HomeMy WebLinkAbout0457.093~ , . .
, ~ _ • .Ie
0.: f''':
August 5, 19$13
HONORAbLE CITY COUNCIL
Palo Alto, California
Stanford Research Park Employee Residential
l,QcatiQn and commute Pattern Analysis
Members of the Council:
This is an informational staff report tbat transmits to the
Council a Briefing paper prepared for the Comprehensive plan
~~visory Committee. No City Council action is necessary or
recon:rnended.
The attached Briefing paper compares 1962 a..-.,.d 1991 surveys of
Stanford Research park employees+ Analysis of the survey results
yields conclusions that are consistent with professional research
reported in planning and other professional publications, but
some of which are at variance with the perceptions of many
members of the public (i.e., conventional wisdom) _ Key
conclusions include:
The vast majority of employees live within 15 miles of their
place of work;
A very small percentage of employees live farther than 30
miles from their work site;
Average one-way commute times are not eigniricantly longer
in 1991 than in 1962j
To the extent that success in inducing wo~kers to not use
their automobile is often related to those commuting lon~
distances, the 1991 data does not bode well for signifi
cantly decreased automobile use; and
For a variety of interrelated reasons, it is unljkely that
the Research Park (and all of Palo Alto ur~er current land
use policies) will experience significantly increased
numbers of commuters.
Respectfully submitted.
~?td-/.'~~
KENNI!'l'H R. SCHREIBER
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
•
Att~cb~nt: n~i~fins Papex
~a~ Planning Commis$ion
Santa Cla~a Coun::.y Congest-ion Manag~meut AgJ!:!l'lCy \Mike
aYa:llh"",, , con .. "" McCart!'»')
Stanttlrd l1td . .'vet"Aity {t1'a~.rid N~ul'!lil.n}
Stant~rd M~9~tlt C~any (Curti$ P .. ~nyi
.1",,1« lI""lt"tt
llrad Xnman
,.~ w CPAC n!fing Re~4
!! Tn
STANFORD RESEARCH PARK
EMPLOYEE RESIDENTIAL
LOCATION AND COl\1MUTE
PATTERN ANALYSIS
For addiIiorrd1 ilifOl7Nllion _ 1M amtnrts of dIU papu,
pleIw <tlOIUZCt 1M jolJqwing letJd QJiJ}ror:
Ke!IMth Schrdber, Director of Planning and Community EnviroI!menJ
!29-23S4
t\'\ ... Y;;J
STANFORD RESEARCH PARK EMPLOYEE RESIDENTIAL
LOCATION AnO COIMITE PATTERH ANALYSIS
The followin9 analy'i' oompares !9~l and Ig91 surveys of Stanford Re,.arch
Park employees. Both surveYs contain~ data from appro~imately 25 percent of
the Park's employees (2,500 of approxImately 10,500 In 19~2 and 7,422 of
appro'iDitely 23,000 fn 1991). The 1991 employe. survey focused on the four
Park eoployers with 1,000 or more employees in the Park. The 1962 survey was
from a brOider employer b.se. The extent to which the 1991 results would be
dffferent if .ast or all Park employer, .ere included is not directly known.
Howe\:er~ comparison of journey-ta-work. data from ttli: 1991 survey with Santa
Clara and San Mateo Cour.ty 1990 federa' census data indicates reasonable
c",""atibility.
The analysis includes backgrou~d tnformation en t~e data sources arod analysis
of employee resldentt., locations, means of trayel to and from work, and
travel ti~. The analysis also contains a conclusions and impiementation
sectiDn.
Portions of the 1962 survey and residential location by city ind county for
th~ 1991 survey "spondents are attached.
Special thank' are extended to Co11.en N<carthy and Jerry Ruddy of the Santa
Cl.ra Countl Coonuter Network for their willf.gness to generate and 'hare
aapped and tabulated data from th~ 1991 s"rvey.
hckgroond
In 1962, the Stanford Industrial P.r~ had .pproxf •• t~ly 10,500 employ.es.
Twenty-two park ffnos, representfng appro'i.ately 9,500 employees,
participated fn a transportation ,urv~y. 2,499 """loyees sub!litted cOIIipleted
questionnaires. The survey work wa, coordinated by Jack Beckett, then
President of Palo Alto Engfneering C.-pany. The wor~ was undertaken with the
a~s1sta"ce of Stinford Univeriity's Civil Engineering Department, ~ith the
,"rvey results tabulated by cfYil engine.ring student, Brad Inman. The 1962
survey report fs attached.
In 1990, C.llfomla voters approved transportatIon-related propOSitions that
included the requirement for county Congestfon Management Asencl~s (CMAs}. In
S.nta Clora County, the local CMA emerged from the Golde. Trfangle Task Force,
I BUltl-jurisdictlon tran'portation and land use oriented planning effort.
The Task Force hed de.eloped 0 -.del transportatfon dem.nd .. nagement
ordfnlllCe tt,at was adopted by five cities and Santa Clara County. To
facilitate i~leaentation of the ordinance, the Task Force established, funded
and .taffed the Santi Clara County Commuter Network (CN). In 1990, the eN
bee ... an element of the County CHA. The wor~ of the CN included working with
large e.ployers on thefr transport4t1on needs, including adminlstratfon Df an
e.ployer survey~ In 1991, transportation survey results were available for
7,422 of the approxImately 23,000 employee. located fn the Stanford Research
P.r~. The surveyed eoployee, work for one of the four companies with more
than 1.000 employees in tne Research Park (Hewlett-Packard, Syntex, Varian.
Watkin' Johnson).
Neither the 1962 nor the 1991 survey resulted in a random sa~le Cfass section
of the Park's total employment. In 1961. 19 "f 22 firms in the Park
participated. but responses from the firms a •• percent of their employment
varied considerably. The 1991 survey. by its limitation to firms with over
l.Ooo employees , does not represent newer finms in the Park, and pernaps
contains employees with lQng~r average work tenure. The 1991 survey was also
not a random sa.ple survey of t~e four participating firms. Even with these
constrl;nts~ anilysfs of the survey results yields information that is
consistent with professional research reported in plannfng and other
professional publicatiQ~s. Key conclusions include:
The yast .ajorlty of eoployees live within 15 miles of the place of
werk;
-A very $~a'l percentage of employees live fartner tnan 30 miles from
t~.lr work site;
-Averag~ one-way commute times are net Significantly longer in 1991 than
in 1962: and .
The number of employees who tommute 'n single-occupant iutomobiles has
incre~sed over the past decades.
Epplqyte's Res1dent1al Lpcat10n
roo 1962 survey Identified a "regional are." extending on the Peninsula from
the City of San eOrl05 thrDU9h the City of San Jose. 2,320 (92.81) of the
2.499 alployoes responding to the survey 11.ed within this are.. for tnese
2,320 alplayaes. their resldentiil locltlons were Identified is;
North of Pilo Alt~
(i.e .• Menlo Park through S.n Carlos)
Nonl. Park 6.51
Redwood City 6.0%
Palo Alto
south of Falo Alto
(1 •••• Mountain Yiew
through San Jose)
Mtn. Viow • los Altos
Sunnyvale l Cupertino
Santa Chra
los Gatos , Saratoga
S.." Jose
21.0%
14.81
7.2:1.
9.0%
4.5:1.
20.1D:"
20.91\"
56.5:1."
" For an unexplained reasOl1. the totals in the 1962 study
.""al 98.2:1. rither thin 1001.
.:~tt-en.p .... 2
The res1dent1al 10clt10n fdentiffed by the 7,422 respondents to 1991 surveys
are Identified by city in Attacheent I. By county, the results, including all
citie. with 100 or DDr. employees, include:
IolOlledo County
Fremont 380
Contra Cosh County
Marin County
Napa County
San FranCisco
San Niteo ~ounty
llenlo Park 234
Redwood City 294
S..n Corlos 105
San Mateo 132
Sint. Clara County
Campbell 105
Cupertino 365
los Alto. 3D2
11llpnas 105
IItn. View 729
Palo Alto 633
san Jose 1,315
Santa Clara
Sunnyvale
Solano County
So~ ... County
Outs1de of tho a.y Area
Total
303
753
734
40
5
0
210
1,363
4,898
7
5
ill
7,421
(9.9%)
(2.8%)
(18.4",
(66.010)
i2.a}
An effDrt tD co.plre the two syrveys using .~~ geograph1cal breakdowns i~ the
1962 survey yields tne following;
• OUtside of the ·reglo~al irei·
(i .•. , San C.rlos through San Jose) 7.~ 24.5%
(179 of 2,499) (1,822 of 7,422)
• Distribution of employe.s living in the 1962 'regional ar.a' of San
Carlos through San Jose:
lill l2ll
• North of Palo Alto 20.~" 13.n:
(I .•• , Menlo Park through
San Carios)
• PlIo AltD 20.9%" ILlS
• South of PlIo Alto 56.S" 75.SS**
ll .•. , Hountain View
through San JOSq)
* As noted p~Ylo"sly, the 1962 percentages tot.l 9a.2I rather thon 1001 •
.. Includes Caepbell lnd Milpitas in 1991; does not include San Nartln, Horgan
Hill, and Gilroy.
• Distribution of ",""loyoos llvln9 io cities In the 1962 region.l area (os
a percent of total -.ployeo. living in the 1962 regional area);
U2Z illl
Menlo Park 6.S% C .11
Redwoo<I tHy 6.DlI 5.21
PlIo Alto 20.91 11.1%
Hountoin Ylew , los Altos 21. DlI 17.8%
Sunnynl. & cupert I no 1e.SS 19.6:1;
Sint. eloro 7.21 s.n
los Gatos , Sarotog. 9.DlI 3.1:1;
Son Jose 4.5% 23.1%
• The 1962 survey provided percentog.s based on the total employees living
within the 'regional area.' Rec.lculatlng the 1962 and 1991 survey
perunhges to reflect toto 1 "'"I'loyment .00 translating the IS6Z
.:\lIMr'I!'\'""-..... e
1 • , percentages into numbers of employ •• s yield, the following figures.
Note that the 1962 surv.y accounl.ed for abi>ut 25% of tohl P.rk
eaployoent and the 1991 survey account.d for about 33~ of total Park
eapl~)'II!nt.
1ill llil
• Outside of the 'regional
area', from Sl~ Carlos
through San Jose 1.2% (119) 24.5% (1.822)
o HQrth of Palo Alte (I .•••
from Monlo Park through
San Carlos) 19.111 (494) 9.9% (132)
• Palo Alto 19.4); (485) 8.511: (633)
• Santa Clara County, from
Mountain View through Sar.
Jose ~p~ n.ml 5Z.I!! (Um O
TOTAl lOO.~ (2.499) 100.~ (1.422)
• Does not include the 30 employees from San Martin. Horgan Hill and Gilroy
that are outside of the 1962 'region.l .r ••. •
Percentage of total employment and number of employees by city yields:
llenl0 Park
RI!<!!oGod City
P,lo Alto
Hountain View & los Altos
Sunnyv.le & Cupertino
Santo Cllra
Los <DS 6 Sar.toga
San Jose
TrlDs2prtat j DO tg and frqt wark
1ill
6.~ (I51)
5.611 (139)
19.4' (465)
19. SI (487)
14.8% (343)
7.2% (167)
9.11% (209)
4.5~ (104)
lill
3.2% (234)
4.11% (Z94)
8.51 (633)
13.9% (1.031)
15.1% (l.IlS)
4.1" (303)
2 •• ' (I 19 )
17.111 (1,317)
In 1962. 66.411 of .-ployees droye alone to work. which the 1962 report noted
WI' ·oore thin the lay Are~ a •• rage of 6~.· 10 1991. 73.11 drove alone to
work. The 1962 survey indicates t~lt 28.4~ of employees shared a ride to
work. while the c"""'tned carpool Ind .anpoDl percentage in 1991 wa. 14.61.
Alternative. to the car were alao.t nonexi.tent In 1962. with I.~ walking or
bicycling and alaost no use of bus or rail transit. In 1991. 5.81 used public
5
. i
buse., 1.4S rode bitycl.s .nd 1.41'. used (.ltrain. ,he 1991 ~. distrIbution
for 7,420 employees is:
199! Stan for, Research p@rk Cpmmut~ Mode
lm!Ie Nugr of ""'ovees et:ccentUii
Drive Alone S,428 73.1'
Carpool 1,074 14.5S
Vanpool 61 0.8:\
Publk Bus 434 5.8:\
PrlYat. 8", 6 0.1:0;
""torcyel. 43 0.&1'.
81<1Cl • 182 2.SS
Walk 34 0.5%
Canraln 107 1.4%
Other -2l ~
7,422 IOG.OS
The follow1nq table c""'Pares tile R .... rch Park's 1991 co_te ~s >;Uh Sinh
Clara lAd San Matec Caunty c .... te .-des as Identified In the 1990 fed.ral
census.
Drive Alone
carpool
Transit
Walk
Other
Tray" Ti"
SRP-1991
73.11'.
14.5
7.3
0.5
4.6
Cowute Modes
Santa Clara County
~ ill!!
n.ss 77.71
16.6 12.3
3.1 3.0
2.6 2.1
5.3 4.9
San Mateo County
~ ill2
68.8:\ 72.5'
16.5 13.0
7.9 7.4
2.6 2.&
4.1 4.5
The 1962 .u .... ey report ttlc1uded travel tl .. , .nd the estlm.tes lh.l "the
average c....t. tl .. for employees in the Stanford Industrial Park Is 20 to ZS
.1~otes [one-.ay trip]."
6
The 1991 survey did not 15k for average travel time, but I v,riety of other
data wc~ld indiclte that the average trlvel time Is comparable to 1961.
tensus data Indicates that for Palo Alto resIdents, the averlge trl.el tl .. to
work increased slightly from IS.2 minut.s in 1980 to 19 minutes In 1990. For
Santa Clara County, aver'g" travel time increased from 22.8 .Inut~s in 1980 to
23.3 minutes in 1990. Census and other d.ta indicate that Ivoroge coomuto
time is in the 20-to 25-m1n~te range for every large American urban area
except for somewhat b1gher tlmes in urban areas with majDr cOImUter rill
facilities (i.e., New York, Chicago and Philadelphia).
Census data for Palo Alto 11so indicates slight decreases in reSident workers
with comautes less thin 19 minutes ,nd aver 45 9fnutes and increases for
commuter traveling between 20 and 44 minutes. H~~.r, 77 percent of resident
workers have trayel times of less t~an 30 minutes. For Santa Clara and San
Mateo Counties, the trends are comparable to Palo Alto coamutes; excspt in San
Mateo County~ there WIS a slight decrease in the percentage of re~idents
trlvellng between lD and 29 minutes. Those with travel time less than 30
min"t •• tot.1 54.7~ of Sar. Mateo tounty resident workers .nd 61.2% of Santa
Clara County reSident workers~
Another way of evaluating travel time ;s the distance workers live from t~e
Research Park. Residenti.l location of the 7,422 worker, included in 1991
,urvey' ha' been plotted by the tommuter Hetwork ;n one-square-mile grid •.
Results of the plott:ng indieate th~t:
Res1dence/Vort Djstanct , of Wgrkets S of Wpryrs
10 miles or less 5,256 58_7S
11 to ZD lIil .. 2,8l7 31.6:1;
II to 3G .nos &44 7.2%
Beyond 30 alles 224 l.5~
When the residential location. are aapped, it's c1e.r that a substantial
-.jorit)" of those 11.ing In the 11-to lO-aile distanc. are located within 15
aile. froe the Park.
Conclusions and Impltclt1oD$
Conclusions and implic.tion. that ..erge froa the 1962 and 1991 survey results
include:
• The 1991 comoute pattern extends over I larger are. than the 1962
pattern, but the residences of workers remafn pr;~arl1y w1thfn a 15-.11e
radiUS of the Res.arch Park.
• The wil11ngnes, of c .... t.rs to tra.el long distances Is not .s greot as
often .ssumed in casual ref.rence to people comouting fro. Modesto,
Trlcy, and Gilroy (respectively, 14, 15, and 9 people out of 7,422). If
7
.11 Research Park commuters who live beyond 30 miles fn>~ the Park· (2.S~
of the survey) changed jobs to work clo •• to their houses, the impact on
cong.,tion would be a minimal (and perhaps not even det.ctable)
improvt!lle!'1t.
• The co.mute pattern i5 consistent with research studies that fndicate
people tend to work within a reasonable (defined by some as IS miles/30-
40 .inute.) distance froe their residences. Studi.s also indicate that
the Iverage urban arei c .... t. time is not gotting significantly longer.
Tne Ii4etra~ol1tan Transporhtion CCHJIIf; ssion prediCts that average coeaute
times in the BlY Area will decrei.e between 1990 and 2000 and 2010. The
decrease results primarily fra. continuing dispersal of jobs resulti"9
in i greater mixing of employment and resident;a' locations a"awing
more p~ple tne option of working i~ closer proximity to their
residences.
• The increase in the percentage of ~orkers driving alene to work ;s
s1.ilar to count1 and regional trends, but the Research Park's commute
pattern is somewhat closer to San Mateo County tnan Santa Clara County
patterns.
• To tn. ext.nt that I) mo.t urban are is in San Mateo and Santa Clara
counties thlt Ire within IS .Iles of the Research Park are substantially
developed, ind experiencing very ROderate residentill development;
2) potentill residential growth Ire as in Alameda County are at Dr beyond
the aargin af I reasonable com.ute ti .. ; 3) under current zonlnq, the
ReselTCh Park hiS relatively li.ited potentill for new building area;
and 4} new eoplo,...t opportunities cDnt!nue to disp.rse throughout the
larger urban Ire., it 1s un11kely that the Research Park (and all of
Palo Alto, under current land use poliCies, given the llaited potential
for eoployoent growtn throughout tn. City) will experience Significantly
i ncreued nUlllbers of c.-,ters.
• To the extent that success i. inducing workers to not us. their
auto.Dblle is often rellt~ to those cOimuting long dist •• ces, the 1991
dlh that S8.7l: of workers live within 10 miles of the Park and 9.7l:
live bejond 20 ailes does not bode well for significantly decreased
autOllOb i 1 e use.
• An implication of the 1991 ca.oute patterns (and ti .. spent c...uting)
is that voluntary polici.s, programs and infrlstructure (e.g., carpool
lanes, upgroded tr01n service) are unlikely to have an appreclabl.
poslt1v. effect on inducing a significlnt nUlllber of p~ple to not u.e
their autoaobiles for c .... ting. Measures that aoy effectively
~i$courage auto use include mandatory parking charges, road u.e fe.s and
European level gasoline tox.,. Tn.re Is little, if any, likelihood that
aIY of the ...... ur.s will becu.e acceptable public policy with1n I
foreseeable ti. period.
• The decre •• ed percentage of Rese.rch Park workers from San Mateo County,
Polo Alto, Nount.i. Ylew and los Altos, Santa Cl.ra and lD'
Gltos/Saratoga refl.cts t". greatly Increa.ed eoployment option. in 1991
B
•
versus 1962 and improved iCCesS to So~thern Alameda COUilty'S expanded
housIng opportunities .
• The sign1fitlntly increised percentage of workers liying in Sunnyvale
and Cupertino, and especially in northern San Jose, reflects tne
subst~qtial zmount of nousing developed in these communities over the
fast 30 years and the relatively more .ffordable housin) in those
oCltions tnan in Palo Alto (although the difference in housing prices
between Palo Alto and areas to the south appeared to narrow durIng the
198Os) •
Attac!aents: 1991 Employee Survey· City of Residence
19liZ Survey Report
9
~ .~>--,
Attachment I
li91 Stanford R.s.aTC~ Park ~'oyee Survey -C1ty of Residence
Almeda County ftillrirl Co~nty
Alilleda S Seivedere 0
Albany 0 Corte lladero 1
Be~k"'.y 7 fairfu 0
DubH. S larkspur 0
Elleryvll1. 0 Kill Volley Z
F ...... nt 380 Novato 0
H~ard 59 Ross 0
lIve....,re 12 San Anselmo 0
Newark 117 San Alfael 2
Oakland 23 Sausalito 0
Piedmont 0 Tiburon _0
Ple .... nto" 27
Silln leal1dro 12 T,tal S
Union City 83
Sunol ---1
10t.1 134
Cont.a Costa County Napa County
""ti~~ 3 Cal1.toq. 0
Brentwood 1 llapa 0
Chyton 1 St. llelen. 0
Concord 3 Y~untv;] 1. --.ll
Duville 7
El Cerrito I lotal 0
1Ie~le. Z
Lafayette 0
llar1.inu 0 Su francisc.o ZlC
Moraga 0
Orinda 1
Pinole Z So1ono County
PitUburg 1
PI ea .. "t Hi 11 3 Benicia 0
Rict.ond 3 Dixon 0
san Pablo 0 Fairfield 0
San Ra.-.n 6 Rio Yista a
Wal nut Creel< • Suh"" City Z
oakley -4 Vacavll !. 0
vallejo ~
Totll 40
Totol 7
San Kateo t.unty
Ath.rto.
8e1_t
8rl$bane
Burlingame
Col.
26
76
4
21
D.ly City 37
[l.t PlIo Alto 13
Foster C1 ty 60
H.lf ~~. 80Y 43
Hi 11 silorOU9h 8
llenio Po.rk 214
111111>,... 11
PltlflCl 33
?ertol. V.l1ey 61
R8<I .... oC t; ty 294
San 8Nne 29
Sa. Carlo. 105
S6. Kateo IlZ
S.SI. Frantlsco 29
lioodslde 21
La Honda 11
Pescadero •
S,. Sregor!. 2
""ntara lZ
""ss Beach 7
LOIN lie" 1
£1 ~r.nad. ~
Total 1,363
50_ Cou~ty
C1o¥eN.l.
Cotati
HuM,burg
Petal ....
Rohnert Park
S.,ta Rosl
S<!bo.$topo 1
StIfION
Wind.or
Total
o o o
2
1
1 o o
J
5
,,,,,,, ... 11
Cupertino
Gil .... y
Los Alto.
1.0. Altos Hi 1 h
lo. Gatos
Milpitas
""ntt Sereno
!4orga. Hll1
!4ountltn Vi ...
"al. Alt.
San J.s.
Santi (lira
Saratoga
Sunnyvale
Sa. ~lrti"
Stanford
Totol
~ ... ' .. V
lOS
365
9
302
64
66
lQS
5
13
129
633
1.337
303
113
703
B
--ll
.,89B
•
outside of the 8ay ArQ.
Calaveras County 2
£1 Dorado County 3
Mendocino County
Monterey tOllllty 15
Sacraoento County Z
San Benito County 1
San Joaquin County 19
Tracy 15
other 4
5uta Cna County 92
Boul der Creek 25
5&nt. Cruz 23
Scotts Valley 10
San lorenzo 7
other 27
Stanislaus County 2S
Modesta 14
other II
•
SDIIFCI!C lliWStHlll. !lUll IIIIPLC!ERS
1D eoopas .1;1 .... vi~ tile
CIVIL &l'Ei-Rpm DIlUDIBIT. STAJIF(IU) UtUl1BRSITr
PAlO AL10
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
PA1.O ALTO, CAL.IFORNIA
J ...... l962
AC~S
ftIia st.1ld;r .... made possible through the eooperattoD of Prot. Cark
Ocleol7y am Prot. 1'iJlcent. J. ~voen of the CiTil Engineer1zlc llepartNot
of Stentor<! Ufti>ersU7. rbo queotic:ma1re .... prep&nd ~0iJIt.l7 by Prot.
Ro~, J. C. Beok.tt aDd Brad lnIaao. Mr. lnIaao i. a e1Yi.l _l.Deering
_t at StaDt.rd. Be eooopleted the tat.ll&t1oo ot ",,,.,U. MIl -. the
CZ'O!SS retereDee analy'a1e tor eovalua:t1on.
T>IozIt7 "'" t1.rao cooperated by dUrtr1but.iDi questioma1re. to eopl."1M"
J. C. BeeJoott, helidozrt. of PUC O. acted .. Chairman of the Eaplo;rero group.
I.1at of Coopvat.1J>I fima .. lleprgeezit ... t! "".:
AdIr1ral coz,.orat1an. 1.. E. l!wIeb
.t.l.1'red llee1irod1cs, A.l Jew
Booblozl/Sp1Dco, Robert Cwm Ingham
C«ItI'Cl Data COl'pO .... t10., J. J. Ferber
I&at.ao X_, V. A • .801101.
IIc8ral Kleetr1~ Co., !I. B. Cool tor
G1Jm .. Co., V. J. ConliJ>
IIevlet'-Paekal'<! Co., Koith Elledge
toc-.s K .. S Co., lI&r1oo L. Sellor. lIalab.. !loa 1.. Sod. til
KatroaiCG A .. oc1ato.. he., W • .I.. Po1tiDa
kt10Dal he ... , J_a C. illite
l'retcmIed Liao Proact. Co., B. F. Sollatz
Pale Alto ~ ~, J. C. laoloott
lI.od1atian at StaDtOl'd, _. I. WUscm
SbacIc1e7 TnDa1atozo. Jebn Selowor
W. J. Btaee7. he., V. L. a.tler
SJDta IDat1_. Cllarl •• s-ttb
JIlllO )0. 1962
Utah ~0t1" II1D11l& C,,;, Y. A. Seedortr. Jr.
Var1&D A.ODC1ata.. DoIIo.l.d .I.. lIIltadg.
V1<!;n, he., Georco IW:eN.
Waw.a....rolmacm ~. S. G. WhittoJ...,.
Tbt fell ........ pro,lect .... 1JDI!ert&Jcen in re_ to an ewer 1I1crB&.sI.I>i
-..01 to l.ecu the traYel habU. aDd dDoirea of tbe people wor!d.JIII 10 the
Staotor<! lDdutr1&l Pori< am to &t~ to ... _ad • tIzta:oe plan fDr the ...u.t of traffie ~1oll. It i. recOllftiMd that Palo Alto i. " foe&1
point tor _ -. 10 tlIo lIid-peni.zmlla """ aDd that stentord IDd
I1Stri&l Pori< 10 _ a -Jor ""I'l"7llB"t centor.
J.ccord1lIa to the Staotcrd Uah .... it7 buaino •• office the IDdaatr1al
Pori< 10 _ bS. _loped. he_ ""I'l_t DWIIbero _t 1O.Sco people;
tbwo t.IIoro will be ~. 20,000 t<> 22,OOJ people dDot1ood lor the _
...... __ 1IO>'IdJI8 cIq. 'ZII1o 10 .... t!>lm the <ad.ot1J>c aDd plaDaed roada
COD haDdle 1d._ c&l>8iDc ......... tro1'fio congesti ....
~ 10 the IDdaotr1al Parle ro.eogn1oe the iq>ortaoce ot preseniDII
gocdvIll1d.tII the ~ reaideDtial .--mlt1o. by d1reet1llc trotfic
..., bw local _to aJIII 0Dt0 ....... oprate roa.1s aDd ~ clee1ped.
"----~,------
. ,
far the caaazter t.rs.tfic. !'his report presents SW"ft7 result·" o:n prennt .""""'to I"'tterna an<! do d,... oJ: ~_. 11> the '"""'.
SIIIlWl CIa .... c"""tj c.'" crown t,..,...ncloualJ' in U.e past. tU'teon )'ear ••
the trafrlc prt>blem 1.5 a:ute .. er;-.ilere in tile eOUZlty &ncI 10 net 11>11t.ed
'to the aid ... pen 'n lS'lll. Tbe 3t6te l·~"rtalOQ of R.1ehvatB eeti.Jste:! that the
b1gb""T dotlc10llCJ' of _ Clan C_y by 19'/0 w1ll be .;800,000,000.
!'!ost ot Ulia vU1 be tor local ~ and c"""tT road.. The nate high
""T need _to to ~S2, '/OC ,000. Thta requl.ro_ """ be OXl'8ct.ed to be
... t !rom £ .. oline t.axe. but. the COImty clafielenq ia beyoncI preoeDt mean.
ot !1z>one1l>g. 137 tho 78ar 1960 tile total ~ de!1c1ollCT in the count)'
.ill _ 1.9 bUlion cIollara.
II> 1961, the people ot S&utI. Cl ..... CoImt7 Ipp~ by tvo-th1:rdo
~r1t1 a $1C,OOO,OOO Eapree>W7 P<nc1 Pzoocna. lbo •• are ge%IO~ obl4atio~
bonda to be _ O?O:' a ten 7"ar period tor the construction oJ: _jor'
ezpree-. to COllDOCt .... ldential an<! ...,107"l0%1f. cOJIte.... The program 1.
cleoiptd tor three stages ot eonatnlctlon totall1l>g ~,OOO,OOO (no al101/
...... tor 1ntlatiOll). TIle elt_tocI ........... tAx rate tor rep&1!lBZ1t of the
first otace _ 1& 22;/$100 &£.uaed ftluaUon.
Thi. Expre.ova;r _ 1. plam>ed to ""I'JIl"""nt o~ te treewoya &ncI
~. Three __ will directly .. ,."., tbo stanton! IncInotrUl.
I'Vk are. -tile FoethUl Eapreo_, the Contral Expre .. ""3', ancI tile 0r0c0ll
A_-Pace Xill Rood Bxpre'-:r
I'l1o State D11Piaion ot ~ baa plans to -stlJr iJIFoft Sl CU1no
Ileal, a aa1n ute.,. to the Stantord I"CIIlstrlal Pari:. or.., new fl'ee...,..,
~ Serra, _ 1111. _at at tile Foothill E:xpreOI""3', and VUlov
_. 211111 •• .....-.t ot I'8p Xill Road vU1 DOt cI1l'ectly .... rve the
IDcm8tr1al _ but vUl bave ... tnn_. on tutare traffic pattBrllll.
ODe obJect at tin. report 1. to obt&1n P"'" 1 aj "'.,. iDtOl'lBllt.ion OIl _
poao1ble un 01 __ t to __ tile 'OOl_ oJ: _il.<> tNrl1e and
stonp. It obould be oblerftcl _ &ftJ'7 tinI in the IDomatr1al Pari: 10
requ1recI to prortcle ....... to att·atreet po.ric1.IIr tor all -.1_. and
Yiaitor.. Th10 __ tactor """ tile .uect oJ: ~ .... ot
printo _ .. tile aole _ at ~ ..... oeat apace
de-rotecl to auto.>Mle JIUId.!Ic 10 60 ...... and will ilmIl ... at 1_ l4ll
acres at the Stantord lancI r ... rvecI tor r .. earcb ObI! l1&bt 1ncIuat.,-.
'!be _ tor • SohUOII
Irm>lftd in tile problea ot treUie c""PetiOll 10 tile ac ... t1>oo .... -
'I"1l'ec1 tor c_tnc ObI! tile 1Dc""""ZI18Z1" _ t.o the cOlllllter u-l! and
to local .... 01_ IIbo teel tho eUect at be&V troUl.~ aNI ccmpst1on •
.. _ """ hll7 eftluat..<\ tile cost oJ: _1l>g by pri'l'&to ... _U. 11>
pnto.-to a ..,... eftic:1ent 117-. but the .""t 10 ...... _tor -..
CODt1t.1.oDs of cozacnt.1oa ad pzocl",b'· del.qfI.
11nl ••• _ ..... lancI1& clewtod ~ ~ aNI parIdJIC opo.ce, U>ere
1. "" pote1bl. eo1ution to the ....-rout trend oJ: ~ in this ares. c_ o1cIar1lIc the coet of 1_"'" tile liloitecl _ aotaUahle tor _~,
an altonlat.e oolut1= 10 .. s1rable to bancIl& tuWre loado.
l'IIbl1c ~tiOD _ bT bIa aNI by tntn, are potontWly .are
etfieteat tor ...,-n."g.-tors. Tho problel'l ot cctt1l>g people to ....
pabllc \r&zIspc>rtoUon baa been pr1mar1l7 _ of __ at .... mee ObI!
bab1t.. '!be "Il.U7 oJ: tile Pal • .uto area 10 IIOt yet. great 8ftO<IIIb to oupport
• ~ bavihg .-. oJ: .....n .. equal to or better thaD the _bile.
but t.bo time 1. DOt. tar I!1etont _ tIIi. vU1 be tile cue. It 10 not too
~ to plan ter tile eOlllllde ~ or tile Stanton! lndIuotr1al Pari:
an<! t.bo __ ter rea .... 'W it.
• 2 -
----._._----
•
"-
" f
Allied v1tIJ tid. planntz>c 10 the crowtll or the P&lo Alto.,s~ord uel
"" • whole 1nc1w!inc the COIII!I1te to otber ...... rro .. local reo1c!enth1
oectiona ot tile md-pemnsula. Placninc for tile 1\Iture 10 oaoent1&l to the
preHrTa~1011 of _!no •• iIIYe._ in tile .,... ODd the .nhancemont or
residential prope2't7 nlue ••
?hi. S1U'?e7 clew w,. w1tIJ the people who work in the S~ord IDdustr1&l
Park. 110 &t~t bq been _ to stud;y total tr&r£1 c or the in!l1Wlce ot
other upl~ center. on route seleetion of Park employeeB.
'lOnlapill« tile Quast1orma1re
A quelt101lD&1re tn>e .",.....,. .... Judaed to be the onl7 practIcal ... o.n.s
,r ~""lopinc ractooal intO,...UOlI ouit.hle for analyeh. Tecblli"",,".r
quest1~ ... tlJodo are ""ll developed &Del vith the advice .r qual1!led
faculty _r. at ~ord • _-pas. queeUozm&1re """ prepared lor thi.
S1U'?e7. 1 tn..l dir..r1bu.tion or las questioJmairea revealed • :Cev vealaleaees
1lli the :Lnterpretation C!t part8 or the £OZ'll~ 'l"be Be were corrected Detore
general cl15tr1bllt1on t. all partlclpat1llg £1..... in the IDdustrial Pork.
Questi~. w,.. distributed to eliIpl"1"' during ..,ridJIg baur. by super
Ti •• r. &lid t..-. A brier expl ..... tion -_tin« th. objecth .. or tile
SU%'ftT .... 11 ..... orally to insure cooperation. liIIplO)'\"es wore asked to
!ill out tile 'l" ... tiomairos on theJr 0",," tao aM to return the 1r anowre
v1t11in 0 ... to _ days. Response va. judged excell""t shov1llc • sincere
interest by the ~. in partielpat1DK in this EtQd;r.
Sapl1ar .... set at 100% for tirlls with le •• than 1SO ~. ODd
25" for l&ra:er croup.. J. lIlIRller sampl.e ""uld. ba.... pro'Iicled acO'!ptal>le
ItatUUcal int.,.,.tI"" but viti! .-. help anilebl. tor tall:t1DK
... 8Ult., U "". pooaible to ..... " latpr croup' 2,b99 queati~s 1IOre _ned cort. of • possible 9 ,Sao ~o:ree. of tile partic1pet1l>£ COIpII>ias.
IIE5UI3S
Locatinn ot 0lII>l.,... ...01_ as deteftdDe4 frca
plotted ... a lazp "I' abovinc all atreeto &lid loe&l boImdar1e.. fac1l1tate an&l:taia, tbJrty-<>DO reo1dant1&l or ..........
seleeted based 011 Iipplbpl1.atll :aeilhborbood ecoDmaic cODlJ1deraUoc. ~"
are ~zed to 3bov Iihere the people 11 .... III ,..lotion to the ~ord
lDduotr1al Park -"'...cure 1. '!'beoa 31 .o.:t1""" are 1L Santa Clare and. San
llateo COUl1t.le. ODd tor oDn'l'8D1enee in ~10C:t are described. !!ere as tho
"rec1on&l area' tor etud;r.
J. a3or1ty of .... 1.,.... are DOt in tile t..d1ate Palo Alto area, and.
to ......... "e thi. point, out of 2,499 """atiOlmllires tallle4, 179, or n
wre ""_s oJ: people li 'I'iar outnde of the ootabl !shed "rec1OZ>Ol area'.
(San Carlo. 011 tile _ aDd san J~"" on the s""th). '!'beoe people li ... as
tar _ aa Santa Crua, San Francloec, ClaklODd and W&lDut Creek.
Of the 2320 tallie, re-.1ninC vi thin the 31 .... t1ons oelected foZ'
~, w,. 21 percent li ... 1n the Cit.,. of P&lo Alto. .lI>otber 21 perceat.
li ... in San llate. CoImt:t, includina 6.>. from ReCllOod City aDd appI'<JE1at6l,y
6S' t.....lIanlo Park. !lore tIJan >6% 11"" _ of Palo Alto. '!be Loa Altoo
_"01. .. View MCtiono acoount. tor 18.8. ODd the S\lm!;\'ftle~rt1nc &r9&
_ lb. as'. Saratop ODd to. Gatos areu tDiotller add IlDOtber n &lid SODta
Clare 7.2". San Joae contribute. only 40$". '/be o1pUloam. point bars i.
that. _ of the people 11"" in a atr1P bet ..... n tile foothllle ODd llayoIIore
Freew;r. n C_ lIe&l ~ 10 t!!e min thoroughtare tIIro>l&b tile lIiddlo
~ of this stdl'. This ~ 10 the :oo/'t direct route tor "","t people
as judpd II)' res1dent1al location. Saratoga i. the nncJ.eus of a _ area
GIld 10 ........, ~ b; hl.cInoq ~.
•
\
~ Cbanot.er:! :+ic>, Host of the eqU07M' are ,.., -n:l. !!U.
FO bi71 " "lie..:"':" of the type of 1.n4u.:rt1"1 where a h1&h proportion
"'" ~r. IOnd BIc.:..od t.edml.oiall.s. An .-l .... U"" wu -.de to c1et.enl1l>e
~ .tgn1t1eaat dit!erence. ill the c...rt.e hAbits ot """,,,0 &0 eoq>&red vitb
"""'. ~. t.ben vu none oxeept tb&t • ~~ 1t1cber perc02lt.ap of _0 pro£ar to dri .... 01_.
"'" IliIber pe~ of _. nplO7M' c&8I !'roa tile _ City
~re& .. 4).5%. 0tbcI1' thaD thil!lJ it appears that IIOre or less tealea 1s
... ,..~ coinoiclelltal. Apparently tile h1aII il>e_ residential areas SI>ch
as 10. Alto. lIUlo, Portola Vallq. eto. aw JU8t u h1aII & reproaent&UOll
ao othen.
o.ror 61 percent ot Park OliIploreeo are tIIlrriad; "ow"r. tile broakdo""
".rie. ~. !!&at lIosIlo PoJok U>d IIorth Palo Alto aft tile higbeot mlllber
of single nplO7MO. IIore tIum oM-third ot the .. ro31c1ento are single.
'!!WI !!13h pereentAge c&I be °xplo;ned b7 tile location of __ aparbm:t
coo¢ ..... and older 11 __ viti! rented roc.o. Also. -.-r1.oc1 po oplo are
1Dcl1noc1 to li ... closer to t.he job. Y,""" lI01'21.ed people _ dlICle tam1l.T
boMo vitllill t.heir t~ bwlpt; tor eXUIplo. ill the Cllpertina area ......
95'. 0/ the PoJok ~. are _ed. ru. IP'01lI' is vUliJ!c to CODIIIlte 11
CCIOIIicleroble diot<mce ill oreler to heft • "'-vitllill tIloiF _.
A)lFGlI:iIoatel:' _-Wn of the tUlUi •• a98 _ I=cIIIt procIw:era -
t~ 1iU _ ill all oectiOCS ""copt. that Redwood City (JelO and ~.
(Jo3lO lied the hiPat lnel ~ Imo_ and vito lIOZ'II:iIl8 teao. IDcoao 1._.
wro c1atribo.ted about .. _ 1«Nld predict.. Loweat t~ -.-. were in
the Sc C&rlo_'_ ..... mel iIllaot Palo Alto. 'botb ill Scll&teo COImty.
JI:1ibeat u.c.-........ reported ill ... rtola Vallq, to. Alto. and to. Alto. H1ll ••
"'" car t-.us. are !lOt aIIIIIIU81. • lute fa. 6~ reported _ e&ra and
lID _tiODal n rated :3 or ...... care. Ie .. _ 1" aft "" car and mat ot
tile .. li ..... ill tile Palo Alto area """ ... 2 .s,: ropertec1 tboT did DOt ride ill
• car to pt to wHo
!Ioat ~07M' -S7f; -pack tlleir 1IoMh. ID the 1_ t1zm """ ...
catoteJiAI .. moe 10 JIO'O'14ec1 CCIl7 mI*'l< their _. ~t.e~ 6.S.
Nt llID:II &10 ZINZ'b7 re_. and s.n ,0 _ Ir>r_.
~~ _tb1rdzI,66.~. dri ... aloDO
Bq ..... _.e of~. !hia ditt ........ ear.
proba~ attribo.tec1 to the cuaronteec1 p&rIdnc __ for ~.. Ion lIDAl¥aio of people ~ lor the __ • hInilIc tile _ ..,Z'II:iIl8 hours
and li1'1ng 010" to .... 0D0tb0r silo_ • hiIIl perceat.ap dri'l1llQ: t.loDe.
~. few taka p.. • u. s.n. and u.el' ride nth __ el8e.
!Ilia _ato that __ ...., \aka p" 'C"re tab ..... _ one. car pool.o
......... _ at • c1iatIIDce tzooa the Park. !boaP tile total oar pool.
wre CCIl7 la. tile 1II1II of car pools (taldJlI tame dri'rilla) ... t&1.r~ hiIIl-
in tile Cllpertim .... -22.6:l. t&o 5&r&toca _-27.311 and ill Loa oatol-33".
rev people 1II1II ...... other tban tile ... t--w. -(lit.tle other ......
10 ottorec1). _ ..... 1Ialk to vorl<. IIl'Uor .... tile s. p. t.rain. and 8 1l8tt
MOJeIe. -• total of 1.6-'-It should be obDeM'O<l tbat _ ~ •• do
not. -.--wolIdDc or pal>lU tran.porta~ioD. For U&IIIf'lo. 1IInIlrlt.
_ !lao "" _ toJ' pedeatriIIDI to 1Ialk fr<IOI pal>lU .1c5ewlJao to the
_. of their plIIDt. ~ it 1 • ..-tat. all people will
arrl. ... 117 aut.o.>b1le OJ' pri ... t.e ..tor ..,Mol ••
!bore ......... "" little ditt ........ in re __ to tile pat10D eoncem1nc
_ of _ ... 1 .,.,.,. wH in d1attnot1on I""", ·to· ..,ric. VariaU ..... """
DOted bat ttle ... _re occa51oD&l.
-k-
_ car at. Work: .I. l&:rp pe~entag. 1ndicate~ that tIu7 r.e~ded t!H!1r car.
at VOi'll. lliii>iit 30% (2~. 7) reported a need for !.heir car. durinG the ~.
lC:l attellpt w;s ~ to leartl how MZlf could U~ c01!Zp4l"O' e&:'a tor ~1.neS3
or 1IOJ'O """ lIB1IlII' c"-"3' _ can. ru. queot1on _do additiOllOl
explanation. 011 the sariaell there doelll"l't ~ to be an;y reaaon 'Yb:T SCI
_ _ the1%' cars <IuriDj; the o\aJ'.
It. .... surprioill& to learn frw. t.hi. """"" tbat == .• --til.. Porlr 1'rc311 the .... t (oouth ... t)~. Ba.ed
on root"",,"o io,,.tl,onll C_ R_al should han tha hJ.&beot percenk&. of
U3e for Park eJIFlO)'&&e.. Seftre conpetiD.D Of!: El Cu:1r.a t'OJ"Ce!J COD!I1tu",
to take tile Fromnt routo ... t.be 1 ...... evil. West FrolllOnt Into JunipeZ'O
Serra Bl'l1l &ccOl1l>t. for 27.B:I of all traffic de,tlned for t.I>o Industr<..al
ParI<. ThU 10 tile tupest of &1Iif aiogle 2'O!lW to tho Park. This fact
_ ..... to oupport t.be interest r'''''rin& tile installation ot s1&n&ll1ght.
at tbo _r of Page Mill Road am Junl.perc S.rn Blvd.
!be 700tbUl 8>pres_ 10 ideally located to bandl. th1. Oow of
trarric. It 1IC>Uld appear that tbe propoood Jlmip"ro Serra 7roew;r is too lor
West. to be of INCh n.lIoo to Park traffic -just as lIa7.:u,re 'Ireewa7 10 too
far Eaot.. Le •• than u. or tbo Park emplO)'Oeo "". Ba:yohcre. lIoot. of tIwt ..
.... f'roa tIwt north 1'en1:llaul&, _ Bq aDd San .10'_. An J.n&lys!.a or the RIpl_. 11Y1nc in Bonta Clara ohollOd that 33.81 .... FroJIIOIrt. .1._ 1n
prete.--to Il Coadno. OrefOll AY.""" account. tor lJ.n of tbe "CioDOl
tnt!'"c of vhieh _t 7% haa it. oririn in Palo Alto. !be ONB"".I. _
_ ",.s. accmmt. for 22.6;1 of tho "ret;1onal" autozb1lo s ontorin& tbe
ParI<. El CUI1no lIo&l lroIa tbe oout!> addo 21. 2;1.
Poopl6 vUl. taIao & ..... stant1&l part at tile dq t.. 11 ... 18 ....
wort in _tiler. A lev driw li hauro _ w;r-(-c_J.
Geuer&ll7, it -.. lonpr to ",t. __ to '0 to worIr. St.&cProd lIal'k
iDe -. baa belpo4 rolleve tile -.. pe&k!Nt. baa DOt bad u _ bImofit
in tile laW attemocm. A liat of t.be ~ed ~ hav.re at tbe partio-
1pot1nc nr. 1.0 1 ... _ in tbe appeI>II1x.
JIWGple .-1>1111: n-tile nortb pea1nwl.a nuqe bettor IIJIftd than
u..,.., fl'<IIl tile 1OOI1tI1. !hU 10 attril>olt.od in part to tIwt l'eY$..... nov
~ in relaU= to San 7nDo1.aco _ tr&!t1o. c-te t1a
1.0 al&o • flm<:t.ioD of o<JII!POlI3" Ilour. &DC! plQrsical locat.1on in tile PvIc.
7reJooDt .1._ baa & ..,... F"'"'Lm..'Od peak now than El C...u.o; -.... it.
1JIq be toot. for ..-1Rrt. 01011 ter otber ••
It _. people li~ in Soatl1l'olo llto I ..... , to 12 _tel to ",t to _ ODd b'al1O to 20 1I1nUte. to cot _. CD tile __ it _ •
• --. rroa SaZ'Ilt<>p JO to 4, _. to pt. to ..... k ODd aborIt tbe _
to pt._.
A _jor1t7 40 DOt fa,.,r ue of po1olio
to t.ha ParI<. Ii high percantqa. ):)11.
R14 t.be7 _clod t.belr can ~ tobe dq. S--.... •• ISIIfficieJlt -..
1D41cated ... 1nteroat. in p>bl1< truri t to warrant attention •
.I.~~ ~ (39.6) Mid that tbe7 would U08 • bwI it oerrice .......
provided. I!aot. of tile ........ in tbe Los II to. toothUlo ........ (Sl.1%). t.be
~e ..... (~, aDd Sarat.op. (S8J) • .u-.t >r4 (119.5)
eoprw.oed fa...,.. t.ow.rd& rop1d tranait. (t.r&ino 18 pr&terence to _0);
howoftr, • ]up _'" 12.6% th<>I2cbt tile quoati"" on troino too iJpobablo
to ..........
Queat.ioaa em _. aDd tro1no a.S1llIIed tbat. deli ... ..,. 1IOUld be inside
tbe ~ Park. !'be .. people ... ro lIill1ne to walk as much ... 5 blOCka
bet a _ &DC! t.raDe1 t ot&t.iCIII aDd vocld wa1t. ... "",ch eo 1, _. for
-S --------_.
_ DUt bols (depend1na _ travel. d1nonco !1'OlIl vcrk). OVer 77t. thOllCht
I_I of _ L¢ PIlI' .u. ...,. re"""""ble tboqgh people over is ..u .. <11._ cut. • heavier "Do' TOte 0:> the _stion. (For travel ..... _
1$ Id.le., 3# PIlI' llil. 10 obt&il>&bl •• )
Peopl. in P0rt01& Vall01 and Loa Alto. iUlio had no interest !.n public
t.nns1 t. It 10 3ust .. voll, boc&u6e _... low del!Oi tJ residential area I
could not be 00"""", e""""""-e&l.lJ. IoplOJOO' in Palo A.l to .".,.,. litU.
iltterest. As 1mlc .. tb.tre 10 ~e poridlIs IIJI"CC it is ""',.., c_ont.
(littl. lou of tao) to dri" 01""" to >!Orlc for those UTing 010 ... in.
It,... into ... stu. to ~b .. rft that 18t. Ca relaU"'l1 hiah tigare)
WOUld .... to a diJ'teftnt area it 1004 puhllc transport&~ion ....... -u&bl •.
bt of tbo_ ... re in laat Polo eto, CoJ1tral PL., .uto &:Id San 30 .... (It _.1 ... tao to o-.to troaa Sen J_ va lIaT.more tb.on te c.,...,to troa
Saratoga).
to .... peopl.o .'-Ito tiM 1. • :letomiltl.Jlr tooter in cboorln/I .1 t.ber ,ob or h_ locaUCIIl _. to ""at it ~I to be "conoIa:7. :!he
.....-age c"""'""'" tae tor e,.u.."....s in tho ~tan..·ord ll>dItotr1&l I'ari: 10 20
to 2$ _.. %hio 10 roaaonabla. but .. tbo aroe contiml.eo tel:l'O" .mel
traffic 110_ ..... _s_, tranl tiM om iJwreu.,
OUic1o.l1 of t.be ~. 1. I!a,y Area Rapi4 Transit lliatt'ict. "otiaate that
tile ~ 0IIIpl"1""'nt. _1t.1 of tbe stentord ~al Park 10 """
811!t1c1tmt. to ~ de~ 0 _t _~ with a .... Jor at&tion 11>
tbo Indutnal 1Wit. liow .......... ~o;!'MZ!t _. 15.000 t.hU-U
be Gt1re11 te&s1bl... c:mo1der1ag otber .....w. 11> tbe oroa. public trana1 t
plom1,. ebcal.4 stan _ !.n anUc1patian ot .. dq ..... it 1dll be 0
t.1'ODIpOrtat1oa """,,1>"1 tl7 •
- 6 -
~
SAN MATEO ,t
COUNTY ~
20.8%
•
L All
WHERE THEY LIVE
( SU"'MARY I
PAI.O ALTO
20.9%
AL
...... PERO SERRA BLVD
i
o
~ z ..
'"
/
/
;'-565"1.
/
/
MOUNTAIN VIEW
a LOS ALTOS
/ 21.0%
SUNNYVALE
/ CUPE~TINO
/
/
14.8°/.
SANTA CLARA
7.2%
SAN JOSE
4.5%
LOS GJUOS
a
SARATOGA
9.0%
EMPLOYMENT CHARACTERISTICS
71% are men
33% of those living In north Palo Alto and
east Menlo Park are single whereas only 5%
are single In the Sunnyvale-Cupertino area
33f reported more than one full time wage
ea~n~r per family (about 42% In Sunnyvale)
42.6% own two autos
5.0% own more than two
2.8% reported no car and most of these
live In Palo Alto
Portola Valley and Los Altos Hills have
greatest number of two car families -70%
Urlvlng pools are popular In the Sunnyvale
Cupertino area -22.6%, and Saratoga-27.3J
• .i:.,
•
EMPLOYEE RIDING HABITS
66.4% drive alone
5.6% take passenger
11.8S ride with someone.
11.0S car pool (rotate).
3.2% chauffeured
1.71 walk, bike (home to work)
1.4 employees per auto (appro~imately)
Orlver's_ lIcense -97.SS
none 2.4%
·Drfver may not necessarily be destined
for Stanford I~dustrlal Park, and a few walk part way.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
SUMMARY
Favor bus -39.5%
Must use car at work
O-ppose bus serv I ce
Total against
favor trains -49.5%
Must use car at work
Oppose train service
Total against
29.7%
_g!!.:U
59.5% (actual count
59.5%)
29.7%
_gQ.:U
50.5%·(actual count
38.9%)
·Clncludes 12.6% who thought the question
on trains too Improbable to answer.)
'~uld like bus service but not trains 8.85%
Would like train service but not bus 22.6%
Greatest interest In public transit is from
a distance through congested areas
Los Altos lower foothills area
Cupertino -Sunnyvale
Saratoga -Los Gatos
No Interest from Portola Valley and Los
_ Altos Hills
Little Interest from Palo Alto
,-" ,
WQ\Tl'1Il BroRS
CamJIl' _ .. I J1PIISS JlO. OF 00'l.CtEIS Hems
I._C_ .... tion 2' 2 a.oo • lidO
901 CllUon>1& 1._
AL.'re4 El.et.rGrl1e. lOS 60 7.1" • 4:1, :;176 _ .. 1Ir1"" I,) 8')0 • ):00
1e~1neo h7C 17S 7.)0 • 10:00
Jll7 Cll.1tomio 1._ 2SC a,oo . 4:4S
Centrel Dlta Co:rpcnUo.n 60 8:00 • ).00
33)0 BUl1"1ew 1._ 8:)0 • 5.)0
_lodak l.oo 6:00 • 1,,)0
~5 Pap IIill _ 7.00 • 3:)0 (1'nMI.)
a-raJ. Ilactrio ~;o )00 200 • 7:)0 -4.1S
601 Cal1tand& 1._ 100 -7:105 • 4.)0 -.. ~ 29 6 • 8,00 • 1 .. 45
2SSo -.. Street 23 • 8.1,) -~:)O
1In1att-_ C""l'Ul7 .. 2,3OC 7.)0 -1,,15 l!iOl Pop IIUl _ 7:45 • 4.)0
J.oe1rbee" II1esUea ". Space Co." 32Sl _ street 2,03$ )0 • 7.00 • ,).)0
1, • 7.)0 • 4.15
290 -7.1,) -,..)0
IISU»S 200 7.)0 -1..00 (ohop)
)300 BUl_.l_ 8.)0 • 5.00 (oUtee)
lIo_ea hsociate., IDe. 20 6,)0 -5.)0
)2Ol ~1Ir1 ..
Palo lito ~ Co. 220 110 -7.)0 • 1,,00 620 Pop IIUl _ SO -7:)0 -1.:)0
__ LiDo __ Co.
S! 100 • 7:00 -,).)0
6ooa-v..,. 2 • 7.)0 -4.00
!J • 8.00 -5.00
II641at1col at staDtcml 100 35 -8.00 -1..)0 Jl80 .. CUi st.reet. 65 -8.)0 • 5:00
SbocIrl87 -stor 1)2 67 -8.00 -1.,)0 ~prod.l llIOJ. ,.,. IIUl _ 65 -8.00 -4.45 0lIp'.
r,J!!tC I.cotU"t..
322l ",rter!)ri_
ot.!> c-truet1m> I< I41mJ>;:
2hOO PM 'JJ StNet
Varian l ... GC1ote, ..
611_110;,
Vl.d;Ja. lIIC • 2626 __ t
VatldJlo..r.-c_
J33) 1WJ.Y1sY A_
2~ 9,00 -5,00
75 75 -8,lS -$:00
3,100 SOlr -8,00 -1o'JO
SOlr -8,lS -".4$
75 8.00 -$.00
lSo 20 -TICO -3.)0
llS -811S -!i ,00
liS -6,)0 -S,15
PARTtCm'tt»') Caat.H!t:S -9!!!!.t1.",....u,. .. I.sued IIetltrn -!
... iIo1ral Co>po:-aUOD lS'O )7.~
Bee_ lS'O 6l.J
C=trol lIote Co:poraU"" 60 88.3
~lCodMk 1;0 ;0.6
Oenorol Ilect.ri.e 12S 57.0
QiDD • C '_'Q" II lOC.O
IIolett-"ebrd 600 96.0
~ II " S 550 61.,
IIohI>o 12; 76.1.
lInrom •• 20 60.0
"t.~_ 60 Hore_
N. I.lt.o I!ftcllMerilIS Co. llIS 12.0
Pzoet_ I4Do _ S'O 88.0
IIa&&t1cD at. Steatlllni 100 96.0
SIIccklq trmud._ 130 8,9.1.
J. 11. Steoer. IDe. 30 B).J
s,m.a: Iut.1_ 2S 110 roturns
11teb CaaoIt.ra.cUon • II1D1ne 70 70.0
TII'1aD Auociat.o. 700 81.B
TI.cIl&. IDe. 7, 8/,.0
Watk'n, kbDeQQ CoIIipIZt'¥ 150 n.o
tItlVB!. 1DIE. (Question Il2J. % 01 roopecUn t.ot&l
!)pl.eal reopoaso:
2S' 35' ke' liS' 50' .;0' Sect.icD 1):"-S' 10' 1,' 20' 30' ro_ 1) S).2 28.1 1..2 0.9 ro_ 8.8 )2 •• 31..7 lB., 2.6 2.8
Sect.icD 21"
"'1OO1'Ir:: 1.6 ).9 1l.3 lS.6 16.8 1.9,s ).1 3.1 ro_ ).1 1S.6 8.6 16.1& 31. •• )S 7.0
• EMPLOYEE QUESTlONNAlRE ON TRAFFIC TO STANFORD INDUSTRIAL PARK
ThIs. que9~ionnajre i.s an aue."PI" [0 discover the tra\,el patterns of Park employees to determi .... e the fl:asl-
11,ty.and pubHc acceptam::e of.a modern area-wide (ransponetlon system. Your cooperation in relurning the
quO!stionnaire will be greuly appreciated.
(1) Home address, ___________________ City ____________ _
Nearest eross street _____________ _
(2) Do you have a driver's license? Yes__ No __
(3) Sex.: male __ female__ (4) Married? Yes __ No
(5) Number of family emplayed? __ (6) Number of cars In fam:ly'? __
(7) Annual incane brackee is) What are your hux:h habits?
pack luncb
__ ;JO home for hmch
cafeteria at 'Worle
t10 lunch
__ 'Up to SS.OOC
05,000 • $7,000
S7,()(X} -.'UO,OOO
110,000 • $15,000
over '15.000 Test.unnt -name ________________ _
(9) How do you usually travel wand from work? If you leave work at JUllcb. please check chat column. too.
Arrive Leave Lunch
aJ drive alODe
b) tab pa aaengen
e) rlcle With .a%XXher employee
d) alternate drlviDg in car pool. No . .in pgo11 _______ _
e) Chauffeured by member of the family o otbel' (.rpeoi1y) ____________ _
(10) Do you lIeeci)'OUr cal' 4urlDJ the day tor U5e other ctme lUDCb and traveling to and from. work? Yes __
No
(11) What route do you most often tate to aDd. fram work? (Refer to map 011 reverse aide.)
([2) How long does pour [rip to work take? ______ -'; to ret\lrn hon.e? ________ _
(13) Would. you use all area-WIde modern bwI I)'stl!m WiLi frequeJlt scbcc1ules and ccmvettiem 8tOpli? Yes
(U ~ J8 "DO," disregard No. 1-«.) No __
(14) Please cbeck UDder whar CODdltfoDa you would be willfn( to use a bua [0 and fron work. (Delivers you wi.th1lI
200 yards oC worl:.)
.) Wax.izrJum dist .. :nce of bull 8tOF f:ran your home· -
1.5O)'do. (1 blocicl __ 2 ___ S _ Ij-mllel __ 1 mao __
b) Maxlmum 1t'aiDDg tf..me benJeetl buaes··5 mm.__ 10 mfn.__ 15 mln. __ 30 min. __
c) Coat of mp--4t per mile hninimum 2Dt) Yes __ No __
d' AA1tt:fooal time aceedinC present travel time--5 min.__ 10 min.__ 15 min. __ 30 min. __
lIS} Would you Uve in " dttferent loutioa thllI you do now if public [ransportatton was better? Yes__ No __
(16) Would you favor electric tra.lns OIl • private right-of -way with a .shuttle: bus service? Yo. __ No __
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
•
(
)
I
\. 1 .. ' 1 ' .. ,
BAy
INDICATE APPROXIMATE ROUTE YOU PR.IENTLY
USE TO REO\CH YOUR. PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT *
Oregon Ave:rme 6) Junipero Serra from
south
San Mateo County Alma from the
7) El Camino from the north
El Camiao from the south
8) Alma from the north
a.&rlestou Road
9) Other
West Fremont from the south
* See other side
I o
total "RegiMe' It T&lJ,y tor.4.1.] the ?ark
10. of qu&~t1onna1ren-2,320
2) XES 97.6'; 10 2.1olI IIA .129%
') lila n.08$ PII!UB 28. 7~ IU< .22,i
k) 11llIItllID I XES 80. 68~ 110 18. S% Jill .82$
5) 10. llI!PID!ID, 1) '7.au 2) 32.61 ) 2.9.3% II) 1.0411
O!HIR 0-.22$ Nl.>.~ (4,'.6.7,1i.i)· .3l
,,) 110. CllIS 0) .86% II ,3.44$ 2) 42.6l 3) S.lb% OTHER Nl 3.h6%
7)
9)
• $!i,OOO
5,000-7,000
7,000 • 10,000
10,000 • 15,000
+ 15,000
10 J.II!IIIII.
IJIl!I\'B tIlVE
66.42% 66.12. ,S2 >.711
U.76 U.B,
U U
3.23 3.2)
1.610 1.$9
./a3 .107
18 • .3%
2II.04l
23.8%
16.7%
).106"
13.?r;
IDIICII
a.12~
2.211
1.la7
• US
8) UIM:Ii,
10)
~ • IIftIVII .uaJII!
I .. 'rUE ,. MlMqtgs
c -IlIIlB lIIlIl 0lBIIIi
J) -CAlI !'COL.
(4.5,6,7.1t.i)·1.06.
57%
5.73
2).3
2.28
6.S>
3.84 .. 1.2'c
IIEEIl ca, lES 29'?r;
110 67.44% .. .86%
U) RCO'IZ. 1 • 13.~
2 • 6.99
• 0S18 It • CIl&UJJII!tQIJ!D ). 21.2
• 346 F _ D!IIIIl (lIIolk, haa, bRa, Ia • ".1l8
biqcl., YV7) , . 27.76
III 6. 7.9
7. 9.0)
8. 1.72
9. 3.68
III 2.84
12l 1'lIIB,' 10' IS' 20' 25' )0' .1,' he' 4$' So' +So' re_,
re IIIJII, =
13l __ IIIIS, ns 39.6% lIO S9.~ lIO <7ea to 110)211.1% or tile lID """" ....
JIll .~ •
lb} WiIlImitI,
~. 1 Block 20. T1 2-107.88': S.-26.1olI1 IW.. ).28% JIll-1.74lI
II. Vldt. S'-15.6% 10" 42.7. 15'· J2.9lI )0'. II.)" JIll.4.04l
C. COlOt, ns m lIO 11.1olI III S."5.
I). BEtra rs., S'-21. 7lI1O'· 1.7.$% 15'· Zl.JjI )O'-l.B,% !II. 6.m o-.Sl.5.r
15) waJll) mr JICIIE, US 18.22$ 10 79.8,C III 1.1l8J1
16) D_ 2!!&I11S, (1D re 113) US 2IIS,C 10 8.85$
(110 re IlJl US 22.6% JIO 27.08% JIO J.ISW!R 12.6%
(lJDZ'Olated) DIS 2.)?r; JIO 1.9blI Nl .3B8l1
..
•. 0
"
• ® TRAFFIC GATEWAYS
TO THE
STANFORD INDUSTRIAL PARK
(AS Jf;!RC£HTAtES )
{ RS-GIOMAl ONLY)
8AYSHOR£----y----FREE'II'~Y
r
oJ
~
--ALMA ST.--_--t-
---"")--EI.
STAKFOI!D
INDUSTRIAL
PARK
T
22.6
I
CAMINO
i
~2.8
I
0
0:
.....
..J
j"
"' '" a!
I
40.7
REAL --(""7---21.2
OTHER ~.1 -WALK-a IKE
2 .• l ~ ,p
~
5.0 C
---------~.~--~9 J / 27.8
.JJNIIIEIIO SEIIIIA W. fREMONT
..
P
I I I I I f IJ t I I ! I I
• TRAFFIC
TO
GATEWAYS
THE
STANFORD INDUSTRIAL PARK
BAYSHORE
• 1.1
ISP
I ,loS P(fI,E""Tl&G£S'
(BAY AREA TOTAL J
r
lo.e
I ..,
~
~
'" ... a:
0
I
17.4
~~1f'1
I
+
\
25.7
I
FREEWAY
6:r --AL .....
4
ST.
z g
'" ...
-' a: .. :r u
---_~--EL ') B.B CA",,'lO REAL
t --r""""---2.0.5 ~~-+
STANFORD
INDUSTRIAL
PARK
-------.... ---·7.1
114.B
I
d a:
-'
-' 2
OJ <.
f
I
U.O
~
OTHeR U -WALK-BII(E
2..7
,
I
/
:1
f ~
• l ID I,f ~ :
~ rn'i
l< i • l!! ;;;
II! ;
I
~
~ Jctions
l
2
3
L
S
6
7 e
9
10
11
12
13
l.I.
1$
16
11
1Il
19
20
21
22
23
2la 25
26
21
29
",;l
31
).
.51 .04
.. 47
.04
.17
1.32
3.06
1..3)
.80
1.16
.100
1.1S
.17
.26
2 3
2.1.0
2.76
.87
.U
.56
.0<1
2.25
1.07
1.48
3.S2
1.92
.12
1.69
2.9S
.08
.16
.19
3.80
.36
.21
.68
.37
.21
ROUTt.
.04
.43
1.)S
.311
1.64
• 6)
.03
.02
.09
.27
:~
I
5 6 7
.8S l.se
11.02
1.20
.06 •
6.ll
.77
1.02
5".20 2.45
1.2S
1.69
.27
.2$
.66
.86 'r.71 .06 .91
.73 .13
2.56 ,3.2S
.)5 I
.1$
.09 .1$
.06 1.1.6
1.64 .810
.20 ."7 1.12
I , .10 2.24
.14 .86
.13 .09 6.50
.35
.07 II :~~ .48 .80 ).07
.12 .33 2.93
.16 . 1.68
.le 2.91 6.16
.80, .55 SSS
.OS 9.20
.55 1.!1O
.10 I .95 .11. 3.96
.oS B. ~
.06 • 6.00
.01 I 1.33 .09 4.~2
.10 ' 9.16 , .85
I 1.21
.10 I 50Sl .oS 7.20
.OS 1.64
1.!1O
2.93
.82
.20 1.1.2
TO'lI.1S 13.90 1.02 21.16 S.oo 27.80 7.87 8.91 1.70 6.1.9
IleciDllAl _. 111 l'ereezrt <_. DOt, iDelwie But. ky or IIorth l'enI.':\I!OI.l&)
" .. ',","