- API
Vital Signs: Time in Congestion - Corridor (Updated October 2018)
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2018-10-24T00:31:33.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Time Spent in Congestion (T7) FULL MEASURE NAME Time Spent in Congestion LAST UPDATED October 2018 DATA SOURCE MTC/Iteris Congestion Analysis No link available CA Department of Finance Forms E-8 and E-5 http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-8/ http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/ CA Employment Division Department: Labor Market Information http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/ CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Time spent in congestion measures the hours drivers are in congestion on freeway facilities based on traffic data. In recent years, data for the Bay Area comes from INRIX, a company that collects real-time traffic information from a variety of sources including mobile phone data and other GPS locator devices. The data provides traffic speed on the region’s highways. Using historical INRIX data (and similar internal datasets for some of the earlier years), MTC calculates an annual time series for vehicle hours spent in congestion in the Bay Area. Time spent in congestion is defined as the average daily hours spent in congestion on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays during peak traffic months on freeway facilities. This indicator focuses on weekdays given that traffic congestion is generally greater on these days; this indicator does not capture traffic congestion on local streets due to data unavailability. This congestion indicator emphasizes recurring delay (as opposed to also including non-recurring delay), capturing the extent of delay caused by routine traffic volumes (rather than congestion caused by unusual circumstances). Recurring delay is identified by setting a threshold of consistent delay greater than 15 minutes on a specific freeway segment from vehicle speeds less than 35 mph. This definition is consistent with longstanding practices by MTC, Caltrans and the U.S. Department of Transportation as speeds less than 35 mph result in significantly less efficient traffic operations. 35 mph is the threshold at which vehicle throughput is greatest; speeds that are either greater than or less than 35 mph result in reduced vehicle throughput. This methodology focuses on the extra travel time experienced based on a differential between the congested speed and 35 mph, rather than the posted speed limit. To provide a mathematical example of how the indicator is calculated on a segment basis, when it comes to time spent in congestion, 1,000 vehicles traveling on a congested segment for a 1/4 hour (15 minutes) each, [1,000 vehicles x ¼ hour congestion per vehicle= 250 hours congestion], is equivalent to 100 vehicles traveling on a congested segment for 2.5 hours each, [100 vehicles x 2.5 hour congestion per vehicle = 250 hours congestion]. In this way, the measure captures the impacts of both slow speeds and heavy traffic volumes. MTC calculates two measures of delay – congested delay, or delay that occurs when speeds are below 35 miles per hour, and total delay, or delay that occurs when speeds are below the posted speed limit. To illustrate, if 1,000 vehicles are traveling at 30 miles per hour on a one mile long segment, this would represent 4.76 vehicle hours of congested delay [(1,000 vehicles x 1 mile / 30 miles per hour) - (1,000 vehicles x 1 mile / 35 miles per hour) = 33.33 vehicle hours – 28.57 vehicle hours = 4.76 vehicle hours]. Considering that the posted speed limit on the segment is 60 miles per hour, total delay would be calculated as 16.67 vehicle hours [(1,000 vehicles x 1 mile / 30 miles per hour) - (1,000 vehicles x 1 mile / 60 miles per hour) = 33.33 vehicle hours – 16.67 vehicle hours = 16.67 vehicle hours]. Data sources listed above were used to calculate per-capita and per-worker statistics. Top congested corridors are ranked by total vehicle hours of delay, meaning that the highlighted corridors reflect a combination of slow speeds and heavy t
- 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: Commute Mode Choice (by Place of Residence) – Bay Area
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2020-05-20T21:50:47.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Commute Mode Choice (T1) FULL MEASURE NAME Commute mode share by residential location LAST UPDATED April 2020 DESCRIPTION Commute mode choice, also known as commute mode share, refers to the mode of transportation that a commuter uses to travel to work, such as driving alone, biking, carpooling or taking transit. The dataset includes metropolitan area, regional, county, city and census tract tables by place of residence. DATA SOURCE U.S. Census Bureau: Decennial Census (1960-2000) - via MTC/ABAG Bay Area Census http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/transportation/Means19802000.htm U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey Form B08301 (2006-2018; place of residence) www.api.census.gov CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) For the decennial Census datasets, the breakdown of auto commuters between drive alone and carpool is not available before 1980. "Other" includes bicycle, motorcycle, taxi, and other modes of transportation. For the American Community Survey datasets, 1-year rolling average data was used for metros, region, and county geographic levels, while 5-year rolling average data was used for cities and tracts. This is due to the fact that more localized data is not included in the 1-year dataset across all Bay Area cities. Regional mode shares are population-weighted averages of the nine counties’ modal shares. "Auto" includes drive alone and carpool for the simple data tables and is broken out in the detailed data tables accordingly, as it was not available before 1980. “Transit” includes public operators (Muni, BART, etc.) and employer-provided shuttles (e.g., Google shuttle buses). "Other" includes motorcycle, taxi, and other modes of transportation; bicycle mode share was broken out separately for the first time in the 2006 data and is shown in the detailed data tables. Census tract data is not available for tracts with insufficient numbers of residents or workers. The metropolitan area comparison was performed for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area in addition to the primary MSAs for the nine other major metropolitan areas.
- API
Vital Signs: Life Expectancy – by ZIP Code
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2018-07-06T18:05:06.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Life Expectancy (EQ6) FULL MEASURE NAME Life Expectancy LAST UPDATED April 2017 DESCRIPTION Life expectancy refers to the average number of years a newborn is expected to live if mortality patterns remain the same. The measure reflects the mortality rate across a population for a point in time. DATA SOURCE State of California, Department of Health: Death Records (1990-2013) No link California Department of Finance: Population Estimates Annual Intercensal Population Estimates (1990-2010) Table P-2: County Population by Age (2010-2013) http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/ U.S. Census Bureau: Decennial Census ZCTA Population (2000-2010) http://factfinder.census.gov U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey 5-Year Population Estimates (2013) http://factfinder.census.gov CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Life expectancy is commonly used as a measure of the health of a population. Life expectancy does not reflect how long any given individual is expected to live; rather, it is an artificial measure that captures an aspect of the mortality rates across a population that can be compared across time and populations. More information about the determinants of life expectancy that may lead to differences in life expectancy between neighborhoods can be found in the Bay Area Regional Health Inequities Initiative (BARHII) Health Inequities in the Bay Area report at http://www.barhii.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/barhii_hiba.pdf. Vital Signs measures life expectancy at birth (as opposed to cohort life expectancy). A statistical model was used to estimate life expectancy for Bay Area counties and ZIP Codes based on current life tables which require both age and mortality data. A life table is a table which shows, for each age, the survivorship of a people from a certain population. Current life tables were created using death records and population estimates by age. The California Department of Public Health provided death records based on the California death certificate information. Records include age at death and residential ZIP Code. Single-year age population estimates at the regional- and county-level comes from the California Department of Finance population estimates and projections for ages 0-100+. Population estimates for ages 100 and over are aggregated to a single age interval. Using this data, death rates in a population within age groups for a given year are computed to form unabridged life tables (as opposed to abridged life tables). To calculate life expectancy, the probability of dying between the jth and (j+1)st birthday is assumed uniform after age 1. Special consideration is taken to account for infant mortality. For the ZIP Code-level life expectancy calculation, it is assumed that postal ZIP Codes share the same boundaries as ZIP Code Census Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs). More information on the relationship between ZIP Codes and ZCTAs can be found at http://www.census.gov/geo/reference/zctas.html. ZIP Code-level data uses three years of mortality data to make robust estimates due to small sample size. Year 2013 ZIP Code life expectancy estimates reflects death records from 2011 through 2013. 2013 is the last year with available mortality data. Death records for ZIP Codes with zero population (like those associated with P.O. Boxes) were assigned to the nearest ZIP Code with population. ZIP Code population for 2000 estimates comes from the Decennial Census. ZIP Code population for 2013 estimates are from the American Community Survey (5-Year Average). ACS estimates are adjusted using Decennial Census data for more accurate population estimates. An adjustment factor was calculated using the ratio between the 2010 Decennial Census population estimates and the 2012 ACS 5-Year (with middle year 2010) population estimates. This adjustment factor is particularly im
- API
Vital Signs: Jobs – by subcounty
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2020-04-13T23:19:44.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Jobs (LU2) FULL MEASURE NAME Employment estimates by place of work LAST UPDATED March 2020 DESCRIPTION Jobs refers to the number of employees in a given area by place of work. These estimates do not include self-employed and private household employees. DATA SOURCE California Employment Development Department: Current Employment Statistics 1990-2018 http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/ U.S. Census Bureau: LODES Data Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics Program (2005-2010) http://lehd.ces.census.gov/ U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables S0804 (2010) and B08604 (2010-2017) https://factfinder.census.gov/ Bureau of Labor Statistics: Current Employment Statistics Table D-3: Employees on nonfarm payrolls (1990-2018) http://www.bls.gov/data/ METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) The California Employment Development Department (EDD) provides estimates of employment, by place of employment, for California counties. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) provides estimates of employment for metropolitan areas outside of the Bay Area. Annual employment data are derived from monthly estimates and thus reflect “annual average employment.” Employment estimates outside of the Bay Area do not include farm employment. For the metropolitan area comparison, farm employment was removed from Bay Area employment totals. Both EDD and BLS data report only wage and salary jobs, not the self-employed. For measuring jobs below the county level, Vital Signs assigns collections of incorporated cities and towns to sub-county areas. For example, the cities of East Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Portola Valley, Redwood City and Woodside are considered South San Mateo County. Because Bay Area counties differ in footprint, the number of sub-county city groupings varies from one (San Francisco and San Jose counties) to four (Santa Clara County). Estimates for sub-county areas are the sums of city-level estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey (ACS) 2010-2017. The following incorporated cities and towns are included in each sub-county area: North Alameda County – Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland, Piedmont East Alameda County - Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton South Alameda County - Fremont, Hayward, Newark, San Leandro, Union City Central Contra Costa County - Clayton, Concord, Danville, Lafayette, Martinez, Moraga, Orinda, Pleasant Hill, San Ramon, Walnut Creek East Contra Costa County - Antioch, Brentwood, Oakley, Pittsburg West Contra Costa County - El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond, San Pablo Marin – all incorporated cities and towns Napa – all incorporated cities and towns San Francisco – San Francisco North San Mateo - Brisbane, Colma, Daly City, Millbrae, Pacifica, San Bruno, South San Francisco Central San Mateo - Belmont, Burlingame, Foster City, Half Moon Bay, Hillsborough, San Carlos, San Mateo South San Mateo - East Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Portola Valley, Redwood City, Woodside North Santa Clara - Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale San Jose – San Jose Southwest Santa Clara - Campbell, Cupertino, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Saratoga South Santa Clara - Gilroy, Morgan Hill East Solano - Dixon, Fairfield, Rio Vista, Suisun City, Vacaville South Solano - Benicia, Vallejo North Sonoma - Cloverdale, Healdsburg, Windsor South Sonoma - Cotati, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, Sonoma
- API
Vital Signs: Time Spent in Congestion – by Corridor
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2018-07-06T18:04:35.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Time Spent In Congestion (T7) FULL MEASURE NAME Congested delay on regional freeways LAST UPDATED May 2017 DESCRIPTION Time spent in traffic congestion – also known as congested delay – refers to the number of minutes weekday travelers spend in congested conditions in which freeway speeds drop below 35 mph. Total delay, a companion measure, includes both congested delay and all other delay in which speeds are below the posted speed limit. DATA SOURCE Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Iteris: Congested Corridor Analysis CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Delay statistics only include freeway facilities and rely upon INRIX traffic data. They reflect delay on a typical weekday, which is defined as Tuesday through Thursday during peak traffic months. Delay statistics emphasize recurring delay - i.e. consistent delay greater than 15 minutes on a specific freeway segment. Congested delay is defined as congestion occurring with speeds less than 35 mph and is commonly recognized as inefficient delay (meaning that the freeway corridor is operating at speeds low enough to reduce throughput - as opposed to speeds greater than 35 mph which increase throughput). Data sources listed above were used to calculate per-capita and per-worker statistics; national datasets were used for metro comparisons and California datasets were used for the Bay Area. Top congested corridors are ranked by total vehicle hours of delay, meaning that the highlighted corridors reflect a combination of slow speeds and heavy traffic volumes. Historical Bay Area data was estimated by MTC Operations staff using a combination of internal datasets to develop an approximate trend back to 1998. The metropolitan area comparison was performed for the combined primary urbanized areas (San Francisco-Oakland and San Jose) as well as nine other major metropolitan areas' core urbanized area. Because the Texas Transportation Institute no longer reports congested freeway delay or total freeway delay (focusing solely on total regional delay), 2011 data was used to estimate 2014 total freeway delay for each metro area by relying upon the freeway-to-regional ratio from 2011. Estimated urbanized area workers were used for this analysis using the 2011 ratios, which accounts for slight differentials between Bay Area data points under the regional historical data and the metro comparison analysis. To explore how 2016 congestion trends compare to real-time congestion on the region’s freeways, visit 511.org.
- API
Vital Signs: Housing Affordability - County Overall
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2019-10-25T20:43:28.000ZHousing Affordability (EQ2) FULL MEASURE NAME Housing Affordability LAST UPDATED October 2018 DATA SOURCE U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census Form STF3 – https://nhgis.org (1980-1990) Form SF3a – https://nhgis.org (2000) U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey Form B25074 (2009-2017) Form B25095 (2009-2017) http://api.census.gov Image: Flickr (Creative Commons license), Photographer: Frank Kehren, https://www.flickr.com/photos/fkehren/8481894011 CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) The share of income brackets used for different Census and ACS forms varied over time. To allow for historical comparisons, the Census Bureau merges housing expenditure brackets into three consistent bins (less than 20 percent, 20 percent to 34 percent, and more than 35 percent) that work for all years. The highest income bracket for renters in the ACS data was $100,000 or more, while the homeowner dataset included brackets for $100,000 to $149,999 and $150,000 and above. These brackets were merged together to allow for uniform comparison across tenure. While some studies use 30 percent as the affordability threshold, Vital Signs uses 35 percent as this is the closest break point using the standardized affordability brackets above. Historical data for Napa County is unavailable due to an insufficient sample size for renters in a number of years, making it impossible to calculate affordability for all households. All ACS data is for a single year, rather than a rolling average. Income breakdown data is only provided for one year as it is not possible to compare consistent inflation-adjusted income brackets over time given Census data limitations.
- API
Vital Signs: Life Expectancy – Bay Area
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2018-07-06T18:05:05.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Life Expectancy (EQ6) FULL MEASURE NAME Life Expectancy LAST UPDATED April 2017 DESCRIPTION Life expectancy refers to the average number of years a newborn is expected to live if mortality patterns remain the same. The measure reflects the mortality rate across a population for a point in time. DATA SOURCE State of California, Department of Health: Death Records (1990-2013) No link California Department of Finance: Population Estimates Annual Intercensal Population Estimates (1990-2010) Table P-2: County Population by Age (2010-2013) http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/ CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Life expectancy is commonly used as a measure of the health of a population. Life expectancy does not reflect how long any given individual is expected to live; rather, it is an artificial measure that captures an aspect of the mortality rates across a population. Vital Signs measures life expectancy at birth (as opposed to cohort life expectancy). A statistical model was used to estimate life expectancy for Bay Area counties and Zip codes based on current life tables which require both age and mortality data. A life table is a table which shows, for each age, the survivorship of a people from a certain population. Current life tables were created using death records and population estimates by age. The California Department of Public Health provided death records based on the California death certificate information. Records include age at death and residential Zip code. Single-year age population estimates at the regional- and county-level comes from the California Department of Finance population estimates and projections for ages 0-100+. Population estimates for ages 100 and over are aggregated to a single age interval. Using this data, death rates in a population within age groups for a given year are computed to form unabridged life tables (as opposed to abridged life tables). To calculate life expectancy, the probability of dying between the jth and (j+1)st birthday is assumed uniform after age 1. Special consideration is taken to account for infant mortality. For the Zip code-level life expectancy calculation, it is assumed that postal Zip codes share the same boundaries as Zip Code Census Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs). More information on the relationship between Zip codes and ZCTAs can be found at https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/zctas.html. Zip code-level data uses three years of mortality data to make robust estimates due to small sample size. Year 2013 Zip code life expectancy estimates reflects death records from 2011 through 2013. 2013 is the last year with available mortality data. Death records for Zip codes with zero population (like those associated with P.O. Boxes) were assigned to the nearest Zip code with population. Zip code population for 2000 estimates comes from the Decennial Census. Zip code population for 2013 estimates are from the American Community Survey (5-Year Average). The ACS provides Zip code population by age in five-year age intervals. Single-year age population estimates were calculated by distributing population within an age interval to single-year ages using the county distribution. Counties were assigned to Zip codes based on majority land-area. Zip codes in the Bay Area vary in population from over 10,000 residents to less than 20 residents. Traditional life expectancy estimation (like the one used for the regional- and county-level Vital Signs estimates) cannot be used because they are highly inaccurate for small populations and may result in over/underestimation of life expectancy. To avoid inaccurate estimates, Zip codes with populations of less than 5,000 were aggregated with neighboring Zip codes until the merged areas had a population of more than 5,000. In this way, the original 305 Bay Area Zip codes were reduced to 218 Zip
- 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: Home Prices – by county
data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2019-10-25T20:29:56.000ZVITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Home Prices (EC7) FULL MEASURE NAME Home Prices LAST UPDATED August 2019 DESCRIPTION Home prices refer to the cost of purchasing one’s own house or condominium. While a significant share of residents may choose to rent, home prices represent a primary driver of housing affordability in a given region, county or city. DATA SOURCE Zillow Median Sale Price (1997-2018) http://www.zillow.com/research/data/ Bureau of Labor Statistics: Consumer Price Index All Urban Consumers Data Table (1997-2018; specific to each metro area) http://data.bls.gov CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Median housing price estimates for the region, counties, cities, and zip code come from analysis of individual home sales by Zillow. The median sale price is the price separating the higher half of the sales from the lower half. In other words, 50 percent of home sales are below or above the median value. Zillow defines all homes as single-family residential, condominium, and co-operative homes with a county record. Single-family residences are detached, which means the home is an individual structure with its own lot. Condominiums are units that you own in a multi-unit complex, such as an apartment building. Co-operative homes are slightly different from condominiums where the homeowners own shares in the corporation that owns the building, not the actual units themselves. For metropolitan area comparison values, the Bay Area metro area’s median home sale price is the population-weighted average of the nine counties’ median home prices. Home sales prices are not reliably available for Houston, because Texas is a non-disclosure state. For more information on non-disclosure states, see: http://www.zillow.com/blog/chronicles-of-data-collection-ii-non-disclosure-states-3783/ Inflation-adjusted data are presented to illustrate how home prices 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.