Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

The End of Commuting

458 views

Published on

Alan E. Pisarski,

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

The End of Commuting

  1. 1. Forming Transportation Policy and Planning in a Data-free World – THE CASE OF CIA3 Portland October 27, 2006 Alan E. Pisarski
  2. 2. Alan E. Pisarski WE ARE BLESSED WITH LOFTY GOALS TO STIR MEN’S (& WOMEN’S) SOULS? Present National Goal: MAKING THINGS GET WORSE - --- SLOWER! “ Many areas are targeting a goal of slowing the growth of congestion, rather than a reduction.” THE 2002 URBAN MOBILITY REPORT, TTI, pg. 10
  3. 3. The starting point WHAT IS THE GOAL? My goal for transportation is to reduce the effects of distance as an inhibiting force in our society’s ability to realize its economic and social aspirations
  4. 4. Alan E. Pisarski Responding to “The Tyranny of Distance”  It is a very big country!  Few nations have been challenged as greatly as we have been by “The Tyranny of Distance.”  No other nation has succeeded as we have in reducing the influence of distance on its economic future!
  5. 5. Alan E. Pisarski Transportation Was Always About Time And Distance Time Pressures Will Dominate THE AUTO IS NOW AND WILL BE THE TIME TOOL  HIGH INCOME POPULATION  HIGH VALUE OF GOODS  SKILLED WORKERS IN SHORT SUPPLY  A MULTI-TASKING SOCIETY  PRESSURES ON WOMEN
  6. 6. Alan E. Pisarski - The New Millennium World – a challenged affluent society  A STABLE “OLD” POPULATION  SKILLED WORKERS AT A PREMIUM  WORKERS CAN LIVE, WORK ANYWHERE  WHO, WHERE ARE THE IMMIGRANTS?  MAINSTREAMING MINORITIES  THE SCOURGE OF AFFLUENCE  THE GLOBALIZATION OF EVERTHING
  7. 7. Alan E. Pisarski The Demographic Story 1. Boomers moving off stage 2. Where will the workers come from? 3. Advent of the immigrant workforce 4. Exurbanization
  8. 8. Alan E. Pisarski Forces of Stability and Change in Future Travel Demand Stable  Licenses/Vehicles  Workers  Population & Households  Migration Changing  Incomes  Locations  Immigrants  Aging
  9. 9. Alan E. Pisarski Old & Revised Census Estimates 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 1950- 1960 1960- 1970 1970- 1980 1980- 1990 1990- 2000 2000- 2010 2010- 2020 2020- 2030 2030- 2040 2040- 2050 BLUE = actual pop; PINK = 2000 estimate; RED = 2005 estimate
  10. 10. Alan E. Pisarski Complex projections – or a ruler? 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 ESTIMATE 2000 25 MEG ESTIMATE 2005 A 25 million per decade estimate works pretty well! New estimate: 420 meg in 2050
  11. 11. Alan E. Pisarski POPULATION SHARES 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 % UNDER 18 % WORKING AGE % 65 AND OVER
  12. 12. Alan E. Pisarski MALES OF WORKING AGE & AS SHARE OF POPULATION 82,675 92,234 95,932 98,622 105,411 112,366 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 (000'S) 50% 52% 54% 56% 58% 60% 62% WORK AGE % WORK AGE
  13. 13. Alan E. Pisarski END OF THE BOOM WORKERS ADDED PER DECADE 12.2 19.8 18.4 13.3 0 5 10 15 20 25 1960-70 1970-80 1980-90 1990-00 MillionsofWorkers 1980-90  18.5 MILLION WORKERS  1990-2000  13.3 MILLION WORKERS  Our problem may be too few commuters not too many!
  14. 14. Alan E. Pisarski There’s more to transportation than just commuting!  COMMUTING (16-20% of local psgr travel)  OTHER LOCAL TRAVEL  TOURISM  SERVICES (Power/phone/cable/sewer/water)  PUBLIC VEHICLES (gov’t services)  URBAN GOODS MOVEMENT  THRU PASSENGER TRAVEL  THRU FREIGHT TRAVEL
  15. 15. Alan E. Pisarski The Role of Commuting Today WORK TRIP SHARE OF TRAVEL BY DAY OF WEEK 4.7 18.9 19.3 18.7 18.8 16.5 6.4 18.4 14.9 0 5 10 15 20 25 S unday M onday TuesdayW ednesday Thursday Friday S aturday 5 D A Y 7 D A Y %
  16. 16. Alan E. Pisarski The Role of Commuting Today  Still declining in share  But some new understanding  Activities of workers Work as a Percentage of all Travel Measures 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Person Trips Person Miles of Travel Vehicle Trips Vehciles Miles of Travel
  17. 17. Alan E. Pisarski Dailytrips per Capita 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 WORK FAM/PERS BUS SCHOOL/CHCH SOC/REC OTH
  18. 18. Alan E. Pisarski workers byage group 2000 0 10000000 20000000 30000000 40000000 50000000 60000000 70000000 <16 16-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Worker non worker
  19. 19. Alan E. Pisarski TREND IN PERSONAL VMT – by age-sex 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 16- 19 20- 34 35- 54 55- 64 65+ 16- 19 20- 34 35- 54 55- 64 65+ Female Male 90-01 CHG 90 VMT
  20. 20. Alan E. Pisarski Metro Stability re Driving Alone?
  21. 21. Alan E. Pisarski Metro Stability re Driving Alone?
  22. 22. Alan E. Pisarski Metro Stability re Driving Alone?
  23. 23. Alan E. Pisarski Special Transit Study of Trips Downtown % metro Wash DC 9% New York 25% Seattle 7% Dallas Ft W 1.8%
  24. 24. Alan E. Pisarski Special Transit Study of Trips Downtown % metro % cc Wash DC 9% 21% New York 25% 45% Seattle 7% 12% Dallas Ft W 1.8% 2.6%
  25. 25. Alan E. Pisarski Special Transit Study of Trips Downtown % metro % cc % “Downtown” Wash DC 9% 21% 38% New York 25% 45% 77% Seattle 7% 12% 37% Dallas Ft W 1.8% 2.6% 14%
  26. 26. Alan E. Pisarski Four key Dichotomies Over/under 20 minutes commute In/out of metro area over 5 million (12 metros in 2005) Before/after 8 am Over/under age 55
  27. 27. Alan E. Pisarski Adjusting for travel times 21.7 22.4 25.5 21.7 23.4 25.5 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1980 1990 2000 National Adj National
  28. 28. Alan E. Pisarski Extreme Commutes  10 million over 60 minutes; 1/3 90+  60-90 minute commute grew 2x average  90+ minute commute grew 5x average Percent of workers commuting over 60 minutes and under 20 minutes by metro size 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 5,000,000 or more 2,500,000 to 4,999,999 1,000,000 to 2,499,999 500,000 to 999,999 250,000 to 499,999 100,000 to 249,999 50,000 to 99,999 % under 20 % over 60
  29. 29. Alan E. Pisarski 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 1 2 3 In met area -- 5,000,000 + In met area -- 2,500,000 to 4,999,999 In met area -- 1,000,000 to 2,499,999 In met area -- 500,000 to 999,999 In met area -- 250,000 to 499,999 In met area -- 100,000 to 249,999 In met area -- 50,000 to 99,999 Not in metro area CARPOOLING TRANSIT WORK AT HOME
  30. 30. Alan E. Pisarski TRANSIT SHARE BY METRO AREA SIZE - 2000 0 5 10 15 20 25 5,000,000 orm ore 2,500,000 to 4,999,999 1,000,000 to 2,499,999 500,000 to 999,999 250,000 to 499,999 100,000 to 249,999 50,000 to 99,999 percent CC SUB
  31. 31. Alan E. Pisarski male-female commuting distribution by hour of the day 2000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 12:00 a.m .to 4:59 a.m .: 5:00 a.m .to 5:29 a.m .: 5:30 a.m .to 5:59 a.m .: 6:00 a.m .to 6:29 a.m .: 6:30 a.m .to 6:59 a.m .: 7:00 a.m .to 7:29 a.m .: 7:30 a.m .to 7:59 a.m .: 8:00 a.m .to 8:29 a.m .: 8:30 a.m .to 8:59 a.m .: 9:00 a.m .to 9:59 a.m .: 10:00 a.m .to 10:59 a.m .: 11:00 a.m .to 11:59 a.m .: 12:00 p.m .to 3:59 p.m .: 4:00 p.m .to 11:59 p.m .: 00 Male 00 Female
  32. 32. Alan E. Pisarski 8 O’clock and all’s well 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 12:00 a.m .to 4:59 a.m . 5.00 a.m .to 5:29 a.m . 5.30 a.m .to 5:59 a.m . 6.00 a.m .to 6:29 a.m . 6.30 a.m .to 6:59 a.m . 7.00 a.m .to 7:29 a.m . 7.30 a.m .to 7:59 a.m . 8.00 a.m .to 8:29 a.m . 8.30 a.m .to 8:59 a.m . 9.00 a.m .to 9:59 a.m . 10.00 a.m .to 10.59 a.m . 11.00 a.m .to 11:59 a.m . 12:00p.m .to 3:59 p.m . 4:00 p.m .to 11:59 p.m . ALL bus or trolley bus Streetcar or Trollley car Subway or Elevated Railroad Ferryboat Taxicab Motorcycle Bicycle walked Other method
  33. 33. Alan E. Pisarski START TIME CHANGES IN SHARE 1990-2000 2.4 14.7 6.9 3 11.2 24.9 12.4 5.9 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 pre 5 am 5-6:30am 9-11am WAH % was in '90 shr of chg
  34. 34. Alan E. Pisarski Aging out of the Boomers -1 SHARES OF OVER 55 WORKERS BY AGE GROUP 49% 27% 12% 7% 5% 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75+
  35. 35. Alan E. Pisarski Aging out of the Boomers - 2 Over 55 patterns in mode use of private vehicles 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% 55-64 65-74 75+ Drove alone 2 people 3 people 4 people 5 or 6 people 7 or more people
  36. 36. Alan E. Pisarski Aging out of the Boomers - 3 Over 55 patterns in mode use of other modes 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 55-64 65-74 75+ bus or trolley bus Streetcar or Trollley car Subway or Elevated Railroad Ferryboat Taxicab Motorcycle Bicycle walked worked at home Other method
  37. 37. Alan E. Pisarski Aging out of the Boomers - 4 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 16-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ MALE UNDER 20 MINS FEMALE UNDER 20 MINS MALE OVER 60 MINS FEMALE OVER 60 MINS
  38. 38. Alan E. Pisarski THE SHIFT HAS BEGUN OVER 65 1990 2000 % POPULATION (millions) 31.2 35.0 12.2 % WORKERS (millions) 3.5 4.25 21.4 % SHARE AT WORK 11.2% 12.1%
  39. 39. Alan E. Pisarski THE SHIFT HAS BEGUN OVER 65 1990 2000 % 2005 POPULATION (millions) 31.2 35.0 12.2 % 36.8* WORKERS (millions) 3.5 4.25 21.4 % 4.66 SHARE AT WORK 11.2% 12.1% 12.7% * Census estimate 2005
  40. 40. Alan E. Pisarski THE SHIFT HAS BEGUN OVER 65 1990 2000 2010 2020 POPULATION 31.2 35.0 40.2 54.6 WORKERS 3.5 4.25 5.1 6.9 SHARE AT WORK 11.2% 12.1% 12.7% 12.7%
  41. 41. Alan E. Pisarski Immigrants will be a key part of the work force HISPANIC SHARE OF POPULATION BY WORKING AGE GROUPS 17% 11% 12% 5% 13% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% % <16 %16+ %16-65 % 65+ ALL
  42. 42. Alan E. Pisarski The Immigrant story - 1 immigrants are only 13.5% of workers but are significant part of usage in some modes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Drove alone2 people3 people4 people 5 or6 people 7 orm ore people Bus ortrolley bus Streetcar/trolley car Subw ay orelevatedRailroadFerryboatTaxicab M otorcycle BicycleW alked W orked athom e O therm ethodallwork BORN US ALL 2 US
  43. 43. Alan E. Pisarski The Immigrant story - 2 Mode Use by Years in US 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% < 5 yrs 5- <10 yrs 10-<15 yrs 15-<20 yrs >20 yrs BORN US other Worked at home Walked Bicycle transit carpool Drove alone
  44. 44. Alan E. Pisarski The Immigrant story - 3 Carpool Use by Yrs in US 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% < 5 yrs 5- <10 yrs 10-<15 yrs 15-<20 yrs >20 yrs BORN US carpool 3 carpool 4 carpool 5 or 6 carpool 7&+
  45. 45. Alan E. Pisarski The Immigrant story - 4 8.9% 6.7% 5.8% 4.7% 3.5% 2.0% 4.2% 5.4% 4.4% 4.0% 3.5% 1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0% <5 yrs 5- <10 yrs 10-<15 yrs 15-<20 yrs >20 yrs BORNUS Bus or trolley bus Subway or elevated
  46. 46. HELP STAMP OUT AFFLUENCE We can do it if we work together!
  47. 47. Alan E. Pisarski Transportation spending rises in share as income rises. Percent of all Consumer Spending onTransportation 2002 by income quintile 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% LOWEST LOWER MID MIDDLE UPPER MID HIGHEST
  48. 48. Alan E. Pisarski Annual Trips Per Household by Household Income - 2001 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 < $10K 10K - < $20K 20K - < $30K 30K - < $40K 40K - < $50K 50K - < $60K 60K - < $70K 70K - < $80K 80K+ 2005
  49. 49. Alan E. Pisarski WORK TRIP LENGTH TREND by income 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 < $10K 10K - < $20K 20K - < $30K 30K - < $40K 40K - < $50K 50K - < $60K 60K - < $70K 70K - < $80K 80K+ miles 1990 1995 2001
  50. 50. Alan E. Pisarski Mode Choice by Income – 2001 – all purposes 0 20 40 60 80 100 < $20,000 $20- $40K $40- $75K $75- $100K $100K+ % SOV HOV Transit Walk Other (+taxi+Bike+school)
  51. 51. Alan E. Pisarski Modes have an income signature 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Drovealone 2-personcarpool 3-personcarpool 4-personcarpool 5-or-6-personcarpool 7-or-more-personcarpool Busortrolleybus Streetcarortrolleycar Subwayorelevated Railroad Ferryboat Bicycle Walked TaxicabMotorcycleOthermeans Workedathome alltransit under $25,000 $25,000 to $75,000 $75,000-$100,000 OVER $100,000
  52. 52. Alan E. Pisarski WE ARE AT VEHICLE SATURATION? 0 50 100 150 200 250 1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1995 PEOPLEPERCAR POPULATION TO VEHICLE RATIO 1900-1995 2.6 1.3
  53. 53. Alan E. Pisarski TRENDS IN SHARES OF HOUSEHOLDS BY VEHICLE OWNERSHIP 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 O VEHICLES 1 VEHICLE 2 VEHICLES 3+ VEHICLES
  54. 54. Alan E. Pisarski zero vehicle households by Race and Ethnicity 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 1990 2000 % White Non-Hisp Black Hisp Asian Am Indian All THE DEMOCRATIZATION OF MOBILITY HAS MORE TO GO!
  55. 55. Alan E. Pisarski A key to the future? When will minorities reach 5%? Percent Households without vehicles 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 White Black Hisp Asian All 1995 2001
  56. 56. Alan E. Pisarski Another key Foreign-born persons in households without Vehicles by Year of Arrival 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% ARRIVED BETWEEN 1996-2000 ARRIVED BETWEEN 1991-1995 ARRIVED BETWEEN 1980-1990 ARRIVED 1980 AND BEFORE NOT FOREIGN BORN
  57. 57. Alan E. Pisarski 20th CENTURY POPULATION TREND 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 SUBS CC NON MET
  58. 58. Alan E. Pisarski SHARE OF POPULATION CHANGES 2000-2030 15% 20% 15%15% 23% 5% 7% CALIFORNIA REST OF WEST TEXAS FLORIDA REST OF SOUTH NORTH EAST MIDWEST
  59. 59. Alan E. Pisarski The Focus will be on Big Metros  60% of population in big metros (2000)  1960 34 areas over 1 million  1990 39 areas over 1 million  2000 50 areas over 1 million  2005 53 areas  Probably 60 by 2020  60/20/20 big metro/metro/rural
  60. 60. Alan E. Pisarski The Focus will be on Big Metros  12 areas with more than 5 meg.  1/3 of national pop.; 100 meg.  Growth is in exurbs expanding areas  NY, LA, CHI, DC, SF, DFW, PHIL, BOS, DET, MIA, HOU, ATL,  PHX, SEA next
  61. 61. Alan E. Pisarski Immense distortions from choices of geography  Census redefinitions distort trends  “central cities – not”  Exurbs vs rural  Urbanized area boundaries  Need a science of suburbanism  Flows from suburb to suburb  Think markets
  62. 62. Alan E. Pisarski % LEAVING COUNTY TO WORK U.S.  1990 23.9% of workers left home  2000 26.7%  OF ALL 13.2 Meg. WORKERS 51% Left home county (6.7 Meg. )  ONLY 3 STATES DOWN !  Wash DC Area leads
  63. 63. Alan E. Pisarski Ware Burke Clinch Hall Laurens Early Floyd Lee Bulloch Worth Wayne Charlton Coffee Fulton Tift Long ScrevenHarris Emanuel Decatur Carroll Troup Dodge Irwin Grady Bryan Polk Colquitt Liberty Wilkes Telfair Brooks Dooly Bartow Appling Sumter Thomas Gilmer Mitchell Jones Camden Tattnall Cobb Elbert Walker Talbot Berrien Hart Echols Taylor Stewart Macon Coweta RabunFannin Baker Union Washington JeffersonBibb Wilcox Lowndes Jasper Hancock Henry Greene Brantley Marion Pierce Crisp Monroe Terrell Miller Glynn Murray Twiggs Upson Pike Gwinnett Heard Gordon Clay Effingham Morgan Wilkinson Cherokee Houston Toombs Bacon White Jackson Oglethorpe Warren Banks Newton Lincoln McIntosh Chatham Lumpkin Columbia Richmond Ben Hill Dougherty Haralson Candler EvansSchley Spalding Muscogee Stephens Clayton Quitman Georgia.shp GA_25per_more_1990.shp 0 - 25 25 - 100 N EW S GA: 25% or More Leaving County of Residence to Work in 1990
  64. 64. Alan E. Pisarski Ware Burke Clinch Hall Laurens Early Floyd Lee Bulloch Worth Wayne Charlton Coffee Fulton Tift Long ScrevenHarris Emanuel Decatur Carroll Troup Dodge Irwin Grady Bryan Polk Colquitt Liberty Wilkes Telfair Brooks Dooly Bartow Appling Sumter Thomas Gilmer Mitchell Jones Camden Tattnall Cobb Elbert Walker Talbot Berrien Hart Echols Taylor Stewart Macon Coweta RabunFannin Baker Union Washington JeffersonBibb Wilcox Lowndes Jasper Hancock Henry Greene Brantley Marion Pierce Crisp Monroe Terrell Miller Glynn Murray Twiggs Upson Pike Gwinnett Heard Gordon Clay Effingham Morgan Wilkinson Cherokee Houston Toombs Bacon White Jackson Oglethorpe Warren Banks Newton Lincoln McIntosh Chatham Lumpkin Columbia Richmond Ben Hill Dougherty Haralson Candler EvansSchley Spalding Muscogee Stephens Clayton Quitman Georgia.shp Ga_25per_more_2000.shp 0 - 25 25 - 100 N EW S GA :25% or More Leaving the County of RTesidence to Work
  65. 65. Alan E. Pisarski Cnty_cnty_wrkrflow.shp 0 - 25 25 - 100 N EW S County-to-County Worker Flow Percentage: 2000
  66. 66. Alan E. Pisarski Cnty
  67. 67. Alan E. Pisarski Share of Increase in Commuting Flows 1990-2000 3% 19% 14% 64% Cent City to Cent City Cent City to Suburbs Suburbs to Cent City Suburbs to Suburbs
  68. 68. Alan E. Pisarski The “Donut” Metro  Jobs and workers centered in suburbs  46% of commutes;  64% of growth 90-00  7.5 million coming in to the subs from exurbs and other metros each day  7.5 million going out to the subs from central cities  CC to subs > Subs to CC in share of growth
  69. 69. Alan E. Pisarski Suburban Flows grow with metro size 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 50,0 00 to 99,9 99 100,000 to 249 ,999 250,000 to 499 ,999 500,0 00 to 999 ,999 1,00 0,000 to 2 ,499,999 2,50 0,000 to 4 ,999,999 5,000 ,000 or m ore subs-out subs-subs subs-cc cc-out cc-subs cc-cc
  70. 70. Alan E. Pisarski Own Metropolitan Area Other Metropolitan area suburbs Central city Central city suburbs 24.5 7.5 16.6 40.8 .7 2.2 1.1 3.5 1.9 .5 24.4 1.6 2.9 Non-metropolitan Area 2000 METRO FLOW MAP
  71. 71. Alan E. Pisarski Two things are key: Time and Cost we measure both badly TIME  Weak Travel Time for work  Nothing else NPTS  No purchased modes data  No service summary data COST  CEX only small  AAA limited  No trucking costs  No ton-mile costs  Limited fare costs in purchased modes
  72. 72. Alan E. Pisarski My keys on travel time % under 20 mins / % over 60 mins Percent of workers commuting over 60 minutes and under 20 minutes by metro size 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 5,000,000 or more 2,500,000 to 4,999,999 1,000,000 to 2,499,999 500,000 to 999,999 250,000 to 499,999 100,000 to 249,999 50,000 to 99,999 % under 20 % over 60
  73. 73. Alan E. Pisarski CIA II – Unresolved Questions  Force of Immig. Persist?  Immig. trend to mainstream?  Job/worker balance?  Minorities typical?  Will tech fixes work?  WAH & telecom impact?  ITS influence?  Aging commuters change the trend?  Growth in smaller metro areas?  Higher densities?
  74. 74. Alan E. Pisarski New Patterns to Watch  Who, where will the workers be?  Will long distance commute expand further?  Will role of commuting decline/grow or just change?  Will value of time still be the guiding factor?  Value of mobility recognized?
  75. 75. Alan E. Pisarski Is Our Transportation System In Place? A nation that by the end of the decade can expect:  Another 25-30 million people  And probably as many vehicles  And another $3 trillion in GDP Cannot say that its transportation work is done!
  76. 76. Alan E. Pisarski WE ADD THE POPULATION OF A CANADA EACH DECADE!!!! DO WE ADD CANADA’S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM?
  77. 77. Alan E. Pisarski For the first time in history –  A nation’s population is approaching a state where it can live and work wherever it wants!  Affluence and low cost transportation and communications have made that possible.  American society must have the mobility it needs to meet its social and economic goals. IT IS NOT OK TO FAIL!
  78. 78. Thank you  Alan E. Pisarski
  79. 79. Alan E. Pisarski PATTERNS TO WATCH  Immigrant arrivals?  Where do immigrants go?  Minorities & mobility?  Where do aging baby-boomers go?  Multiple home ownership?  What happens to Job/Worker suburban ratios?  Even more women in workplace?  Work by >65 pop?  Workplace patterns?
  80. 80. Alan E. Pisarski 30 YEAR POP TREND BY AGE GROUP 0 50,000,000 100,000,000 150,000,000 200,000,000 250,000,000 300,000,000 350,000,000 400,000,000 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 .Under 5 years .5 to 13 years .14 to 17 years .18 to 24 years .25 to 44 years .45 to 64 years .65 years and over
  81. 81. Alan E. Pisarski WORKING AGE POP VS DEPENDENT POP 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000 450000 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 OVER 65 WORKAGE UNDER 20
  82. 82. Alan E. Pisarski Transit use sensitive to income – at both ends of spectrum Central City and suburban Transit Use by income 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% Lessthan $10,000- $15,000- $20,000- $25,000- $30,000- $35,000- $40,000- $45,000- $50,000- $60,000- $100,000- $150,000 CC TRANSIT SUB TRANSIT
  83. 83. Alan E. Pisarski Cars per Household – 40 year trend NUMBER OF HH BY VEHICLES OWNED 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 OOO'S O VEHICLES 1 VEHICLE 2 VEHICLES 3+ VEHICLES
  84. 84. Alan E. Pisarski POP TREND BY AGE GROUP 2000-2050 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 ..85+ ..65-84 ..45-64 ..20-44 ..5-19 ..0-4
  85. 85. Alan E. Pisarski CHANGE IN WORK AGE POP 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 ..0-4 ..5-19 ..20-44 ..45-64 ..65-84 ..85+
  86. 86. Alan E. Pisarski SHARES OF DEPENDENT POPULATION 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 % DEP % < 20 % >65
  87. 87. Alan E. Pisarski Aging out of the Boomers - 2 Car, truck, or van 70.00% 72.00% 74.00% 76.00% 78.00% 80.00% 82.00% 84.00% 86.00% 88.00% 90.00% 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75+
  88. 88. Alan E. Pisarski Transportation Spending by Workers/hh 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 single consumer no earner (1) multiple consumer no earner (2.3) single consumer one earner (1) multiple consumer 1 earner (2.9) multiple consumer 2 earners (3.1) multiple consumer 3+ earners (4.4)
  89. 89. Alan E. Pisarski VEHICLES OWNED BY NUMBER OF WORKERS 1.20 2.50 3.20 2.00 1.80 0.80 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 single consumer no earner (1) multiple consumer no earner (2.3) single consumer one earner (1) multiple consumer 1 earner (2.9) multiple consumer 2 earners (3.1) multiple consumer 3+ earners (4.4)
  90. 90. Alan E. Pisarski 2000-2050 GROWTH RATES BY AGE GROUP 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 ..TOTAL 0-4 5-19 20-44 45-64 ..65-84 85+ GROWTHRATE 2000-2050
  91. 91. Alan E. Pisarski Male Female Growth Rates 2000-2050 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 M ALETOTAL 0-419-M ay 20-44 45-64 65-84 85+FEM ALETOTAL 0-419-M ay 20-44 45-64 65-84 85+
  92. 92. Alan E. Pisarski GROWTH BY AGE GROUP, (OOO'S) -10,000 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 0-4 5-19 20-44 45-64 65-84 85+ TOTAL 2000-2010 2010-2020 2020-2030 2030-2040 2040-2050
  93. 93. Alan E. Pisarski WORKING AGE GROUP GROWTH (000'S) -5,000 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 20-44 45-64 2000-2010 2010-2020 2020-2030 2030-2040 2040-2050
  94. 94. Alan E. Pisarski AGE GROUP GROWTH RATES 2000-2030 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% Under 5 years 5 to 13 years 14 to 17 years 18 to 24 years 25 to 44 years 45 to 64 years 65 years and over ALL
  95. 95. Alan E. Pisarski Commuting in America III hots  From a Social point of view  Af am vehicles  Immig transitions  From an Economic Point of view  % leave home county  From a transportation point of view  leave home by 6 am  Work at home
  96. 96. WHAT IS CONGESTION ? Congestion is: People with the economic means to act on their social and economic interests - getting in the way of other people with the means to act on theirs!

×