opposition. Federal officials in the last decade have attempted to streamline the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, which is California’s NEPA equivalent), and other permitting procedures. A goal of PIP was to find a method for responsibly arriving at a consensus plan with less conflict, particularly in the environmental-review phase. The Regional Transportation Plan was approved by the MCAG Governing Board and received no opposition during the CEQA Environmental Impact Report (EIR) public-comment period. Results of the Partnership for Integrated Planning model include: • 800 percent increase in public participation in the transportation-planning process • 89 percent of participants said they enjoyed the PIP project • 89.1 percent of participants said they learned more about transportation issues • 30 percent increase in awareness of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) among all county residents • New issues brought to the surface from county groups who had not previously participated in the process • Better relationships were built at both the county and city level among civic organizations, agencies, and residents • RTP was approved by the MCAG Governing Board and received no opposition during public-comment periods • Development of an Environmentally Sensitive Areas map based on shared information from a variety of resource- agency databases • Development of a Prime Agricultural Lands map based on input and information from a variety of agricultural interests Further research is needed on the portability of this information and this tool-centered collaborative approach. Adjacent counties with similar needs are prime candidates for study. In addition, future projects should include measures of the social and political planning decision network structures existing before and after the conduct of such projects.

The first fact to know about CARA is that participating groups or individuals collectively felt that scores of sets of facts were critical to their individual or cooperative work with California's rivers. In all, 99 sets of statewide, regional, or local data were integrated directly into CARA. Links were created to another 206 internet providers of information.

CARA contains 39 sets of mapped geographical information system(GIS) layers, 60 sets of tabular (database) and textual text) data, as well as links (internet connections) to 510 additional maps, tables and texts located on other servers. All of this data is organized by watershed and theme. CARA makes the data available to interested parties over the internet for a wide variety of analytical and management purposes.

In the next 40 years, the eight counties of the San Joaquin Valley are projected to double in population from 3.3 million to more than 7 million (Great Valley Center 2006). The region faces many challenges with respect to its capacity to accommodate this dramatic increase in population while maintaining its environmental infrastructure and preserving its diminishing natural resources.

In response to these growing pressures, Governor Schwarzenegger announced in June 2005 the formation of the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley (Partnership) to “the economic well-being of the Valley and the quality of life of its residents” (Department of Business Housing and Transportation 2006a). This 26-member Partnership, led by the Secretary of the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency, is composed of eight state government members (primarily cabinet level appointees), eight local government members (primarily members of county boards of supervisor), eight private sector members (representing leadership in various business sectors), and two deputy chairs. The Partnership region includes San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Tulare, Kings, and Kern Counties.

The Information Center for the Environment (ICE) at UC Davis supported the Partnership by providing geographic information system (GIS) data and growth allocation build-out scenarios. Based on input from the Partnership and the Great Valley Center, ICE developed and produced seven urban growth scenarios for the region that project popula¬tion to year 2050 using UPlan, a rulebased GIS urban growth model (Johnston et al. 2006). These scenarios were developed based on different goals (such as Compact—within current spheres of influence; Farmland Protection—prime farmland masked; Great Cities—create “mega-cities” in concentrated regions) and produced vastly different outcomes.

This paper discusses the seven growth scenarios and the implications of mapped future urban growth in the San Joaquin under those scenarios on a collection of biologically significant factors. A team of federal, state, and non-government organization biological experts selected 14 key biological layers crucial for protecting high value open space in the San Joaquin Valley. ICE combined the modeled urban growth output for the seven growth scenarios with the 14 biologically significant GIS layers. The growth scenarios reflect seven different policy directions that the region’s leaders may choose when planning for growth in the upcoming several decades. Results showed that depending on the scenario chosen (and hence the policy emphasis), the magnitude of biological resources likely to be lost varies significantly. The scenario with the least overall ecological impact is the Compact Growth Scenario (Scenario 3), with Scenarios 6 (New Cities) and 7 (Great Cities) also fairly low in relative impact. Scenario 4 (Prime Farmland Protection) resulted in the largest decline in the acreage of the 14 key biological data layers we examined. Scenarios 5 (I-5 to Highway 99 Exclusion), 2 (East/West Road Improvement) and 1 (Status Quo) also showed relatively high negative impacts.

The University of California Information Center for the Environment (ICE) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) are developing a GIS-based analytical framework to improve the effectiveness of biological mitigation throughout California. Goals include incorporating the best available sets of mapped natural resource data into the early project planning and preliminary environmental assessments for single and multiple projects. Incorporation of these data will facilitate early and more strategic identification of mitigation requirements and op¬portunities, for both single-project and regional mitigation efforts.

The cost of delays and over-runs due to late and fragmented project-by-project environmental planning and mitigation in California is estimated at $75 million per year. Developing systematic GIS-based decision-support tools to identify important species and habitats, both those impacted directly by Caltrans activities and those that might contribute to effective mitigation in the same locale or watershed will permit Caltrans, counties, and environmental regulators to incorporate the results of biological impact assessments earlier in the planning process, and identify opportunities mitigating the combined biological impacts of many projects in a given area. By building upon previous efforts and using tools known to be effective for integrated analyses, this project will help Caltrans improve planning results, decrease costs, improve project delivery schedules and provide greater environmental protection in the long-term.

To accomplish these goals, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis and conservation planning principles are being applied to develop multi-scale longrange (10-year) mitigation need forecasts for each Caltrans district, county, and watershed in the State of California. These will be used to determine the cumulative mitigation needs for early biological mitigation planning of multiple projects in a given area. Available statewide biological data have been integrated into a database that can be queried by Caltrans district, county, or any of six levels of watershed classification. For a queried geographic area, the database returns the biological resources expected to exist in the area based on the available data, as well as the potential impacts to these resources from Caltrans projects that are currently funded to be constructed in the area over the next 10 years. The type of project programmed to occur was then used to estimate the impact zone of each project (e.g. road repaving, road widening, new road, etc.). Then, by querying the database for a given geographic region, the area, habitats and species potentially affected by cumulative biological impacts from all programmed highway projects in that region can be estimated. From this, estimates of area and types of lands that would need to be acquired for mitigation can be determined.

This project provides a framework for analyzing and estimating biological mitigation needs that could be generalized for use in transportation planning in other geographic areas, as well as for other types of planning. The database schema developed here could easily be adapted to analyze the potential impacts and mitigation needs for urban growth planning efforts, and other development projects with biological impacts that require biological mitigation planning. Overall, by integrating available data into a useful database format, this project has developed a system for assessing long-term biological mitigation needs that will assist in the implementation of early biological mitigation planning.

Riparian habitats in the California hardwoods zone are slowly being converted from natural landuses to permanently anthropogenic landuses. Riparian habitat is important for species diversity, water quality, and recreation. CA Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) Hardwoods Rangeland Monitoring Project's map of the riparian areas in the hardwoods zone was combined with the UCSB California Gap Analysis Managed Areas map to show the area of the riparian habitat in the study not protected from development. Using ARC/INFO GRID, it was found that, of the approximately 2,780,000 acres of riparian mapped by CDF, 65% is privately owned and not managed for biodiversity. A digital elevation model (DEM) was used to determine which riparian areas were on slopes of <10¦ . Riparian habitat on a slope of <10¦ and privately owned is at a higher risk of development and represents 35% of the total riparian habitat in the study area. In addition, to the management status and slope of the riparian hardwood habitat, the population growth rate of the study area counties was examined. The population of California is estimated to increase from 23,383,000 in 1996 to 47,507,000 by 2020, with 44% of the population growth expected in occur in the counties with riparian hardwood habitat. In order to protect the riparian habitat in the hardwoods zone, a coordinated effort between 42 counties in the hardwoods zone is needed.

In the next 40 years, the eight counties of the San Joaquin Valley are projected to double in population from 3.3 million to more than 7 million (Great Valley Center 2006). The region faces many challenges with respect to its capacity to accommodate this dramatic increase in population while maintaining its environmental infrastructure and preserving its diminishing natural resources.

In response to these growing pressures, Governor Schwarzenegger announced in June 2005 the formation of the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley (Partnership) to “…improve the economic well-being of the Valley and the quality of life of its residents” (Department of Business Housing and Transportation 2006a). This 26-member Partnership, led by the Secretary of the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency, is composed of eight state government members (primarily cabinet level appointees), eight local government members (primarily members of county boards of supervisor), eight private sector members (representing leadership in various business sectors), and two deputy chairs. The Partnership region includes San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Tulare, Kings, and Kern Counties.

The Information Center for the Environment (ICE) at UC Davis supported the Partnership by providing geographic information system (GIS) data and growth allocation build-out scenarios. Based on input from the Partnership and the Great Valley Center, ICE developed and produced seven urban growth scenarios for the region that project popula¬tion to year 2050 using UPlan, a rule-based GIS urban growth model (Johnston et al. 2006). These scenarios were developed based on different goals (such as Compact—within current spheres of influence; Farmland Protection—prime farmland masked; Great Cities—create “mega-cities” in concentrated regions) and produced vastly different outcomes.

This paper discusses the seven growth scenarios and the implications of mapped future urban growth in the San Joaquin under those scenarios on a collection of biologically significant factors. A team of federal, state, and non-government organization biological experts selected 14 key biological layers crucial for protecting high value open space in the San Joaquin Valley. ICE combined the modeled urban growth output for the seven growth scenarios with the 14 biologically significant GIS layers. The growth scenarios reflect seven different policy directions that the region’s leaders may choose when planning for growth in the upcoming several decades. Results showed that depending on the scenario chosen (and hence the policy emphasis), the magnitude of biological resources likely to be lost varies significantly. The scenario with the least overall ecological impact is the Compact Growth Scenario (Scenario 3), with Scenarios 6 (New Cities) and 7 (Great Cities) also fairly low in relative impact. Scenario 4 (Prime Farmland Protection) resulted in the largest decline in the acreage of the 14 key biological data layers we examined. Scenarios 5 (I-5 to Highway 99 Exclusion), 2 (East/West Road Improvement) and 1 (Status Quo) also showed relatively high negative impacts.

The Sacramento, California, U.S.A, Area Council of Governments (SACOG) commissioned the Information Center for the Environment, University of California, Davis (ICE) to assemble a suite of the best available region-wide GIS data depicting natural resource values and conservation opportunities for the six County, 6,500 square mile (16,830 square kilometer) Sacramento, California region. This region is planned and managed by a large and diverse number of government entities and it contains a population of approximately 2,000,000 with a wide range of natural resource and economic interests. The purpose of this commission was to create a visual, conceptual tool depicting and weighting natural resource variables that are of value to the many parties of interest in land use and conservation planning in the region.