[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Vehicle Ownership Forecasts
for the
San Francisco Bay Area
1990 - 2020



Technical Summary



Planning Section
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
101 Eighth Street
Oakland, California 94607-4700
(510) 817.5700

August 1998


Report Outline


List of Tables & Figures


SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

  1. The Past - 1990-1998

  2. Total population in the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area increased from 6.02 million residents in 1990 to 6.65 million residents in 1998, a 10.5 percent increase over eight years. This represents 630 thousand new Bay Area residents between 1990 and 1998.
  3. The number of households residing in the Bay Area increased from 2.25 million households in 1990 to 2.39 million households in 1998, a 6.2 percent increase over eight years. This represents 143 thousand new Bay Area households between 1990 and 1998.
  4. Average household size in the Bay Area increased from 2.61 persons per household in 1990 to 2.72 persons per household in 1998. Household population (excluding group quarters population) increased from 5.87 million persons in 1990 to 6.50 million persons in households in 1998.
  5. The number of vehicles available in Bay Area households increased from 3.96 million vehicles in 1990 to 4.37 million vehicles in 1998, a 10.4 percent increase. This represents 417 thousand new vehicles between 1990 and 1998.
  6. Overall vehicles available per capita has remained fairly constant between 1990 and 1998 at about 657 vehicles per 1000 persons.
  7. Vehicles per household increased from 1.76 in 1990 to 1.83 vehicles per household in 1998.
  8. The number of households with zero vehicles decreased from 237 thousand households in 1990 to 228 thousand households in 1998, a 3.9 percent decrease. The share of households with zero vehicles also declined during this period, from a 10.6 percent share in 1990 to a 9.5 percent share in 1998.
  9. The number of households with two-or-more vehicles increased from 1.28 million households in 1990 to 1.46 million households in 1998, a 14.1 percent increase. The share of households with two-or-more vehicles increased from 57.2 percent of all households in 1990 to 61.0 percent of all households in 1998.
  10. San Francisco has the highest number of zero-vehicle households in the Bay Area in 1990 (94 thousand) and in 1998 (91 thousand). The share of zero-vehicle households decreased from 30.8 percent of all San Francisco households in 1990 to 29.0 percent of San Francisco households in 1998.
  11. San Francisco has the highest density of vehicle ownership in the Bay Area. The 46.7 square mile city had 6,943 vehicles per square mile in 1990 increasing to 7,572 vehicles per square mile in 1998. The average vehicle ownership density in the Bay Area increased from 570 vehicles per square mile in 1990 to 631 vehicles per square mile in 1998.
  12. Alameda County has the second highest number of zero-vehicle households in the Bay Area with 59 thousand households in 1990 and 56 thousand households in 1998. This represents 12.3 percent of all Alameda County households in 1990 and 11.2 percent of Alameda County households in 1998.
  13. Santa Clara County has the highest vehicle ownership in terms of vehicles per household, increasing from an average of 1.99 vehicles per household in 1990 to 2.04 vehicles per household in 1998.
  14. Marin County has the highest per capita vehicle ownership, increasing from 764 vehicles per 1000 residents in 1990 to 766 vehicles per 1000 residents in 1998.
  15. Sonoma County has the second highest per capita vehicle ownership in the Bay Area, increasing from 727 vehicles per 1000 residents in 1990 to 760 vehicles per 1000 residents in 1998.

    The Future - 1998-2020

  16. The Bay Area total population is expected to increase from 6.65 million persons in 1998 to 7.77 million persons in the year 2020, a 16.8 percent increase over 22 years. This represents 1.12 million additional Bay Area residents.
  17. Total households in the Bay Area is expected to increase from 2.39 million households in 1998 to 2.84 million households in the year 2020, an 18.8 percent increase over 22 years. This represents 448 thousand new households.
  18. Bay Area average household size is expected to decrease from 2.72 persons per household in 1998 to 2.68 persons per household in 2020. Household population is projected to increase from 6.50 million household residents in 1998 to 7.61 million household residents in 2020.
  19. Total household vehicles in the Bay Area is projected to increase from 4.37 million vehicles in 1998 to 5.47 million vehicles by the year 2020, a 25.2 percent increase over 22 years. This represents 1.10 million new vehicles in the Bay Area.
  20. Bay Area per capita vehicle ownership is expected to increase from 657 vehicles per 1000 persons in 1998 to 704 vehicles per 1000 persons in 2020.
  21. Average vehicles per household in the Bay Area is expected to climb from 1.83 vehicles per household in 1998 to 1.93 vehicles per household by the year 2020.
  22. The number of Bay Area households with zero vehicles is projected to decrease from 228 thousand households in 1998 to 207 thousand households in 2020. The share of Bay Area households with zero vehicles is also projected to decline, from 9.5 percent of households in 1998 to 7.3 percent of households by the year 2020.
  23. The number of Bay Area households with two-or-more vehicles is expected to increase from 1.46 million households in 1998 to 1.87 million households by the year 2020. This represents 61.0 percent of all Bay Area households in 1998 and 65.9 percent of all Bay Area households by 2020.
  24. San Francisco is projected to have the most zero vehicle households of Bay Area counties, decreasing from 91.4 thousand households in 1998 to 78.2 thousand households by the year 2020. This is a 14.4 percent decrease in the number of San Francisco zero-vehicle households. The zero-vehicle share of households is projected to decrease from 29.0 percent of households in 1998 to 23.2 percent of households by the year 2020.
  25. Alameda County is projected to have the second highest number of zero-vehicle households in the Bay Area at 52.0 thousand households by year 2020. The share of zero-vehicle households in Alameda is expected to decline from 11.2 percent in 1998 to 8.9 percent of households by 2020.
  26. Solano County is projected to have the highest average vehicle ownership per household, increasing from 2.02 vehicles per household in 1998 to 2.11 vehicles per household by the year 2020. Over 75 percent of Solano County households are projected to own two-or-more vehicles by the year 2020.
  27. Sonoma County is projected to have the highest per capita vehicle ownership rate in the Bay Area, increasing from 760 vehicles per 1000 residents in 1998 to 814 vehicles per 1000 residents by the year 2020.
  28. Marin County is projected to have the lowest share of zero-vehicle households of Bay Area counties with 3.3 percent of households in the year 2020. Other low share of zero-vehicle household counties include Sonoma (3.4 percent), Solano (3.4 percent), Contra Costa (4.3 percent) and Napa County (also 4.3 percent.)

I. INTRODUCTION

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) maintains a set of travel demand forecasting models for use in San Francisco Bay Area transportation planning studies. One major component of this model system is an auto ownership choice model. This particular auto ownership model uses demographic data, provided by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), to produce estimates of households by vehicles in household level (i.e., zero vehicles in the household, one vehicle in the household, and two-or-more vehicles in the household). This model also produces estimates of households by number of workers in the household (i.e., no worker in the household, one worker in the household, and two-or-more workers in the household.)

This technical summary reports MTC auto ownership level forecasts for all forecast years included in the ABAG's Projections '98 database (1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020). Also included are MTC interpolations for years 1996 and 1998. These 1996 and 1998 intermediate year forecasts are for use in MTC transportation planning studies, including base year updates for the balance of MTC's travel demand models.

These auto ownership level forecasts are prepared at MTC's 1099 regional travel analysis zone level. For sake of comprehension, results are summarized and reported at MTC's 34 superdistrict and nine county level. Superdistricts are aggregations of MTC's regional travel analysis zones and are used in the analysis of sub-county level demographic and travel forecasts.

Following this introduction are sections discussing the technical details of the data inputs and models; and a section discussing the detailed findings.


II. DATA INPUTS AND MODELS

(General readers may want to skip this technical section.)

The MTC model that predicts the share of households by workers in household and by vehicles in household level is the "Workers in Household, Auto Ownership" choice model, or WHHAO.

In casual conversation we may call this the "MTC auto ownership model." Strictly speaking, this model is used to predict the distribution of households by vehicles available to the household, using a decennial census definition of vehicles as "automobiles, vans and trucks of one-ton capacity or less that are kept at home for use by members of the household."

The MTC WHHAO model was estimated using data from the 1990 MTC household travel survey, and then calibrated and validated against household data from the 1990 Census (Census Transportation Planning Package / Urban Element.) Calibration and validation was completed at the MTC 34 superdistrict level. This means that the results from the base year model validation for 1990 were adjusted to match 1990 Census counts of households by workers in household and vehicles available in household levels.

WHHAO model inputs include:

  • number of households by household income quartile;
  • group mean household income, by household income quartile;
  • average household size;
  • share of multi-family of total households;
  • share of population age 62+;
  • gross population density; and,
  • employed residents.
These model inputs (except for 1996 and 1998) are documented in the MTC technical summary: Superdistrict and County Summaries of ABAG's Projections '98: 1990-2020 (July 1998). Data for 1996 and 1998 were linearly interpolated, on a zone-by-zone basis, using Projections '98 data for years 1995 and 2000.

Two of these input variables - share of multi-family of total households and share of population age 62-or-older - are developed by MTC staff using data from the 1990 Census and from ABAG's county-level age cohort forecasts. ABAG does not estimate small area population-by-age nor small area single-family vs. multi-family household data.

The WHHAO model is a nested logit choice model. Logit choice models are a commonly used model formulation used in travel models with discrete choices (e.g., auto ownership level or mode choice). The "upper level" of the WHHAO nested logit choice model splits the total number of households into households by workers in household. The "lower level" nest of this model further splits the households by auto ownership level. A diagram of this nested logit choice model is shown below:

Workers in Household Auto Ownership Choice Models

In the above graphic, NWHH refers to non-working (or zero worker) households; SWHH refers to one-worker (single worker) households; and MWHH refers to multi-worker households. The term AO refers to auto ownership (strictly speaking, vehicle availability).

Note that the data inputs to this model are stratified by household income quartile. This means that the zone-of-residence level output from this model are the number of households stratified by income quartile (4), by workers in household (3), by vehicles in household (3), for a total of 36 different types of households by each travel analysis zone.

(Technical readers interested in the detailed inner workings of this nested logit choice model may want to refer to a 10/3/95 technical memorandum included in the MTC report San Francisco Bay Area: 1990 Travel Model Development Project: Compilation of Technical Memorandum: Volume III (March 1996). This technical memo provides detailed examples on how to apply this particular nested choice model at a disaggregate, or household level. Other non-published memos are available that show how this disaggregate choice model is adapted for application at an aggregate, or zone-of-residence level.)


III. DETAILED FINDINGS

Regional and county highlights of these auto ownership forecasts are included in the Summary of Findings section of this report. Also, a regional summary table, Table R.1, is included.

Regional and county tabulations are included in Tables 1 and 2. Results of the workers in household level forecasts and related statistics are included in Table 1. Results of the vehicles in household level forecasts and related statistics are included in Table 2. Superdistrict-level tabulations are included as Tables S.1 through S.16.

Superdistrict, county and regional level data from the 1980 and 1990 decennial censuses is included in Tables A.1 through A.3. This data is used to convert the number of two-or-more vehicle households into the total number of vehicles available to households. A map of the MTC 34 superdistricts is included at the very end of this technical summary.

Households by Workers in Household Level.

These data are not discussed in the Summary of Findings but are discussed in this section. These results are from the "upper nest" of the MTC Workers in Household, Auto Ownership choice model (WHHAO).

Non-working households include retired households and unemployed households. Analysis of 1990 Census data for the Bay Area suggests that approximately 75 percent of non-working households are "retired households" (e.g., head of household is of retirement age.) Other non-working households are a mix of households with unemployed workers, disabled person households, or households of single parents-with-children.

Key in the prediction of households by workers in household level is the number of employed residents in the travel analysis zone of residence, the share of population age 62-or-over, and the average household income by income quartile. Certain neighborhoods with very high shares of elder age population and low numbers of employed residents are likely to be retirement communities with very high shares of non-working households (e.g., Leisure World in Vacaville and Rossmoor in West Walnut Creek.)

Regionally the number of non-working households is projected to decline between 1990 and 2010, from 479 thousand non-working households (1990) to 449 thousand non-working households (2010). The aging of the baby boomer population is expected to reverse this trend in non-working (retired) households, with an increasing number of non-working households to the year 2020 - 525 thousand non-working households. The regional share of non-working households is projected to decrease from a high of 21.3 percent of total households in 1990 to a low of 16.9 percent of total households by the year 2010, then increasing back to 18.5 percent non-working households by 2020.

At a county level, Napa County has the highest share of non-working households. In 1990, 27.7 percent of Napa County households were non-working. By the year 2020 this share is projected to decrease to 23.4 percent of all Napa households.

Santa Clara County has the lowest share of non-working households in the nine-county Bay Area. In 1990, 16.0 percent of Santa Clara County households were non-working. By the year 2020 the Santa Clara County share is expected to decrease to 15.5 percent of all households. The year 2010 forecast for Santa Clara County shows a low of 13.2 percent non-working of total households.

Regionally, the number of multi-worker (two-or-more) households is projected to increase from 0.94 million households in 1990 to 1.29 million households by the year 2020. Multi-worker household forecasts for 2015 are identical at the regional level to 2020. Between 2015 and 2020 the number of multi-worker households is projected to decrease in the central Bay Area counties, and is offset by increases in multi-worker households in north bay counties. The regional share of multi-worker of total households is projected to steadily increase from 41.9 percent in 1990 to 48.2 percent by the year 2010. This share is then expected to drop to 45.5 percent by the year 2020.

Santa Clara County has the highest share of multi-worker counties in the Bay Area. Santa Clara's share of multi-worker households is projected to increase from 47.8 percent of households in 1990 to 52.5 percent of households by 2010. This multi-worker household share is then projected to slide back to 49.2 percent by the year 2020.

Other counties with very high multi-worker county shares for 2020 include Solano (47.9 percent), San Mateo (47.5 percent) and Sonoma (46.6 percent).

San Francisco County shows the largest increase in multi-worker household share, increasing from just 33.9 percent of San Francisco households in 1990 to 44.5 percent of households by the year 2020. This is due to increasing workers per household as predicted by ABAG in Projections '98 - from 1.28 workers per household in 1990 to 1.40 workers per household in 2020.

The third market - single worker (one-worker) households is expected to steadily increase from 827 thousand households in 1990 to 1.02 million households by the year 2020. The share of single worker of total households is expected to drop from 36.8 percent in 1990 to 34.7 percent by 2005, then to increase to 36.0 percent by 2020.

County-level shares of one-worker households tend to hover between 33 and 40 percent. San Francisco and Marin have the highest shares of one-worker households in the Bay Area, both historically as well as projected.

Households by Vehicles in Household Level

Again, the Summary of Findings section of this report provides a re-cap of the highlights of these forecasts. These findings are not repeated in this section.

The regional number of zero-vehicle households is projected to decline between 1990 and 2010, then to increase between 2010 and 2020. This parallels the change in non-working households discussed in the previous section. Regionally this works out to 237 thousand zero-vehicle households in 1990, 204 thousand zero-vehicle households in 2010, and 207 thousand zero-vehicle households in 2020. In terms of share of zero-vehicle of total households, these are expected to decline from a high of 10.6 percent of households in 1990 to 7.3 percent of all Bay Area households by the year 2020.

The regional number of one-vehicle households is also expected to decline, dropping from 725 thousand households in 1990 to 700 thousand households by the year 2000. Between 2000 and 2020, the number of one-vehicle households in the Bay Area is projected to increase from 700 thousand to 760 thousand. The share of one-vehicle households is projected to decrease from 32.3 percent of households in 1990 to 26.8 percent of all households by 2020.

The regional trend in multi-vehicle households shows a constant increase, rising from 1.28 million households in 1990 to 1.87 million households by the year 2020. The regional share is also expected to steadily increase from 57.2 percent of Bay Area households in 1990 to 65.9 percent of households by the year 2020.

All of the relevant county-level vehicle ownership results are discussed in the Summary of Findings.

Comparison with State Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) Registration Estimates

The California State Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) publishes an end-of-year estimate of "fees-paid" registered vehicles by county-of-registration. Data is published for automobiles, commercial vehicles, trailers and motorcycles. According to the DMV, the DMV statistics are the:

"estimated number of fee-paid vehicle registrations which occurred in California counties during the past calendar year. It represents the official DMV count of vehicle registration transactions. This count should not be used for revenue projections because it is based upon a percentage distribution formula. It is not an exact count." (http://www.dmv.ca.gov/profile/97fee.htm)

According to the federal Truck Inventory and Use Survey (TIUS, 1997), 68.0 percent of commercial-plated vehicles are light duty trucks. MTC staff apply this 68.0 percent figure to DMV commercial registrations, summed with automobile registrations, to obtain a census-comparable "personal use estimated fee paid vehicles" by county-of-registration. This technique works fairly poorly for 1990 - the Census Bureau (and MTC) estimates 3.95 million household vehicles in the nine-county Bay Area; the State DMV, 4.32 million household vehicles. On the other hand, the comparison for 1997/98 is fairly good: MTC estimates 1998 vehicle ownership at 4.37 million vehicles; DMV-based estimates of December 1997 vehicle ownership is also 4.37 million vehicles. The following table summarizes these DMV to MTC county-level estimates:

DMV and MTC Estimates of Vehicles Registered - 1997/98

County DMV
12/31/97
MTC
1998
Percent
Difference
San Francisco 367,600 353,400 -3.9%
San Mateo 573,200 488,900 -14.7%
Santa Clara 1,142,100 1,134,800 -0.6%
Alameda 871,000 875,300 0.5%
Contra Costa 607,800 656,100 7.9%
Solano 230,100 253,900 10.3%
Napa 85,100 90,300 6.1%
Sonoma 310,200 332,500 7.2%
Marin 186,300 186,500 0.1%
Region 4,373,400 4,371,700 0.0%

DMV-based estimates of personal use vehicles show just a 1.7 percent increase between December 1989 and 1997, from 4.32 million to 4.37 million vehicles. This same technique yields 4.52 million personal use vehicles registered in the Bay Area for 1996. This represents a 3.3 percent decrease in vehicles registered in the Bay Area between December 1996 and December 1997. This apparent reduction in vehicles registered in the Bay Area (and California) is due, in part, to seasonal fluctuations in license registration revenue received by the DMV over the years. Another plausible explanation is that increased insurance requirements in California have resulted in an increased number of unlicensed vehicles.

DMV data may serve as an independent check on MTC vehicle ownership forecasts. Unfortunately the DMV does not provide estimates of the number of households by vehicle ownership level (the basic data that MTC is predicting!) The best check on these forecasts will be to compare these forecasts against data from the Year 2000 Decennial Census. Year 2000 Census data should become available by around the year 2002.

Review of Superdistrict-Level Results

MTC superdistrict, county and regional level auto ownership and workers in household level forecasts are included as Tables S.1 through S.16. Data is provided for all forecast years, including the interpolated demographic forecasts for the years 1996 and 1998.

Total households by MTC superdistrict is (intentionally) repeated in Table S.4 and S.11, as a summary check on households by workers in household and vehicles in household level.

It is important to note the wide variation in the number of households by superdistrict. In 1990, this ranges from a low of 13 thousand households in superdistrict #28 (upper Napa County) to a high of 165 thousand households in superdistrict #18 (greater Oakland and Alameda). Most of the comparative analyses included in this section relate to the share of households by either workers in household or vehicles in household level.

The distribution of households by workers in household, by superdistrict, is the subject of Tables S.1 through S.7. In 1990, the non-working household share ranged from a low of 10.6 percent of superdistrict #13 (South San Jose / Almaden) households to a high of 35.9 percent of superdistrict #1 (northeastern San Francisco) households (see Table S.5). These two superdistricts share the same distinction in 2020, with 8.3 percent of superdistrict #13 and 29.1 percent of superdistrict #1 households projected to be non-working.

Alameda County has the largest range in non-working household shares, ranging (in 2020) from a low of 8.7 percent in superdistrict #16 (Fremont / Union City) to a high of 28.1 percent in superdistrict #18 (Oakland / Alameda).

In Contra Costa County, the fairly high share of non-working households in superdistrict #22 (Walnut Creek / Lamorinda) (26.0 percent in 1990 increasing to 28.8 percent in 2020) is due in part to the Rossmoor retirement community in western Walnut Creek.

Other superdistricts with high shares of non-working households in 2020 include: superdistrict #20 (Richmond / El Cerrito), superdistrict #28 (St. Helena / Calistoga), and superdistrict #18 (Oakland / Alameda), all at 28.1 to 28.2 percent non-working households.

In terms of multi-worker household shares (see Table S.7), superdistrict #1 (northeastern San Francisco) has the lowest share, at 21.8 percent of 1990 households and 30.4 percent of 2020 households. Superdistrict #12 in Santa Clara County (Milpitas / East San Jose) has the highest multi-worker household shares, increasing from 57.0 percent of households in 1990 to 62.0 percent of households by the year 2020.

Other superdistricts with high shares of multi-worker households in 2020 include: superdistrict #13 (South San Jose / Almaden) at 59.7 percent; superdistrict #16 (Fremont / Union City) at 58.6 percent; and superdistrict #15 (Livermore / Pleasanton) at 56.3 percent.

The share of households with zero vehicles (see Table S.12), at superdistrict level, ranges from a low of 1.0 percent of superdistrict #23 (Danville / San Ramon) households to a high of 62.1 percent of superdistrict #1 (northeastern San Francisco) households (data for 1990.) For the year 2020, the zero vehicle household share is projected to decrease to 0.7 percent of superdistrict #23 households and 52.9 percent of superdistrict #1 households.

Other superdistricts with high projected shares of zero vehicle households include superdistrict #2 (Richmond District of San Francisco) at 19.3 percent; superdistrict #18 (Oakland / Alameda) at 16.8 percent; superdistrict #3 (Mission District of San Francisco) at 15.1 percent; and superdistrict #19 (Berkeley / Albany) at 13.6 percent zero vehicle households.

Other superdistricts with low projected shares of zero vehicle households include superdistrict #15 (Livermore / Pleasanton) at 1.6 percent; superdistrict #31 (Healdsburg / Cloverdale) at 1.7 percent; and superdistrict #15 (Fremont / Union City) at 2.1 percent. Outside of San Francisco, Alameda County has the widest range of zero-vehicle household shares, ranging from a projected low of 1.6 percent of East Alameda County households to a high of 16.8 percent of Oakland/Alameda City households.

For 1998, the share of households with zero vehicles ranges from a low of 0.9 percent of Danville/San Ramon Valley area households to a high of 60.1 percent of greater downtown San Francisco households.

The share of households with two-or-more vehicles (see Table S.14), at superdistrict level, is projected to range from a low of 13.2 percent of households in superdistrict #1 to a high of 85.3 percent of households in superdistrict #23 (Danville / San Ramon).

Other superdistricts with high projected shares of multi-vehicle households include: superdistrict #15 (Livermore / Pleasanton) at 83.0 percent; superdistrict #13 (South San Jose / Almaden) at 81.6 percent; superdistrict #14 (Gilroy / Morgan Hill) at 81.1 percent; and superdistrict #16 (Fremont / Union City) at 80.1 percent share of multi-vehicle households for the year 2020.

The other San Francisco superdistricts, Berkeley and Oakland are projected to have the lowest share of multi-vehicle households in the Bay Area by year 2020.

Average total vehicles available per household, by MTC superdistrict, is shown in Table S.16. Greater downtown San Francisco (superdistrict #1) has the lowest ownership rate, at 0.49 vehicles per household in 1990 climbing to 0.63 vehicles per household by the year 2020.

Four superdistricts are projected to have year 2020 average vehicles per household in excess of 2.3 vehicles per household: superdistrict #14 (Gilroy / Morgan Hill) at 2.373 vehicles/household; superdistrict #23 (Danville / San Ramon) at 2.358 vehicles/household; superdistrict #12 (Milpitas / East San Jose) at 2.339 vehicles/household; and superdistrict #13 (South San Jose / Almaden) at 2.303 vehicles per household.

For 1998, average vehicles per household ranges from a low of 0.527 vehicles per household in greater downtown San Francisco to a high of 2.332 vehicles per household in the Danville / San Ramon Valley area of Contra Costa County.


IV. REFERENCES & CONTACT

The following MTC publications are available from the MTC/ABAG library, at (510) 817.5836. Or you may e-mail the library at: library@mtc.ca.gov with your request.

Travel Demand Models for the San Francisco Bay Area: Technical Summary (June 1997). This report provides technical specifications for the entire MTC modeling system, including the workers in household, auto ownership choice model. /datamart/forecast/baycast1.htm

Auto Ownership in the San Francisco Bay Area: 1930-2010 (July 1997). This report is a compilation of statistics from the decennial census, the state DMV, and older vintage MTC auto ownership forecasts. Auto Ownership Paper

Superdistrict and County Summaries of ABAG's Projections '98: 1990-2020: Technical Summary (July 1998). This report summarizes ABAG's Projections '98 databases at MTC's 34 superdistrict and nine-county level.



Return to MTC DataMart: Travel Models & forecasts