s c b d v , mtc j 12, 2017 mtc abag baaqmd...

MTC BAAQMD BCDCABAG

SONOMA COUNTY BRIEFING

DAVID VAUTIN, MTC – JUNE 12, 2017

Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/frank_schulenburg/8152540815/

WHAT IS VITAL SIGNS?

Vital Signs tracks 40 performance indicators to understand if the Bay Area is (or is not) making progress towards key regional goals.


This initiative recognizes that transportation is not siloed – land use, the economy, the environment, and social equity intersect with it.


The interactive Vital Signs website allows residents to explore trends on the regional, county, city, and even neighborhood levels.

vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov

KEY FINDINGS – SONOMA COUNTY

Sonoma County saw a significant housing boom during the 20th century, but this has slowed significantly in recent years.1

2

3

4

5

The county’s job market has roughly paralleled the region, with unemployment rates nearing natural levels.

Economic challenges continue to impact county residents, including low wages, displacement risk, and unaffordability.

Transportation investments have paid off by reducing traffic congestion (e.g., US-101), but modal shifts have been limited.

Critical differences exist between (and within) the various cities and towns of Sonoma County.

Bay Area population now exceeds 7.6 million.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Popul

ation (in

mill

ions)

POPULATION – BAY AREA & SONOMA COUNTY

2016

REGIONAL PERFORMANCE

POPULATION

7.6M

Source: California Department of Finance

502K

Bay Area

Sonoma County

Sonoma County’s population growth has slowed over time.

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

ANNUAL PERCENT POPULATION GROWTH – BAY AREA & SONOMA COUNTY

2016


POPULATION

+1.0%


+0.5%Bay Area

Sonoma County

North Bay counties have similar growth trajectories; regional growth has been increasingly concentrated in the core.

LOCAL FOCUS

POPULATION165

147

62

13

(25)

113

423

37 58

32

100

14

20

(37)

30

230

63 9

5

171

147

8 12 4

5

62

203

104

89

160

141

16

13 4

9

55

179

53

69

73 1

04

6 13 32

13

105

21

27

118

74

10

6

61

48

146

18

18

ALAMEDA CONTRA COSTA

MARIN NAPA SAN FRANCISCO

SAN MATEO SANTA CLARA SOLANO SONOMA

NOMINAL CHANGE BY COUNTY (IN THOUSANDS)

1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s

Source: California Department of Finance; note: 2010s spans six years between 2010 and 2016

Growth in cities like Santa Rosa and Brentwood has slowed post-Recession, while growth in South Bay cities has sped up.

LOCAL FOCUS

POPULATION


0 25 50 75 100

Sunnyvale

Milpitas

Redwood City

Antioch

Dublin

Hayward

Fremont

Oakland

San Francisco

San Jose

Population Growth in Thousands

CITIES THAT ADDED THE MOST PEOPLE 2010-2016

0 50 100 150 200

Livermore

Fairfield

Hayward

San Ramon

Antioch

Fremont

Brentwood

Santa Rosa

San Francisco

San Jose

Population Growth in Thousands

CITIES THAT ADDED THE MOST PEOPLE 1990-2010

Permitting has declined on the regional and county levels.


HOUSING GROWTH

Source: Construction Industry Research Board (1967-2010); California Homebuilding Foundation (2011-2015)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1967 1973 1979 1985 1991 1997 2003 2009 2015

Thousa

nds

of

Perm

itte

d U

nits

PERMITTED UNITS BY YEAR – BAY AREA

Single-Family Units Multi-Family Units

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1967 1973 1979 1985 1991 1997 2003 2009 2015Thousa

nds

of

Perm

itte

d U

nits

PERMITTED UNITS BY YEAR – SONOMA COUNTY

Single-Family Units Multi-Family Units

Outside the North Bay, permitting has accelerated noticeably.

LOCAL FOCUS

HOUSING GROWTH

Source: California Homebuilding Foundation (2011-2015)

2,2

00

1,1

00

10

0

20

0

2,0

00

80

0

3,2

00

40

0

60

0

5,0

00

2,4

00

10

0

30

0

3,7

00

1,5

00

4,9

00

1,4

00

40

0


MARIN NAPA SAN FRANCISCO

SAN MATEO SANTA CLARA SOLANO SONOMA

ANNUAL HOUSING UNITS PERMITTED (SINCE 2010)

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Greenfield development has slowed across the region over time; greenfield protection policies have made a difference.

-

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

2-Y

ear

Gro

wth

in

Deve

loped L

and in

Acr

es

TWO-YEAR CHANGE IN REGIONAL GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT(CHANGE IN DEVELOPED LAND)


GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT

Source: Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program

Sonoma County

Rest of Region

Sonoma County has significantly slowed its development of greenfield lands, especially since 2010.

-1,000 4,000 9,000 14,000 19,000 24,000

CONTRA COSTA

SANTA CLARA

SONOMA

ALAMEDA

SOLANO

NAPA

SAN MATEO

MARIN

SAN FRANCISCO

NET CHANGE IN GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT (ACRES)

COUNTY GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT GROWTH AND DECLINE BY DECADE

1990-2000 2000-2010 2010-2014

LOCAL FOCUS

GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT

Source: Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program

PM2.5

Major investments in wetland restoration in the mid-2000s resulted in thousands of new acres of Bay surface area.


BAY RESTORATION

Source: BCDC Annual Report, 2015

-1,000

1,000

3,000

5,000

7,000

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Acr

es

of

Annual C

hang

e

ANNUAL CHANGE IN SAN FRANCISCO BAY SURFACE AREA

Major wetland restorations in Sonoma

County, Solano County, and Hayward

Major wetland

restorations in Novato

Major wetland

restorations in Redwood

City and North Bay

Major wetland

restorations in

Solano County


Sonoma County saw a significant housing boom during the 20th

century, but this has slowed significantly in recent years.1

2

3

4

5





Bay Area employment now exceeds the year 2000 peak.

-

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Popul

ation (in

mill

ions)

JOBS – BAY AREA & SONOMA COUNTY


JOBS

3.7M


134K

Bay Area

Sonoma County

Sonoma County tied the region for job growth rate in 2015.

-8%

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

ANNUAL PERCENT JOBS GROWTH – BAY AREA & SONOMA COUNTY


JOBS

+3.6%


Bay Area

Sonoma County

Excluding the early 2000s, Sonoma County’s unemployment rate has closely mirrored the region as a whole.

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Unem

plo

ym

ent Rate

UNEMPLOYMENT – BAY AREA AND SONOMA COUNTY

LOCAL FOCUS

UNEMPLOYMENT

Source: Employment Development Department

Bay Area

Sonoma County 4%

Sonoma County is a small but growing component of the overall regional economy.

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

$800

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

GRP (in

bill

ions

of

2015 d

olla

rs)

GROSS REGIONAL PRODUCT BY SUB-REGION

LOCAL FOCUS

ECONOMIC OUTPUT

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis (inflation-adjusted to 2015 dollars)

Note: GRP is reported at the MSA level; the San Jose MSA include Santa Clara County and San Benito County

Napa CountySolano CountySonoma County

San Jose MSA

(2 counties)

San Francisco MSA

(5 counties)

$7$15$22

$133

$331

$9$17$24

$145

$360 $371

$173

$22$17$8

$9$20$26

$235

$432

Silicon Valley is booming, widening the gap in per capita GRP between northern and southern parts of the Bay Area.

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Per

Capita G

RP (in

tho

usa

nds

of

2015 d

olla

rs)

GROSS REGIONAL PRODUCT PER CAPITA

LOCAL FOCUS

ECONOMIC OUTPUT

Napa County

Solano CountySonoma County

San Jose MSA

San Francisco MSA

Sources: Bureau of Economic Analysis (inflation-adjusted to 2015 dollars); Department of Finance

Note: GRP is reported at the MSA level; the San Jose MSA include Santa Clara County and San Benito County




2

3

4

5





With a slight but steady decline in middle-wage jobs, the Bay Area has seen a long-term trend of job polarization.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Share

of

Regio

nal Jo

bs

REGIONAL SHARE OF JOBS BY WAGE LEVEL


JOBS BY WAGE LEVEL

Middle-Wage

Low-Wage

High-Wage

Sources: Employment Development Department; U.S. Census Bureau/American Community Survey, 2015

37%

45%

18%

High-wage jobs are now the plurality of jobs in all areas –with the notable exception of the North Bay.

2001 2015

EAST BAY

LOCAL FOCUS

JOBS BY WAGE LEVEL

2001 2015

WEST BAY

2001 2015

NORTH BAY

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

2001 2015

Share

of

Jobs

SOUTH BAY

High-Wage

Low-Wage

Middle-Wage

Note: South Bay is Santa Clara + San Benito; West Bay is Marin, San Francisco + San Mateo; East Bay is Alameda + Contra Costa; North Bay is Sonoma, Solano + Napa counties

Sources: Employment Development Department; U.S. Census Bureau/American Community Survey, 2015

SHARE OF JOBS BY WAGE LEVEL BY SUBREGION

Median worker earnings in San Francisco and Silicon Valley have increased noticeably compared to the rest of the region.

$30

$35

$40

$45

$50

$55

$60

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Media

n W

ork

er

Earn

ings

(in thousa

nds

of

2015

dolla

rs)

MEDIAN WORKER EARNINGS BY COUNTY

LOCAL FOCUS

INCOME

Santa Clara

San Mateo

Marin

San Francisco

Contra Costa

Alameda

NapaSolanoSonoma

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau/American Community Survey (inflation-adjusted to 2015 dollars); Bureau of Labor Statistics

Rural poverty remains a serious issue – Solano, Sonoma and Napa counties have the highest poverty rates in the region.

30%28% 28%

25% 25% 24%

21% 21%19%

SOLANO SONOMA NAPA SAN FRANCISCO


SANTA CLARA SAN MATEO MARIN

Share

Of

Popul

ation In

Pove

rty (200%

Leve

l)

2015 POVERTY RATE BY COUNTY

LOCAL FOCUS

POVERTY

Source: U.S. Census Bureau/American Community Survey, 2015

Note: poverty is defined as living below twice the national poverty level

Bay Area Regional Poverty Rate – 24%

Once a relatively minor issue in Sonoma County, displacement risk today is on par with San Francisco.

0%

20%

40%

60%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Sha

re o

f Lo

wer-

Inco

me H

ouse

hold

s at Risk

DISPLACEMENT RISK BY COUNTY

LOCAL FOCUS

DISPLACEMENT RISK

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau/American Community Survey; Longitudinal Tract Database; note that recent data relies upon 5-year rolling averages; only 2010 and 2015 are shown for clarity

San Francisco

San Mateo

Solano

Marin

Alameda

Santa Clara

Sonoma

Contra Costa

Napa

San Francisco

San Mateo

Solano

Marin

Alameda

Santa Clara

Sonoma

Contra Costa

Napa

North Bay residents are increasingly moving out of the region and are being replaced by new arrivals from the West Bay.

28

LOCAL FOCUS

MIGRATION

Sources: American Community Survey/U.S. Census Bureau – County-to-County Migration Data; note that data relies upon 5-year rolling averages; immigration from abroad not shown for simplicity

2014 NET MIGRATION BY SUBREGION

SAN FRANCISCO + SILICON VALLEY EAST BAY NORTH BAY

East Bay:

-14,100 people

Out of Region:

-5,900 people

SF +

Silicon Valley:

+14,100 people

North Bay:

-3,600 people

North Bay:

+600 people

Out of Region:

-9,100 people

SF +

Silicon Valley:

+3,600 people

East Bay:

-600 people

Out of Region:

-1,800 people

Sonoma County home prices have risen since the end of the recession but remain below their 2005 peak.

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015

Media

n H

om

e S

ale

Price

(in

tho

usa

nds

of

2015

dolla

rs)

MEDIAN HOME SALE PRICE BY COUNTY

LOCAL FOCUS

HOME PRICES

San Francisco

San Mateo

MarinSanta Clara

Alameda

NapaSonomaContra Costa

Solano

Sources: Zillow (inflation-adjusted to 2015 dollars); Bureau of Labor Statistics

Compared to booming rental markets elsewhere in the region, rents in Sonoma County have been more stable.

$1,100

$1,200

$1,300

$1,400

$1,500

$1,600

$1,700

$1,800

$1,900

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Media

n M

onth

ly R

ent Paym

ent

MEDIAN RENT PAYMENTS BY COUNTY

LOCAL FOCUS

RENT PAYMENTS

San MateoSanta Clara

Marin

San Francisco

AlamedaContra Costa

Napa

Sonoma

Solano

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau/American Community Survey (inflation-adjusted to 2015 dollars); Bureau of Labor Statistics

Sonoma County’s housing affordability – as a share of income – has closely tracked regional trends since 1980.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Share

of

House

hold

s

SHARE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME SPENT ON HOUSING – BAY AREA


HOUSING AFFORDABILITY

Less than 20% of Income

20% to 34% of Income

At least 35% of Income 31%

32%

37%48%

30%

22%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau/American Community Survey

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015Share

of

House

hold

s

SHARE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME SPENT ON HOUSING – SONOMA COUNTY

Less than 20% of Income

20% to 34% of Income

At least 35% of Income 33%

31%

36%46%

30%

24%




2

3

4

5





Congestion spiked during construction along US-101, but Sonoma County is now benefiting from those projects.

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Congest

ed S

hare

of

Freew

ay V

MT

MILES TRAVELED IN CONGESTION – BAY AREA AND SONOMA COUNTY


MILES TRAVELED IN CONGESTION

Source: Iteris/PeMS, 2015

Bay Area

Sonoma County

6%

1%

Commute times have ticked upward regionally in recent years, while remaining stable in Sonoma County.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Media

n C

om

mute

Tim

e

COMMUTE TIMES – BAY AREA AND SONOMA COUNTY


COMMUTE TIME

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Bay Area

Sonoma County24 min.

31 min.

Thanks to the county’s relative affordability, most Sonoma County workers are able to avoid a long-distance commute.

LOCAL FOCUS

COMMUTE PATTERNS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Census Transportation Planning Package

Sonoma County91%

Marin County2%

Other Bay Area

Counties4%

Outside the Bay Area

3%

Other9%

COMMUTE ORIGINS OF SONOMA COUNTY WORKERS

Sonoma County83%

Marin County

8%

San Francisco3%

Other Bay Area Counties

5%

Outside the Bay Area

1%

Other17%

COMMUTE DESTINATIONS OF SONOMA COUNTY RESIDENTS

Of course, weekday congestion hotspots do remain –notably, the Marin-Sonoma Narrows and in Santa Rosa.

LOCAL FOCUS

TIME SPENT IN CONGESTION

Source: MTC, 2016

Of the 162 congested segments in the Bay Area, seven

are located in Sonoma County. All are along US-101.

AM Peak Period:

65. Southbound from Redwood Hwy to Petaluma Blvd

86. Northbound from Santa Rosa Ave to SR-12

PM Peak Period:

48. Northbound from Novato to Petaluma (Narrows)

53. Southbound from River Rd to SR-12

77. Northbound from Golf Course Dr to Baker Ave

154. Southbound near SR-12 Interchange

161. Northbound near SR-12 Interchange

On SR-37, new weekday hotspots have emerged in

neighboring Marin & Solano counties (ranked 115 & 137).

The Bay Area has made slight but meaningful gains in reducing auto dependence, mostly in the central Bay Area.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

COMMUTE MODE SHARE – BAY AREA

Auto Transit Walk, Bike, Other Work at Home

70%

81%79%

75%


COMMUTE MODE CHOICE

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

COMMUTE MODE SHARE – SONOMA COUNTY

Auto Transit Walk, Bike, Other Work at Home

76%86% 87% 86%

PM2.5

Per-capita GHG emissions from transportation have remained relatively steady in the Bay Area over the past five years.

1

2

3

4

5

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Ann

ual Per-

Capita G

HG

Em

issions

(in

metr

ic tons)

PER-CAPITA GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM TRANSPORTATION


GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM FUEL SALES

Sources: California Energy Commission, 2015; American Community Survey; note that 2010 and 2011 data use an older methodology; * = Napa County variations are due to small sample size

San Francisco

San Mateo

Solano

Marin

Alameda

Santa Clara

Sonoma

Contra Costa

Napa*

Bay Area




2

3

4

5





Sonoma County:City Comparison

• Measured by the share of residents who use a non-auto mode to get to work on a typical day

• Healdsburg, Sebastopol, and Sonoma are in the lead, thanks to their above-average rates of walking and telecommuting

LOCAL FOCUS

COMMUTE MODE CHOICE

12%

11%

21%

15%

9%10%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015; city data limited to 5-year rolling average

20%

19%

11%

County Average:

Regional Average:

14%

25%

Cloverdale

Healdsburg

Windsor

Sebastopol

Cotati

Santa

Rosa

Rohnert

Park

PetalumaSonoma


• Measured by (door-to-door) median commute time for all modes by place of residence

• All Sonoma County cities and towns have commute times shorter than the regional average

• Santa Rosa has the fifth-shortest commute time of any Bay Area city

LOCAL FOCUS

COMMUTE TIME

28

22

22

29

2728

23

25

25

County Average:

Regional Average:

24

31

Cloverdale

Healdsburg

Windsor

Sebastopol

Cotati

Santa

Rosa

Rohnert

Park

PetalumaSonoma



• Measured by the three-year rolling-average pavement condition index (PCI)

• Overall, Sonoma County has the worst road conditions of any Bay Area county

• Petaluma has the second-worst streets of any Bay Area city – only surpassed by Larkspur

LOCAL FOCUS

STREET PAVEMENT CONDITION

61

60

61

46

7152

Source: StreetSaver, 2016

58

73

75

County Average:

Regional Average:

55

67

Cloverdale

Healdsburg

Windsor

Sebastopol

Cotati

Santa

Rosa

Rohnert

Park

PetalumaSonoma


LOCAL FOCUS

HOUSING GROWTH

131

1.7k

107

1.1k

10213

Source: CIRB/CHF, 2010-2015

68

140

55

County Total:

Regional Total:

3.7k

99.7k

Cloverdale

Healdsburg

Windsor

Sebastopol

Cotati

Santa

Rosa

Rohnert

Park

PetalumaSonoma

• Measured by the number of housing units permitted between 2010 and 2015

• Santa Rosa and Petaluma combined account for three-quarters of all Sonoma County housing development since the end of the recession


LOCAL FOCUS

INCOME

$64k

$61k

$66k

$80k

$58k$62k

$58k

$63k

$85k

County Average:

Regional Average:

$67k

$89k

Cloverdale

Healdsburg

Windsor

Sebastopol

Cotati

Santa

Rosa

Rohnert

Park

PetalumaSonoma

• Measured by median household income based on place of residence

• Windsor and Petaluma have the highest annual incomes in the county

• Neighboring cities often have surprisingly different income levels



LOCAL FOCUS

HOME PRICES

$404k

$448k

$590k

$536k

$359k$420k

Source: Zillow, 2015

$662k

$572k

$514k

County Average:

Regional Average:

$475k

$708k

Cloverdale

Healdsburg

Windsor

Sebastopol

Cotati

Santa

Rosa

Rohnert

Park

PetalumaSonoma

• Measured by median home sale prices

• Rohnert Park is the most affordable Sonoma County city to purchase a home

• Santa Rosa falls in the middle of the pack, whereas Sebastopol and Healdsburg are the most expensive cities for buying


LOCAL FOCUS

POVERTY

31%

31%

30%

22%

33%28%

19%

19%

18%

County Average:

Regional Average:

28%

24%

Cloverdale

Healdsburg

Windsor

Sebastopol

Cotati

Santa

Rosa

Rohnert

Park

PetalumaSonoma

• Measured based on share of population below 200% federal line

• Four Sonoma County cities have more than 30 percent of their population living below the 200% poverty line


MTC BAAQMD BCDCABAG

DAVID VAUTIN, [email protected]

UPCOMING DATA RELEASES:JUNE 2017 – TRANSPORTATION

SUMMER 2017 – ENVIRONMENT

Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/isolino/8338786790/

vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov

QUESTIONS?

s c b d v , mtc j 12, 2017 mtc abag baaqmd...

Documents