UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies

This report examines the growing yet understudied phenomenon of urban vehicle residency, wherein economically active individuals, including professionals, retirees, and students—reside in personal vehicles due to housing constraints and shifting employment norms. Despite their stable engagement in urban economies, these residents are systematically excluded from infrastructure access through restrictive parking policies and service models misaligned with their needs. Using ethnographic interviews and spatial analysis, the study identifies three distinct resident typologies: Strategic Budgeters, Lifestyle Optimizers, and Self-Sufficient Nomads. While their motivations vary, all emphasize the need for legal, safe parking and basic infrastructure, while expressing resistance to institutionalized or service-heavy programs. The report reframes vehicle residency as a form of housing innovation and proposes the adaptive reuse of underutilized municipal parking garages as a scalable, infrastructure-based intervention. Garages provide environmental protection, utility access, and operational advantages over street parking or crisis-response models. A user-informed, three-tiered service model is introduced, alongside a spatially driven site selection strategy. A policy framework, drawing from carshare parking regulation, outlines steps for regulatory integration, stakeholder engagement, and interagency coordination. This model offers a cost-effective, inclusive alternative to enforcement-centric approaches. By leveraging existing infrastructure to accommodate diverse housing strategies, the findings contribute to urban planning literature on informal housing, mobility, and infrastructure adaptation.

The urgency of establishing a robust public Direct Current Fast Charging (DCFC) infrastructure in neighborhoods predominantly composed of renters is becoming increasingly critical. With the anticipated transition to electric vehicles (EVs) projected to reshape our transportation landscape, the current disparity in public DCFC access risks perpetuating existing inequities in EV adoption. This study examines the potential consequences of neglecting the needs of renters, who largely lack access to overnight charging options, thereby limiting their ability to adopt EVs and hindering economic opportunities for local communities. The current distribution of public DCFC stations across Los Angeles County reveals significant gaps, particularly in areas with high concentrations of renters. Our analysis indicates that approximately 13,492 DCFC ports are needed to meet the projected basic demand from renters. Yet, only 2,533 ports are currently available, and the existing infrastructure primarily caters to freeway users rather than local renters, intensifying competition for access to public EV fast charging. To rectify the public DCFC infrastructure deficit, we propose expanding the number of DCFC ports by at least fivefold. This expansion would involve strategically positioning new DCFC ports in urban areas characterized by high rental populations. To be successful, power utility companies should prioritize the development of resources that facilitate and expedite the permitting process for public DCFC ports. In addition, local governments should support the urban DCFC expansion by implementing financial mechanisms to ensure ongoing assistance for the operation of newly installed public DCFC ports in areas where immediate demand may be limited until local EV adoption increases.

California faces significant challenges related to housing affordability and climate vulnerability, especially in rural and disadvantaged communities. The Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) grant program, administered by the California Strategic Growth Council, seeks to address these issues by funding affordable housing projects near public transit to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This research critically examines the AHSC program’s scoring and selection methodologies, highlighting structural biases that disadvantage rural applicants due to lower scores on greenhouse gas reduction metrics. Utilizing quantitative analysis of historical application data from four recent funding cycles and qualitative insights from semi-structured interviews with program administrators and stakeholders, the study identifies key areas of imbalance, such as geographic allocation practices leading to suboptimal environmental outcomes and scoring methodologies inadequately capturing the long-term benefits of affordable housing. The analysis demonstrates no significant differences in greenhouse gas reduction between projects from disadvantaged versus non-disadvantaged communities, underscoring effective integration of equity objectives. To enhance equity and effectiveness, the research recommends adopting a revised greenhouse gas efficiency metric, refining geographic goal implementation, and extending evaluation periods. These strategic adjustments can improve fairness, transparency, and overall effectiveness of the AHSC program, enabling better alignment between housing affordability, geographic equity, and environmental goals. The Strategic Growth Council can utilize these findings and recommendations to ensure equitable distribution of funding and to optimize the environmental and social impact of public investments in sustainable housing and transportation solutions.

This policy brief examines the potential for land value capture (LVC) strategies to fund the completion of the Los Angeles River Bikeway (LARiverWay) through the San Fernando Valley, a critical gap in the city’s active transportation network. Despite strong regional momentum around river revitalization, several segments remain unfunded. This report analyzes three incomplete segments—4, 5, and 7—through a one-mile radius land use, demographic, and zoning study. Findings reveal divergent development patterns north and south of the river. The north side exhibits more flexible zoning, higher renter-occupancy rates, and stronger housing demand, suggesting greater LVC feasibility. In contrast, the south side is constrained by single-family zoning and lower growth. The report recommends tailoring LVC tools, such as commercial linkage fees, to fit neighborhood conditions. It also proposes reclassifying the bikeway as a transit corridor to unlock Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) incentives and revising outdated overlays to support higher-density development. Additionally, the report advocates for expanding or supplementing the existing Project Impact Assessment (PIA) fee and forming public-private partnerships with commercial stakeholders. If implemented, these strategies could equitably finance the bikeway while fostering mixed-use growth and improved access to transit, recreation, and housing.

Bicycle boulevards, also known as neighborhood greenways, are low-speed, low-volume residential streets with traffic calming measures designed to help pedestrians and less-confident bicyclists feel comfortable sharing the road with vehicles. The Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) aims to incorporate best practices from other cities’ bike boulevards to incorporate into their “Stress-Free Connections” project, an effort to enhance the bicycle and pedestrian network citywide. This research analyzed the bike boulevard planning and implementation process in three cities, Long Beach, Minneapolis, and Albuquerque, by conducting nine interviews with practitioners and community advocates in combination with a review of associated plans, city council minutes, news articles, blogs, and social media posts. This research found that popular design treatments for vehicle speed and volume management as well as the facilitation of safe crossings included mini traffic circles, traffic diverters, and pedestrian hybrid beacons. Commonly cited challenges across the three case study cities included consistent data collection and evaluation of the effectiveness of design treatments on bike boulevards as well as community pushback. This research provides several recommendations for LADOT, such as assessing the feasibility of incorporating popular design treatments in their South LA project area, evaluating the effectiveness of design treatments at regular intervals, and supporting group bicycle tours after design treatments are implemented.

By 2027, the Sawtelle neighborhood on Los Angeles’ westside will be uniquely positioned between the existing Metro E Line and the upcoming Metro D Line. The introduction of the D Line is expected to bring changing mobility demands and travel patterns as more people enter and pass through Sawtelle. This shift, along with the city’s implementation of pedestrian and bicycle improvements outlined in its Mobility Plan 2035, creates an opportunity to prioritize safe, multimodal transportation for all Sawtelle residents and visitors. In light of these developments, the West Los Angeles Sawtelle Mobility and Environmental Committee (MEC), a standing committee of the West Los Angeles Sawtelle Neighborhood Council, partnered with the researcher to launch the Sawtelle Mobility Study. Through an online survey, pop-up events, and a walk audit, the study gathered direct input from community members about their mobility needs and priorities.Key findings from the community outreach events reflect residents' strong interest in safer and more accessible active transportation options. Pedestrian improvements such as high-visibility crosswalks, wider sidewalks, and better lighting emerged as top priorities. Participants advocated for a north-south bike lane along with safer bicycle intersections and more bicycle parking. Public transit enhancements focused on providing real-time information, shelter, and cleanliness at stops. Based on these results, the study recommends upgrading the Barrington Ave bike facility, improving pedestrian crosswalks, and enhancing bus stop amenities. The Sawtelle Mobility Study lays the groundwork for a more inclusive and connected Sawtelle, guided by ongoing collaboration between residents and the Neighborhood Council.

In 2016, the City of Los Angeles Planning Commission produced the Mobility Plan 2035, an element of the General Plan, which includes bicycle path projects. The city of Los Angeles has struggled to implement the Green Network (Class I Bicycle Path Network) included in the Mobility Plan 2035 and disproportionately distributes cycling infrastructure and green space to more affluent, White neighborhoods. This project aims to answer two research questions: What is the state of existing bicycle path infrastructure in the city of Los Angeles? Given the city’s goals and plans related to bicycle path infrastructure, how should the agency prioritize projects? To answer these questions, I draw on other infrastructure prioritization models and the goals of the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) to develop a model for prioritizing projects. The model most heavily weights the Equity, Safety, and Network Expansion aspects of projects. It also prioritizes bicycle path segments that would score well on competitive state grants such as the Caltrans Active Transportation Program. The final weighted model better prioritized bicycle path segments crossing through census tracts with high Equity Index scores. Even with this priority, the bicycle path segments with priority scores in the top quintile are still evenly distributed across the city of Los Angeles.This modeling effort highlights the importance of translating the city’s goals into quantifiable measures that provide LADOT with the information necessary to strategically prioritize its infrastructure investments. To improve future prioritization models, I recommend that LADOT focus on collaborating with other departments and community stakeholders to better understand each path segment, including cost-benefit analyses as part of the planning process, and expanding this modeling effort to other assets included in LADOT’s Capital Infrastructure Plan.

This research assesses how the City of Oakland is meeting the basic transportation needs of its residents, defined by their ability to safely and comfortably use critical infrastructure such as sidewalks, roads, street lighting, street trees, and curb ramps. The study investigates the relationship between neighborhood demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and the quality and availability of transportation assets, aiming to determine if these resources are distributed equitably.The analysis utilized geospatial datasets on pavement condition, curb ramp ADA compliance, sidewalk integrity, and street tree conditions. These factors were mapped and compared against OakDOT’s Priority Neighborhoods dataset, which assigns each of the City’s 116 census tracts an equity priority designation. Findings reveal inequities in infrastructure quality. Issues like deteriorating pavement, non-ADA-compliant curb ramps, and severe sidewalk damage are disproportionately distributed, with many lower equity priority neighborhoods unexpectedly displaying higher maintenance needs. However, closer examination showed that these issues in lower equity priority areas, particularly in the hilly neighborhoods northeast of the I-580 freeway, are significantly influenced by environmental factors such as steep and uneven slopes. Higher equity priority neighborhoods face compounded disadvantages, including higher pollution exposure, increased ambulatory disability rates, and limited street tree coverage. These overlapping vulnerabilities highlight the need for continued targeted investment in high equity priority neighborhoods. The study recommends expanding asset data collection, developing tailored performance metrics, integrating these metrics into prioritization frameworks, and collaborating closely with community organizations. These measures aim to foster transparency and equity in Oakland’s transportation infrastructure planning and investments.

This report directly supports San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA)’s equity goals by identifying past inequities in service delivery, planning, and community engagement––particularly during the city’s transition from private railway companies to publicly funded municipal transit. This report focuses on the priority neighborhoods Lakeview, Oceanview, Merced Heights, and Ingleside Terraces (LOMI), home to multigenerational communities of color. Many residents in these areas are homeowners but may have limited disposable income, which can create financial challenges. To understand how access to public transportation has been shaped by past SFMTA decisions, a qualitative analysis of historical documents, books, and digital archives was conducted to analyze public transit developments in LOMI neighborhoods between 1938 and 1971. This research was complemented by ten interviews with current and former residents capturing personal narratives often absent from institutional records. Archival research revealed limited engagement between SFMTA and LOMI residents during planning decisions within this time period. Interviewees for the study shared their concerns on accessing basic needs, safety while boarding buses, and the decline of Black residents in LOMI. Interviewees did highlight the improvement in reliability, frequency, and cleanliness of Muni service over the past few decades. Several policy recommendations were identified to improve community engagement going forward. We recommend SFMTA (1) send representatives to interact with community members at intercept events, (2) implement a ‘no-wrong door’ approach, (3) expand accessibility efforts for elderly and disabled residents, (4) increase accessibility to essential services, and (5) improve engagement with non-English speakers.

Transportation is often necessary for accessing food, medical care, income, and other essential services. This study examines how nine major benefit programs serving low-income households in Los Angeles County, including CalFresh, Medi-Cal, CalWORKs, and transportation-specific programs like Metro LIFE and Metrolink Mobility-4-All, currently support transportation access. Within each program, this analysis evaluates transportation support, enrollment accessibility, and opportunities for integrating transportation across benefit programs. The results show that seven of the nine programs offer some form of transportation benefit, but the level and nature of support for mobility needs vary widely. This analysis defines meaningful transportation access as the ability to use multiple modes of transportation and reach various types of destinations. While most programs offer some form of mobility assistance, these benefits are typically limited to a single mode or destination type, and therefore do not achieve comprehensive transportation access. Without this level of access, low-income individuals, in particular, are left with limited, and often inadequate, options for reaching essential services such as food, healthcare, or employment. This paper concludes with near- and long-term policy recommendations to improve coordination, enhance communication, and draw on other pilots that consolidate transportation benefits into a more coherent, accessible system. The findings highlight how aligning mobility with benefit delivery is essential for building an equitable and effective support system.