The historical impacts of transportation planning and investment have left lasting scars on communities of color and low-income communities. This research evaluates online equity tools that exist as spatial dashboards —i.e., interactive maps in which the parameters of interaction are controlled. Twelve tools ranging from the national to the local level were identified and qualitatively assessed for their ability to address conditions related to transportation equity. The evaluation focused on how each tool defines disadvantaged communities, the outcomes they measure (benefits, burdens, or other), their ease of use, and their ability to guide decisions about equity. The findings show a diversity of methods and metrics in defining disadvantage, with most relying on composite demographic indexes and comparative population thresholds. Tools most commonly provided accessibility metrics to assess transportation benefits, while incorporating a range of environmental and health indicators as burden measures. A minority of tools had integrated features to support planning or project implementation. This study provides examples of promising practices in transportation equity support tools.

To provide California with recommendations for how to advance transportation equity, this study examines how state DOTs and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) are implementing equity-based planning. The research team conducted a content analysis on the long-range transportation plans (LRTPs) and active transportation plans of six state DOTs, and the LRTPs and federal transportation improvement documents of six California MPOs to identify equity practices and performance measures in those plans. They also interviewed representatives from five state DOTs to identify methods the organizations are using to advance equity. Every organization acknowledged the importance of considering equity, but the nature and degree with which equity practices were implemented varied considerably. Outreach and engagement were the most common equity practices. Many DOTs had developed or were developing performance metrics for equity, but several lacked appropriate disaggregate data to identify effects on people of color or other marginalized population groups. Few organizations explicitly identified how equity was guiding decision-making in their plans. Innovative practices included establishing listening sessions to define transportation equity, centering public health in decision-making, developing creative ways to direct funding to the neediest communities, and institutionalizing equity through leadership positions or bottom-up decision-making within functional areas.

We interviewed eight subject-matter experts in California in 2023 tounderstand how travel behavior and priorities may change in response to direct experience with road collisions. Expertsrepresented a variety of perspectives, including medical doctors, advocates for active transportation safety, and advocates for people with disabilities. Their diverse specialties enabled us to capture a variety of concerns without triggering emotionally sensitive areas for people who have directly experienced road collisions. These experts identified common themes, including mental stress from the prospect of returning to driving—especially on freeways, lesser incidence of long-term changes in travel modes after experiencing a collision, dependence on others for rides in private vehicles, and changing routes or times of day of travel when traveling independently. These experts also explained how people’s mode choices are also affected by general concerns about collisions in the news more than by specific personal experiences with near misses. Interview subjects’ spoke of more specific concerns as well. These included but were not limited to, bicyclists using sidewalks instead of bike lanes when both are present, feeling stigmatized from using public transit or paratransit after experiencing a collision, and concerns with motorists treating bicyclists badly. These initial interviewsclarify areas of focus and methodology for future qualitative and quantitative studies on the intersection oftransportation safety and travel behavior change, particularly as they involve people who have directly experienced road collisions.

While transportation infrastructure and efficiency should inform where to build more housing, little is known about how housing allocation and development processes can be coordinated more systematically with transportation. To date, transportation-housing coordination has often relied on the densification of areas near rail transit stations, putting heavy burdens on these locations and their residents. Much less attention has been paid to how densification can be achieved in a more equitable manner by encompassing other sites. This report directs attention to non-rail locations, specifically low vehicle miles traveled (VMT) areas and bus corridors, and examines the challenges that can arise in promoting densification more broadly. It shows that data uncertainties can make it challenging to identify low VMT locations and that prioritizing only low VMT locations for residential development may have limited effectiveness in expanding housing opportunities in high opportunity areas. The report further explores ways to achieve more inclusive densification of non-rail transit areas and highlights the importance of anti-displacement strategies.