I recently put together a small analysis of the Campus Travel Survey report's data in response to a request from David Greenwald, a Davis Vanguard reporter. He asked how many UC Davis students owned a car, so I provided him with a summary of how many students have access to a car (just under half, regardless of residential location). I noted that the figure most likely represented an over-estimate of the true number of cars owned by students, as students may be referring to shared cars when they responded to the survey.
The article, "Analysis: New Data Demonstrates Fewer Students Have Access to a Vehicle", then used the data to respond to comments about a proposed apartment complex in Davis. Greenwald shows that the reduced number of parking spots provided by the new complex - 1 spot per 3 residents - is in line with current patterns of car access among undergraduate and graduate students.
From my perspective, it is encouraging to see the city and developers provide sufficient parking but no more than is necessary - housing vacancy is at a ridiculously low 0.3%, so it makes less sense than ever to provide empty parking spaces where people could live. In a forthcoming paper written with Jamey Volker, we note that the city of Davis provides far too much residential parking - only about 1/3 of available spaces were used at peak hours (late evening and early morning) on the streets we surveyed. This shift toward reduced parking requirements is therefore a refreshing change. But arguably even more could be done to reduce parking provision at this apartment complex, with shared car programs, etc. to further reduce the necessary number of parking spaces and thereby increase the number of apartments built - something that the university is actively looking into in its updated Long Range Development Plan.