Difference between revisions of "Jobs Housing Balance"
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
[http://travel-housing.mtcanalytics.org/#origin=375+Beale+St,+SF,+CA&mode=da&time=AM&scenario=2010&xyz=9.00/37.8573/-121.5896] | [http://travel-housing.mtcanalytics.org/#origin=375+Beale+St,+SF,+CA&mode=da&time=AM&scenario=2010&xyz=9.00/37.8573/-121.5896] | ||
− | EDD maintains a good volume of information about employment destinations and where the workers live [http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/ | + | EDD maintains a good volume of information about employment destinations and where the workers live [http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/geography/lmi-by-county.html] |
Revision as of 21:59, 6 August 2018
A central premise of environmentally beneficial development is the concept of the Jobs-Housing Balance. In our region, it is generally accepted that a Jobs/Housing ratio of 1.4-1.5 is healthy for a community to economically exist while minimizing the impacts of daily commuter traffic [1]. Achieving this ratio supports housing that is affordable, and employment opportunities that are closer to those residences.
In the San Francisco Bay Area Megaregion, the counties with too high a ratio (too many jobs or too few houses) are Santa Clara, San Mateo and San Franciso. Those with a deficient ratio (too many houses or too few jobs) include San Joaquin. The remaining counties in the Bay Area are somewhat balanced.
EDD maintains a good volume of information about employment destinations and where the workers live [3]