published journal article

Grocery shopping in California and COVID-19: Transportation, environmental justice, and policy implications

Abstract

To understand how COVID-19 changed grocery shopping and explore implications for transportation and environmental justice, we surveyed in May 2021 California members of KnowledgePanel®, the largest and oldest U.S. probability-based panel. We asked how frequently Californians grocery shopped before and during the pandemic, and how they may grocery shop afterward in-store, online with home delivery (“e-grocery”), or online with store/curbside pick-up (“click-and-pick”). We found that most Californians continued to grocery shop in-person during the pandemic, although less frequently than before. Many relied more on e-grocery (+8.9 %) and click-and-pick (+13.3 %), although older generations remained attached to in-store shopping. African American households grocery shopped in-store less than Whites pre-pandemic; post-pandemic, they may compensate with more e-grocery and click-and-pick. While higher levels of environmental injustice (based on CalEnviroScreen) were associated with less in-store shopping, we found no association with e-grocery or click-and-pick. Our results have implications for travel, food logistics, and parking management.

policy brief

Barrier Effects of Freeways for Pedestrian and Bicycle Travel

research report

Understanding Transportation Programs and Services at California Community Colleges

Publication Date

November 9, 2022

Author(s)

Madeline Brozen, Rasik Hussain, Nicole Matteson

Abstract

High transportation costs and access barriers can make it difficult for community college students to manage employment, household responsibilities, and education, negatively affecting their academic success. Understanding the state of existing transportation services and programs at California community colleges is the first step to addressing these barriers. We inventoried the transportation services, programs, and costs at 115 of the 116 California community colleges as advertised on each campus’ website. We found that most community colleges offer some form of parking or public transit student subsidies but little else. Due to the state education code, parking costs were similar across campuses. In contrast, transit pass costs varied from $0 to more than $100 per semester. On average, students paid more for transit passes than for parking permits. Throughout the search process, information on the campus’ transportation programs and services was difficult to locate since each campus posted this information in different places on their websites. The findings suggest that more colleges should consider offering low-cost transit passes by assessing a transportation fee or enacting partnerships with other government entities. California community colleges may also want to consider expanding how they provide transportation support and better publicizing information on transportation and standardizing how information is provided. Overall, community colleges, with the support of the State, have opportunities to better support students’ transportation needs to ensure that transportation access is not a barrier to educational outcomes.

research report

Dividing Highways: Barrier Effects and Environmental Justice in California

Abstract

We examine the barrier effects of freeways in California. We analyze the association between freeways and three measures of nearby street connectivity: the composite Street Network Disconnectedness index (SNDi), circuity, and the distance between crossings – underpasses or bridges that enable people to cross the freeway. We also assess the quality of a sample of these crossings for pedestrians and cyclists. We find that barrier effects are most pronounced in communities of color. We also find that even where crossings exist, they are unpleasant or even hazardous for pedestrians and cyclists because of high-speed traffic on on- and off-ramps, and because large volumes of traffic are funneled through a small number of crossings rather than being distributed over a wider network.

policy brief

Sustainable Transportation and Just Affordable Housing

Publication Date

October 13, 2022

Author(s)

Allie Padgett, Anne Yoon, Chhandara Pech, Jacob Wasserman, Paul Ong, Tiffany Green

Abstract

California’s intense affordable housing crisis has highlighted the fundamental linkage between land use, transportation, climate policy, and equity. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the main contributor to climate change, is a priority policy goal for the state of California, and cutting vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is a key mechanism for achieving this goal. In order to equitably achieve this reduction, it is critical that affordable housing options be situated in areas that facilitate less driving, through reliable access to public transit, walkability, and proximity to employment. These elements, among others, can combine to create more sustainable communities.In the face of rising housing prices, publicly subsidized affordable housing is crucial for low-income and other vulnerable Californians. This study analyzed geographic transportation, environmental, and racial and economic equity indicators alongside the spatial distributions of two affordable housing programs in 2012 and their change from 2012 to 2019:
• Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV), also known as “Section 8”: the nation’s major tenant-based rental support program, a portable voucher designed to cover the gap between 30% of a household’s income and the cost of rent in a market unit.
• Low-income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC): the nation’s largest project-based affordable housing development program, a tax credit used to subsidize income-restricted, lower-rent housing units.

research report

The Spatial Dilemma of Sustainable Transportation and Just Affordable Housing: Part I, Housing Choice Vouchers

Publication Date

September 13, 2022

Author(s)

Allie Padgett, Anne Yoon, Chhandara Pech, Jacob Wasserman, Paul Ong, Tiffany Green

Abstract

This study examines the spatial distribution of tenant-based Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8) units to understand whether geographic patterns and trends are consistent with climate change and equity goals. The analysis compares the location of heavy commercial vehicle units in 2012 and net changes from 2012 to 2019 with a number of transportation, environmental, and racial and economic equity metrics. While the change in units from 2012 to 2019 shows promising trends for reducing vehicle miles traveled and increasing walkability and transit accessibility, there is a cost: higher exposure to pollution and a higher rate of vehicle collisions. heavy commercial vehicle units are further concentrated in disproportionately low-income neighborhoods and neighborhoods of color, with worsened access to economic opportunity. The findings reveal an inherent structural dilemma in whether the heavy commercial vehicle program is able to simultaneously achieve climate and equity goals.

research report

The Spatial Dilemma of Sustainable Transportation and Just Affordable Housing: Part II, Low-income Housing Tax Credits

Publication Date

September 1, 2022

Author(s)

Allie Padgett, Anne Yoon, Chhandara Pech, Jacob Wasserman, Paul Ong, Tiffany Green

Abstract

This study examines the spatial distribution of Low-income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) units to understand whether geographic patterns and trends are consistent with climate change and equity goals. The analysis compares the location of LIHTC units in 2012 and net changes from 2012 to 2019 with a number of transportation, environmental, and racial and economic equity metrics. Unit locations are, at best, somewhat more sustainable than the state overall, with slightly lower-skewing vehicle miles traveled and better walkability, though low transit accessibility. What environmental gains there were, though, come at the cost of higher exposure to pollution. LIHTC units are also concentrated in disproportionately low-income neighborhoods and neighborhoods of color, with worse access to economic opportunity. The findings reveal an inherent structural dilemma in whether the LIHTC program is able to simultaneously achieve climate and equity goals.

research report

Simulating Life with Personally-Owned Autonomous Vehicles through a Naturalistic Experiment with Personal Drivers

Abstract

Forty-three households in the Sacramento region representing diverse demographics, modal preferences, mobility barriers, and weekly vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided personal chauffeurs for one or two weeks to simulate travel behavior with a personally owned, fully autonomous vehicle (AV). During the chauffeur week(s), the total number of trips increased on average by 25 percent, 85 percent of which were “zero-occupancy” (ZOV) trips (when the chauffeur is the only occupant). The average VMT for all households increased by 60 percent, over half of which came from ZOV trips. VMT increased most in households with mobility barriers and those with less auto-dependency but least in higher VMT households and families with children. Transit, ride-hailing, biking, and walking trips dropped by 70 percent, 55 percent, 38 percent, and 10 percent, respectively. The results highlight how AVs can enhance mobility, but also adversely affect the transportation system.

research report

Steering California’s Transportation Future: A Report on Possible Scenarios and Recommendations

Abstract

To investigate possible future transportation and land use scenarios for California as well as their likely precipitating policies and potential consequences, the team convened a panel of 18 experts and used a novel variation of the Delphi method to systematically explore four specific scenarios and probe the desirability and likelihood of each. The scenario that panel members collectively thought most desirable for California (one with diverse transportation options and higher-density development) was also the one they thought least likely to materialize by 2050. This report describes the findings of the three surveys and two meetings that the method entailed and summarizes some of the discussions among panelists. The report includes reflections on the salient but unexpected finding that panelists viewed trust in government as both critical to effecting the scenario they considered most desirable and also lacking to such an extent that pursuing that desirable outcome could cause unintended consequences or outright failure. Accordingly, the report discusses possible implications and outlines policy recommendations for improving both processes and conditions that can instill in California’s government more trust, without which a future of multimodal transportation and higher-density, mixed land uses is unlikely to succeed.

policy brief

Exploring Future Scenarios for Transportation and Land Use in California

Abstract

What will California’s transportation and land use future look like? Will Californians gain more mobility and housing options that support the state’s economic, social, and climate goals? Or will the car continue to shape what cities look like and how people get around in them? These questions are important because how Californians live and move in the future will be shaped by investments and policies made today.The California 100 Initiative is exploring California’s future across many realms of public life, and they tasked the UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies with mapping plausible futures of California’s transportation and land use systems. As part of this work, we developed a modified Delphi method and conducted a series of surveys and panel discussions with 18 experts. We presented panelists with four possible scenarios — two distinct land use futures intersecting with two transportation futures (see Figure 1). Their consensus opinion was that the most desirable scenario (“Easy to Get Around without a Car”) is also the least likely to materialize, due to faults in the political planning process. Despite promising state policies to increase transportation choices, problematic local land use politics and patterns appear likely to yield a future scenario (“Lots of Travel Choices, but Most Will Drive”) that continues car dependence and chronic congestion, absent a significant rebuilding of government trust and capacity