jobs housing fit in the bay area

1

JOBS HOUSING FIT IN THE BAY AREAChris Benner, University of California Davis

2

From jobs-housing balance to fit

First systematic studies in the late 1980s Found that commute distance was

affected by a multitude of factors Low-income workers given special

consideration Appropriate “fit” between jobs and

housing often discussed but never explicitly studied

3

Issues and opportunities

Why should we care? VMT, GHG, and equity

Current conditions versus projections

Appropriate geography of analysis

Prototype jobs-housing fit analysis(Sacramento Area Council of

Governments)

4

Data

Jobs Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics http://onthemap.ces.census.gov/ Any geography possible Low-wage ≤ $1250/month

Affordable rental units American Community Survey Census Summary File 1 Rent ≤ $750/month Margins of error (places vs. tracts)

5

Method

Jurisdiction level Linked to political process and decisions

regarding affordable housing provision Tract/buffer level

More closely linked to VMT Avoids problems with arbitrary boundaries

6

mappingregionalchange.ucdavis.edu

Red = Severe shortage of affordable rental units

Blue = Excess of affordable rental units in relation to available low-wage jobs

7

8

Multiple Silicon Valley Cities with JHFit > 5

Multiple Eastern Suburbs with

JHFit > 10

9

10

Tract/buffer level results

11

Buffer definition

• Sidestep problems with arbitrary jurisdictional boundaries

• Test different sizes using travel data

• Highlights small geographies with poor fit

Example buffer definition

12

13

14

15

Commute performanceby Alex Karner

16

Bay Area VMT

Data from activity-based microsimulation of daily travel patterns in 2010

Allows analysis of low-wage VMT attracted to each zone

Bay Area VMT

Census Tract 15

Low-wage worker 115 mile one-way commute

Low-wage worker 212 mile one-way commute

Low-wage worker 322 mile one-way commute

Total work VMT attracted = 49Total workers = 3

Attracted work VMT per worker= 49/3 = 16.3

18

Bay Area VMT

JH fit category

0 – 2.2 2.2 – 4 > 4

VMT attracted

7.10 7.61 10.4

JH fit category

Coefficient p-value

2.2 – 4 0.51 0.005

> 4 3.31 < 0.001

N = 1592, R2 = 0.24

Model results

Mean VMT attracted by JH fit category

19

Bay Area VMT

20

Conclusions

New method to calculate and track changes in jobs-housing fit over time using public data

Highlights opportunities for affordable housing provision and economic development

Clear implications for low-income commute performance

Contact

CollaboratorsBidita TithiAlex KarnerJonathan LondonCatherine Garoupa-White

AdvocatesFelicity GasserSam Tepperman-GelfantLisa Hershey

Acknowledgements

Chris Bennerccbenner@ucdavis.eduhttp://regionalchange.ucdavis.edu http://mappingregionalchange.ucdavis.edu