Post on 14-Apr-2018
MEMORANDUM
To: LisaKoch,KansasDepartmentofTransportationFrom: NicholasPappas,UniversityofKansasTransportationCenterDate: April9,2009Re: RegionalZonalAnalysisforPilotAreasUsingthefourpilotcitiesforthisanalysis—GardenCity,Hays,Hutchinson,andSalina—aseriesofmapsdepictingaggregatetripattractionswithineachzoneandsignificantlocationsbetweenzonesareincludedinthisdocument.Tripattractionsinclude:acitypopulationgreaterthan5,000;thepresenceofaVAoutpatientclinic,cardiaccenter,oncologycenter,dialysiscenter,disabilityrehabilitationcenter,socialservicescenter,veteranemploymentcenter,pharmacy,andgeneralemploymentcenter;andwhetherthereisapresenceofaninstitutionforhigherlearning.Inaddition,allmapsincludearoadwayflowoverlayofJourney‐to‐Workcounty‐leveldatathatiscalculatedfromthecentroidofeachcounty.TheroadwayflowmapwascreatedinTransCAD,primarilyusingJourney‐to‐WorkdatafromtheU.S.Census(2000figures),anationalhighwayshapefileprovidedbytheU.S.DepartmentofTransportation,andhighwayclassificationaveragesfromNCHRPReport365.Itisimportanttonotethatproductionsandattractionsareassumedtostartandendateachcounty’scentroid,notthepopulationcenter.Outputfiguresdepicttotalflowinbothdirectionsperday.Theboundariesforeachzonewerecalculatedbycreatingmidpointthresholddistancesbetweenthelocationsofeachattraction,assumingthatpeoplewithinthosedistanceswouldtraveltothetripattraction’snearestrespectivelocation.Thistechniquecanbeaccomplishedusingtwoproximitytoolscalled“ThiessenPolygons”1and“GenerateNearTable”2inaGISprogram.Afterseveralothertechniqueswereperformed,alltripattractionswereweightedwithrespecttotheirimportanceandcombined.Preferencewasgiventovariablesinthefollowingorder:citieswithapopulationof5,000ormoreandthepresenceofaninstitutionofhigherlearning,thentohealthcenters,thentosocialservicescenters,thentoemploymentcenters.Thefinaloutputmapsshowzonalintensityasitpertainstotripattractions,withZone1beingthemostintenseandZone4beingtheleastintense.Countieswithinthesezonesweretabulatedifoneormoreofthezonesoccupiedmorethanhalfthecounty.Thespecificzoneassignedtoeachcountywasdeterminedbychoosingthezonewiththemostpresenceinthatcounty.Forexample,althoughtherearemanycountiesinSalina
1AThiessenPolygonisapolygonwhoseboundariesdefinetheareathatisclosesttoeachpoint(i.e.,acity)relativetoallotherpoints.Thiessenpolygonsaregeneratedfromasetofpoints;theyaremathematicallydefinedbytheperpendicularbisectorsofthelinesbetweenallpoints.2The“GenerateNearTable”toolisusedtodeterminethedistancefromeachpointtospecificallydefinedpointsanddisplaytheresultsinatable.
2
thatarepartlycomposedofZone2orZone4,eitherZone1orZone3hadmorepresence,and,therefore,wereassignedtothatcounty.Ultimately,countiesthathaverelativelyfewservicesthemselveswilllikelyobtaintheseservicesfromSalina.Additionally,amapshowingpopulationdensitypercounty(weightedforruralsettings)isalsoincluded.Followingeachpilotcityzonalanalysisisazonalinteractionmap,depictingserviceareaoverlaysfromadjacentpilotcitiesoradjoininglocations.Summarytablesofcountieswithineachregionareprovidedforeachsignificantlocation.AllpopulationfiguresandridershipcharacteristicdatawereobtainedfromtheU.S.Census.Withtheexceptionofdisabledpopulationdata,whichisderivedfrom2000data,allotherinformationisderivedfrom2007estimates.
3
TableofContents
PageI. WeightedPopulationDensity………………………………………………………………… 4
II. Journey‐to‐WorkTrafficAnalysis…………………………………………………………… 5
III. ZonalAnalyses
a. DodgeCityZonalAnalysis…………………………………..……………………… 9
b. GardenCityZonalAnalysis……………………………………..……………….... 12
c. GreatBendZonalAnalysis………………………………………..……………….. 15
d. HaysZonalAnalysis……………………………………………………………………. 18
e. HutchinsonZonalAnalysis…………………………………………………………. 22
f. LiberalZonalAnalysis……………………………………….………………………… 25
g. McPhersonZonalAnalysis……………………….…………………………………. 28
h. SalinaZonalAnalysis……………………………….………………………………….. 31
i. WichitaZonalAnalysis…………………….………………………………………….. 34
IV. InteractionAnalyses
a. GardenCityZonalInteractionAnalysis……………………………………….. 37
b. HaysZonalInteractionAnalysis………………………………………………….. 38
c. HutchinsonZonalInteractionAnalysis……………………………………….. 39
d. SalinaZonalInteractionAnalysis………………………………………………… 40
4
Thismapshowsweightedpopulationdensitiesforeachcounty,placinganemphasisonthemoreruralcounties.2007county‐leveldatawereobtainedthroughtheU.S.Census.
5
Journey‐to‐Workinter‐countytrafficflowsdisplaycounty‐leveldataobtainedfromthe2000U.S.Census.Duetothelimitationsofthedata,countycentroidshadtobedefinedinordertoaccuratelydisplaytheaggregatecountydataandavoidbiasinassumingthatapopulationcenternecessarilycontainsthemajorityofthetrips.Asaresult,themapshouldbereadassumingthatthepopulationcenterofthecountyisalsothecentroidofthecounty.Additionaldataisneeded—eitheratthetractlevelorblockgrouplevel—toestablishamoreaccuraterepresentationoftrafficflows.
6
GardenCityZonalAnalysis
ThefollowingtwopagesdescribeGardenCity’sdemographiccharacteristicsaswellastabulatethetripattractionsthatmakethepilotcityacenterofactivitytothosecountiesthatlacksuchattractions.The“LackofAttractions”tableorganizescountiesbytheirzonalintensity,ascanbeviewedonthemapthatfollows.An“X”indicatesalackofattractionforthatcounty,therebymakingthatcountyreliantonGardenCityforthatparticularservice.
PopulationCharacteristics
COUNTY 2007 Pop Pop %Pop Housing %Poverty %Unemp. Pop %Pop
Pop Den 65+ 65+Renter
Occupied Minority Minority
Cheyenne 2,901 3 750 26 285 8 3 86 3
Clark 2,240 2 511 23 212 11 3 121 5
Finney 38,728 30 3,116 8 4,325 11 5 11,479 30
Ford 34,237 31 3,458 10 3,927 10 5 10,283 30
Grant 7,394 13 773 10 655 8 5 1,851 25
Gray 5,790 7 738 13 547 6 3 561 10
Greeley 1,290 2 245 19 133 9 2 93 7
Hamilton 2,566 3 454 18 298 11 2 607 24
Haskell 4,217 7 470 11 394 9 3 726 17
Hodgeman 2,100 2 392 19 176 10 1 65 3
Kearny 4,506 5 516 11 407 9 3 945 21
Lane 1,835 3 400 22 179 6 2 43 2
Logan 2,736 3 594 22 264 5 4 89 3
Meade 4,627 5 785 17 434 7 3 492 11
Morton 3,124 4 499 16 334 8 4 372 12
Scott 4,465 6 639 14 465 4 2 263 6
Seward 23,410 37 2,072 9 2,678 14 5 9,189 39
Sherman 6,027 6 1,156 19 770 11 3 367 6
Stanton 2,154 3 317 15 247 12 3 422 20
Stevens 5,410 7 702 13 473 8 4 1,087 20
Thomas 7,448 7 1,189 16 922 8 6 261 4
Wallace 1,536 2 289 19 136 11 2 103 7
Wichita 2,236 3 369 17 226 11 3 355 16
7
GardenCityZonalAnalysis
PopulationCharacteristics(continued)
COUNTY Pop %Pop Total%
Households %Households%
Workforce%
Workforce Pop>16%Pop>
16
Hispanic Hispanic Householdswith1Vehicle
withNoVehicle
Walk‐to‐Work Carpool Disabled Disabled
Cheyenne 137 5 1,601 25 4 5 10 517 18
Clark 124 6 1,113 26 3 6 11 318 14
Finney 16,139 42 13,662 30 5 2 19 7,344 19
Ford 16,450 48 12,046 30 6 2 18 5,970 17
Grant 2,833 38 3,025 28 4 1 15 1,111 15
Gray 775 13 2,225 26 2 4 11 724 13
Greeley 157 12 688 22 2 8 13 285 22
Hamilton 708 28 1,207 27 4 5 15 596 23
Haskell 1,175 28 1,642 26 4 5 11 622 15
Hodgeman 81 4 970 21 4 4 10 296 14
Kearny 1,267 28 1,689 24 3 3 13 674 15
Lane 41 2 987 19 4 6 9 235 13
Logan 56 2 1,391 26 3 6 7 480 18
Meade 635 14 1,974 26 3 3 12 599 13
Morton 441 14 1,500 23 2 4 14 598 19
Scott 400 9 2,230 22 4 3 11 639 14
Seward 12,185 52 8,121 35 6 1 21 3,993 17
Sherman 508 8 3,143 23 3 3 8 1,104 18
Stanton 666 31 989 24 3 6 18 320 15
Stevens 1,420 26 2,279 27 3 3 10 754 14
Thomas 172 2 3,500 25 4 3 7 1,236 17
Wallace 98 6 772 17 2 8 8 145 9
Wichita 479 21 1,096 23 2 3 10 445 20
9
TheGardenCityzonalmapdisplaystwolevelsofdata:tripattractiondatacodedintozonalintensities(theblueshadedpolygons)andJourney‐to‐Worktrafficflowsthatstandapartfromthetripattractiondata.Therefore,thetwolevelsofdatashouldbereadseparately.Areasofgreaterzonalintensities(darkblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbemoreinclinedtoobtainservicesfromthepilotcitysincethecitycontainsthemajorityofservicesoftensought.Areasoflowerzonalintensities(lightblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbeinclinedtoobtainsomeservices,butnotall.Giventheoption,residentsintheseregionsmaydecidetoobtainsomeserviceselsewhereduetocloserproximitytothoselocations.Often,servicesrequiredfromthepilotcityintheselightbluezonesarespecializedservices(i.e.,cardiaccenters,educationalinstitutions,orsocialservicescenters)asopposedtodailyservices(i.e.,pharmacies,stores,etc.).ForGardenCity,onlyKearneyCountyhasthemajorityofitsrespectiveareafallingintothehighestzonalintensityasidefromFinneyCountyitself.Additionally,trafficflowsindicaterelativelystronginteractionbetweenKearneyandHamiltoncounties.SinceHamiltonCountyexhibitsstrongtrafficflowsdespiteitsrelativelylowzonalintensity,furtherinvestigationofHamiltonCountyisrecommended.
10
TheGardenCityzonalinteractionmapdisplaysslightlydifferentinformationfromthepreviouszonalmap.Whiletrafficflowdataremainsthesame,thegrayzonesdepictregionsinwhichthereexistsaninteractionbetweenthepilotareasandanothersizeablecity.Thedarkbluezones(missing)depictregionsinwhichthereexistsnointeractionbetweenGardenCityandanothersizeablecity.ThisindicatesthatregionsinthedarkbluezonesarereliantonGardenCitymorethananyotherregionintheanalysisareabyvirtueoftherebeingnootherchoice.Fromthismap,wecanconcludethatthereisinteractionbetweenGardenCityandothercitiesthroughoutthefullextentoftheanalysisarea.
Overall,thecountiesinthisanalysisareacanbeorganizedintotwogroupsbasedontheirdependenceonGardenCityforservices,fromgreatestdependencetoleastdependence.ThosewiththegreatestdependencehavehighzonalintensitiesanddisplaystrongtrafficflowinteractionswithGardenCity—thisincludesKearnyCounty.ThosewiththelowestrelativedependencerelyonGardenCitytypicallyforspecializedservicesonlyanddonotdisplaystrongtrafficflowinteractions.InGardenCity’scase,thereisnocountythatreliesonthisanalysisareaalone.EvencountiesintheextremenorthhavesignificantinteractionwithHaysforservices.Therefore,itcanbeconcludedthattheonlycountywithsignificantdependenceonGardenCityisKearnyCounty.
11
HaysZonalAnalysis
ThefollowingtwopagesdescribeHays’sdemographiccharacteristicsaswellastabulatethetripattractionsthatmakethepilotcityacenterofactivitytothosecountiesthatlacksuchattractions.The“LackofAttractions”tableorganizescountiesbytheirzonalintensity,ascanbeviewedonthemapthatfollows.An“X”indicatesalackofattractionforthatcounty,therebymakingthatcountyreliantonHaysforthatparticularservice.
PopulationCharacteristics
COUNTY 2007 Pop Pop %Pop Housing %Poverty %Unemp. Pop %Pop
Pop Den 65+ 65+Renter
Occupied Minority Minority
Barton 28,141 31 5,007 18 3,195 11 5 2,536 9
Cheyenne 2,901 3 750 26 285 8 3 86 3
Decatur 3,104 3 832 27 324 9 1 81 3
Edwards 3,270 5 660 20 308 8 3 363 11
Ellis 26,494 29 3,792 14 4,006 7 4 1,308 5
Gove 2,674 2 662 25 222 8 2 52 2
Graham 2,662 3 714 27 240 9 3 129 5
Hodgeman 2,100 2 392 19 176 10 1 65 3
Jewell 3,260 4 870 27 306 10 2 41 1
Lane 1,835 3 400 22 179 6 2 43 2
Lincoln 3,370 5 728 22 315 9 2 70 2
Logan 2,736 3 594 22 264 5 4 89 3
Mitchell 6,277 9 1,350 22 660 8 4 173 3
Norton 5,576 6 1,045 19 468 7 4 408 7
Osborne 3,957 4 1,012 26 369 7 4 63 2
Pawnee 6,664 9 1,209 18 640 7 13 633 9
Phillips 5,373 6 1,223 23 487 8 2 97 2
Rawlins 2,569 2 676 26 262 7 2 38 1
Rooks 5,289 6 1,138 22 513 7 4 157 3
Rush 3,367 5 811 24 265 7 3 65 2
Russell 6,724 8 1,605 24 724 9 4 174 3
Scott 4,465 6 639 14 465 4 2 263 6
Sheridan 2,549 3 553 22 186 12 1 41 2
Sherman 6,027 6 1,156 19 770 11 3 367 6
Smith 4,034 5 1,142 28 347 9 3 56 1
Thomas 7,448 7 1,189 16 922 8 6 261 4
Trego 2,982 3 738 25 252 11 2 74 2
Wallace 1,536 2 289 19 136 11 2 103 7
12
HaysZonalAnalysis
PopulationCharacteristics(continued)
COUNTY Pop %Pop Total%
Households %Households%
Workforce%
Workforce Pop>16%Pop>
16
Hispanic Hispanic Householdswith1Vehicle
withNoVehicle
Walk‐to‐Work Carpool Disabled Disabled
Barton 3,076 11 12,988 29 5 2 9 4,065 14
Cheyenne 137 5 1,601 25 4 5 10 517 18
Decatur 59 2 1,781 21 3 4 10 536 17
Edwards 490 15 1,742 25 5 4 13 511 16
Ellis 676 3 12,157 31 5 4 9 3,708 14
Gove 37 1 1,394 20 3 9 8 323 12
Graham 22 1 1,532 21 3 5 13 503 19
Hodgeman 81 4 970 21 4 4 10 296 14
Jewell 23 1 2,050 18 4 5 8 604 19
Lane 41 2 987 19 4 6 9 235 13
Lincoln 66 2 1,843 20 4 4 12 508 15
Logan 56 2 1,391 26 3 6 7 480 18
Mitchell 63 1 3,269 24 5 6 9 954 15
Norton 140 3 2,630 25 5 4 7 832 15
Osborne 17 0 2,347 22 5 5 9 720 18
Pawnee 315 5 3,048 29 3 4 11 2,228 33
Phillips 47 1 3,022 20 4 4 10 1,001 19
Rawlins 33 1 1,526 20 5 7 12 487 19
Rooks 68 1 2,722 24 5 5 10 1,277 24
Rush 53 2 1,911 21 4 5 11 664 20
Russell 82 1 3,697 25 4 3 9 1,618 24
Scott 400 9 2,230 22 4 3 11 639 14
Sheridan 51 2 1,269 21 4 7 7 275 11
Sherman 508 8 3,143 23 3 3 8 1,104 18
Smith 43 1 2,273 19 4 6 10 660 16
Thomas 172 2 3,500 25 4 3 7 1,236 17
Trego 32 1 1,699 23 4 3 10 463 16
Wallace 98 6 772 17 2 8 8 145 9
14
TheHayszonalmapdisplaystwolevelsofdata:tripattractiondatacodedintozonalintensities(theblueshadedpolygons)andJourney‐to‐Worktrafficflowsthatstandapartfromthetripattractiondata.Therefore,thetwolevelsofdatashouldbereadseparately.Areasofgreaterzonalintensities(darkblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbemoreinclinedtoobtainservicesfromthepilotcitysincethecitycontainsthemajorityofservicesoftensought.Areasoflowerzonalintensities(lightblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbeinclinedtoobtainsomeservices,butnotall.Giventheoption,residentsintheseregionsmaydecidetoobtainsomeserviceselsewhereduetocloserproximitytothoselocations.Often,servicesrequiredfromthepilotcityintheselightbluezonesarespecializedservices(i.e.,cardiaccenters,educationalinstitutions,orsocialservicescenters)asopposedtodailyservices(i.e.,pharmacies,stores,etc.).ForHays,thefollowingcountieshavethemajorityofeachcountyareafallingintothehighestzonalintensity:Ellis,Ness,Russell,andTrego.Additionally,trafficflowsindicaterelativelystronginteractionbetweenEllisCountyandRooks,Rush,andRussellcounties.Sincesomeofthesecountiesexhibitstrongtrafficflowsdespitetheirrelativelylowzonalintensities,furtherinvestigationofRooksandRushcountiesisrecommended.
15
TheHayszonalinteractionmapdisplaysslightlydifferentinformationfromthepreviouszonalmap.Whiletrafficflowdataremainsthesame,thegrayzonesdepictregionsinwhichthereexistsaninteractionbetweenthepilotareasandanothersizeablecity.ThedarkbluezonesdepictregionsinwhichthereexistsnointeractionbetweenHaysandanothercity.ThisindicatesthatregionsinthedarkbluezonesarereliantonHaysmorethananyotherregionintheanalysisareabyvirtueoftherebeingnootherchoice.Therefore,thefollowingcounties—withtheexceptionofthosealreadymentionedinthezonalanalysis—arerecommendedforfurtherinspection:Decatur,Gove,Graham,Norton,Phillips,Rawlins,Sheridan,Smith,andThomas.Overall,thecountiesinthisanalysisareacanbeorganizedintothreegroupsbasedontheirdependenceonHaysforservices,fromgreatestdependencetoleastdependence.ThosewiththegreatestdependencehavehighzonalintensitiesanddisplaystrongtrafficflowinteractionswithHays,including:Ness,Russell,andTregocounties.ThosewithmediocredependenceonlyhavestrongtrafficflowinteractionswithHays,including:RooksandRushcounties.Finally,thosewiththelowestrelativedependencerelyonHaystypicallyforspecializedservicesonlyanddonotdisplaystrongtrafficflowinteractions.ThesecountiesincludeDecatur,Gove,Graham,Norton,Phillips,Rawlins,Sheridan,Smith,andThomas.
16
HutchinsonZonalAnalysis
ThefollowingtwopagesdescribeHutchinson’sdemographiccharacteristicsaswellastabulatethetripattractionsthatmakethepilotcityacenterofactivitytothosecountiesthatlacksuchattractions.The“LackofAttractions”tableorganizescountiesbytheirzonalintensity,ascanbeviewedonthemapthatfollows.An“X”indicatesalackofattractionforthatcounty,therebymakingthatcountyreliantonHutchinsonforthatparticularservice.
PopulationCharacteristics
COUNTY 2007 Pop Pop %Pop Housing %Poverty %Unemp. Pop %Pop
Pop Den 65+ 65+Renter
Occupied Minority Minority
Barber 4,893 4 1,050 21 516 9 2 148 3
Comanche 1,937 2 483 25 231 9 0 42 2
Ellsworth 6,313 9 1,257 20 489 5 4 417 7
Kingman 7,999 9 1,622 20 687 9 2 237 3
Kiowa 2,900 4 638 22 345 8 3 115 4
McPherson 29,600 33 5,044 17 2,898 5 4 1,143 4
Pratt 9,516 13 1,742 18 1,052 8 5 561 6
Reno 63,371 51 10,603 17 7,248 9 4 5,688 9
Rice 10,411 14 1,862 18 919 10 6 631 6
Saline 53,989 75 7,705 14 6,573 6 3 6,760 13
Stafford 4,413 6 901 20 413 10 3 275 6
COUNTY Pop %Pop Total%
Households %Households%
Workforce%
Workforce Pop>16%Pop>
16
Hispanic Hispanic Householdswith1Vehicle
withNoVehicle
Walk‐to‐Work Carpool Disabled Disabled
Barber 104 2 2,716 25 3 5 10 979 20
Comanche 40 2 1,099 23 4 6 8 228 12
Ellsworth 249 4 3,238 21 4 4 14 1,039 16
Kingman 145 2 3,812 22 3 3 14 1,431 18
Kiowa 97 3 1,599 22 5 8 9 575 20
McPherson 701 2 12,199 26 5 5 8 1,791 6
Pratt 470 5 4,706 28 5 3 11 1,391 15
Reno 4,057 6 27,626 28 6 2 10 12,305 19
Rice 755 7 4,563 23 5 6 11 1,968 19
Saline 4,214 8 23,223 29 5 1 9 9,555 18
Stafford 336 8 2,408 25 5 6 12 821 19
18
TheHutchinsonzonalmapdisplaystwolevelsofdata:tripattractiondatacodedintozonalintensities(theblueshadedpolygons)andJourney‐to‐Worktrafficflowsthatstandapartfromthetripattractiondata.Therefore,thetwolevelsofdatashouldbereadseparately.Areasofgreaterzonalintensities(darkblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbemoreinclinedtoobtainservicesfromthepilotcitysincethecitycontainsthemajorityofservicesoftensought.Areasoflowerzonalintensities(lightblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbeinclinedtoobtainsomeservices,butnotall.Giventheoption,residentsintheseregionsmaydecidetoobtainsomeserviceselsewhereduetocloserproximitytothoselocations.Often,servicesrequiredfromthepilotcityintheselightbluezonesarespecializedservices(i.e.,cardiaccenters,educationalinstitutions,orsocialservicescenters)asopposedtodailyservices(i.e.,pharmacies,stores,etc.).ForHutchinson,onlyRiceCountyhasthemajorityofitsrespectiveareafallingintothehighestzonalintensityasidefromRenoCountyitself.Additionally,trafficflowsindicaterelativelystronginteractionbetweenRiceandEllsworthcounties.SinceEllsworthCountyexhibitsstrongtrafficflowsdespiteitsrelativelylowzonalintensity,furtherinvestigationofEllsworthCountyisrecommended.
19
TheHutchinsonzonalinteractionmapdisplaysslightlydifferentinformationfromthepreviouszonalmap.Whiletrafficflowdataremainsthesame,thegrayzonesdepictregionsinwhichthereexistsaninteractionbetweenthepilotareasandanothersizeablecity.Thedarkbluezones(missing)depictregionsinwhichthereexistsnointeractionbetweenHutchinsonandanothersizeablecity.ThisindicatesthatregionsinthedarkbluezonesarereliantonHutchinsonmorethananyotherregionintheanalysisareabyvirtueoftherebeingnootherchoice.Fromthismap,wecanconcludethatthereisinteractionbetweenHutchinsonandothercitiesthroughoutthefullextentoftheanalysisarea.
Overall,thecountiesinthisanalysisareacanbeorganizedintotwogroupsbasedontheirdependenceonHutchinsonforservices,fromgreatestdependencetoleastdependence.ThosewiththegreatestdependencehavehighzonalintensitiesanddisplaystrongtrafficflowinteractionswithHutchinson—thisincludesRiceCounty.ThosewiththelowestrelativedependencerelyonHutchinsontypicallyforspecializedservicesonlyanddonotdisplaystrongtrafficflowinteractions.InHutchinson’scase,thereisnocountythatreliesonthisanalysisareaalone.EvencountiestowardthesouthwesthavesignificantinteractionwithWichitaandLiberalforservices.Therefore,itcanbeconcludedthattheonlycountywithsignificantdependenceonHutchinsonisRiceCounty.
20
SalinaZonalAnalysis
ThefollowingtwopagesdescribeSalina’sdemographiccharacteristicsaswellastabulatethetripattractionsthatmakethepilotcityacenterofactivitytothosecountiesthatlacksuchattractions.The“LackofAttractions”tableorganizescountiesbytheirzonalintensity,ascanbeviewedonthemapthatfollows.An“X”indicatesalackofattractionforthatcounty,therebymakingthatcountyreliantonSalinaforthatparticularservice.
PopulationCharacteristics
COUNTY 2007 Pop Pop %Pop Housing %Poverty %Unemp. Pop %Pop
Pop Den 65+ 65+Renter
Occupied Minority Minority
Cloud 9,680 14 2,181 23 1,004 6 4 208 2
Ellsworth 6,313 9 1,257 20 489 5 4 417 7
Jewell 3,260 4 870 27 306 10 2 41 1
Lincoln 3,370 5 728 22 315 9 2 70 2
McPherson 29,600 33 5,044 17 2,898 5 4 1,143 4
Mitchell 6,277 9 1,350 22 660 8 4 173 3
Ottawa 6,098 8 1,046 17 429 6 4 188 3
Republic 5,026 7 1,368 27 465 7 3 92 2
Saline 53,989 75 7,705 14 6,573 6 3 6,760 13
COUNTY Pop %Pop Total%
Households %Households%
Workforce%
Workforce Pop>16%Pop>
16
Hispanic Hispanic Householdswith1Vehicle
withNoVehicle
Walk‐to‐Work Carpool Disabled Disabled
Cloud 104 1 4,763 26 4 4 10 1,588 16
Ellsworth 249 4 3,238 21 4 4 14 1,039 16
Jewell 23 1 2,050 18 4 5 8 604 19
Lincoln 66 2 1,843 20 4 4 12 508 15
McPherson 701 2 12,199 26 5 5 8 1,791 6
Mitchell 63 1 3,269 24 5 6 9 954 15
Ottawa 130 2 2,781 18 4 3 11 875 14
Republic 60 1 3,004 22 3 2 7 938 19
Saline 4,214 8 23,223 29 5 1 9 9,555 18
22
TheSalinazonalmapdisplaystwolevelsofdata:tripattractiondatacodedintozonalintensities(theblueshadedpolygons)andJourney‐to‐Worktrafficflowsthatstandapartfromthetripattractiondata.Therefore,thetwolevelsofdatashouldbereadseparately.Areasofgreaterzonalintensities(darkblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbemoreinclinedtoobtainservicesfromthepilotcitysincethecitycontainsthemajorityofservicesoftensought.Areasoflowerzonalintensities(lightblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbeinclinedtoobtainsomeservices,butnotall.Giventheoption,residentsintheseregionsmaydecidetoobtainsomeserviceselsewhereduetocloserproximitytothoselocations.Often,servicesrequiredfromthepilotcityintheselightbluezonesarespecializedservices(i.e.,cardiaccenters,educationalinstitutions,orsocialservicescenters)asopposedtodailyservices(i.e.,pharmacies,stores,etc.).ForSalina,thefollowingcountieshavethemajorityofeachcountyareafallingintothehighestzonalintensity:Ellsworth,Lincoln,Ottawa,andSaline.Additionally,trafficflowsindicaterelativelystronginteractionbetweenSalineCountyandOttawa,Dickinson,andMcPhersoncounties.Sincesomeofthesecountiesexhibitstrongtrafficflowsdespitetheirrelativelylowzonalintensities,furtherinvestigationofDickinsonandMcPhersoncountiesisrecommended.
23
TheSalinazonalinteractionmapdisplaysslightlydifferentinformationfromthepreviouszonalmap.Whiletrafficflowdataremainsthesame,thegrayzonesdepictregionsinwhichthereexistsaninteractionbetweenthepilotareasandanothersizeablecity.ThedarkbluezonesdepictregionsinwhichthereexistsnointeractionbetweenSalinaandanothercity.ThisindicatesthatregionsinthedarkbluezonesarereliantonSalinamorethananyotherregionintheanalysisareabyvirtueoftherebeingnootherchoice.Therefore,thefollowingcounties—withtheexceptionofthosealreadymentionedinthezonalanalysis—arerecommendedforfurtherinspection:Cloud,Jewell,Mitchell,andRepublic.Overall,thecountiesinthisanalysisareacanbeorganizedintothreegroupsbasedontheirdependenceonSalinaforservices,fromgreatestdependencetoleastdependence.ThosewiththegreatestdependencehavehighzonalintensitiesanddisplaystrongtrafficflowinteractionswithSalina,including:Ellsworth,Lincoln,andOttawacounties.ThosewithmediocredependenceonlyhavestrongtrafficflowinteractionswithSalina,including:DickinsonandMcPhersoncounties.Finally,thosewiththelowestrelativedependencerelyonSalinatypicallyforspecializedservicesonlyanddonotdisplaystrongtrafficflowinteractions.ThesecountiesincludeCloud,Jewell,Mitchell,andRepublic.
24
DodgeCityZonalAnalysis
ThefollowingtwopagesdescribeDodgeCity’sdemographiccharacteristicsaswellastabulatethetripattractionsthatmakethepilotcityacenterofactivitytothosecountiesthatlacksuchattractions.The“LackofAttractions”tableorganizescountiesbytheirzonalintensity,ascanbeviewedonthemapthatfollows.An“X”indicatesalackofattractionforthatcounty,therebymakingthatcountyreliantonDodgeCityforthatparticularservice.
PopulationCharacteristics
COUNTY 2007 Pop Pop %Pop Housing %Poverty %Unemp. Pop %Pop
Po Den 65+ 65+Renter
Occupied Minority Minority
Clark 2,240 2 511 23 212 11 3 121 5
Comanche 1,937 2 483 25 231 9 0 42 2
Ford 34,237 31 3,458 10 3,927 10 5 10,283 30
Gray 5,790 7 738 13 547 6 3 561 10
Hodgeman 2,100 2 392 19 176 10 1 65 3
Kiowa 2,900 4 638 22 345 8 3 115 4
Ness 2,898 3 792 27 311 7 2 71 2
COUNTY Pop %Pop Total%
Households%
Households%
Workforce%
Workforce Pop>16%Pop>
16
Hispanic Hispanic Householdswith1Vehicle
withNoVehicle
Walk‐to‐Work Carpool Disabled Disabled
Clark 124 6 1,113 26 3 6 11 318 14
Comanche 40 2 1,099 23 4 6 8 228 12
Ford 16,450 48 12,046 30 6 2 18 5,970 17
Gray 775 13 2,225 26 2 4 11 724 13
Hodgeman 81 4 970 21 4 4 10 296 14
Kiowa 97 3 1,599 22 5 8 9 575 20
Ness 86 3 1,767 21 2 8 12 478 16
26
TheDodgeCityzonalmapdisplaystwolevelsofdata:tripattractiondatacodedintozonalintensities(theblueshadedpolygons)andJourney‐to‐Worktrafficflowsthatstandapartfromthetripattractiondata.Therefore,thetwolevelsofdatashouldbereadseparately.Areasofgreaterzonalintensities(darkblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbemoreinclinedtoobtainservicesfromthepilotcitysincethecitycontainsthemajorityofservicesoftensought.Areasoflowerzonalintensities(lightblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbeinclinedtoobtainsomeservices,butnotall.Giventheoption,residentsintheseregionsmaydecidetoobtainsomeserviceselsewhereduetocloserproximitytothoselocations.Often,servicesrequiredfromthepilotcityintheselightbluezonesarespecializedservices(i.e.,cardiaccenters,educationalinstitutions,orsocialservicescenters)asopposedtodailyservices(i.e.,pharmacies,stores,etc.).ForDodgeCity,onlyGrayCountyhasthemajorityofitsrespectiveareafallingintothehighestzonalintensityasidefromFordCountyitself.Additionally,itappearsthatthereismoretrafficflowbetweenGrayandFordcountiesthanbetweenGrayandFinneycounties,indicatingapossibleinteractionwiththeGardenCitypilotarea.
27
GreatBendZonalAnalysis
ThefollowingtwopagesdescribeGreatBend’sdemographiccharacteristicsaswellastabulatethetripattractionsthatmakethepilotcityacenterofactivitytothosecountiesthatlacksuchattractions.The“LackofAttractions”tableorganizescountiesbytheirzonalintensity,ascanbeviewedonthemapthatfollows.An“X”indicatesalackofattractionforthatcounty,therebymakingthatcountyreliantonGreatBendforthatparticularservice.
PopulationCharacteristics
COUNTY 2007 Pop Pop %Pop Housing %Poverty %Unemp. Pop %Pop
Pop Den 65+ 65+Renter
Occupied Minority Minority
Barton 28,141 31 5,007 18 3,195 11 5 2,536 9
Comanche 1,937 2 483 25 231 9 0 42 2
Edwards 3,270 5 660 20 308 8 3 363 11
Ellis 26,494 29 3,792 14 4,006 7 4 1,308 5
Ellsworth 6,313 9 1,257 20 489 5 4 417 7
Kiowa 2,900 4 638 22 345 8 3 115 4
Lincoln 3,370 5 728 22 315 9 2 70 2
Osborne 3,957 4 1,012 26 369 7 4 63 2
Pawnee 6,664 9 1,209 18 640 7 13 633 9
Pratt 9,516 13 1,742 18 1,052 8 5 561 6
Rice 10,411 14 1,862 18 919 10 6 631 6
Rooks 5,289 6 1,138 22 513 7 4 157 3
Rush 3,367 5 811 24 265 7 3 65 2
Russell 6,724 8 1,605 24 724 9 4 174 3
Stafford 4,413 6 901 20 413 10 3 275 6
28
GreatBendZonalAnalysis
PopulationCharacteristics(continued)
COUNTY Pop %Pop Total%
Households %Households%
Workforce%
Workforce Pop>16%Pop>
16
Hispanic Hispanic Householdswith1Vehicle
withNoVehicle
Walk‐to‐Work Carpool Disabled Disabled
Barton 3,076 11 12,988 29 5 2 9 4,065 14
Comanche 40 2 1,099 23 4 6 8 228 12
Edwards 490 15 1,742 25 5 4 13 511 16
Ellis 676 3 12,157 31 5 4 9 3,708 14
Ellsworth 249 4 3,238 21 4 4 14 1,039 16
Kiowa 97 3 1,599 22 5 8 9 575 20
Lincoln 66 2 1,843 20 4 4 12 508 15
Osborne 17 0 2,347 22 5 5 9 720 18
Pawnee 315 5 3,048 29 3 4 11 2,228 33
Pratt 470 5 4,706 28 5 3 11 1,391 15
Rice 755 7 4,563 23 5 6 11 1,968 19
Rooks 68 1 2,722 24 5 5 10 1,277 24
Rush 53 2 1,911 21 4 5 11 664 20
Russell 82 1 3,697 25 4 3 9 1,618 24
Stafford 336 8 2,408 25 5 6 12 821 19
30
TheGreatBendzonalmapdisplaystwolevelsofdata:tripattractiondatacodedintozonalintensities(theblueshadedpolygons)andJourney‐to‐Worktrafficflowsthatstandapartfromthetripattractiondata.Therefore,thetwolevelsofdatashouldbereadseparately.Areasofgreaterzonalintensities(darkblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbemoreinclinedtoobtainservicesfromthepilotcitysincethecitycontainsthemajorityofservicesoftensought.Areasoflowerzonalintensities(lightblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbeinclinedtoobtainsomeservices,butnotall.Giventheoption,residentsintheseregionsmaydecidetoobtainsomeserviceselsewhereduetocloserproximitytothoselocations.Often,servicesrequiredfromthepilotcityintheselightbluezonesarespecializedservices(i.e.,cardiaccenters,educationalinstitutions,orsocialservicescenters)asopposedtodailyservices(i.e.,pharmacies,stores,etc.).ForGreatBend,thefollowingcountieshavethemajorityofeachcountyareafallingintothehighestzonalintensity:Barton,Pawnee,andRush.DuetoRushCountyandEllsworthCounty’srelativelystrongtrafficflowstoEllisandSalinecounties,respectively,interactionwiththeHaysandSalinapilotareasisapparentandshouldbeinvestigatedfurther.
31
LiberalZonalAnalysis
ThefollowingtwopagesdescribeLiberal’sdemographiccharacteristicsaswellastabulatethetripattractionsthatmakethepilotcityacenterofactivitytothosecountiesthatlacksuchattractions.The“LackofAttractions”tableorganizescountiesbytheirzonalintensity,ascanbeviewedonthemapthatfollows.An“X”indicatesalackofattractionforthatcounty,therebymakingthatcountyreliantonLiberalforthatparticularservice.
PopulationCharacteristics
COUNTY 2007 Pop Pop %Pop Housing %Poverty %Unemp. Pop %Pop
Pop Den 65+ 65+Renter
Occupied Minority Minority
Clark 2,240 2 511 23 212 11 3 121 5
Comanche 1,937 2 483 25 231 9 0 42 2
Finney 38,728 30 3,116 8 4,325 11 5 11,479 30
Ford 34,237 31 3,458 10 3,927 10 5 10,283 30
Grant 7,394 13 773 10 655 8 5 1,851 25
Gray 5,790 7 738 13 547 6 3 561 10
Greeley 1,290 2 245 19 133 9 2 93 7
Hamilton 2,566 3 454 18 298 11 2 607 24
Haskell 4,217 7 470 11 394 9 3 726 17
Kearny 4,506 5 516 11 407 9 3 945 21
Meade 4,627 5 785 17 434 7 3 492 11
Norton 5,576 6 1,045 19 468 7 4 408 7
Seward 23,410 37 2,072 9 2,678 14 5 9,189 39
Stanton 2,154 3 317 15 247 12 3 422 20
Stevens 5,410 7 702 13 473 8 4 1,087 20Wichita 2,236 3 369 17 226 11 3 355 16
32
LiberalZonalAnalysis
PopulationCharacteristics(continued)
COUNTY Pop %Pop Total%
Households %Households%
Workforce%
Workforce Pop>16%Pop>
16
Hispanic Hispanic Householdswith1Vehicle
withNoVehicle
Walk‐to‐Work Carpool Disabled Disabled
Clark 124 6 1,113 26 3 6 11 318 14
Comanche 40 2 1,099 23 4 6 8 228 12
Finney 16,139 42 13,662 30 5 2 19 7,344 19
Ford 16,450 48 12,046 30 6 2 18 5,970 17
Grant 2,833 38 3,025 28 4 1 15 1,111 15
Gray 775 13 2,225 26 2 4 11 724 13Greeley 157 12 688 22 2 8 13 285 22
Hamilton 708 28 1,207 27 4 5 15 596 23
Haskell 1,175 28 1,642 26 4 5 11 622 15
Kearny 1,267 28 1,689 24 3 3 13 674 15
Meade 635 14 1,974 26 3 3 12 599 13
Norton 140 3 2,630 25 5 4 7 832 15
Seward 12,185 52 8,121 35 6 1 21 3,993 17
Stanton 666 31 989 24 3 6 18 320 15
Stevens 1,420 26 2,279 27 3 3 10 754 14
Wichita 479 21 1,096 23 2 3 10 445 20
34
TheLiberalzonalmapdisplaystwolevelsofdata:tripattractiondatacodedintozonalintensities(theblueshadedpolygons)andJourney‐to‐Worktrafficflowsthatstandapartfromthetripattractiondata.Therefore,thetwolevelsofdatashouldbereadseparately.Areasofgreaterzonalintensities(darkblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbemoreinclinedtoobtainservicesfromthepilotcitysincethecitycontainsthemajorityofservicesoftensought.Areasoflowerzonalintensities(lightblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbeinclinedtoobtainsomeservices,butnotall.Giventheoption,residentsintheseregionsmaydecidetoobtainsomeserviceselsewhereduetocloserproximitytothoselocations.Often,servicesrequiredfromthepilotcityintheselightbluezonesarespecializedservices(i.e.,cardiaccenters,educationalinstitutions,orsocialservicescenters)asopposedtodailyservices(i.e.,pharmacies,stores,etc.).ForLiberal,thefollowingcountieshavethemajorityofeachcountyareafallingintothehighestzonalintensity:Meade,Seward,andStevens.Additionally,thereappearstobeasimilarlystrongtrafficflowbetweenSewardandHaskellcounties,asthereexistsbetweenHaskellandFinneycounties.ThisindicatesaclearinteractionwiththeGardenCitypilotarea,anissueworthfurtherinvestigation.
35
McPhersonZonalAnalysis
ThefollowingtwopagesdescribeMcPherson’sdemographiccharacteristicsaswellastabulatethetripattractionsthatmakethepilotcityacenterofactivitytothosecountiesthatlacksuchattractions.The“LackofAttractions”tableorganizescountiesbytheirzonalintensity,ascanbeviewedonthemapthatfollows.An“X”indicatesalackofattractionforthatcounty,therebymakingthatcountyreliantonMcPhersonforthatparticularservice.
PopulationCharacteristics
COUNTY 2007 Pop Pop %Pop Housing %Poverty %Unemp. Pop %Pop
Pop Den 65+ 65+Renter
Occupied Minority Minority
McPherson 29,600 33 5,044 17 2,898 5 4 1,143 4
COUNTY Pop %Pop Total%
Households %Households%
Workforce%
Workforce Pop>16%Pop>
16
Hispanic Hispanic Householdswith1Vehicle
withNoVehicle
Walk‐to‐Work Carpool Disabled Disabled
McPherson 701 2 12,199 26 5 5 8 1,791 6
36
McPhersonZonalAnalysis
LackofAttractionsbyZone
Zone County LackofTripAttractionsbyCountyinEachRegion
LackofCitywithaPopulationExceeding
5,000
LackofDisabilityRehabCenters
LackofPharmacies
LackofCardiacCenters
LackofEmployment
Centers
1 McPherson 2 (none) 3 (none) 4 (none)
37
TheMcPhersonzonalmapdisplaystwolevelsofdata:tripattractiondatacodedintozonalintensities(theblueshadedpolygons)andJourney‐to‐Worktrafficflowsthatstandapartfromthetripattractiondata.Therefore,thetwolevelsofdatashouldbereadseparately.Areasofgreaterzonalintensities(darkblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbemoreinclinedtoobtainservicesfromthepilotcitysincethecitycontainsthemajorityofservicesoftensought.Areasoflowerzonalintensities(lightblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbeinclinedtoobtainsomeservices,butnotall.Giventheoption,residentsintheseregionsmaydecidetoobtainsomeserviceselsewhereduetocloserproximitytothoselocations.Often,servicesrequiredfromthepilotcityintheselightbluezonesarespecializedservices(i.e.,cardiaccenters,educationalinstitutions,orsocialservicescenters)asopposedtodailyservices(i.e.,pharmacies,stores,etc.).ForMcPherson,onlyMcPhersonCountyitselfhasthemajorityofitsrespectiveareafallingintothehighestzonalintensity.However,relativelystrongtrafficflowswithSalineCountyindicateaninteractionwiththeSalinapilotarea,anissueworthfurtherinvestigation.
38
WichitaZonalAnalysis
ThefollowingtwopagesdescribeWichita’sdemographiccharacteristicsaswellastabulatethetripattractionsthatmakethepilotcityacenterofactivitytothosecountiesthatlacksuchattractions.The“LackofAttractions”tableorganizescountiesbytheirzonalintensity,ascanbeviewedonthemapthatfollows.An“X”indicatesalackofattractionforthatcounty,therebymakingthatcountyreliantonWichitaforthatparticularservice.
PopulationCharacteristics
COUNTY 2007 Pop Pop %Pop Housing %Poverty %Unemp. Pop %Pop
Pop Den 65+ 65+Renter
Occupied Minority Minority
Barber 4,893 4 1,050 21 516 9 2 148 3
Butler 63,253 44 7,921 13 5,003 6 4 3,582 6
Cowley 34,927 31 5,387 15 3,916 10 8 4,007 11
Harper 5,949 7 1,369 23 650 9 4 206 3
Kingman 7,999 9 1,622 20 687 9 2 237 3
Reno 63,371 51 10,603 17 7,248 9 4 5,688 9
Sedgwick 469,551 470 53,366 11 59,586 7 5 106,303 23
Sumner 24,460 21 3,802 16 2,145 8 5 1,286 5
COUNTY Pop %Pop Total%
Households %Households%
Workforce%
Workforce Pop>16%Pop>
16
Hispanic Hispanic Householdswith1Vehicle
withNoVehicle
Walk‐to‐Work Carpool Disabled Disabled
Barber 104 2 2,716 25 3 5 10 979 20
Butler 1,717 3 25,203 23 3 2 10 9,902 16
Cowley 2,254 6 15,680 28 5 3 11 7,768 22
Harper 97 2 3,189 25 5 5 12 1,107 19
Kingman 145 2 3,812 22 3 3 14 1,431 18
Reno 4,057 6 27,626 28 6 2 10 12,305 19
Sedgwick 47,857 10 201,982 30 5 1 9 84,552 18
Sumner 871 4 10,884 23 3 3 11 4,973 20
40
TheWichitazonalmapdisplaystwolevelsofdata:tripattractiondatacodedintozonalintensities(theblueshadedpolygons)andJourney‐to‐Worktrafficflowsthatstandapartfromthetripattractiondata.Therefore,thetwolevelsofdatashouldbereadseparately.Areasofgreaterzonalintensities(darkblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbemoreinclinedtoobtainservicesfromthepilotcitysincethecitycontainsthemajorityofservicesoftensought.Areasoflowerzonalintensities(lightblueareas)depictregionsinwhichresidentswillbeinclinedtoobtainsomeservices,butnotall.Giventheoption,residentsintheseregionsmaydecidetoobtainsomeserviceselsewhereduetocloserproximitytothoselocations.Often,servicesrequiredfromthepilotcityintheselightbluezonesarespecializedservices(i.e.,cardiaccenters,educationalinstitutions,orsocialservicescenters)asopposedtodailyservices(i.e.,pharmacies,stores,etc.).ForWichita,onlySedgwickCountyitselfhasamajorityofitsrespectiveareawithinthehighestzonalintensity.Additionally,trafficflowsindicateminorinteractionwithRenoCounty,indicatingthattheHutchinsonpilotareamaybesomewhatself‐contained.