For people with disabilities, ride-hailing services like Uber and Lyft can be a lifeline or a pain — or both. Abigail Cochran shares what she learned from individuals with disabilities about what’s working and what’s not.

Show Notes:

• Cochran, A. L. (2022). How and why do people with disabilities use app-based ridehailing? Case Studies on Transport Policy, 10(4), 2556-2562.
• 99% Invisible podcast episode on the “curb cut effect.”
• Venkataram, P. S., Flynn, J. A., Bhuiya, M. M. R., Barajas, J. M., & Handy, S. (2023). Framing availability and usability of transportation for people with disabilities. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 22, 100961.
• Cochran, A. L., & Chatman, D. G. (2021). Use of app-based ridehailing services and conventional taxicabs by adults with disabilities. Travel Behaviour and Society, 24, 124-131.

Shared micromobility programs offering scooters and bikes have exploded across the US in recent years, but the benefits haven't been shared evenly. Anne Brown joins to discuss the equity goals and mandates cities are requiring of operators, and which seem to be most effective.

Show Notes:

• Brown, A., & Howell, A. (2024). Mobility for the people: Equity requirements in US shared micromobility programs. Journal of Cycling and Micromobility Research, Volume 2, 2024, 100020,ISSN 2950-1059, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmr.2024.100020.
• Brown, A., & Howell, A. (2025.) From Paper to Practice: Shared Micromobility Requirements and Outcomes (preprint; forthcoming Transportation Research Interdisplinary Perspectives).
• Brown, A., & Howell, A. (2024.) Small fares for small modes: Discount Ride Programs and Equity in US Shared Micromobility Programs (preprint).
• Operationalizing Equity: US Micromobility Equity Requirements Database.
• MacArthur, J., Fang, K., & Thigpen, C. (2024). Taxing Shared Micromobility: Assessing the Global Landscape of Fees and Taxes and Their Implications for Cities, Riders, and Operators. Portland State University Transportation Research and Education Center.
• LADOT Year 1 Snapshot: A review of the 2019-2020 dockless vehicle program.

Do people drive less because they live in buildings that don’t provide parking, or do they live in buildings that don’t provide parking because they drive less? That question has huge implications for how we build and rebuild our cities, yet researchers have struggled for decades to answer it conclusively. UCLA professor Adam Millard-Ball joins us to discuss new research that finally — we hope — puts the question to bed. Taking advantage of San Francisco’s affordable housing lottery, Millard-Ball and colleagues find that (as-good-as-)randomly assigning tenants to different buildings and neighborhoods has substantial impacts on their transportation choices, with lower parking ratios resulting in less driving and more transit use. We talk about what this means for housing and parking policy, and what it says about the behavioral shifts needed to make cities more affordable, accessible, and sustainable.

Show notes:

• Millard-Ball, A., West, J., Rezaei, N., & Desai, G. (2022). What do residential lotteries show us about transportation choices?. Urban Studies, 59(2), 434-452.
• Free summary of article at Transfers Magazine.
• Chatman, D. G. (2013). Does TOD need the T? On the importance of factors other than rail access. Journal of the American Planning Association, 79(1), 17-31.
• On parking cash-out programs: Shoup, Don. (2017). Opinion: Here’s an easy way to fight L.A.'s traffic and boost transit ridership — reward commuters who don’t drive. Los Angeles Times.
• Blumenberg, E., & Pierce, G. (2017). The drive to work: The relationship between transportation access, housing assistance, and employment among participants in the welfare to work voucher program. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 37(1), 66-82.
• King, D. A., Smart, M. J., & Manville, M. (2019). The poverty of the carless: Toward universal auto access. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 0739456X18823252.

Many studies have looked at the effects of new transit infrastructure on housing prices, gentrification, and other neighborhood changes. But how does housing policy — specifically rising rents and worsening affordability — affect transit? Mike Manville takes the guest seat in the first episode of our four-part series on transportation research: Road Scholars.

Show Notes

• Manville, M., King, H., Matute, J., & Lau, T. (2024). Neighborhood change and transit ridership: Evidence from Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Journal of Transport Geography, 121, 104048.
• Three previous episodes discussing why housing supply matters for affordability:
  • Episode 79 of UCLA Housing Voice: Who Pays For Inclusionary Zoning with Shane Phillips
  • Episode 83 of UCLA Housing Voice: Local Effects of Upzoning with Simon Büchler and Elena Lutz
  • Episode 5 of UCLA Housing Voice: Market-Rate Development and Neighborhood Rents with Evan Mast

When a city proposes zoning changes, how do you know whether they’ll be effective? Aaron Barrall shares how we approached the problem in Los Angeles, with lessons for similar upzoning efforts around the world. This is the second episode in a two-part conversation.

Show notes:

• Barrall, A., & Phillips, S. (2024). CHIPing In: Evaluating the effects of LA’s Citywide Housing Incentive Program on neighborhood development potential. UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies.
• YouTube recording of Aaron’s and Shane’s presentation at UCLA on the report’s findings.
• Wikipedia article about the États-Unis neighborhood in Lyon, France.
• Episode 20 of UCLA Housing Voice: French Social Housing and the SRU Law with Magda Maaoui.
• Monkkonen, P., Carlton, I., & Macfarlane, K. (2020). One to Four: The market potential of fourplexes in California’s single-family neighborhoods. UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies.
• Gabriel, S., & Kung, E. (2024). Development Approval Timelines, Approval Uncertainty, and New Housing Supply: Evidence from Los Angeles. SSRN.
• Manville, M., Monkkonen, P., Gray, N., & Phillips, S. (2023). Does discretion delay development? The impact of approval pathways on multifamily housing’s time to permit. Journal of the American Planning Association, 89(3), 336-347.
• Hilgard Analytics 2024 update on City of Los Angeles housing permitting.
• Dillon, L. (Nov 18 2024). Los Angeles rezoning plan won’t spur enough new housing, report finds. Los Angeles Times.
• Summary of California Senate Bill 79 (2025).
• Information on California Assembly Bill 647 (2025).
• Barrall, A., & Monkkonen, P. (2024). The Fair Housing Land Use Score in California: An Evaluation of 199 Municipal Plans. UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies.

When a city proposes zoning changes, how do you know whether they’ll be effective? Aaron Barrall shares how we approached the problem in Los Angeles, with lessons for similar upzoning efforts around the world. This is the first episode in a two-part conversation.

Show notes:

• Barrall, A., & Phillips, S. (2024). CHIPing In: Evaluating the effects of LA’s Citywide Housing Incentive Program on neighborhood development potential. UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies.
• YouTube recording of Aaron’s and Shane’s presentation at UCLA on the report’s findings.
• Monkkonen, P., Manville, M., Lens, M., Barrall, A., & Arena, O. (2023). California’s Strengthened Housing Element Law: Early Evidence on Higher Housing Targets and Rezoning. Cityscape, 25(2), 119-142.
• Elmendorf, C. S., Biber, E., Monkkonen, P., & O’Neill, M. (2020). Making It Work: Legal Foundations for Administrative Reform of California’s Housing Framework. Ecology Law Quarterly, 47(4), 973-1060.
• Episode 59 of UCLA Housing Voice: The Costs of Discretion with Paavo Monkkonen and Mike Manville.
• Episode 79 of UCLA Housing Voice: Who Pays For Inclusionary Zoning with Shane Phillips.

Helping people move to higher-opportunity neighborhoods requires knowing which neighborhoods are actually better. Are we any good at it? Dionissi Aliprantis shares his research on measuring neighborhood opportunity and the rent assistance program features that could meaningfully reduce racial segregation.

Show notes:

• Aliprantis, D., Martin, H., & Tauber, K. (2024). What determines the success of housing mobility programs? Journal of Housing Economics, 65, 102009.
• 99% Invisible episode on chambre le bonne (maid’s rooms) in Paris.
• Episode 87 of UCLA Housing Voice, on housing voucher lease-up rates with Sarah Strochak.
• Episode 17 of UCLA Housing Voice, on using fair market rents to improve housing vouchers with Rob Collinson.
• Episode 58 of UCLA Housing Voice, on the health impacts of Baltimore’s housing mobility program with Craig Pollack.
• The book, Waiting for Gautreaux: A Story of Segregation, Housing, and the Black Ghetto, by Alexander Polikoff.
• Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., Hendren, N., Jones, M. R., & Porter, S. R. (2018). The Opportunity Atlas: Mapping the childhood roots of social mobility (No. w25147). National Bureau of Economic Research.
• Bergman, P., Chetty, R., DeLuca, S., Hendren, N., Katz, L. F., & Palmer, C. (2024). Creating Moves to Opportunity: Experimental evidence on barriers to neighborhood choice. American Economic Review, 114(5), 1281-1337.