- API
Vital Signs: Transit Cost-Effectiveness – by operator
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2018-07-06T18:04:51.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Transit Cost-Effectiveness (T13) FULL MEASURE NAME Net cost per transit boarding (cost per boarding minus fare per boarding) LAST UPDATED May 2017 DESCRIPTION Transit cost-effectiveness refers to both the total and net costs per transit boarding, both of which are adjusted to reflect inflation over time. Net costs reflect total operating costs minus farebox revenue (i.e. operating costs that are not directly funded by system users). The dataset includes metropolitan area, regional, mode, and system tables for net cost per boarding, total cost per boarding, and farebox recovery ratio. DATA SOURCE Federal Transit Administration: National Transit Database http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/data.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics: Consumer Price Index http://www.bls.gov/data/ CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Simple modes were aggregated to combine the various bus modes (e.g. rapid bus, express bus, local bus) into a single mode to avoid incorrect conclusions resulting from mode recoding over the lifespan of NTD. For other metro areas, operators were identified by developing a list of all urbanized areas within a current MSA boundary and then using that UZA list to flag relevant operators; this means that all operators (both large and small) were included in the metro comparison data. Financial data was inflation-adjusted to match 2015 dollar values using metro-specific Consumer Price Indices.
- API
Vital Signs: Rent Payments – by metro
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2019-10-25T20:17:20.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Rent Payments (EC8) FULL MEASURE NAME Median rent payment LAST UPDATED August 2019 DESCRIPTION Rent payments refer to the cost of leasing an apartment or home and serves as a measure of housing costs for individuals who do not own a home. The data reflect the median monthly rent paid by Bay Area households across apartments and homes of various sizes and various levels of quality. This differs from advertised rents for available apartments, which usually are higher. Note that rent can be presented using nominal or real (inflation-adjusted) dollar values; data are presented inflation-adjusted to reflect changes in household purchasing power over time. DATA SOURCE U.S. Census Bureau: Decennial Census 1970-2000 https://nhgis.org Note: Count 1 and Count 2; Form STF1; Form SF3a U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey 2005-2017 http://api.census.gov Note: Form B25058; 1-YR Bureau of Labor Statistics: Consumer Price Index 1970-2017 http://www.bls.gov/data/ Note: All Urban Consumers Data Table (by metro) CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Rent data reflects median rent payments rather than list rents (refer to measure definition above). Larger geographies (metro and county) rely upon ACS 1-year data, while smaller geographies rely upon ACS 5-year rolling average data. 1970 Census data for median rent payments has been imputed by ABAG staff as the source data only provided the mean, rather than the median, monthly rent. Metro area boundaries reflects today’s metro area definitions by county for consistency, rather than historical metro area boundaries. Inflation-adjusted data are presented to illustrate how rent payments have grown relative to overall price increases; that said, the use of the Consumer Price Index does create some challenges given the fact that housing represents a major chunk of consumer goods bundle used to calculate CPI. This reflects a methodological tradeoff between precision and accuracy and is a common concern when working with any commodity that is a major component of CPI itself.
- API
Vital Signs: Transit Cost-Effectiveness – by metro
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2018-07-06T18:04:53.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Transit Cost-Effectiveness (T13) FULL MEASURE NAME Net cost per transit boarding (cost per boarding minus fare per boarding) LAST UPDATED May 2017 DESCRIPTION Transit cost-effectiveness refers to both the total and net costs per transit boarding, both of which are adjusted to reflect inflation over time. Net costs reflect total operating costs minus farebox revenue (i.e. operating costs that are not directly funded by system users). The dataset includes metropolitan area, regional, mode, and system tables for net cost per boarding, total cost per boarding, and farebox recovery ratio. DATA SOURCE Federal Transit Administration: National Transit Database http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/data.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics: Consumer Price Index http://www.bls.gov/data/ CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Simple modes were aggregated to combine the various bus modes (e.g. rapid bus, express bus, local bus) into a single mode to avoid incorrect conclusions resulting from mode recoding over the lifespan of NTD. For other metro areas, operators were identified by developing a list of all urbanized areas within a current MSA boundary and then using that UZA list to flag relevant operators; this means that all operators (both large and small) were included in the metro comparison data. Financial data was inflation-adjusted to match 2015 dollar values using metro-specific Consumer Price Indices.
- API
Vital Signs: Rent Payments – Bay Area
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2019-10-25T20:17:35.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Rent Payments (EC8) FULL MEASURE NAME Median rent payment LAST UPDATED September 2016 DESCRIPTION Rent payments refer to the cost of leasing an apartment or home and serves as a measure of housing costs for individuals who do not own a home. The data reflect the median monthly rent paid by Bay Area households across apartments and homes of various sizes and various levels of quality. This differs from advertised rents for available apartments, which usually are higher. Note that rent can be presented using nominal or real (inflation-adjusted) dollar values; data are presented inflation-adjusted to reflect changes in household purchasing power over time. DATA SOURCE U.S. Census Bureau: Decennial Census 1970-2000 https://nhgis.org Note: Count 1 and Count 2; Form STF1; Form SF3a U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey 2005-2015 http://api.census.gov Note: Form B25058; 1-YR Bureau of Labor Statistics: Consumer Price Index 1970-2015 http://data.bls.gov Note: All Urban Consumers Data Table (by metro) CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Rent data reflects median rent payments rather than list rents (refer to measure definition above). Larger geographies (metro and county) rely upon ACS 1-year data, while smaller geographies rely upon ACS 5-year rolling average data. 1970 Census data for median rent payments has been imputed by ABAG staff as the source data only provided the mean, rather than the median, monthly rent. Metro area boundaries reflects today’s metro area definitions by county for consistency, rather than historical metro area boundaries. Inflation-adjusted data are presented to illustrate how rent payments have grown relative to overall price increases; that said, the use of the Consumer Price Index does create some challenges given the fact that housing represents a major chunk of consumer goods bundle used to calculate CPI. This reflects a methodological tradeoff between precision and accuracy and is a common concern when working with any commodity that is a major component of CPI itself.
- API
Vital Signs: Greenfield Development – by metro area
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2020-07-03T16:36:42.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Greenfield Development (LU5) FULL MEASURE NAME The acres of construction on previously undeveloped land LAST UPDATED November 2019 DESCRIPTION Greenfield development refers to construction on previously undeveloped land and the corresponding expansion of our region’s developed footprint, which includes the extent of urban and built-up lands. The footprint is defined as land occupied by structures, with a building density of at least 1 unit to 1.5 acres. DATA SOURCE Department of Conservation: Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program GIS Data Tables/Layers (1990-2016) https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp U.S. Census Bureau: Decennial Census Population by Census Block Group (2000-2010) http://factfinder.census.gov U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey (5-year) Population by Census Block Group (2000-2017) http://factfinder.census.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) For regional and local data, FMMP maps the extent of “urban and built-up” lands, which generally reflect the developed urban footprint of the region. The footprint is defined as land occupied by structures with building density of at least 1 unit to 1.5 acres. Uses include residential, industrial, commercial, construction, institutional, public administration, railroad and other transportation yards, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, water control structures, and other developed purposes. To determine the amount of greenfield development (in acres) occurring in a given two-year period, the differences in urban footprint are computed on a county-level. FMMP makes slight refinements to urban boundaries over time, so changes in urban footprint +/- 100 acres are not regionally significant. The GIS shapefile represents the 2016 urban footprint and thus does not show previously urbanized land outside of the footprint (i.e. Hamilton Air Force Base). For metro comparisons, a different methodology had to be used to avoid the geospatial limitations associated with FMMP. U.S. Census population by census block group was gathered for each metro area for 2000, 2010, and 2017. Population data for years 2000 and 2010 come from the Decennial Census while data for 2018 comes from the 2017 5-year American Community Survey. The block group was considered urbanized if its average/gross density was greater than 1 housing unit per acre (a slightly higher threshold than FMMP uses for its definition). Because a block group cannot be flagged as partially urbanized, and non-residential uses are not fully captured, the urban footprint of the region calculated with this methodology is smaller than in FMMP. The metro data should be primarily used for looking at comparative growth rate in greenfield development rather than the acreage totals themselves.
- API
Vital Signs: Transit Cost-Effectiveness – Bay Area
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2018-07-06T18:04:54.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Transit Cost-Effectiveness (T13) FULL MEASURE NAME Net cost per transit boarding (cost per boarding minus fare per boarding) LAST UPDATED May 2017 DESCRIPTION Transit cost-effectiveness refers to both the total and net costs per transit boarding, both of which are adjusted to reflect inflation over time. Net costs reflect total operating costs minus farebox revenue (i.e. operating costs that are not directly funded by system users). The dataset includes metropolitan area, regional, mode, and system tables for net cost per boarding, total cost per boarding, and farebox recovery ratio. DATA SOURCE Federal Transit Administration: National Transit Database http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/data.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics: Consumer Price Index http://www.bls.gov/data/ CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Simple modes were aggregated to combine the various bus modes (e.g. rapid bus, express bus, local bus) into a single mode to avoid incorrect conclusions resulting from mode recoding over the lifespan of NTD. For other metro areas, operators were identified by developing a list of all urbanized areas within a current MSA boundary and then using that UZA list to flag relevant operators; this means that all operators (both large and small) were included in the metro comparison data. Financial data was inflation-adjusted to match 2015 dollar values using metro-specific Consumer Price Indices.
- API
Vital Signs: Seaport Activity – by metro area
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2019-10-25T20:09:10.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Seaport Activity (EC18) FULL MEASURE NAME Shipping containers moved (TEUs) LAST UPDATED August 2019 DESCRIPTION Seaport activity refers to the quantity of goods moved into or out of the region through seaports. Seaport activity is measured at major ports by the number of shipping containers moved; these are known as twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs). DATA SOURCE American Association of Port Authorities: Western Hemisphere Port TEU Container Volumes 1990-2017 https://www.aapa-ports.org/unifying/content.aspx?ItemNumber=21048 Port of Oakland 1990-2018 https://www.oaklandseaport.com/performance/facts-figures/ CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Container volumes include both empty and full containers that move through a given port; they include imports, exports, and domestic freight flows.
- API
Vital Signs: Seaport Activity – Bay Area
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2019-10-25T20:09:24.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Seaport Activity (EC18) FULL MEASURE NAME Shipping containers moved (TEUs) LAST UPDATED August 2019 DESCRIPTION Seaport activity refers to the quantity of goods moved into or out of the region through seaports. Seaport activity is measured at major ports by the number of shipping containers moved; these are known as twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs). DATA SOURCE American Association of Port Authorities: Western Hemisphere Port TEU Container Volumes 1990-2017 https://www.aapa-ports.org/unifying/content.aspx?ItemNumber=21048 Port of Oakland 1990-2018 https://www.oaklandseaport.com/performance/facts-figures/ CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Container volumes include both empty and full containers that move through a given port; they include imports, exports, and domestic freight flows.
- API
Vital Signs: Greenfield Development – by county
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2020-07-03T16:36:18.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Greenfield Development (LU5) FULL MEASURE NAME The acres of construction on previously undeveloped land LAST UPDATED November 2019 DESCRIPTION Greenfield development refers to construction on previously undeveloped land and the corresponding expansion of our region’s developed footprint, which includes the extent of urban and built-up lands. The footprint is defined as land occupied by structures, with a building density of at least 1 unit to 1.5 acres. DATA SOURCE Department of Conservation: Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program GIS Data Tables/Layers (1990-2016) https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp U.S. Census Bureau: Decennial Census Population by Census Block Group (2000-2010) http://factfinder.census.gov U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey (5-year) Population by Census Block Group (2000-2017) http://factfinder.census.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) For regional and local data, FMMP maps the extent of “urban and built-up” lands, which generally reflect the developed urban footprint of the region. The footprint is defined as land occupied by structures with building density of at least 1 unit to 1.5 acres. Uses include residential, industrial, commercial, construction, institutional, public administration, railroad and other transportation yards, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, water control structures, and other developed purposes. To determine the amount of greenfield development (in acres) occurring in a given two-year period, the differences in urban footprint are computed on a county-level. FMMP makes slight refinements to urban boundaries over time, so changes in urban footprint +/- 100 acres are not regionally significant. The GIS shapefile represents the 2016 urban footprint and thus does not show previously urbanized land outside of the footprint (i.e. Hamilton Air Force Base). For metro comparisons, a different methodology had to be used to avoid the geospatial limitations associated with FMMP. U.S. Census population by census block group was gathered for each metro area for 2000, 2010, and 2017. Population data for years 2000 and 2010 come from the Decennial Census while data for 2018 comes from the 2017 5-year American Community Survey. The block group was considered urbanized if its average/gross density was greater than 1 housing unit per acre (a slightly higher threshold than FMMP uses for its definition). Because a block group cannot be flagged as partially urbanized, and non-residential uses are not fully captured, the urban footprint of the region calculated with this methodology is smaller than in FMMP. The metro data should be primarily used for looking at comparative growth rate in greenfield development rather than the acreage totals themselves.
- API
Vital Signs: Transit Cost-Effectiveness – by Mode
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2018-07-06T18:04:45.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Transit Cost-Effectiveness (T13) FULL MEASURE NAME Net cost per transit boarding (cost per boarding minus fare per boarding) LAST UPDATED May 2017 DESCRIPTION Transit cost-effectiveness refers to both the total and net costs per transit boarding, both of which are adjusted to reflect inflation over time. Net costs reflect total operating costs minus farebox revenue (i.e. operating costs that are not directly funded by system users). The dataset includes metropolitan area, regional, mode, and system tables for net cost per boarding, total cost per boarding, and farebox recovery ratio. DATA SOURCE Federal Transit Administration: National Transit Database http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/data.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics: Consumer Price Index http://www.bls.gov/data/ CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Simple modes were aggregated to combine the various bus modes (e.g. rapid bus, express bus, local bus) into a single mode to avoid incorrect conclusions resulting from mode recoding over the lifespan of NTD. For other metro areas, operators were identified by developing a list of all urbanized areas within a current MSA boundary and then using that UZA list to flag relevant operators; this means that all operators (both large and small) were included in the metro comparison data. Financial data was inflation-adjusted to match 2015 dollar values using metro-specific Consumer Price Indices.