Many studies have shown that a comprehensive plan with sufficient mitigation elements can significantly reduce natural disaster impact. However, they often neglect the need to match the implementation of mitigation measures to the local conditions because the ability to cope with impacts from a severe disaster varies by socioeconomic group. Therefore, it is extremely important to identify who and what are more exposed to a natural hazard and design adequate mitigation measures accordingly. This study aims to (1) identify seismic and climate-change-induced (sea-level rising and wildfire) hazardous locations in the San Francisco Bay Area, and (2) examine whether all neighborhoods, in four dimensions (economic, social, land use, and capital investment), are equally exposed to each natural hazard at three spatial scales (county, region, the Bay) over two time periods (2020–2060, 2060–2099). Methodologically, the study region and its sub-regions were divided into hazard and non-hazard zones with a defined hazard level for three natural hazards. Vulnerability variables in the four dimensions were collected at the census tract level. A two-sample t-test was then conducted to examine whether each vulnerability variable was significantly different between the two zones (hazard and non-hazard) for a specific natural hazard at a specific spatial scale in a specific time period. The findings reveal where, who, and what are exposed to different natural hazards. Corresponding mitigation measures for local governments are suggested. The results also highlight whether the spatial pattern of each hazard changes over time and whether local governments should work on mitigation alone, cooperate with other counties, or act together.

Transit-oriented development (TOD) has been promoted worldwide as an integrated land-use and transportation strategy to foster urban sustainability. Bike share provides people with a convenient and relatively affordable way to enlarge the spatial scale of TODs across urban communities, as a solution to the first/last mile (FLM) issue with respect to the transit nodes of TODs. Even though barriers to FLM have been frequently studied, few studies incorporate people’s perceptions of their barriers and/or the integration of multiuse paths (MUPs) into the network of bike share and public transit. Using a survey conducted in the Greater Cincinnati area, Ohio, this study aimed to answer the following questions: (1) What are people's major barriers to integrating different green transportation modes and/or facilities (bike share, MUPs, public transit)? (2) To what extent does the built environment around people’s residential location affect their integration level of MUPs, bike share, and public transit? (3) Which improvements would most likely encourage people to integrate them more often? With descriptive statistics, spatial analysis, and statistical comparison, we found that (1) the major barrier to integrating MUPs into the green transportation system was their lack of connection and availability to transit and bike share; (2) a person’s living environment is spatially related to whether a person integrates bike share; and (3) more respondents would use MUPs more often if an integrated green transportation system could be provided or improved. These findings suggest the potential of incorporating MUPs and bike share into TOD strategies to address the FLM issue.