CHAPTER 4: REGIONAL PROFILE AND DEMOGRAPHICS

Transcription

1 CHAPTER 4: REGIONAL PROFILE AND DEMOGRAPHICS The Greater Lowell region consists of the City of Lowell and its eight suburbs Billerica, Chelmsford, Dracut, Dunstable, Pepperell, Tewksbury, Tyngsborough and Westford and has a land area of approximately 196 square miles and an inland water area of 5.76 square miles. The City of Lowell serves as the central city and economic center of the region. According to the.s. Census Bureau, the Greater Lowell region had a population of 286,901 in 2010, which represented an increase of 2.2% since This growth rate was one-third of what the region experienced between 1990 and The region is tied together by the Merrimack River and is located in the northeastern section of Massachusetts, abutting the New Hampshire state line. Lowell is approximately forty-five minutes from the Boston and Manchester, New Hampshire and an hour from Worcester and Portsmouth, New Hampshire. DEELOPMENT HISTORY The Greater Lowell region represents the classic development of an urban center and its suburbs. The nine communities within this region initially shared a common agricultural development pattern, but later separated into urban, suburban and rural communities. Three hundred fifty years ago these communities didn t exist, but with the establishment of meeting houses within the classic New England town centers, the communities, as we know them today, were formed. Billerica and Chelmsford were incorporated in 1655, while Dunstable was incorporated in By the first part of the 18th century, Dracut (1701), Westford (1729), and Tewksbury (1734) were incorporated. Pepperell (1775) and Tyngsborough (1809) were incorporated later. Lowell was founded in 1821 and became a City in Initially, this region focused upon agriculture and related activities, such tanning, blacksmithing, coopering, and furniture making. Other activities, such as grist and saw milling and iron forging, depended upon good sources of water power. Major growth in the region occurred between 1790 and 1820 when the vast potential of the Merrimack River and its tributaries Concord River, Stony Brook and Beaver Brook- was recognized. The canal system was instituted in the 1790s principally for travel to Boston and New Hampshire. The Pawtucket and Middlesex Canals provided the necessary waterways, while the Middlesex Turnpike served as the principal land trade route to Boston. The industrialization of the region began in 1811, with the introduction of wool manufacturing in North Billerica. Subsequently, the first planned industrial city in America was 51 Page

2 created in Lowell, utilizing the hydraulic power resource of the Merrimack River at Pawtucket Falls. By 1836, the City of Lowell had eight major textile firms employing 7,000 people. The Lowell region was also impacted as small industrial settlements grew into extensive textile mill villages, particularly in North Billerica, North Chelmsford, Graniteville, Forge illage and Collinsville. The growth in these communities was spurred by these developments between 1820 and Increased industrialization occurred between 1850 and 1890 with the introduction of the railroad. The railroad made the canals obsolete for transportation and brought many immigrants to work in the mills. The immigrant workers settled in Lowell and its surrounding communities and, thus, began the influx of ethnic groups to the region. However, with the introduction of the railroad nationwide, the competitive advantage enjoyed by this region shifted to the South and by 1920 the textile industry had begun to deteriorate. The Depression years were hard on this area due to the overdependence on the textile industry. Following World War II, the construction of major highways and the investment in housing, particularly outside the City, created new growth opportunities for the region. Suburbs were being formed, which still depended upon Lowell as the regional economic center. The construction of Routes 128 and 3, I-93, I-495 and the Lowell Connector opened up the region to increased economic opportunities. The tie-in between this region and the Route 128 area was enhanced by the road construction and the cheaper houses that were being built to accommodate a local labor force that worked along Route 128. The expansion of Route 3 during the last decade increased economic opportunities in the region through enhanced connections to Route 128 and New Hampshire. Development pressures in the region shifted from the City of Lowell to the other communities, particularly Billerica, Chelmsford and Tewksbury, in the 1970s and 1980s. Manufacturing continued to decline in the 1970s as the textile, shoe, metal working and chemical industries re-located to other parts of the country with cheaper labor and expenses. Increased investment in defense and service industries did not make up for the loss in these manufacturing industries. During the 1980s, the growth of the computer, communications systems and military equipment industries, as well as the construction and housing industries, pulled the Lowell region out of the economic depths it had experienced. Employment growth increased outside the City of Lowell with the development of new industrial parks along Route 3, I-495 and I-93. However, during the late 1980s and early 1990s, the region experienced a large number of layoffs in the computer and military equipment industries. It wasn t until the mid-1990s that the region was able to regain its footing economically by diversifying its industrial and commercial base. The growth of small- to medium-sized businesses ended up exceeding the job losses in major firms in the area. During the mid-2000s, the Greater Lowell region enjoyed a diversified economy that did not rely as heavily on the City of Lowell or 52 Page

3 Route 128, as it had in the past, but, rather, expanded economic opportunities in the suburban communities and in New Hampshire. The region s economy was hit hard by the National Recession, which began in As a result, the Greater Lowell region experienced unemployment rates that hadn t been seen in this area for thirty years. In 2007 and 2008, six out of the nine Greater Lowell communities suffered plant layoffs, primarily in the high tech manufacturing, information technology, and retail sectors. Other economic indicators, such as the number of establishments, unemployment rates, average monthly employment, number of foreclosures, housing sales and median housing prices were also negatively affected by the struggling housing market and the national recession. While layoffs continued to occur between 2010 and 2013, maintaining higher unemployment rates in some areas, on the whole, signs of economic recovery have begun to take hold occur across the region. Over the past two years, there has been growth in employment levels and business establishments, and the unemployment rate has dropped. The housing market is also showing signs of resurgence with a reduced number of foreclosure petitions and growth in homes sales and sales prices, even though there has been slower growth in condominiums. POPLATION CHARACTERISTICS According to the 2010.S. Census, Lowell accounts for 37% of the region s population and continues to have the highest population density, at over 7,325 persons per square mile. Billerica, Chelmsford, Dracut and Tewksbury, the early suburbanized communities with population densities over 1,000 persons per square mile, collectively account for 46% of the region s population. The remaining communities, where much of the development activity occurred during the 1990s, account for 17% of the region s population. Table 4.1 on the next page summarizes the population characteristics of the region s communities. The American Community Survey (ACS), undertaken by the.s. Census Bureau, estimates that the region s population has increased by 1.42% over a five-year period. It is important to note that ACS consists of a five-year average based on a limited sample size. The margin of error for the ACS is much greater than the decennial census, due to the relatively small sample size. 53 Page

4 Community 2000 Population Table 4.1: Population by Community 2010 Population % Change Population Estimate % Change between 2010 Census and ACS estimate Billerica 38,981 40, , Chelmsford 33,858 33, , Dracut 28,562 29, , Dunstable 2,829 3, , Lowell 105, , , Pepperell 11,142 11, , Tewksbury 28,851 28, , Tyngsborough 11,081 11, , Westford 20,754 21, , Total 281, , , Source:.S. Census Bureau, 2000, 2010, and ACS 5-Year Estimate When reviewing the demographic statistics for our region, it helps to review land area, population density, median age and average household size. Map 4.1 on the next page illustrates this information for the region and individual community. The map shows a progression of color from the highest number to the lowest number. For instance, the City of Lowell had a population of 107,466 at the high end of the population scale, while Dunstable had the fewest residents at 3,255. In terms of land area, Westford is the largest community in the region at square miles, while Lowell is the smallest community at square miles. It makes sense then that Lowell has the highest population density at 7,391 residents per square mile, while Dunstable has the lowest population density at 194 residents per square mile. In terms of median age, the oldest population resides in Dunstable at 44.2 years, while the youngest median age is in the City of Lowell at 32.9 years. This data has implications for transportation planning as well. As the population ages, there is an increased need for transportation modes other than the automobile. That s why those communities that don t currently have transit infrastructure in place will need to address those needs in the future. Average household size provides an indicator not only of the number of residents, but, potentially, the number of vehicles per household. Westford has the highest average household size at 2.96 persons per household, while Chelmsford has the fewest at 2.56 persons per household. This data has implications for transportation options for each community. The data on Map 4.1 is useful in terms of determining where each of the communities stands in reference to these demographic statistics. 54 Page

5 Map 4.1: Population Characteristics of the Northern Middlesex Region Population and Land Area Population Density Pepperell Population:11, sq. mi. Population (2013 ACS 5-Year Est.) 107,466 Lowell 40,932 Billerica 34,199 Chelmsford 29,968 Dracut 29,429 Tewksbury 22,458 Westford 11,675 Tyngsborough 11,645 Pepperell 3,255 Dunstable Dunstable Population:3, sq. mi. Tyngsborough Population:11, sq. mi. Westford Population:22, sq. mi. Chelmsford Population:34, sq. mi. Dracut Population:29, sq. mi. Lowell Population:107, sq. mi. Billerica Population:40, sq. mi. Tewksbury Population:29, sq. mi. Pepperell 503 per sq. mi. Population per Square Mile 7,391 Lowell 1,552 Billerica 1,469 Chelmsford 1,403 Dracut 1,397 Tewksbury 717 Westford 631 Tyngsborough 503 Pepperell 194 Dunstable Dunstable 194 per sq. mi. Westford 717 per sq. mi. Tyngsborough 631 per sq. mi. Chelmsford 1,469 per sq. mi. Dracut 1,403 per sq. mi. Lowell 7,391 per sq. mi. Billerica 1,552 per sq. mi. Tewksbury 1,397 per sq. mi. Median Age Average Household Size Pepperell 43.1 years Dunstable 44.2 years Tyngsborough 42.1 years Dracut 40.3 years Pepperell 2.74 people Dunstable 2.87 people Tyngsborough 2.82 people Dracut 2.71 people Lowell 32.9 years Lowell 2.63 people Median Age in Years 44.2 Dunstable 43.3 Tewksbury 43.1 Pepperell 42.5 Chelmsford 42.4 Westford 42.1 Tyngsborough 40.3 Dracut 40.1 Billerica 32.9 Lowell Northern Middlesex Council of Governments 40 Church Street, Suite 200 Lowell, Massachusetts (978) nmcog.org Westford 42.4 years Chelmsford 42.5 years Billerica 40.1 years Tewksbury 43.3 years Average Household Size 2.96 Westford 2.87 Dunstable 2.82 Tyngsborough 2.80 Billerica 2.74 Pepperell 2.71 Dracut 2.64 Tewksbury 2.63 Lowell 2.56 Chelmsford Westford 2.96 people Chelmsford 2.56 people Sources:S Census Bureau (American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates ); MassDOT/NMCOG (2013 roads; 2010 urbanized area); MassGIS (town boundaries); MassDEP (water). Data provided on this map is not sufficient for regulatory interpretation. Produced 7/20/2015 by NMCOG. Page 55 Billerica 2.8 people Tewksbury 2.64 people 0 2 Miles $

6 This page intentionally left blank. 56 Page

7 HOSING OERIEW The total number of housing units in the region increased from 99,342 units in 2000 to 109,446 units in 2010, an increase of 9.9%. According to the ACS estimates, the region has approximately 112,223 housing units, which represents a 2.53% increase since As can be seen in Table 4.2 below, housing density has continued to increase as the region s population has grown and new household formation has also increased to accommodate an aging population, empty nesters and young families. As expected, housing density is highest in the City of Lowell (2, units per square mile), according to the ACS estimates, and lowest in Dunstable (70.73 units per square mile), which is reflective of the town s rural nature. Table 4.2: 2000, 2010 and Housing nits and Housing Density Community No. of No. of No. of ACS Housing Housing Housing Housing Housing Land Housing nit nit nits nits nits Area nit Density Density (2000 (2010 ( (Sq. Mi.) Density (Per Sq. (Per Sq. Census) Census) ACS) (Per Sq. Mi.) Mi) Mi) Billerica 12,919 14,481 14, Chelmsford 12,812 13,807 13, Dracut 10,451 11,351 11, Dunstable 923 1,098 1, Lowell 37,887 41,431 42, , , , Pepperell 3,847 4,348 4, Tewksbury 9,964 10,848 11, Tyngsborough 3,731 4,206 4, Westford 6,808 7,876 8, Total 99, , , DEMOGRAPHIC FORECASTS Demographic factors and land use activities are primary considerations in the transportation planning process. The intensity and geographic distribution of vehicular trip generation is estimated on the basis of socio-economic factors. Demographic data was analyzed and projected through the year 2040 for population, households and employment as shown in Tables 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5 on pages 58, 59, and 60. Following the release of the ACS 5-Year Estimate, MassDOT refined the population projections for the region. These population projections are based upon the calculation of a 57 Page

8 statewide control total, and a specific share of the population total is then assigned to each Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) region and its member communities. NMCOG staff has worked with MassDOT to adjust these numbers to reflect known development patterns within each municipality, while maintaining the MassDOT assigned control totals for the region. As shown in Table 4.3 below, population growth is expected to continue throughout the region over the upcoming decades, with the region s population increasing by 7% between 2010 and The region s population is estimated to reach 291,101 by 2020, 295,370 by 2030 and 306,913 by While population growth rates are expected to be highest in the region s less densely developed communities of Dunstable, Tyngsborough and Westford, the highest number of additional residents will be in Lowell, Billerica and Chelmsford. Population growth in these areas could put a strain on the transportation network, leading to new demands for improved transportation infrastructure and services. Note: The use of growth rates can be misleading given the smaller base that is being utilized, particularly in Dunstable, and Tyngsborough. Table 4.3: Greater Lowell Region Population Figures and Estimates, Actual Estimate 2020 Estimate 2030 Estimate % Change Community % % Regional Population Population Regional Share Share Billerica 40, ,942 41,647 43, Chelmsford 33, ,208 34,558 35, Dracut 29, ,976 30,571 32, Dunstable 3, ,256 3,397 3, Lowell 106, , , , Pepperell 11, ,648 11,962 12, Tewksbury 28, ,436 29,980 31, Tyngsborough 11, ,678 11,962 12, Westford 21, ,464 23,039 25, Greater Lowell Region 286, , , , Source: 2010.S. Census and 2020, 2030, and 2040 projections by MassDOT with input from NMCOG Following completion of the population projections for 2020, 2030, and 2040, MassDOT developed household projections for the Greater Lowell region. The.S. Census defines households as being equivalent to occupied housing units. According to the MassDOT projections for 2020, 2030 and 2040, the number of households in the Greater Lowell region will increase by 20.9% from 104,022 households in 2010 to 125,795 households in 2040, as summarized in Table 4.4 on the following page. 58 Page

9 Table 4.4: Household Figures and Projections for the Greater Lowell Region, Community % Change Number % Share Billerica 14,034 15,406 16,275 17, Chelmsford 13,313 14,205 14,864 15, Dracut 10,956 11,872 12,632 13, Dunstable 1,063 1,271 1,446 1, Lowell 38,470 40,780 42,251 43, Pepperell 4,197 4,788 5,252 5, Tewksbury 10,492 11,560 12,319 12, Tyngsborough 3,999 4,657 5,113 5, Westford 7,498 8,684 9,483 10, Greater Lowell Region 104, , , , Source: 2010.S. Census and 2020, 2030, and 2040 projections by MassDOT with input from NMCOG MassDOT has developed updated employment projections for the Greater Lowell region, as shown in Table 4.5 on the following page. MassDOT applied a top-down approach that utilizes employment projections for the state as a whole, and then assigns shares of these figures to the MPO regions and individual communities within those regions. Based upon this approach, the employment projections at the state level are more accurate than those for the region or individual communities. Nevertheless, there is merit in understanding the projected employment numbers that have been calculated for the nine communities in the Greater Lowell region. The highest employment growth, from , is anticipated in the communities of Dracut (29.6%), Pepperell (27%) and Tyngsborough (21.4%), while the greatest number of new jobs will be located in Lowell, Billerica and Chelmsford. Note: The use of growth rates can be misleading given the smaller base that is being utilized, particularly in Pepperell and Tyngsborough. The employment growth will have impacts on every community in the Northern Middlesex region, which will require additional infrastructure roads, bridges, sewers, water lines and internet and public transit services to increase the mobility of residents to the new places of business. Without these investments, the employment projections will not be reached and the Commonwealth will lose businesses to other states making these infrastructure investments. 59 Page

10 Table 4.5: Local and Regional Employment Projections, % Change Community Actual Projected Projected Projected Billerica 20,693 22,916 22,779 23, Chelmsford 20,846 22,547 23,152 23, Dracut 4,852 6,160 6,224 6, Dunstable Lowell 33,381 35,729 36,098 36, Pepperell 1,386 1,725 1,743 1, Tewksbury 15,294 15,400 15,559 15, Tyngsborough 4,145 4,928 4,979 5, Westford 11,743 13,552 13,692 13, Greater Lowell Region 112, , , , Source:.S Census Bureau, 2010 Census and Mass DOT projections with input from NMCOG LAND SE CHARACTERISTICS Transportation, land use and economic activity are interrelated and dependent on one another. The NMMPO must consider this interrelationship during the transportation decision-making process in order to meet the region s needs today and in the future. The transportation infrastructure must support local and regional economic activity and be capable of moving supplies, workers and finished products efficiently. Congestion on the transportation network results in serious economic consequences in the way of lost productivity, and higher costs for the delivery of goods and services. At a time when the unemployment situation is worse than it has been in many years, these efforts are extremely important. Figure 4.1 on the next page provides an overview of the change in land uses within the Greater Lowell region between 1971 and 2005, based on McConnell land use data provided by the niversity of Massachusetts. A more detailed look at land use statistics by community can be found in Appendix. Although more recent land use data has been made available for some communities, the 2005 data was utilized as it provides the most recent information base that is comparable across community boundaries, as shown on Map 4.2 on Page 65.. In 1971, 18.9% of the land within the region was developed. Approximately 5.3% of the developed land was devoted to commercial purposes, while 10% was utilized for industrial purposes, and 84.8% was devoted to residential uses. By 2005, the acreage of developed land across the region 60 Page

11 increased by 148%, with commercially utilized land increasing by 97%, industrially used land growing by 52% and residentially used land increasing by 119%. By 2005, 47.1% of the land within the Greater Lowell region was developed. Even though industrial uses increased from 1971 to 1990, the region lost 27% of its industrial uses between 1991 and Between 1971 and 2005, the amount of undeveloped land in the region diminished by approximately 35%. Map 4.2 on page 65 shows land uses across the region in Between 1971 and 2005, the following communities experienced an increase in developed land area that exceeded the regional average of 148%: Dunstable (365%), Tyngsborough (363%), Pepperell (288%), Tewksbury (208%), Westford (165%), and Chelmsford (150%). The Town of Billerica had the lowest increase (86%), while Lowell (143%) and Dracut (121%) were below the regional average. In terms of the loss of undeveloped land, Lowell (-80%), Chelmsford (-51%), Billerica (-40%) and Tewksbury (-39%) exceeded the region s average loss of undeveloped land at 35%. Figure 4.1: Land se in the Northern Middlesex region, (in acres) 120, , , Acres 60, , , Type of Land se LAND SE PATTERNS AND TRENDS Source: McConnell Land se Data The communities of Lowell, Billerica, Chelmsford and Tewksbury had the greatest acreage devoted to commercial use in 2005, followed by Dracut, Tyngsborough and Westford. Of the nine Greater Lowell communities, the Town of Billerica had the largest land area used for industrial purposes (1,071 acres), followed by Lowell (632 acres), Tewksbury (586 acres), Chelmsford (561 acres) and 61 Page

12 Westford (416 acres). In 2005, the overall region had 2,470 acres of land utilized for commercial development and 3,612 acres devoted to industrial development. One-quarter of the region s commercially and industrially developed land (1,491 acres) was located within the Town of Billerica. This land use pattern was quite different from that seen in 1971, when the City of Lowell had the largest land area devoted to commercial and industrial uses, and reflects the continued suburbanization of employment centers. As noted in Figure 4.1, the Northern Middlesex region experienced a significant increase in residential land use (119.12%) between 1971 and 2005 while the amount of commercial and industrial land remained relatively constant. Dunstable experienced the largest growth in residential land use (368.1%) from 1971 to The region also experienced a significant increase in developed land during the same time period. In fact, the following communities experienced an increase in developed land area that exceeded the regional average of 148%: Chelmsford, Dunstable, Pepperell, Tewksbury, Tyngsborough, and Westford. The significant development in these communities generates travel, and travel generates the need for new facilities, which in turn increases accessibility and attracts further development in these communities. The largest category of developed land use in the region is residential. This includes all residential dwelling types, from large lot, single-family homes to multi-family apartments and condominiums. Recent development across the region has been largely in the form of large lot, single family subdivisions, although there have been several multi-family projects constructed under Chapter 40B. A significant amount of undeveloped land remains, although it is not evenly distributed throughout the region. This undeveloped land includes land that is vacant and developable, as well as land that may be classified as undevelopable due to various development constraints, such as wetlands. Land consumption will likely continue at an alarming rate as long as large lot zoning remains the norm in the suburbs. Commercial development continues to be dispersed beyond traditional centers to locations along state numbered routes and major travel corridors, such as Route 110 in Lowell, Chelmsford and Westford, Route 3A in Billerica, Lakeview Avenue in Dracut, Route 38 in Tewksbury, and Middlesex Road in Tyngborough. The greatest concentration of industrial areas tends to be in technology parks built near highway interchanges and along major corridors, such as Route 110 in Westford, Route 129 in Chelmsford and Billerica, Concord Road and the Middlesex Turnpike in Billerica, and Route 133 in Tewksbury. Such industrial parks are often built in a campus-like setting with large fields of paved parking, resulting in higher land consumption rates than would occur in an urban or compact development setting where higher floor area ratios are typically allowed. 62 Page

13 The increased development of land in the Northern Middlesex region provides an increased need for various transportation modes to serve residential, commercial and industrial uses. The highway system in the region will be impacted as more automobiles and trucks are used to serve these additional uses, while the basic transportation network will come under additional strain due to the need to maintain safety and a smooth flow of traffic. The bridges in the region will need to be upgraded, such as through the TIGER grant, in order to open up additional commercial and residential development to maintain a healthy regional economy. 63 Page

14 This page intentionally left blank. 64 Page

15 Northern Middlesex Regional Transportation Plan 2016 Map 4.2: 2005 Land se in the Northern Middlesex Region M AS SA C H S E TT S Brookline NH Hollis NH Hudson NH Nashua NH 3A D N S TA B L E PEPPERELL Pelham NH DRACT Methuen 113 TYN GSBORO GH Groton 119 Groton LO WELL 3A 111 WESTFORD 495 TEWKSBRY A BIL L ERICA 3A Carlisle Sources: MassGIS/NMCOG (2005 MacConnell land use); MassDOT/NMCOG (2013 roads); MassDOT (2010 urban boundaries); MassGIS (town boundaries); MassGIS/MassDEP (water) Town Boundary Andover CHELMSFORD Interstate or Highway Major Road Northern Middlesex Council of Governments Agricultural Forest Recreational - Open Lands Low Density Residential (Lots greater than 0.5 acres) High Density Residential (Lots 0.5 acre or less) Multi-Family Residential Commercial Industrial, Transportation, Mining Institutional Lands Water Produced 4/7/2015 by NMCOG Land se (2005) Land use classification is based on the William P. MacConnell twenty-one category classification system and generalized into ten major categories. NMCOG updated the MassGIS 1999 land use data based on 2005, 2007, and 2008 orthophotos. Data provided on this map is not sufficient for either boundary determination or regulatory interpretation Wilmington Littleton $ 0 2 Miles Acton Bedford Burlington 40 Church Street, Suite 200 Lowell, Massachusetts (978) nmcog.org Page 65

16 This page intentionally left blank. 66 Page

17 COMMTING CHARACTERISTICS Formerly part of the Lowell MA-NH Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA), the Greater Lowell region has been re-defined based upon changes made by the.s. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Within New England, OMB has established New England City and Town Areas (NECTAs) that use towns instead of counties to define various labor market areas. Those areas with an urban core with a population larger than 50,000 are defined as Metropolitan NECTAs, while those areas with urban cores less than 50,000 are described as Metropolitan NECTAs. The Greater Lowell region is principally part of the Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH Metropolitan NECTA and the Lowell-Billerica-Chelmsford, MA-NH NECTA Division (also includes the town of Pelham, New Hampshire). The town of Pepperell falls within the Worcester, MA-CT Metropolitan NECTA. The suburban communities in the Greater Lowell region have been impacted by many of the issues affecting the City of Lowell, including increased development, traffic and congestion. There is large crossover traffic across the New Hampshire State line for employment and consumer purposes. Table 4.6 below shows the percentage of residents working outside of Middlesex County and the State, according to the ACS 5-Year estimate. The Towns of Dunstable, Pepperell and Tyngsborough contain the largest percentages of residents who work out of state, which one would expect given to their close proximity to New Hampshire. In addition, the Town of Tewksbury contains the largest percentage of residents who work within Massachusetts, but outside the county (24.4%). Table 4.6: Percent of Residents Working Outside of Middlesex County and the State Community % working in County of % working outside of County of Residence % working outside State of Residence (% of Residents) residence Billerica Chelmsford Dracut Dunstable Lowell Pepperell Tewksbury Tyngsborough Westford Source: ACS 5- Year Estimates. Figure 4.2 on the following page displays the average commute time by mode of travel, according to the ACS 5-Year Estimate. The most common commuting time for residents that drove 67 Page

18 alone or carpooled was minutes, while public transit users spent 60 minutes or longer commuting to work. This may be due, in part, to commuters who work in Boston using commuter rail to get to and from work each day. It may also be due to multiple bus transfers for commuters, which could potentially slow down a commute. The majority of residents who walked and biked to work spent less than 10 minutes commuting. Appendix provides a more detailed look at commuting time by mode by community. Figure 4.2: Number of Commuters by Average Commute Time by Mode of Travel Number of workers Drive Alone Carpool Public Transportation Walk, Bike, Taxi, Other 0 <10 mins mins mins mins mins mins mins mins >60 mins Average Commute Times Source: ACS 5-Year Estimate. As shown in Table 4.7 on the following page, the.s. Census Bureau estimates that almost 83% of the region s commuters drive alone to their place of work, while 8.7% carpool, 2.2% walk, 0.2% bicycle, 2.5% use public transportation (excluding taxis), 3.2% work from home and 0.8% arrive by taxi, motorcycle or other means. 68 Page

19 Table 4.7: Commuter Mode Choice by Community Community Total Workers Mode Choice Drive Alone Carpool Walk Bike Public Transportation (excluding taxicab) Work at Home Other Workers % Workers % Workers % Workers % Workers % Workers % Workers % Billerica 21,199 18, % 1, % % % % % % Chelmsford 17,287 14, % 1, % % % % % % Dracut 15,943 13, % 1, % % % % % % Dunstable 1,730 1, % % 5 0.3% 0 0.0% % % % Lowell 49,582 37, % 6, % 2, % % 1, % 1, % % Pepperell 6,341 5, % % % 0 0.0% % % % Tewksbury 15,236 13, % 1, % % % % % % Tyngsborough 6,167 5, % % % % % % % Westford 10,960 9, % % % % % % % Total 144, , % 12, % 3, % % 3, % 4, % 1, % Source: ACS 5-Year Estimate. 69 Page

20 This page intentionally left blank. 70 Page