SR 06:064B - Laserfiche WebLink

Commuting and Place of Work An important issue facing communities like Pleasanton is the location of its residents' place of work. Commute patterns affect traffic congestion through a community, and can affect residents' quality of life. Many cities seek to organize economic development strategies around a better matching of jobs located within a community to residents' skills and occupations, minimizing in- and out- commuting or at least giving residents greater opportunity to work within their community. Table 9 profiles where Pleasanton residents go to work. Slightly less than one-third of Pleasanton's employed residents worked at jobs located within the community in 2000. including about five percent who worked at home. This represents an increase of over eighteen percent since 1990. Based on employed residents at the time, this equated to approximately 10,515 Pleasanton residents who worked within Pleasanton in 2000, including approximately 1,760 residents working at home. An additional nearly16 percent commuted to nearby job locations in other Tri-Valley areas, a slight decline from 1990 when just over 17 percent of employed Pleasanton residents worked in the Tri-Valley. While only just under 13 percent of Pleasanton workers commuted to Silicon Valley in 1990, this number jumped to almost 15 percent in 2000 as the high tech industry in the region was booming. Only 4.2 percent commuted to San Francisco in 2000, an increase from 3.2 percent in 1990. The number of Pleasanton workers commuting to the Central Valley remained flat over the ten- year period. Overall. this resident commute pattern to local jobs in Pleasanton was relatively high; meaning that the jobs in Pleasanton were capturing many local residents as workers. Table 9: Pleasanton Employed Residents bv Place of Work. 1990 - 2000 U.S. Census Pleasanton Commute Survey =>llaceofWork 1990 2000 Percent Change, Number ~ ~ ~ 1990 - 2000 B,878 30.8% 10,515 318% 18.4% 4,919 17.1% 5,255 15.9% 6.8% 14,320 49.7% 16,998 51.4% 18.7% .2. 3.2% 1,390 4.2% 49.6% 3,642 12.7% #,939 14.9% 35.6% 196 0.7% 203 0.6% 3.6% 4" --LOll. ---lI:i... ~ _m~ 28785 100.0% 33066 100.0% 14.9% 2003 Numbe P'~'nt 118 29.8% 79 19.9% 190 48.0% " '.0% .2 15.7% 9 2.3% n n~ '0' 100".4 Pleasanton Residents Working in Pleasanlon PlaaslYlton Residents Working Elsewhere in Tn-Valley Pleasa1lon Residents Working Elsewhere in the Bay Area (a) Pfeasanton Residents Working in San Francisco Pleasanton Residents Wotking in Silicon Valley (b) PleasW'llon Residents Working in the Central Valley (c) Pleasanlon RR!':idAnI!': Workino in Other locations fdl fatal Pleasanton Employed Residents (e) Noles: (a) Bay Ivea defined as the nine county region (b) Silicon Valley defined as Santa Clara County. (e) Central Valley defined as the following Collll.ies: Stanislaus, San Joaquin, and Sacramento. (d) Other indud6S all those working outside of the Bay Area and the Central Valley as defined above. (e) Does not include employed Pieasanton residents working outside of California. Sources 1990 and 2CXX> U_S. Census, CTPP Part 3; Bay Area Economics, 2005. P1easanton Economic Development Background Report FINAL - January 2006 14