Institute of Transportation Studies at UC Berkeley

Many small, resource-strapped communities located in areas vulnerable to wildfire don’t have resources to conduct dedicated evacuation studies and many do not consider the impact of background traffic (i.e., normal traffic rather than evacuating traffic) on evacuation. In response, we explored the performance of several generalizable evacuation strategies with background traffic for representative communities in Marin County, including the Ross Valley, Woodacre Bowl, Tamalpais Valley, and an area near Highway 101 and Ignacio Boulevard in Novato (hereafter referred to as ‘Novato Neighborhood’). The strategies we explored include vehicle reduction (i.e., evacuees share a vehicle), phased evacuation (i.e., evacuees in different zones have different departure times), and off-street parking (i.e., street parking is prohibited on a high-fire Red Flag Day to increase overall road capacity in the event of an evacuation). We then tested each strategy using a wildfire-traffic simulation framework.

Shared micromobility (bikesharing and scooter sharing) experienced market growth since 2021, rebounding from the pandemic across markets in the US, Mexico, and Canada. In partnership with the North American Bikeshare and Scootershare Association (NABSA) and Toole Design, researchers at the Transportation Sustainability Research Center (TSRC) at UC Berkeley have collaborated on the data collection and analysis of the shared micromobility industry metrics through a series of annual reports beginning in 2019. This includes a series of operator and agency surveys.1 Most recently, TSRC researchers collaborated on an Operator Survey (n=29) and an Agency Survey (n=52), distributed between January 2023 and June 2023, of all known shared micromobility operators and agencies as part of the 2022 state-of-the-industry report. Similar surveys were deployed in January 2022 and May 2022. These surveys include questions about shared micromobility systems2 operating within those agency jurisdictions and operator markets.

This brief explores how shared micromobility (bikesharing and scooter sharing) has evolved since the pandemic. Primary data for this report were collected through four surveys: An Operator Survey (n=25) and an Agency Survey (n=52) distributed between January 2022 and May 2022 to all known shared micromobility operators and agencies and included questions about the attributes of shared micromobility systems1 operating within those agency jurisdictions and operator markets; and a similar Operator Survey (n=29) and an Agency Survey (n=52) distributed between January 2023 and June 2023 to all known shared micromobility operators and agencies.

Commuter rail is known to have a “first- and last-mile” problem (i.e., a lack of options for getting commuters to and from a rail station). The first- and last-mile dilemma creates inequalities in access. For example, high-income commuters drive to work (forgoing transit altogether), middle-income commuters drive to a rail station and pay to park, and low-income commuters rely on feeder buses or walking to reach a rail station. Transportation network companies (TNCs), like Uber and Lyft, are a viable option for connecting travelers to rail stations, especially for those who don’t own a car, however, their high fares make them attractive only to higher-income travelers. To close this equity gap, subsidies could be provided for TNC rides that connect travelers to commuter rail. To explore this concept further, we developed idealized (but physically realistic and rational) models to describe communities in the San Francisco Bay Area, and simulated the effects of various subsidization policies (i.e., providing subsidies for TNC rides to and from rail stations, increasing rail stations parking fees) using real-world data representative of Bay Area commuter populations.

Connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) willrevolutionize the way we travel; however, what impact this revolution will have on advancing broader societal goals is uncertain. To date, the private sector technology rollout has emphasized the automation side of CAVs and neglected the potentially transformative possibilities brought by a more collaborative notion of connectivity. This may have significant downsides from a broader societal perspective. For example, CAVs (including those on the road today) collect a vast amount of data gathered through onboard systems (e.g., radar, lidar, camera), however, this data is not typically shared with other vehicles, roadside infrastructure, or public transportation agencies. This lack of collaboration will likely make traffic worse and forfeit the opportunity to manage traffic at the systems-level, which is where significant gains can be made in terms of improving traffic flow and safety, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle energy use, and more.

Economists have long argued in favor of congestion pricing, under which drivers pay a fee or toll to enter roadways during peak times. An increasing number of global cities have adopted or are considering pricing programs. Even so, these regimes remain relatively rare and controversial. One key concern with congestion pricing is fairness. Road pricing can pose a substantial burden for low-income drivers, many of whom have little option to avoid travel during peak times and limited opportunity to choose other modes of travel. Prior research has shown that congestion pricing regimes tend to be regressive in terms of their initial burden, that is, in terms of who ends up paying more to use the roads.1 But, the ultimate effect of a road pricing program depends also on how its revenue is used. Some or all of the revenue from a congestion pricing program can be returned to households, and this can fundamentally change the program’s fairness.

Curb space has been traditionally designed for private vehicle parking, public transit, and passenger and commercial loading. However, in recent years, a growing number of newservices and activities have increased the demand for limited curb space, including passenger pick-up and drop-off; last-mile delivery (e.g., courier network services, personal delivery devices); electric vehicle (EV) charging; micromobility parking and use (e.g., personally owned and shared bikes and scooters); and carsharing services. The curb serves a variety of functions such as vehicle and device storage (including personally owned and shared vehicles and devices), outdoor dining and retail, greenspace, and other uses. These changes are contributing to a notable shift in how people access and use the curb, and how public agencies plan, prioritize, and manage curbside interactions.

Transportation Network Companies (TNCs, also known as ridehailing and ridesourcing) have expanded across California over the past decade and changed the way people travel. Using a smartphone, travelers can quickly summon a vehicle from almost anywhere and know what the estimated wait time, travel time, and cost will be before stepping into the vehicle. While TNCs are clearly addressing an unmet need for travelers, their growing popularity has raised a number of policy questions, including if TNCs are shifting people away from public transit and other travel modes (e.g., carshare, walking, biking).

As interest in hydrogen as an energy carrier has increased, the various ways that hydrogen is made are being categorized as “green,” “blue,” “gray,” and other colors in relation to their environmental impact. While these categorizations are somewhat useful to indicate the environmental and climate change impacts of different production pathways, they are not especially useful for policy making or industry decisionmaking purposes because they are subjective. For example, most definitions of green pathways for hydrogen production only include electrolysis from renewable electricity sources; however, Figure 1 indicates additional production pathways with some of these having near-zero or even negative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as well as low or no other emissions of concern. To help clarify the role of hydrogen in decarbonizing California, this brief summarizes the latest scientific findings from recent and in-progress research across the University of California Institute of Transportation Studies (UC ITS) concerning the relative carbon intensity (CI) of hydrogen production pathways. It also briefly covers the availability of biomass and biogas in California that could be applied to the production of low-CI hydrogen.

In response to California law (SB 743, Chapter No. 386, Statutes of 2013), school districts are encouraged to use vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as criteria when evaluating the transportation impacts of new school construction, and identify feasible mitigation measures that eliminate or substantially reduce VMT generated by the new construction. To better understand the implications of this new law on school siting decisions, researchers at UC Berkeley analyzed 301 new schools constructed between 2008 and 2018 with respect to four VMT mitigation measures identified by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) known to minimize VMT – proximity to high quality transit areas (HQTA), proximity to roads with bicycle facilities, proximity to electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, and walkability scores.