United States Department of Transportation
i
Are California’s Local Jurisdictions Disproportionately Directing Growth Toward Existing Disadvantaged Communities? Evidence from the Southern California and San Francisco Bay Area Regions
-
2024-10-01
[PDF-5.54 MB]
Details:
-
Creators:
-
Corporate Creators:
-
Corporate Contributors:State of California SB1 2017/2018, Trustees of the California State University Sponsored Programs Administration ; United States. Department of Transportation. University Transportation Centers (UTC) Program ; United States. Department of Transportation. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology
-
Subject/TRT Terms:
-
Publication/ Report Number:
-
Resource Type:
-
Geographical Coverage:
-
Edition:Final Report
-
Corporate Publisher:
-
Abstract:Communities across the United States are striving to promote smart urban growth through compact urban infill residential development. They are doing so to mitigate sprawl's negative fiscal, environmental, social, and physical impacts, strengthen land use-housing-transportation linkages, and develop at densities needed for well-functioning public transit. Some states, such as California, have gone a step further by linking compact urban infill development as critical to meeting greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets. Anecdotal evidence suggests some California local jurisdictions are planning disproportionately large amounts of new urban development in disadvantaged communities (DACs). However, empirical evidence is lacking. This study aims to fill this gap. Using the two most populated regions of the state—the San Francisco Bay Area (S.F. Bay Area) and Southern California (SoCal)—as case studies, this research finds that the new housing is disproportionately planned in DACs in both the case study regions. Specifically, of the areas earmarked for future growth, close to a quarter (22%) are disadvantaged in the S.F. Bay Area region and close to half (48%) in the SoCal region. Meanwhile, the total area of the region that is disadvantaged is only 14% and 26%, respectively. These findings are critical for equity implications in policy and planning in these areas and beyond.
-
Format:
-
Funding:
-
Collection(s):
-
Main Document Checksum:
-
Download URL:
-
File Type:
