D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 2 B e a c o n F a l l s ∙ B e t h l e h e m ∙ C h e s h i r e ∙ M i d d l e b u r y ∙ N a u g a t u c k ∙ O x f o r d ∙ P r o s p e c t ∙ S o u t h b u r y ∙ T h o m a s t o n ∙ W a t e r b u r y ∙ W a t e r t o w n ∙ W o l c o t t ∙ W o o d b u r y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n T r e n d s a n d C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n t h e C N V R : 2 0 1 0 TITLE: Transportation Trends and Characteristics of the CNVR: 2010 AUTHOR: Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley SUBJECT: General transportation statistics and data on the journey- to-work for the Central Naugatuck Valley Region. DATE: December 2012 LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY: Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley SOURCE OF COPIES: Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley 60 North Main Street, 3 rd Floor Waterbury, CT 06702 SERIES NO.: N/A NUMBER OF PAGES: 74 ABSTRACT : This report presents transportation statistics from the 2006-2010 American Community Survey (ACS) and the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2010 Journey -to -Work data for the Central Naugatuck Valley Region (CNVR) and its municipalities. **************** The material contained herein may be quoted or reproduced without special permission, although mention of the source is appreciated. The preparation of the report was financed through grants from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration, a grant from the Connecticut Department of Transportation, and by the contributions from member municipalities of the Central Naugatuck Valley Region. T: ProjectsTransportationTransportation Trends Work-LiveDraftDraft.docx AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY AND CENSUS DATA DISCLAIMER Several tables and figures in this report compare data from the 2006-2010 American Community Survey (ACS) five-year estimates to the 2000 Census. Beginning in 2005, the ACS replaced the long-form census as the source for detailed socioeconomic and housing data. The first complete ACS dataset covered the years 2005-2009. The 2006-2010 ACS is a five-year estimate where a small percentage of all households are sampled each year. ACS estimates represent an average over the course of five years and are not equivalent to the 100 percent count data from the 2010 census. The ACS five-year estimates are not optimal for analyzing year to year trends because four of the five years of samples are reused in the next year’s estimates . One-year and three-year ACS data are only available for larger municipalities. The ACS surveys approximately 3 million households per year (roughly 2.5% of households) and aggregates the data on multi-year intervals . The long-form 2000 Census was given to approximately 16% of households . Both datasets used samples to calculate estimates for the entire population. The differences in methodology between the long-form 2000 Census and the 2006 – 2010 ACS make their comparisons difficult. However, because of the lack of related datasets, they were compared in several tables and maps. Readers should take note that these comparisons can help show general trends, but may be inaccurate in providing specific numbers. Tables and figures using these datasets are marked with an asterisk (*) in the List of T ables and Figures on the following pages. TABLE OF CONTENTS PageI. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. Summary of Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 III. Analysis of Transportation Trends. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 A. Availability of Vehicles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 B. Means of Travel to Work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 C. Travel Time to Work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 D. Journey to Work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Regional Trends. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 CNVR Residents – Where do They Work? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 CNVR Employees – Where Do They Live? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 IV. Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 LIST OF TABLES * Table III-A1: Availability of Vehicles in the CNVR, by Municipality: 2000-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 * Table III-B1: Means of Travel to Work of CNVR Residents: 2006-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Table III-B2: Means of Travel to Work of CNVR Residents: 2000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 * Table III-C1: Average Travel Time to Work for CNVR Residents, by Municipality: 2000-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Table III-D1: Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 CNVR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Beacon Falls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Bethlehem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Cheshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Middlebury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Naugatuck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Oxford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Prospect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Southbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Thomaston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Waterbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Watertown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Wolcott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Woodbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Table III-D2: Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 CNVR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Beacon Falls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Bethlehem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Cheshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Middlebury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Naugatuck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Oxford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Prospect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Southbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Thomaston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Waterbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Watertown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Wolcott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Woodbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 LIST OF FIGURES * Figure III-A1: CNVR Households Without Access to a Vehicle, by Block Group: 2006-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 * Figure III-B1: Percent of Workers who Drove Alone to Work, by Block Group: 2006-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 * Figure III-C1: Average Travel Time to Work for CNVR Residents, by Census Tract: 2006-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure III-D1: Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, by Region: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Figure III-D2: Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Region: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Figure III-D3: Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, by Municipality: 2010 CNVR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Beacon Falls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Bethlehem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Cheshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Middlebury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Naugatuck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Oxford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Prospect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Southbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Thomaston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Waterbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Watertown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Wolcott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Woodbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Figure III-D4: Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2010 CNVR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Beacon Falls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Bethlehem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Cheshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Middlebury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Naugatuck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Oxford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Prospect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Southbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Thomaston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Waterbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Watertown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Wolcott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Woodbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Regional Planning Organizations in Connecticut. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 I. INTRODUCTION This report presents transportation statistics from the 2006-2010 American Community Survey (ACS) and the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2010 journey-to-work data for the Central Naugatuck Valley Region (CNVR) and its municipalities. The report provides data on the availability of vehicles, the means of transportation to work, travel time to work, and origins and destinations of work trips. The ACS has replaced the U.S. Decennial Census as the main source for detailed demographic, economic, housing and transportation data. ACS data is based on five-year estimates. Journey- to-work data comes from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Longitudinal Employer -Household Dynamics (LEHD) dataset. Both datasets are updated annually. Figure III-A1 and Figure III-B1 show data at the block group level while Figure III- C1 shows data at the tract level. Block groups and tracts are geographic units delineated by the U.S . Census Bureau that are used to show data at the sub-municipal level. Tracts are larger geographic units than block groups. Figure III-D1 through Figure III-D4 shows CNVR commuting data at the municipal or regional level. The regions mentioned in this report are concurrent with the regional planning organizations as defined by the Connecticut Office of Policy and Management (OPM). Some of the major regions mentioned in this report are the South Central Region (Greater New Haven-Meriden area), the Capitol Region (Greater Hartford), the Litchfield Hills (Greater Torrington), Central Connecticut (Greater Bristol-Southington area), the Valley (Greater Derby-Shelton area), and the Housatonic Valley (Greater Danbury). A map showing the regions of Connecticut can be seen in Appendix A . [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] II. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS  From 2006-2010, 18.0% of households in Waterbury did not have access to a vehicle. In contrast, only 3.9% of households in the remainder of the region did not have access to a vehicle.  85.0% of CNVR residents drove alone to work. An additional 7.8% of residents carpooled, while 3.2% of residents worked from home. Only 1.9% of residents took public transportation to work.  CNVR residents continue to see their commute times increase, albeit at a smaller rate than previous decades . Employed CNVR residents commuted, on average, 25.3 minutes to work from 2006 -2010, an increase of 1 minute since 2000.  In 2010, the number of individuals working in the CNVR was less than the number of employed individuals living in the region. There were 95,883 individuals working in the region, compared to 128,652 employed individuals living in the region. This gap has increased since 2000.  CNVR residents are increasingly working outside of the region. In 2010, only 41.6% of CNVR residents work ed in the region. This is a decrease from 2000 when 55.1% of CNVR residents worked in the region. 18.7% of employed CNVR residents worked in Waterbury, a decline of 19.7% since 2000.  The South Central Region (13.4%) and Capitol Region (10.1%) were the top employment destinations for CNVR residents working outside the region in 2010. The number of CNVR residents working in the Capitol Region has more than doubled since 2000.  CNVR employees are increasingly coming from outside the region. In 2010, CNVR residents made up 55.9% of CNVR employees, a decline of 23.0% since 2000. 22.7% of CNVR employees lived in Waterbury compared to 28.5% in 2000.  From outside of the region, the largest share of CNVR employees came from the South Central Region (9.3%) and the Central Connecticut Region (7.8%).  The number of CNVR residents working outside of Connecticut has more than tripled in the last decade. In 2010, 5.1% of CNVR residents worked out of state, compared to only 1.6% in 2000. The top out of state employment destination for CNVR residents was Manhattan, where 1.6% of CNVR residents worked.  From 2000 to 2010, the CNVR has become increasingly tied to the Capitol Region. During this time period, the number of CNVR residents working in the Capitol Region increased by 107.3% while the number of CNVR employees living in the Capitol Region increased by 154.3%.       [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] III. ANALYSIS OF TRANSPORTATION TRENDS A. Availability of Vehicles From 2006-2010, 18.0% of Waterbury households did not have access to a vehicle, a slight decrease sin ce 2000 (19.4%) . Waterbury has the fourth highest rate of households without access to a vehicle in the state, behind Hartford (34.6%), New Haven (27.0%), and Bridgeport (22.2%). In the remaining CNVR municipalities, only 3.9% of households did not have access to a vehicle. The availability of vehicles is presented in Figure III-A1 and Table III-A1 . Households that do not have access to a vehicle need alternative means of travel. These individuals are more likely to rely on public transportation, and more likely to live where public transportation is readily available. B. Means of Travel to Work Table III- B1 (2006- 2010) and Table III-B2 (2000) provide summary data on the means of travel to work of CNVR residents. Means of travel is a choice made by commuters after comparing travel time, cost, and characteristics of all available modes of transportation. The means of travel to work is influenced by the origin of the work trip, the place of residence, the destination of the work trip, and the workplace. This report aggregates means of travel into five categories : 1) drove alone, 2) carpooled, 3) used public transportation, 4) bicycled, walked or some other mode, and 5) worked from home. ‘Other modes’ include motorcycles and taxis. The most common means of travel to work for CNVR residents was driving alone in a passenger vehicle (85.0%). This represents a slight increase from 2000, when 83.7% of residents drove alone. Beacon Falls (92.3%) and Wolcott (91.1%) had the highest shares of residents driving alone to work while Waterbury (80.2%) had the lowest (Figure III-B1). Carpooling, the second most common means of travel to work, represented 7.8% of work trips from 2006-2010, compared to 9.9% in 2000. Waterbury (10.3%) and Naugatuck (9.3%) residents had the highest rates of carpooling in the region. Improved telecommunications technology, notably wireless network connections and high-speed internet, has allowed many CNVR residents to work from home. From 2006-2010, 3.2% of CNVR residents worked from home, compared to 2.4% in 2000. Travel by means other than a passenger vehicle increased by 8.8% between 2000 and 2010. From 2006 -2010, 1.9% of CNVR residents took public transit to work, compared to 1.6% in 2000. Waterbury, w hich has an extensive bus system, continues to see the highest share of residents commuting to work using public transit (4.3%). The remainder of the CNVR, which has limited or no local bus service, had ju st 0.6% of its employed residents commuting to work using public transit. The number of CNVR residents walking, biking, or taking ‘some other mode’ (motorcycle or taxi) remained stable in the last decade. Residents of Waterbury (3.8%), Watertown (3.0%), and Bethlehem (2.8%) were the most likely to walk, bike, or take ‘ some other mode’ of transportation to work, while residents of Wolcott (0.5%) and Cheshire (0.9%) were the least likely. C. Travel Time to Work From 2006-2010, employed CNVR residents commuted, on average, 25.3 minutes to work, higher than b oth the state (24.6 minutes) and national (25.2 minutes 1 ) averages (Figure III-C1 and Table III-C1). This represents an increase of one minute (4.2%) since 2000. Watertown residents had the shortest average travel time to work (22.2 minutes), followed by Prospect (23.0 minutes) and Waterbury (23.3 minutes). Residents of Oxford (31.4 minutes) and Woodbury (30.4 minutes) had the longest average travel time to work in the region. Only 20.3% of Oxford residents and 42.0% of Woodbury residents worked in the CNVR, which can partially explain the long commute times. D uring this same time period, the national average travel time to work decreased from 25.5 minutes in 2000 to 25.2 minutes from 2006-2010. 1 While the CNVR and statewide average travel time to work increased, they increased at a smaller rate than in previous decades. Four towns in the CNVR — Watertown (-2.3 minutes), Bethlehem (-2.1 minutes), Prospect (-1.8 minutes), and Beacon Falls (-0.1 minutes) — saw their average travel time to work decrease since 2000. The remaining municipalities in the region saw their average travel time to work increase with Woodbury (+3.8 minutes) and Middlebury (+3.3 minutes ) having the largest gains. From 2006-2010, 14.9% of commutes were 45 minutes or more, compared to 13.0% in 2000. 2 Only 13.1% of CNVR residents commuted 10 minutes or less to work. 2 Travel mode also influences average travel time to work. Employed CNVR residents who walked, biked, or used ‘ some other mode’ of transportation (motorcycle or taxi) had the shortest average commute of just 17.9 minutes 3 . Persons who walk or bike to work often live near their place of employment. Residents who drove alone averaged a 24.9 minute commute, while residents who carpooled had an average commute of 26.9 minutes. 3 Finally, residents using public transit had the longest average commute (42.2 minutes ).3 The long commutes that many public transit users face can be partially explained by the additional time it takes to walk to or from the transit stop, time spent waiting for a t ransit vehicle to arrive, and transfer time . 1 U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census Transportation Planning Package Profile: Census 2000 and 2006-2010 ACS 2 U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey 2006-2010, 5-Year Estimates, B08012 3 U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey 2006-2010, 5-Year Estimates, C08136. No data was available for Beacon Falls, Middlebury, or Prospect 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% CWRCT Waterbury Wolcott Cheshire Prospect Naugatuck Beacon  Falls Oxford Middlebury Southbury Woodbury Bethlehem Watertown Thomaston Data  based on  block group geography. Source:  U.S. Bureau  of the  Census,  American  Community Survey,  5‐Ye a r   Estimates,  2006‐2010 B25045 Figure  III ‐A1.      CNVR  Households  Without  Access to  a  Vehicle,  by  Block  Group:  2006 ‐2010 Ta b l e  III ‐A1.   Availability  of  Ve h i cl e s  in the  CNVR,  by  Municipality:  2000 ‐2010 Households  with no  Access to  Veh icles  2006 ‐2010 Source:   U.S.  Bureau  of the  Census,  Census 2000;  ACS, 5 ‐Ye a r  Estimates,  2006‐2010.  B25045                0510 Miles ¯ C on n e ct ic u t C N V R W at er bu ry R em a i n d er o f R eg io n Percent  of  Households Without  Access  to a  Vehic le To w n s Block Groups Up  to  5% 5%  ‐ 9.9% 10%  ‐ 14.9% 15% ‐ 24.9% 25% or  More Geographic  A re a 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 CN V R 108, 561 103, 255 10, 377 11, 072 9. 6% 10. 7% ‐6. 3% Wate rbury 43, 689 42, 622 7, 858 8, 294 18. 0% 19. 5% ‐5. 3% Remainder  of   Region 64, 872 60, 633 2, 519 2, 778 3. 9% 4. 6% ‐9. 3% Beacon  F al l s 2, 278 2, 032 88 59 3. 9% 2. 9% 49. 2% Be thl e he m 1, 485 1, 246 28 38 1. 9% 3. 0% ‐26.3% Che s hi re 9, 214 9, 349 317 391 3. 4% 4. 2% ‐18.9% Midddlebury 2,666 2,398 54 61 2.0% 2.5% ‐11.5% N augatuck 12, 369 11, 829 588 760 4. 8% 6. 4% ‐22.6% Ox f ord 4, 250 3, 343 51 46 1. 2% 1. 4% 10. 9% P rospe ct 3, 300 3, 020 136 112 4. 1% 3. 7% 21. 4% Southbury 7,423 7,225 426 440 5.7% 6.1% ‐3. 2% Thomaston 3, 214 2, 916 60 138 1. 9% 4. 7% ‐56.5% Wate rtow n 8, 528 8, 046 368 359 4. 3% 4. 5% 2. 5% Wol cott 5, 929 5, 514 173 252 2. 9% 4. 6% ‐31.3% Woodbury 4,216 3,715 230 122 5.5% 3.3% 88.5% Conn e cti cut 1, 359, 218 1, 301, 670 116, 802 124, 626 8. 6% 9. 6% ‐6. 3% Percent Change 2000 ‐2010 House hol ds Number Percent  of  Total Households  without  Access  to  a  Vehicle Table III-B1. Means of Travel to Work of Employed CNVR Residents, by Municipality: 2006-2010 Geographic Area Total Drove Alone Carpooled Public Transit Walk, Bike, Other Work From Home CNVR 132,856112,891 10,3092,5212,9434,192 Waterbury 45,37536,369 4,6961,953 1,719 638Remainder of Region 87,481 76,522 5,613 5681,224 3,554 Beacon Falls 3,0762,839 6933 36 99 Bethlehem 1,9121,617 113 053 129 Cheshire 13,43511,760 743160 118 654 Middlebury 3,4993,156 1512054 118 Naugatuck 16,51414,427 1,532 119168 268 Oxford 6,4915,530 5023567 357 Prospect 5,0474,325 3671368 274 Southbury 7,5206,572 4124688 402 Thomaston 4,1813,681 289 056 155 Watertown 11,80110,075 75640350 580 Wolcott 8,6937,921 4645344 211 Woodbury 5,3124,619 21549122 307 Connecticut 1,726,0961,364,621 143,67976,30573,42068,071 CNVR 100.0.0%7.8%1.9% 2.2%3.2% Waterbury 100.0.2.3% 4.3%3.8%1.4% Remainder of Region 100.0% 87.5%6.4%0.6% 1.4%4.1% Beacon Falls 100.0.3%2.2%1.1% 1.2%3.2% Bethlehem 100.0.6%5.9%0.0% 2.8%6.7% Cheshire 100.0.5%5.5%1.2% 0.9%4.9% Middlebury 100.0.2%4.3%0.6% 1.5%3.4% Naugatuck 100.0.4%9.3%0.7% 1.0%1.6% Oxford 100.0.2%7.7%0.5% 1.0%5.5% Prospect 100.0.7%7.3%0.3% 1.3%5.4% Southbury 100.0.4%5.5%0.6% 1.2%5.3% Thomaston 100.0.0%6.9%0.0% 1.3%3.7% Watertown 100.0.4%6.4%0.3% 3.0%4.9% Wolcott 100.0.1%5.3%0.6% 0.5%2.4% Woodbury 100.0.0%4.0%0.9% 2.3%5.8% Connecticut 100.0.1%8.3%4.4% 4.3%3.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates: B08006 Number of Workers Percent Distribution Table III-B2. Means of Travel to Work of Employed CNVR Residents, by Municipality: 2000 Geographic Area Total Drove Alone Carpooled Public Transit Walk, Bike, Other Work From Home CNVR 126,330105,789 12,5242,0872,9342,996 Waterbury 44,25634,286 6,1321,609 1,627 602Remainder of Region 82,074 71,503 6,392 4781,307 2,394 Beacon Falls 2,8332,538 166143382 Bethlehem 1,8591,539 1672224107 Cheshire 13,15211,621 735107 156533 Middlebury 3,2412,760 2852257117 Naugatuck 15,26313,385 1,387 78243 170 Oxford 5,3904,654 430 791208 Prospect 4,5243,969 3871434120 Southbury 7,8546,444 80575164 366 Thomaston 4,0483,582 256289092 Watertown 11,1209,709 92383185 220 Wolcott 7,8207,009 5591293147 Woodbury 4,9704,293 29216137 232 Connecticut 1,623,7311,309,055 152,28063,47948,32250,595 CNVR 100.0.7%9.9%1.7% 2.3%2.4% Waterbury 100.0.5.9% 3.6%3.7%1.4% Remainder of Region 100.0% 87.1%7.8%0.6% 1.6%2.9% Beacon Falls 100.0.6% 5.9%0.5% 1.2%2.9% Bethlehem 100.0.8% 9.0%1.2% 1.3%5.8% Cheshire 100.0.4% 5.6%0.8% 1.2%4.1% Middlebury 100.0.2% 8.8%0.7% 1.8%3.6% Naugatuck 100.0.7% 9.1%0.5% 1.6%1.1% Oxford 100.0.3% 8.0%0.1% 1.7%3.9% Prospect 100.0.7% 8.6%0.3% 0.8%2.7% Southbury 100.0.0% 10.2% 1.0%2.1%4.7% Thomaston 100.0.5% 6.3%0.7% 2.2%2.3% Watertown 100.0.3% 8.3%0.7% 1.7%2.0% Wolcott 100.0.6% 7.1%0.2% 1.2%1.9% Woodbury 100.0.4% 5.9%0.3% 2.8%4.7% Connecticut 100.0.6%9.4%3.9% 3.0%3.1% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Percent Distribution Number of Workers Waterbury Wolcott Cheshire Prospect Naugatuck Beacon Falls Oxford Middlebury Southbury Woodbury Bethlehem Watertown Thomaston Data  based  on block  group geography. Source:   U.S. Bureau  of the  Census,  American  Community Survey,  Five Ye a r  Estimates,  2006‐ 2010: B08006 Figure  III ‐B1.     Percent  of  Workers  who  Drove  Alone  to  Work,  by  Block  Group:  2006 ‐2010 Towns Block Groups Less than 50% 50% – 69.9% 70% – 79.9% 80% – 89.9% 90% or More 0510 Miles ¯ Percent  of  Workers  who  Drove  Alone  to  Work Waterbury Wolcott Cheshire Prospect Naugatuck Beacon Falls Oxford Middlebury Southbury Woodbury Bethlehem Watertown Thomaston Data  based on  census tract geography.  Does not include persons  who work  at  home. Source:  U.S. Census  Bureau,  American  Community Survey,  5‐Ye a r  Estimates:  2006‐2010,  B08013 Figure  III‐C1.     Average  Trav e l  Time  to  Work  for  CNVR  Residents,  by  Census  Tra c t :  2006 ‐2010 Average  Trave l  Time  to Wo r k:  2006 ‐2010 Towns Census Tracts Less than 20.0 20.0 – 22.9 23.0 – 25.9 26.0 – 28.9 29.0 or More 0510 Miles ¯ Source:   U.S. Bureau  of the  Census,  Census Transportation  Planning Package:  CTTP 2000.                 American  Community  Survey, 5‐Ye a r  Estimates:  2006‐2010, B08013 Geographic  A re a 2010 2000 Mi n u te s P e rce nt CN V R 25. 3 24. 3 1. 0 4. 2% Wate rbury 23.3 21.8 1. 5 6.8% Re mai nde r  of  Re gi on 26. 4 25. 6 0. 8 3. 1% Be acon  Fal l s 27.9 28.0 ‐0.1 ‐0.4% Be thl e he m 27.8 29.9 ‐2.1 ‐7.2% Ch e s hi re 26. 8 24. 9 1. 9 7. 4% Middlebury 27.1 23.8 3.3 13.7% N augatuck 27.2 26.8 0. 4 1.6% Ox f ord 31. 4 28. 9 2. 5 8. 7% P ros pe ct 23. 0 24. 8 ‐1.8 ‐7.1% Southbury 28.3 27.6 0. 7 2.6% Thomaston 23.1 21.9 1. 2 5.5% Wate rtow n 22.2 24.5 ‐2.3 ‐9.3% Wol cott 24.6 23.3 1. 3 5.5% Wood b ury 30. 4 26. 6 3. 8 14. 2% Conne cti cut 24.6 24.4 0. 2 0.8% Average  Trave l  Ti me Change  2000‐ 2010 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 CWRCT C on n e ct ic u t C N V R W a ter bu ry R em ain d e r o f  R eg i o n Ta b l e  III ‐C1.        Average  Trav e l  Time  to  Work  for  CNVR  Residents,  by Municipality:  2000 ‐2010 Average  Trave l  Time (Minutes) D. Journey-to -Work This section presents 2000 and 2010 data on place of work for CNVR residents (Table III-D1 and Figure III- D3 ) and place of residen ce for CNVR employees (Table III-D2 and Figure III-D4 ). Regional commuting patterns can be seen in Figure III-D1 and Figure III-D2. Table III-D1 and Table III-D2 present data on both a town and regional level. The employment numbers in this section come from the U.S. Census Bureau’s LEHD dataset and may not match employment numbers reported by the Connecticut Department of Labor or the American Community Survey . Regional Trends In 2010, 95,8 83 individuals worked in the region and 128,652 employed individuals liv ed in the region, — a net export of 32, 769 workers. This gap has increased since 2000 when 100,697 individuals work ed in the region and 126,330 employed individuals liv ed in the region — a net export of 25, 633 work ers. While the number of employed individuals living in the CNVR increased by 1.8% from 2000 to 2010, the labor force has increased at an even faster rate (8.3%). 4 This has resulted in an unemployment rate (10.3%) higher than the state (8.8%) and national averages (8.9%). 4, 5 Declining employment opportunities in the region have resulted in a record number of CNVR residents working outside of the region. CNVR Residents – Where do they Work? In 2010, the CNVR had 128,652 employed residents, compared to 126,330 in 2000, an increase of 1.8%. In 2010, only 53,581 (41.6%) of CNVR residents worked in the region, compared to 69,597 (55.1%) in 2000. This marks the first time that more than half of CNVR residents worked outside the region. Waterbury, the most popular destination within the region, was the workplace for 24,040 (18.7%) CNVR residents in 2010. This represents a decrease of 19.8% from 2000, when 29,963 (23.7%) CNVR residents worked in the city. Other major workplace destinations for CNVR residents in the region were Cheshire (4.3%), Watertown (3.8%), and Naugatuck (3.5%). Outside of the CNVR, the most common workplace destinations were the South Central Region (13.4%) and the Capitol Region (10.1%). The number of CNVR residents working in the Capitol Region has more than doubled since 2000. Other regions that experienced large increases from 2000 to 2010 were Southwestern Connecticut (75.6%), Central Connecticut (46.1%), and Greater Bridgeport (37.8%). The Litchfield Hills Region (-11.4%) and the South Central Region (-4.7%) both experienced declines from 2000 to 2010. 4 Connecticut Department of Labor, Office of Research, Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS), 2011 LAUS Monthly Data with Annual Averages-Historic Data by Town. http://www1.ctdol.state.ct.us/lmi/LAUS/laustown.asp 5 U.S Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2011 Annual Average Data Regions and municipalities, which were the workplace destination of 4% or more of CNVR residents in 2010, are listed below:  Central Naugatuck Valley Region — 41.6%  Waterbury — 18.7%  Cheshire — 4.3%  South Central Region (Greater New Haven-Meriden area) — 13.4%  Capitol Region (Greater Hartford area) — 10.1%  Housatonic Valley Region (Greater Danbury area) — 5.7%  Central Connecticut (Greater Bristol-Southington area) — 5.7%  Greater Bridgeport Region — 5.5%  Out of State — 5.1% In 2010, 5.1% of CNVR residents worked out of state, compared to just 2.1% in 2000. The most common out of state workplace destination was Manhattan, where 1.6% of employed CNVR residents worked. CNVR Employees – Where do they Live? In 2010, there were 95,8 83 persons working in the CNVR, compared to 100,697 in 2000, a decrease of 4,814, or 4.9%. In 2010, 53,573, or 55.9%, of CNVR employees also lived in the region. This was a decrease from 2000 when 69,597, or 69.1% lived in the region. Waterbury was the place of residence of 21,769 (22.7%) of all CNVR employees. However, this number has declined by 24.3% since 2000, when 28,746 (28.5%) of CNVR employees resided in Waterbury. Watertown (6.3%), Naugatuck (6.2%), and Wolcott (4.0%) were also major sources of CNVR employees. CNVR employees are increasingly living outside of the region. In 2010, 42,234, or 44.1% of all CNVR employees lived outside of the region. This is an increase from 2000, when only 31,100, or 31.9%, of employees lived outside the region. The South Central Region (9.3%), Central Connecticut Region (7.8%), and Capitol Region (5.9%) were the most frequent places of residence outside of the CNVR. The number o f CNVR employees living in the Capitol Region increased 154.3% from 2000 to 2010. The Housatonic Valley (39.9%) and the Central Connecticut (33.8%) regions also experienced significant gains. From 2000 to 2010 the South Central (-15.8%) and Valley (-3.0%) regions both saw declines in number of persons working in the CNVR. Regions and municipalities that were the place of residence of 4% or more of CNVR employees in 2010, are listed below:  Central Naugatuck Valley Region — 55.9%  Waterbury — 22.7%  Watertown — 6.3%  Naugatuck — 6.2%  Wolcott — 4.0%  South Central Region (Greater New Haven-Meriden area) — 9.3%  Central Connecticut (Greater Bristol-Southington area) — 7.8%  Capitol Region (Greater Hartford area) — 5.9%  Litchfield Hills Region (Greater Torrington area) — 4.4%  Other Regions — 7.9% In 2010, 3.3% of CNVR employees lived out of state, compared to just 2.1% in 2000. Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: CNVR Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 53,58141.6% 69,59755.1% -16,016-23.0% Beacon Falls 1,0440.8% 7480.6% 29639.6% Bethlehem 4240.3% 5200.4% -96-18.5% Cheshire 5,5894.3% 6,8285.4% -1,239-18.1% Middlebury 2,1931.7% 2,2861.8% -93-4.1% Naugatuck 4,5353.5% 5,9054.7% -1,370-23.2% Oxford 1,3961.1% 1,3061.0% 906.9% Prospect 1,3631.1% 1,5661.2% -203-13.0% Southbury 3,3272.6% 6,1204.8% -2,793-45.6% Thomaston 1,4391.1% 1,9321.5% -493-25.5% Waterbury 24,04018.7% 29,96323.7% -5,923-19.8% Watertown 4,8943.8% 7,4255.9% -2,531-34.1% Wolcott 1,9151.5% 2,8582.3% -943-33.0% Woodbury 1,4221.1% 2,1401.7% -718-33.6% Capitol Region 13,01010.1% 6,2765.0% 6,734107.3% Hartford 3,9663.1% 2,3591.9% 1,60768.1% Other 9,0447.0% 3,9173.1% 5,127130.9% Central Connecticut Region 7,3515.7% 5,0304.0% 2,32146.1% Bristol 2,1311.7% 1,4461.1% 68547.4% Southington 2,0111.6% 1,3511.1% 66048.9% Other 3,2332.5% 2,2331.8% 1,00044.8% Greater Bridgeport Region 7,1185.5% 5,1654.1% 1,95337.8% Bridgeport 2,2361.7% 1,7681.4% 46826.5% Stratford 2,5672.0% 1,5291.2% 1,03867.9% Other 2,4301.9% 1,8681.5% 56230.1% Housatonic Valley Region 7,3145.7% 7,1035.6% 2113.0% Danbury 4,0683.2% 3,2722.6% 79624.3% Newtown 1,2170.9% 1,3271.1% -110-8.3% Other 2,0431.6% 2,5042.0% -461-18.4% Litchfield Hills Region 2,6282.0% 2,9652.3% -337-11.4% Torrington 2,0111.6% 1,7681.4% 24313.7% Other 6170.5% 1,1970.9% -580-48.5% South Central Region 17,20213.4% 18,04214.3% -840-4.7% Hamden 1,7051.3% 1,7301.4% -25-1.4% Meriden 2,1421.7% 2,1151.7% 271.3% Milford 1,8191.4% 1,9291.5% -110-5.7% New Haven 4,2943.3% 4,6313.7% -337-7.3% North Haven 1,6641.3% 1,4331.1% 23116.1% Wallingford 2,6012.0% 2,3551.9% 24610.4% West Haven 7700.6% 1,1350.9% -365-32.2% Other 2,3561.8% 2,7142.1% -358-13.2% 2010 2000 2000-2010 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: CNVR (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 4,9513.8% 2,8192.2% 2,13275.6% Stamford 1,2331.0% 1,0550.8% 17816.9% Other 3,7182.9% 1,7641.4% 1,954110.8% Valley Region 4,9223.8% 4,6093.6% 3136.8% Seymour 1,1140.9% 1,0460.8% 686.5% Shelton 2,3511.8% 2,1251.7% 22610.6% Other 1,4571.1% 1,4381.1% 191.3% Remainder of State 4,0103.1% 2,6862.1% 1,32449.3% Out of State 6,5655.1% 2,0381.6% 4,527222.1% Total Trips 128,652100.0% 126,330100.0% 2,3221.8% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2010 2000 2000 – 2010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: CNVR Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 53,57955.9% 69,59769.1% -16,018-23.0% Beacon Falls 6770.7% 8060.8% -129-16.0% Bethlehem 8300.9% 1,0941.1% -264-24.1% Cheshire 3,4693.6% 4,6214.6% -1,152-24.9% Middlebury 1,6351.7% 1,9451.9% -310-15.9% Naugatuck 5,9436.2% 7,8967.8% -1,953-24.7% Oxford 1,1871.2% 1,5441.5% -357-23.1% Prospect 2,0452.1% 2,4772.5% -432-17.4% Southbury 2,4682.6% 3,6073.6% -1,139-31.6% Thomaston 1,8201.9% 2,2882.3% -468-20.5% Waterbury 21,76922.7% 28,74628.5% -6,977-24.3% Watertown 6,0536.3% 7,3507.3% -1,297-17.6% Wolcott 3,8434.0% 4,5044.5% -661-14.7% Woodbury 1,8401.9% 2,7192.7% -879-32.3% Central Connecticut Region 7,4607.8% 5,5775.5% 1,88333.8% Bristol 2,0302.1% 1,4571.4% 57339.3% Plymouth 1,3061.4% 1,0341.0% 27226.3% Southington 2,3422.4% 2,0032.0% 33916.9% Other 1,7711.8% 1,0831.1% 68863.5% Housatonic Valley Region 3,4403.6% 2,4592.4% 98139.9% Danbury 1,0561.1% 7440.7% 31241.9% Other 2,3842.5% 1,7151.7% 66939.0% Litchfield Hills Region 4,2004.4% 3,5963.6% 60416.8% Litchfield 7430.8% 7200.7% 233.2% Torrington 1,8822.0% 1,4951.5% 38725.9% Other 1,5751.6% 1,3811.4% 19414.0% South Central Region 8,9559.3% 10,63910.6% -1,684-15.8% Hamden 1,0581.1% 1,2421.2% -184-14.8% Meriden 2,0662.2% 1,9371.9% 1296.7% Milford 5480.6% 6010.6% -53-8.8% New Haven 9941.0% 2,0982.1% -1,104-52.6% Wallingford 1,3141.4% 1,2961.3% 181.4% West Haven 6350.7% 8390.8% -204-24.3% Other 2,3402.4% 2,6262.6% -286-10.9% Valley Region 1,9002.0% 1,9591.9% -59-3.0% Seymour 7020.7% 7550.7% -53-7.0% Other 1,1981.2% 1,1881.2% 100.8% Capitol Region 5,6925.9% 2,2382.2% 3,454154.3% Remainder of State 7,5357.9% 3,4143.4% 4,121120.7% Out of State 3,1223.3% 1,2181.2% 1,904156.3% Total Trips 95,883100.0% 100,697100.0% -4,814-4.8% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2010 2000 2000 – 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT Figure III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, by Region: 2010 ¯ 01020Miles Out of State 13% 42% 10% 5% 6% 6% 4% 4% 2% 5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Journey-to-Work CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT Figure III-D2. Place of Residenc e of CNVR Employees, by Region: 2010 Out of State 3% 01020Miles ¯ Up to 2% 2% – 4.9% 5% – 9.9% 10% – 14.9% 15% or Higher Percent of CNVR Employees Up to 2% 2% – 4.9% 5% – 9.9% 10% – 14.9% 15% or Higher Percent of CNVR Residents 56% 6% 8% 9% 2% 3% 4% 4% Regions To w n s Regions To w n s CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of CNVR Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of CNVR Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Beacon Falls Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 67623.0% 80628.5% -130-16.1% Beacon Falls 1214.1% 1455.1% -24-16.6% Bethlehem 00.0% 00.0% 0— Cheshire 431.5% 331.2% 1030.3% Middlebury 180.6% 140.5% 428.6% Naugatuck 1013.4% 1495.3% -48-32.2% Oxford 521.8% 321.1% 2062.5% Prospect 381.3% 331.2% 515.2% Southbury 592.0% 1154.1% -56-48.7% Thomaston 80.3% 60.2% 233.3% Waterbury 1896.4% 2308.1% -41-17.8% Watertown 250.8% 210.7% 419.0% Wolcott 60.2% 200.7% -14-70.0% Woodbury 160.5% 80.3% 8100.0% Capitol Region 2418.2% 642.3% 177276.6% Hartford 712.4% 421.5% 2969.0% Other 1705.8% 220.8% 148672.7% Central Connecticut Region 1013.4% 260.9% 75288.5% Bristol 250.8% 50.2% 20400.0% Southington 270.9% 00.0% 27— Other 491.7% 210.7% 28133.3% Greater Bridgeport Region 35212.0% 45816.2% -106-23.1% Bridgeport 712.4% 1384.9% -67-48.6% Stratford 1655.6% 1194.2% 4638.7% Other 1163.9% 2017.1% -85-42.3% Housatonic Valley Region 1565.3% 1244.4% 3225.8% Danbury 722.4% 792.8% -7-8.9% Newtown 180.6% 110.4% 763.6% Other 662.2% 341.2% 3294.1% Litchfield Hills Region 341.2% 401.4% -6-15.0% Torrington 240.8% 271.0% -3-11.1% Other 100.3% 130.5% -3-23.1% South Central Region 60020.4% 53819.0% 6211.5% Hamden 541.8% 682.4% -14-20.6% Meriden 301.0% 361.3% -6-16.7% Milford 1133.8% 1063.7% 76.6% New Haven 1535.2% 1234.3% 3024.4% North Haven 43 1.5% 130.5% 30230.8% Wallingford 471.6% 331.2% 1442.4% West Haven 331.1% 692.4% -36-52.2% Other 1274.3% 903.2% 3741.1% 2000 – 20102010 2000 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Beacon Falls (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 762.6% 15318.5% -77-50.3% Stamford 240.8% 7731.5% -53-68.8% Other 521.8% 7621.6% -24-31.6% Valley Region 50617.2% 55719.7% -51-9.2% Seymour 1675.7% 1449.9% 2316.0% Shelton 1966.7% 2459.8% -49-20.0% Other 1434.9% 1685.9% -25-14.9% Remainder of State 862.9% 435.5% 43100.0% Out of State 1153.9% 243.1% 91379.2% Total Trips 2,943100.0% 2,833100.0% 1103.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Beacon Falls Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 1,04367.4% 74870.5% 29539.4% Beacon Falls 1217.8% 14513.7% -24-16.6% Bethlehem 60.4% 00.0% 6— Cheshire 191.2% 161.5% 318.8% Middlebury 201.3% 363.4% -16-44.4% Naugatuck 925.9% 13712.9% -45-32.8% Oxford 523.4% 100.9% 42420.0% Prospect 825.3% 252.4% 57228.0% Southbury 191.2% 373.5% -18-48.6% Thomaston 130.8% 70.7% 685.7% Waterbury 55635.9% 30829.0% 24880.5% Watertown 251.6% 201.9% 525.0% Wolcott 191.2% 70.7% 12171.4% Woodbury 191.2% 00.0% 19— Central Connecticut Region 392.5% 242.3% 1562.5% Bristol 60.4% 60.6% 00.0% Plymouth 40.3% 100.9% -6-60.0% Southington 181.2% 80.8% 10125.0% Other 0.0% 00.0% 0— Housatonic Valley Region 171.1% 111.0% 654.5% Danbury 60.4% 00.0% 6— Other 110.7% 111.0% 00.0% Litchfield Hills Region 362.3% 373.5% -1-2.7% Litchfield 30.2% 50.5% -2-40.0% Torrington 251.6% 323.0% -7-21.9% Other 80.5% 00.0% 8— South Central Region 17211.1% 11911.2% 5344.5% Hamden 191.2% 232.2% -4-17.4% Meriden 161.0% 80.8% 8100.0% Milford 130.8% 151.4% -2-13.3% New Haven 573.7% 80.8% 49612.5% Wallingford 50.3% 50.5% 00.0% West Haven 140.9% 161.5% -2-12.5% Other 483.1% 444.1% 49.1% Valley Region 704.5% 827.7% -12-14.6% Seymour 382.5% 424.0% -4-9.5% Other 322.1% 403.8% -8-20.0% Capitol Region 251.6% 12 1.1% 13108.3% Remainder of State 815.2% 60.6% 751250.0% Out of State 654.2% 222.1% 43195.5% Total Trips 1,548100.0% 1,061100.0% 48745.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2010 2000 2000 – 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Beacon Falls Empl oyees, by Municipality: 2010 Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Beacon Falls Employees Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Beacon Falls Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Beacon Falls Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Bethlehem Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 83048.6% 1,09458.8% -264-24.1% Beacon Falls 60.4% 00.0% 6— Bethlehem 17510.2% 29515.9% -120-40.7% Cheshire 130.8% 50.3% 8160.0% Middlebury 321.9% 321.7% 00.0% Naugatuck 362.1% 432.3% -7-16.3% Oxford 201.2% 60.3% 14233.3% Prospect 40.2% 90.5% -5-55.6% Southbury 673.9% 19410.4% -127-65.5% Thomaston 150.9% 432.3% -28-65.1% Waterbury 19711.5% 23712.7% -40-16.9% Watertown 1307.6% 1156.2% 1513.0% Wolcott 60.4% 140.8% -8-57.1% Woodbury 1297.5% 1015.4% 2827.7% Capitol Region 19011.1% 653.5% 125192.3% Hartford 633.7% 261.4% 37142.3% Other 1277.4% 392.1% 88225.6% Central Connecticut Region 633.7% 221.2% 41186.4% Bristol 271.6% 181.0% 950.0% Southington 13 0.8% 40.2% 9225.0% Other 231.3% 00.0% 23— Greater Bridgeport Region 301.8% 442.4% -14-31.8% Bridgeport 100.6% 140.8% -4-28.6% Stratford 100.6% 181.0% -8-44.4% Other 100.6% 120.6% -2-16.7% Housatonic Valley Region 1478.6% 1266.8% 2116.7% Danbury 663.9% 432.3% 2353.5% Newtown 291.7% 211.1% 838.1% Other 523.0% 623.3% -10-16.1% Litchfield Hills Region 1297.5% 1467.9% -17-11.6% Torrington 563.3% 542.9% 23.7% Other 734.3% 924.9% -19-20.7% South Central Region 724.2% 824.4% -10-12.2% Hamden 80.5% 00.0% 8— Meriden 50.3% 181.0% -13-72.2% Milford 100.6% 150.8% -5-33.3% New Haven 140.8% 231.2% -9-39.1% North Haven 90.5% 00.0% 9— Wallingford 130.8% 211.1% -8-38.1% West Haven 30.2% 50.3% -2-40.0% Other 100.6% 00.0% 10— 2000 – 20102010 2000 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Bethlehem (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 372.2% 502.7% -13-26.0% Stamford 80.5% 201.1% -12-60.0% Other 291.7% 301.6% -1-3.3% Valley Region 372.2% 201.1% 1785.0% Seymour 120.7% 50.3% 7140.0% Shelton 130.8% 90.5% 444.4% Other 120.7% 60.3% 6100.0% Remainder of State 885.1% 1317.0% -43-32.8% Out of State 865.0% 794.2% 78.9% Total Trips 1,709100.0% 1,859100.0% -150-8.1% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Bethlehem Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 42564.2% 52076.1% -95-18.3% Beacon Falls 10.2% 00.0% 1— Bethlehem 17526.4% 29543.2% -120-40.7% Cheshire 30.5% 00.0% 3— Middlebury 132.0% 00.0% 13— Naugatuck 162.4% 152.2% 16.7% Oxford 81.2% 202.9% -12-60.0% Prospect 40.6% 40.6% 00.0% Southbury 101.5% 00.0% 10— Thomaston 91.4% 294.2% -20-69.0% Waterbury 477.1% 6810.0% -21-30.9% Watertown 649.7% 345.0% 3088.2% Wolcott 50.8% 00.0% 5— Woodbury 7010.6% 558.1% 1527.3% Central Connecticut Region 233.5% 00.0% 23— Bristol 40.6% 00.0% 4— Plymouth 101.5% 00.0% 10— Southington 50.8% 00.0% 5— Other 4 0.6% 00.0% 4— Housatonic Valley Region 355.3% 537.8% -18-34.0% Danbury 101.5% 50.7% 5100.0% Other 253.8% 487.0% -23-47.9% Litchfield Hills Region 9814.8% 669.7% 3248.5% Litchfield 172.6% 111.6% 654.5% Torrington 416.2% 466.7% -5-10.9% Other 406.0% 91.3% 31344.4% South Central Region 263.9% 00.0% 26— Hamden 40.6% 00.0% 4— Meriden 81.2% 00.0% 8— Milford 10.2% 00.0% 1— New Haven 20.3% 00.0% 2— Wallingford 10.2% 00.0% 1— West Haven 00.0% 00.0% 0— Other 101.5% 00.0% 10— Valley Region 10.2% 00.0% 1— Seymour 10.2% 00.0% 1— Other 00.0% 00.0% 0— Capitol Region 6 0.9% 152.2% -9-60.0% Remainder of State 263.9% 233.4% 313.0% Out of State 223.3% 60.9% 16266.7% Total Trips 662100.0% 683100.0% -21-3.1% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Bethlehem Employees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Bethlehem Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of Bethlehem Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Bethlehem Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Cheshire Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 3,46924.2% 4,62135.1% -1,152-24.9% Beacon Falls 190.1% 160.1% 318.8% Bethlehem 30.0% 00.0% 3— Cheshire 2,30516.1% 3,16224.0% -857-27.1% Middlebury 630.4% 440.3% 1943.2% Naugatuck 870.6% 560.4% 3155.4% Oxford 150.1% 60.0% 9150.0% Prospect 460.3% 610.5% -15-24.6% Southbury 740.5% 490.4% 2551.0% Thomaston 160.1% 280.2% -12-42.9% Waterbury 7135.0% 1,1058.4% -392-35.5% Watertown 710.5% 500.4% 2142.0% Wolcott 410.3% 290.2% 1241.4% Woodbury 160.1% 150.1% 16.7% Capitol Region 1,67311.7% 1,2619.6% 41232.7% Hartford 4943.4% 4613.5% 337.2% Other 1,1798.2% 8006.1% 37947.4% Central Connecticut Region 1,0507.3% 6755.1% 37555.6% Bristol 2191.5% 910.7% 128140.7% Southington 351 2.4% 2572.0% 9436.6% Other 4803.3% 3272.5% 15346.8% Greater Bridgeport Region 8756.1% 3572.7% 518145.1% Bridgeport 3812.7% 1030.8% 278269.9% Stratford 2501.7% 1140.9% 136119.3% Other 2441.7% 1401.1% 10474.3% Housatonic Valley Region 3582.5% 1751.3% 183104.6% Danbury 1511.1% 470.4% 104221.3% Newtown 280.2% 390.3% -11-28.2% Other 1791.2% 890.7% 90101.1% Litchfield Hills Region 1110.8% 350.3% 76217.1% Torrington 750.5% 160.1% 59368.8% Other 360.3% 190.1% 1789.5% South Central Region 4,73633.0% 4,88537.1% -149-3.1% Hamden 7084.9% 7505.7% -42-5.6% Meriden 4613.2% 5794.4% -118-20.4% Milford 2351.6% 1971.5% 3819.3% New Haven 1,51410.5% 1,34310.2% 17112.7% North Haven 3862.7% 3552.7% 318.7% Wallingford 8525.9% 9667.3% -114-11.8% West Haven 1741.2% 2201.7% -46-20.9% Other 5553.9% 4753.6% 8016.8% 2000 – 20102010 2000 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Cheshire (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 5443.8% 1961.5% 348177.6% Stamford 1741.2% 750.6% 99132.0% Other 3702.6% 1210.9% 249205.8% Valley Region 2892.0% 2902.2% -1-0.3% Seymour 210.1% 720.5% -51-70.8% Shelton 1921.3% 1401.1% 5237.1% Other 760.5% 780.6% -2-2.6% Remainder of State 5694.0% 4243.2% 14534.2% Out of State 6834.8% 2331.8% 450193.1% Total Trips 14,357100.0% 13,152100.0% 1,2059.2% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Cheshire Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 5,58938.9% 6,82849.4% -1,239-18.1% Beacon Falls 430.3% 330.2% 1030.3% Bethlehem 130.1% 50.0% 8160.0% Cheshire 2,30516.1% 3,16222.9% -857-27.1% Middlebury 430.3% 650.5% -22-33.8% Naugatuck 4162.9% 4483.2% -32-7.1% Oxford 260.2% 600.4% -34-56.7% Prospect 2191.5% 2852.1% -66-23.2% Southbury 530.4% 620.4% -9-14.5% Thomaston 560.4% 1010.7% -45-44.6% Waterbury 1,69511.8% 1,79713.0% -102-5.7% Watertown 2721.9% 3752.7% -103-27.5% Wolcott 4012.8% 4012.9% 00.0% Woodbury 470.3% 340.2% 1338.2% Central Connecticut Region 2,03514.2% 1,81013.1% 22512.4% Bristol 4283.0% 4563.3% -28-6.1% Plymouth 1330.9% 900.7% 4347.8% Southington 9026.3% 8516.2% 516.0% Other 572 4.0% 4133.0% 15938.5% Housatonic Valley Region 1210.8% 680.5% 5377.9% Danbury 290.2% 170.1% 1270.6% Other 920.6% 510.4% 4180.4% Litchfield Hills Region 2441.7% 1761.3% 6838.6% Litchfield 240.2% 390.3% -15-38.5% Torrington 1310.9% 520.4% 79151.9% Other 890.6% 850.6% 44.7% South Central Region 2,91920.3% 3,28423.7% -365-11.1% Hamden 2992.1% 4883.5% -189-38.7% Meriden 8796.1% 8316.0% 485.8% Milford 1150.8% 1060.8% 98.5% New Haven 2231.6% 3892.8% -166-42.7% Wallingford 6284.4% 6965.0% -68-9.8% West Haven 1150.8% 1931.4% -78-40.4% Other 6604.6% 5814.2% 7913.6% Valley Region 1661.2% 1260.9% 4031.7% Seymour 520.4% 360.3% 1644.4% Other 1140.8% 900.7% 2426.7% Capitol Region 1,549 10.8% 6774.9% 872128.8% Remainder of State 1,2848.9% 7765.6% 50865.5% Out of State 4443.1% 860.6% 358416.3% Total Trips 14,351100.0% 13,831100.0% 5203.8% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2010 2000 2000 – 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Cheshire Employees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Cheshire Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of Cheshire Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles 0.1% – 0.9% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% – 35.9% Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Cheshire Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Middlebury Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 1,63846.2% 1,94560.0% -307-15.8% Beacon Falls 210.6% 361.1% -15-41.7% Bethlehem 130.4% 00.0% 13— Cheshire 431.2% 652.0% -22-33.8% Middlebury 36810.4% 44113.6% -73-16.6% Naugatuck 1153.2% 1815.6% -66-36.5% Oxford 411.2% 341.0% 720.6% Prospect 361.0% 80.2% 28350.0% Southbury 1644.6% 2076.4% -43-20.8% Thomaston 80.2% 110.3% -3-27.3% Waterbury 65318.4% 74723.0% -94-12.6% Watertown 952.7% 1213.7% -26-21.5% Wolcott 200.6% 70.2% 13185.7% Woodbury 611.7% 872.7% -26-29.9% Capitol Region 39811.2% 1735.3% 225130.1% Hartford 992.8% 662.0% 3350.0% Other 2998.4% 1073.3% 192179.4% Central Connecticut Region 1494.2% 1023.1% 4746.1% Bristol 351.0% 180.6% 1794.4% Southington 39 1.1% 662.0% -27-40.9% Other 752.1% 180.6% 57316.7% Greater Bridgeport Region 2015.7% 1103.4% 9182.7% Bridgeport 742.1% 351.1% 39111.4% Stratford 561.6% 451.4% 1124.4% Other 712.0% 300.9% 41136.7% Housatonic Valley Region 3429.6% 2186.7% 12456.9% Danbury 1454.1% 842.6% 6172.6% Newtown 581.6% 692.1% -11-15.9% Other 1393.9% 652.0% 74113.8% Litchfield Hills Region 732.1% 792.4% -6-7.6% Torrington 541.5% 491.5% 510.2% Other 190.5% 300.9% -11-36.7% South Central Region 3369.5% 3069.4% 309.8% Hamden 300.8% 160.5% 1487.5% Meriden 361.0% 180.6% 18100.0% Milford 421.2% 321.0% 1031.3% New Haven 922.6% 702.2% 2231.4% North Haven 180.5% 441.4% -26-59.1% Wallingford 501.4% 411.3% 922.0% West Haven 140.4% 401.2% -26-65.0% Other 54 1.5% 451.4% 920.0% 2000 – 20102010 2000 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Middlebury (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 1273.6% 1013.1% 2625.7% Stamford 401.1% 411.3% -1-2.4% Other 872.5% 601.9% 2745.0% Valley Region 1022.9% 621.9% 4064.5% Seymour 180.5% 130.4% 538.5% Shelton 551.6% 210.6% 34161.9% Other 290.8% 280.9% 13.6% Remainder of State 1053.0% 912.8% 1415.4% Out of State 752.1% 541.7% 2138.9% Total Trips 3,546100.0% 3,241100.0% 3059.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Middlebury Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 2,19363.4% 2,28667.8% -93-4.1% Beacon Falls 180.5% 140.4% 428.6% Bethlehem 320.9% 320.9% 00.0% Cheshire 631.8% 441.3% 1943.2% Middlebury 36810.6% 44113.1% -73-16.6% Naugatuck 2517.3% 3339.9% -82-24.6% Oxford 631.8% 471.4% 1634.0% Prospect 511.5% 722.1% -21-29.2% Southbury 3269.4% 2216.6% 10547.5% Thomaston 431.2% 180.5% 25138.9% Waterbury 49114.2% 57417.0% -83-14.5% Watertown 2788.0% 36710.9% -89-24.3% Wolcott 712.1% 591.7% 1220.3% Woodbury 1384.0% 641.9% 74115.6% Central Connecticut Region 1985.7% 1213.6% 7763.6% Bristol 561.6% 290.9% 2793.1% Plymouth 411.2% 70.2% 34485.7% Southington 601.7% 270.8% 33122.2% Other 41 1.2% 581.7% -17-29.3% Housatonic Valley Region 1674.8% 1715.1% -4-2.3% Danbury 511.5% 752.2% -24-32.0% Other 1163.4% 962.8% 2020.8% Litchfield Hills Region 1313.8% 1323.9% -1-0.8% Litchfield 341.0% 250.7% 936.0% Torrington 361.0% 361.1% 00.0% Other 611.8% 712.1% -10-14.1% South Central Region 1805.2% 37911.2% -199-52.5% Hamden 240.7% 431.3% -19-44.2% Meriden 320.9% 260.8% 623.1% Milford 140.4% 491.5% -35-71.4% New Haven 150.4% 892.6% -74-83.1% Wallingford 190.5% 270.8% -8-29.6% West Haven 90.3% 190.6% -10-52.6% Other 671.9% 1263.7% -59-46.8% Valley Region 842.4% 692.0% 1521.7% Seymour 351.0% 521.5% -17-32.7% Other 491.4% 170.5% 32188.2% Capitol Region 137 4.0% 531.6% 84158.5% Remainder of State 2677.7% 1103.3% 157142.7% Out of State 1002.9% 521.5% 4892.3% Total Trips 3,457100.0% 3,373100.0% 842.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2010 2000 2000 – 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Middlebury Employees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Middlebury Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of Middlebury Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Middlebury Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Naugatuck Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 5,94337.4% 7,89651.7% -1,953-24.7% Beacon Falls 920.6% 1370.9% -45-32.8% Bethlehem 160.1% 150.1% 1— Cheshire 4162.6% 4482.9% -32-7.1% Middlebury 2511.6% 3332.2% -82-24.6% Naugatuck 2,00112.6% 3,08420.2% -1,083-35.1% Oxford 1541.0% 1230.8% 3125.2% Prospect 1831.2% 2571.7% -74-28.8% Southbury 3372.1% 5243.4% -187-35.7% Thomaston 770.5% 560.4% 2137.5% Waterbury 1,88711.9% 2,16214.2% -275-12.7% Watertown 3602.3% 5083.3% -148-29.1% Wolcott 870.5% 1571.0% -70-44.6% Woodbury 820.5% 920.6% -10-10.9% Capitol Region 1,4679.2% 4402.9% 1,027233.4% Hartford 4893.1% 1821.2% 307168.7% Other 9786.2% 2581.7% 720279.1% Central Connecticut Region 6103.8% 3692.4% 24165.3% Bristol 1781.1% 890.6% 89100.0% Southington 1450.9% 990.6% 4646.5% Other 2871.8% 1811.2% 10658.6% Greater Bridgeport Region 1,3818.7% 1,2708.3% 1118.7% Bridgeport 3582.3% 4703.1% -112-23.8% Stratford 5953.7% 4262.8% 16939.7% Other 4282.7% 3742.5% 5414.4% Housatonic Valley Region 9916.2% 8945.9% 9710.9% Danbury 4733.0% 4002.6% 7318.3% Newtown 1270.8% 2231.5% -96-43.0% Other 3912.5% 2711.8% 12044.3% Litchfield Hills Region 2251.4% 2071.4% 188.7% Torrington 1581.0% 1090.7% 4945.0% Other 670.4% 980.6% -31-31.6% South Central Region 2,36814.9% 2,28315.0% 853.7% Hamden 1831.2% 1641.1% 1911.6% Meriden 2191.4% 1310.9% 8867.2% Milford 3842.4% 3062.0% 7825.5% New Haven 5483.4% 6574.3% -109-16.6% North Haven 2251.4% 2011.3% 2411.9% Wallingford 2581.6% 1781.2% 8044.9% West Haven 1350.8% 1701.1% -35-20.6% Other 416 2.6% 4763.1% -60-12.6% 2000 – 20102010 2000 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Naugatuck (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 6213.9% 5743.8% 478.2% Stamford 1951.2% 2141.4% -19-8.9% Other 4262.7% 3602.4% 6618.3% Valley Region 1,1347.1% 8065.3% 32840.7% Seymour 2411.5% 1440.9% 9767.4% Shelton 5463.4% 4332.8% 11326.1% Other 3472.2% 2291.5% 11851.5% Remainder of State 4322.7% 3192.1% 11335.4% Out of State 7144.5% 2051.3% 509248.3% Total Trips 15,886100.0% 15,263100.0% 6234.1% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Naugatuck Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 4,53560.1% 5,90575.2% -1,370-23.2% Beacon Falls 1011.3% 1491.9% -48-32.2% Bethlehem 360.5% 430.5% -7-16.3% Cheshire 871.2% 560.7% 3155.4% Middlebury 1151.5% 1812.3% -66-36.5% Naugatuck 2,00126.5% 3,08439.3% -1,083-35.1% Oxford 710.9% 530.7% 1834.0% Prospect 2162.9% 3134.0% -97-31.0% Southbury 861.1% 530.7% 3362.3% Thomaston 811.1% 710.9% 1014.1% Waterbury 1,19315.8% 1,44918.5% -256-17.7% Watertown 3034.0% 1792.3% 12469.3% Wolcott 1542.0% 1982.5% -44-22.2% Woodbury 911.2% 761.0% 1519.7% Central Connecticut Region 3694.9% 1712.2% 198115.8% Bristol 1111.5% 350.4% 76217.1% Plymouth 721.0% 210.3% 51242.9% Southington 981.3% 841.1% 1416.7% Other 88 1.2% 310.4% 57183.9% Housatonic Valley Region 2623.5% 841.1% 178211.9% Danbury 1041.4% 450.6% 59131.1% Other 1582.1% 390.5% 119305.1% Litchfield Hills Region 2673.5% 1842.3% 8345.1% Litchfield 430.6% 270.3% 1659.3% Torrington 1421.9% 690.9% 73105.8% Other 821.1% 881.1% -6-6.8% South Central Region 7009.3% 85710.9% -157-18.3% Hamden 821.1% 921.2% -10-10.9% Meriden 1141.5% 1001.3% 1414.0% Milford 490.6% 520.7% -3-5.8% New Haven 250.3% 1491.9% -124-83.2% Wallingford 660.9% 630.8% 34.8% West Haven 761.0% 1451.8% -69-47.6% Other 2883.8% 2563.3% 3212.5% Valley Region 2773.7% 2413.1% 3614.9% Seymour 791.0% 570.7% 2238.6% Other 1982.6% 1842.3% 147.6% Capitol Region 315 4.2% 1111.4% 204183.8% Remainder of State 5657.5% 2062.6% 359174.3% Out of State 2583.4% 891.1% 169189.9% Total Trips 7,548100.0% 7,848100.0% -300-3.8% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2010 2000 2000 – 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Naugatuck Employees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Naugatuck Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of Naugatuck Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Naugatuck Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Oxford Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 1,18720.7% 1,54428.6% -357-23.1% Beacon Falls 520.9% 100.2% 42420.0% Bethlehem 80.1% 200.4% -12-60.0% Cheshire 260.5% 601.1% -34-56.7% Middlebury 631.1% 470.9% 1634.0% Naugatuck 711.2% 531.0% 1834.0% Oxford 4337.5% 74913.9% -316-42.2% Prospect 70.1% 80.1% -1-12.5% Southbury 2123.7% 2514.7% -39-15.5% Thomaston 90.2% 180.3% -9-50.0% Waterbury 1963.4% 2053.8% -9-4.4% Watertown 591.0% 531.0% 611.3% Wolcott 50.1% 70.1% -2-28.6% Woodbury 460.8% 631.2% -17-27.0% Capitol Region 4537.9% 931.7% 360387.1% Hartford 1512.6% 320.6% 119371.9% Other 3025.3% 611.1% 241395.1% Central Connecticut Region 1372.4% 911.7% 4650.5% Bristol 390.7% 490.9% -10-20.4% Southington 240.4% 00.0% 24— Other 981.7% 420.8% 56133.3% Greater Bridgeport Region 79113.8% 94217.5% -151-16.0% Bridgeport 1132.0% 3075.7% -194-63.2% Stratford 3856.7% 3256.0% 6018.5% Other 2935.1% 3105.8% -17-5.5% Housatonic Valley Region 4978.7% 3686.8% 12935.1% Danbury 2574.5% 1613.0% 9659.6% Newtown 921.6% 841.6% 89.5% Other 1482.6% 1232.3% 2520.3% Litchfield Hills Region 661.2% 621.2% 46.5% Torrington 440.8% 430.8% 12.3% Other 220.4% 190.4% 315.8% South Central Region 1,09919.2% 84915.8% 25029.4% Hamden 581.0% 510.9% 713.7% Meriden 530.9% 621.2% -9-14.5% Milford 2514.4% 2053.8% 4622.4% New Haven 3025.3% 1773.3% 12570.6% North Haven 1011.8% 731.4% 2838.4% Wallingford 681.2% 140.3% 54385.7% West Haven 901.6% 931.7% -3-3.2% Other 176 3.1% 1743.2% 21.1% 2000 – 20102010 2000 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Oxford (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 2093.6% 2384.4% -29-12.2% Stamford 611.1% 921.7% -31-33.7% Other 1482.6% 1462.7% 21.4% Valley Region 94216.4% 1,08820.2% -146-13.4% Seymour 2304.0% 2494.6% -19-7.6% Shelton 4107.1% 4728.8% -62-13.1% Other 3025.3% 3676.8% -65-17.7% Remainder of State 1512.6% 390.7% 112287.2% Out of State 2053.6% 761.4% 129169.7% Total Trips 5,737100.0% 5,390100.0% 3476.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Oxford Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 1,39650.1% 1,30658.3% 906.9% Beacon Falls 521.9% 321.4% 2062.5% Bethlehem 200.7% 60.3% 14233.3% Cheshire 150.5% 60.3% 9150.0% Middlebury 411.5% 341.5% 720.6% Naugatuck 1545.5% 1235.5% 3125.2% Oxford 43315.6% 74933.4% -316-42.2% Prospect 351.3% 00.0% 35— Southbury 1676.0% 1275.7% 4031.5% Thomaston 200.7% 70.3% 13185.7% Waterbury 2769.9% 1486.6% 12886.5% Watertown 833.0% 110.5% 72654.5% Wolcott 311.1% 251.1% 624.0% Woodbury 692.5% 381.7% 3181.6% Central Connecticut Region 983.5% 592.6% 3966.1% Bristol 230.8% 281.2% -5-17.9% Plymouth 140.5% 180.8% -4-22.2% Southington 311.1% 00.0% 31— Other 30 1.1% 130.6% 17130.8% Housatonic Valley Region 1947.0% 1054.7% 8984.8% Danbury 521.9% 120.5% 40333.3% Other 1425.1% 934.1% 4952.7% Litchfield Hills Region 682.4% 50.2% 631260.0% Litchfield 140.5% 00.0% 14— Torrington 281.0% 50.2% 23460.0% Other 260.9% 00.0% 26— South Central Region 2268.1% 22410.0% 20.9% Hamden 180.6% 210.9% -3-14.3% Meriden 210.8% 361.6% -15-41.7% Milford 391.4% 311.4% 825.8% New Haven 411.5% 371.7% 410.8% Wallingford 90.3% 150.7% -6-40.0% West Haven 301.1% 301.3% 00.0% Other 682.4% 542.4% 1425.9% Valley Region 29910.7% 34415.3% -45-13.1% Seymour 1615.8% 1546.9% 74.5% Other 1385.0% 1908.5% -52-27.4% Capitol Region 71 2.6% 612.7% 1016.4% Remainder of State 29310.5% 1044.6% 189181.7% Out of State 1395.0% 341.5% 105308.8% Total Trips 2,784100.0% 2,242100.0% 54224.2% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Oxford Employees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Oxford Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of Oxford Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Oxford Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Prospect Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 2,04540.0% 2,47754.8% -432-17.4% Beacon Falls 821.6% 250.6% 57228.0% Bethlehem 40.1% 40.1% 00.0% Cheshire 2194.3% 2856.3% -66-23.2% Middlebury 511.0% 721.6% -21-29.2% Naugatuck 2164.2% 3136.9% -97-31.0% Oxford 350.7% 00.0% 35— Prospect 3947.7% 56612.5% -172-30.4% Southbury 701.4% 491.1% 2142.9% Thomaston 90.2% 461.0% -37-80.4% Waterbury 82816.2% 1,00322.2% -175-17.4% Watertown 901.8% 731.6% 1723.3% Wolcott 420.8% 410.9% 12.4% Woodbury 50.1% 00.0% 5— Capitol Region 4949.7% 2295.1% 265115.7% Hartford 1252.4% 711.6% 5476.1% Other 3697.2% 1583.5% 211133.5% Central Connecticut Region 2575.0% 1723.8% 8549.4% Bristol 831.6% 641.4% 1929.7% Southington 70 1.4% 370.8% 3389.2% Other 1042.0% 711.6% 3346.5% Greater Bridgeport Region 3015.9% 2285.0% 7332.0% Bridgeport 721.4% 861.9% -14-16.3% Stratford 1392.7% 791.7% 6075.9% Other 901.8% 631.4% 2742.9% Housatonic Valley Region 2064.0% 992.2% 107108.1% Danbury 1012.0% 611.3% 4065.6% Newtown 140.3% 00.0% 14— Other 1052.1% 380.8% 67176.3% Litchfield Hills Region 771.5% 1142.5% -37-32.5% Torrington 541.1% 982.2% -44-44.9% Other 230.5% 160.4% 743.8% South Central Region 97419.1% 86119.0% 11313.1% Hamden 691.4% 741.6% -5-6.8% Meriden 1242.4% 1343.0% -10-7.5% Milford 951.9% 621.4% 3353.2% New Haven 2685.2% 1743.8% 9454.0% North Haven 961.9% 1002.2% -4-4.0% Wallingford 149 2.9% 952.1% 5456.8% West Haven 420.8% 701.5% -28-40.0% Other 1312.6% 1523.4% -21-13.8% 2000 – 20102010 2000 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Prospect (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 1362.7% 1102.4% 2623.6% Stamford 410.8% 370.8% 410.8% Other 951.9% 731.6% 2230.1% Valley Region 2244.4% 1022.3% 122119.6% Seymour 511.0% 340.8% 1750.0% Shelton 1212.4% 521.1% 69132.7% Other 521.0% 160.4% 36225.0% Remainder of State 1863.6% 831.8% 103124.1% Out of State 2114.1% 491.1% 162330.6% Total Trips 5,111100.0% 4,524100.0% 58713.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Prospect Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 1,36371.0% 1,56676.1% -203-13.0% Beacon Falls 382.0% 331.6% 515.2% Bethlehem 40.2% 90.4% -5-55.6% Cheshire 462.4% 613.0% -15-24.6% Middlebury 361.9% 80.4% 28350.0% Naugatuck 1839.5% 25712.5% -74-28.8% Oxford 70.4% 80.4% -1-12.5% Prospect 39420.5% 56627.5% -172-30.4% Southbury 110.6% 80.4% 337.5% Thomaston 170.9% 00.0% 17— Waterbury 46124.0% 44421.6% 173.8% Watertown 794.1% 572.8% 2238.6% Wolcott 663.4% 1035.0% -37-35.9% Woodbury 211.1% 120.6% 975.0% Central Connecticut Region 1236.4% 552.7% 68123.6% Bristol 351.8% 60.3% 29483.3% Plymouth 211.1% 190.9% 210.5% Southington 382.0% 80.4% 30375.0% Other 29 1.5% 221.1% 731.8% Housatonic Valley Region 442.3% 321.6% 1237.5% Danbury 110.6% 00.0% 11— Other 331.7% 321.6% 13.1% Litchfield Hills Region 442.3% 231.1% 2191.3% Litchfield 100.5% 100.5% 00.0% Torrington 130.7% 70.3% 685.7% Other 211.1% 60.3% 15250.0% South Central Region 1266.6% 24111.7% -115-47.7% Hamden 80.4% 482.3% -40-83.3% Meriden 331.7% 160.8% 17106.3% Milford 40.2% 231.1% -19-82.6% New Haven 180.9% 552.7% -37-67.3% Wallingford 160.8% 321.6% -16-50.0% West Haven 60.3% 90.4% -3-33.3% Other 412.1% 582.8% -17-29.3% Valley Region 422.2% 361.7% 616.7% Seymour 130.7% 271.3% -14-51.9% Other 291.5% 90.4% 20222.2% Capitol Region 36 1.9% 301.5% 620.0% Remainder of State 965.0% 713.4% 2535.2% Out of State 472.4% 50.2% 42840.0% Total Trips 1,921100.0% 2,059100.0% -138-6.7% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Prospect Employees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Prospect Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of Southbury Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Southbury Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Southbury Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 2,46831.2% 3,60745.9% -1,139-31.6% Beacon Falls 190.2% 370.5% -18-48.6% Bethlehem 100.1% 00.0% 10— Cheshire 530.7% 620.8% -9-14.5% Middlebury 3264.1% 2212.8% 10547.5% Naugatuck 861.1% 530.7% 3362.3% Oxford 1672.1% 1271.6% 4031.5% Prospect 110.1% 80.1% 337.5% Southbury 97212.3% 2,14027.2% -1,168-54.6% Thomaston 150.2% 420.5% -27-64.3% Waterbury 5276.7% 6007.6% -73-12.2% Watertown 951.2% 650.8% 3046.2% Wolcott 170.2% 490.6% -32-65.3% Woodbury 1702.2% 2032.6% -33-16.3% Capitol Region 84510.7% 2252.9% 620275.6% Hartford 2923.7% 931.2% 199214.0% Other 5537.0% 1321.7% 421318.9% Central Connecticut Region 1732.2% 1271.6% 4636.2% Bristol 600.8% 200.3% 40200.0% Southington 35 0.4% 00.0% 35— Other 781.0% 1071.4% -29-27.1% Greater Bridgeport Region 6978.8% 4095.2% 28870.4% Bridgeport 2593.3% 1051.3% 154146.7% Stratford 1772.2% 1321.7% 4534.1% Other 2613.3% 1722.2% 8951.7% Housatonic Valley Region 1,57519.9% 1,81223.1% -237-13.1% Danbury 7679.7% 83310.6% -66-7.9% Newtown 3103.9% 3644.6% -54-14.8% Other 4986.3% 6157.8% -117-19.0% Litchfield Hills Region 1051.3% 490.6% 56114.3% Torrington 730.9% 180.2% 55305.6% Other 320.4% 310.4% 13.2% South Central Region 6888.7% 5066.4% 18236.0% Hamden 530.7% 330.4% 2060.6% Meriden 400.5% 751.0% -35-46.7% Milford 981.2% 620.8% 3658.1% New Haven 2222.8% 1261.6% 9676.2% North Haven 550.7% 320.4% 2371.9% Wallingford 931.2% 450.6% 48106.7% West Haven 300.4% 540.7% -24-44.4% Other 971.2% 791.0% 1822.8% 2000 – 20102010 2000 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Southbury (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 3624.6% 3854.9% -23-6.0% Stamford 1141.4% 1331.7% -19-14.3% Other 2483.1% 2523.2% -4-1.6% Valley Region 3113.9% 2683.4% 4316.0% Seymour 680.9% 380.5% 3078.9% Shelton 1832.3% 1592.0% 2415.1% Other 600.8% 710.9% -11-15.5% Remainder of State 2683.4% 1241.6% 144116.1% Out of State 4145.2% 3424.4% 7221.1% Total Trips 7,906100.0% 7,854100.0% 520.7% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Southbury Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 3,32744.1% 6,12062.6% -2,793-45.6% Beacon Falls 590.8% 1151.2% -56-48.7% Bethlehem 670.9% 1942.0% -127-65.5% Cheshire 741.0% 490.5% 2551.0% Middlebury 1642.2% 2072.1% -43-20.8% Naugatuck 3374.5% 5245.4% -187-35.7% Oxford 2122.8% 2512.6% -39-15.5% Prospect 700.9% 490.5% 2142.9% Southbury 97212.9% 2,14021.9% -1,168-54.6% Thomaston 510.7% 810.8% -30-37.0% Waterbury 78710.4% 1,38914.2% -602-43.3% Watertown 2353.1% 3964.1% -161-40.7% Wolcott 761.0% 1501.5% -74-49.3% Woodbury 2233.0% 5755.9% -352-61.2% Central Connecticut Region 2513.3% 1641.7% 8753.0% Bristol 811.1% 200.2% 61305.0% Plymouth 410.5% 270.3% 1451.9% Southington 721.0% 890.9% -17-19.1% Other 57 0.8% 280.3% 29103.6% Housatonic Valley Region 1,11814.8% 1,00510.3% 11311.2% Danbury 3124.1% 3333.4% -21-6.3% Other 80610.7% 6726.9% 13419.9% Litchfield Hills Region 2893.8% 1021.0% 187183.3% Litchfield 500.7% 140.1% 36257.1% Torrington 1231.6% 390.4% 84215.4% Other 1161.5% 490.5% 67136.7% South Central Region 4405.8% 1,04810.7% -608-58.0% Hamden 530.7% 920.9% -39-42.4% Meriden 490.6% 1241.3% -75-60.5% Milford 630.8% 790.8% -16-20.3% New Haven 470.6% 2282.3% -181-79.4% Wallingford 310.4% 820.8% -51-62.2% West Haven 731.0% 830.8% -10-12.0% Other 1241.6% 3603.7% -236-65.6% Valley Region 2673.5% 2822.9% -15-5.3% Seymour 921.2% 1181.2% -26-22.0% Other 1752.3% 1641.7% 116.7% Capitol Region 440 5.8% 1641.7% 276168.3% Remainder of State 1,12915.0% 5215.3% 608116.7% Out of State 2793.7% 3643.7% -85-23.4% Total Trips 7,540100.0% 9,770100.0% -2,230-22.8% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Southbury Employees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Southbury Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of Southbury Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Southbury Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Thomaston Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 1,82043.0% 2,28856.5% -468-20.5% Beacon Falls 130.3% 70.2% 685.7% Bethlehem 90.2% 290.7% -20-69.0% Cheshire 561.3% 1012.5% -45-44.6% Middlebury 431.0% 180.4% 25138.9% Naugatuck 811.9% 711.8% 1014.1% Oxford 200.5% 70.2% 13185.7% Prospect 170.4% 00.0% 17— Southbury 511.2% 812.0% -30-37.0% Thomaston 59114.0% 87721.7% -286-32.6% Waterbury 69516.4% 62315.4% 7211.6% Watertown 1964.6% 43210.7% -236-54.6% Wolcott 290.7% 150.4% 1493.3% Woodbury 190.4% 270.7% -8-29.6% Capitol Region 58713.9% 3067.6% 28191.8% Hartford 1553.7% 1182.9% 3731.4% Other 43210.2% 1884.6% 244129.8% Central Connecticut Region 44310.5% 42410.5% 194.5% Bristol 1263.0% 1463.6% -20-13.7% Southington 70 1.7% 491.2% 2142.9% Other 2475.8% 2295.7% 187.9% Greater Bridgeport Region 942.2% 391.0% 55141.0% Bridgeport 280.7% 240.6% 416.7% Stratford 250.6% 150.4% 1066.7% Other 411.0% 00.0% 41— Housatonic Valley Region 1864.4% 1313.2% 5542.0% Danbury 591.4% 481.2% 1122.9% Newtown 230.5% 120.3% 1191.7% Other 1042.5% 711.8% 3346.5% Litchfield Hills Region 3718.8% 47211.7% -101-21.4% Torrington 2465.8% 3007.4% -54-18.0% Other 1253.0% 1724.2% -47-27.3% South Central Region 2355.6% 1473.6% 8859.9% Hamden 150.4% 120.3% 325.0% Meriden 421.0% 240.6% 1875.0% Milford 210.5% 30.1% 18600.0% New Haven 300.7% 631.6% -33-52.4% North Haven 320.8% 110.3% 21190.9% Wallingford 621.5% 150.4% 47313.3% West Haven 50.1% 70.2% -2-28.6% Other 28 0.7% 120.3% 16133.3% 2000 – 20102010 2000 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Thomaston (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 811.9% 210.5% 60285.7% Stamford 220.5% 210.5% 14.8% Other 591.4% 00.0% 59— Valley Region 591.4% 551.4% 47.3% Seymour 120.3% 210.5% -9-42.9% Shelton 300.7% 180.4% 1266.7% Other 170.4% 160.4% 16.3% Remainder of State 1503.5% 1383.4% 128.7% Out of State 2064.9% 270.7% 179663.0% Total Trips 4,232100.0% 4,048100.0% 1844.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Thomaston Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 1,43855.3% 1,93261.2% -494-25.6% Beacon Falls 80.3% 60.2% 233.3% Bethlehem 150.6% 431.4% -28-65.1% Cheshire 160.6% 280.9% -12-42.9% Middlebury 70.3% 110.3% -4-36.4% Naugatuck 773.0% 561.8% 2137.5% Oxford 90.3% 180.6% -9-50.0% Prospect 90.3% 461.5% -37-80.4% Southbury 150.6% 421.3% -27-64.3% Thomaston 59122.7% 87727.8% -286-32.6% Waterbury 39215.1% 53617.0% -144-26.9% Watertown 2037.8% 2056.5% -2-1.0% Wolcott 692.7% 642.0% 57.8% Woodbury 271.0% 00.0% 27— Central Connecticut Region 35513.6% 36511.6% -10-2.7% Bristol 863.3% 1173.7% -31-26.5% Plymouth 1897.3% 1745.5% 158.6% Southington 281.1% 341.1% -6-17.6% Other 52 2.0% 401.3% 1230.0% Housatonic Valley Region 351.3% 230.7% 1252.2% Danbury 90.3% 00.0% 9— Other 261.0% 230.7% 313.0% Litchfield Hills Region 45517.5% 61119.4% -156-25.5% Litchfield 903.5% 1033.3% -13-12.6% Torrington 2318.9% 2808.9% -49-17.5% Other 1345.2% 2287.2% -94-41.2% South Central Region 501.9% 682.2% -18-26.5% Hamden 40.2% 00.0% 4— Meriden 90.3% 200.6% -11-55.0% Milford 30.1% 90.3% -6-66.7% New Haven 10.0% 00.0% 1— Wallingford 110.4% 60.2% 583.3% West Haven 70.3% 210.7% -14-66.7% Other 150.6% 120.4% 325.0% Valley Region 90.3% 160.5% -7-43.8% Seymour 40.2% 160.5% 4— Other 50.2% 00.0% 5— Capitol Region 95 3.7% 591.9% 3661.0% Remainder of State 823.2% 692.2% 1318.8% Out of State 823.2% 130.4% 69530.8% Total Trips 2,601100.0% 3,156100.0% -555-17.6% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Thomaston Empl oyees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Thomaston Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of Thomaston Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Thomaston Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Waterbury Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 21,76951.0% 28,74665.0% -6,977-24.3% Beacon Falls 5561.3% 3080.7% 24880.5% Bethlehem 470.1% 680.2% -21-30.9% Cheshire 1,6954.0% 1,7974.1% -102-5.7% Middlebury 4911.2% 5741.3% -83-14.5% Naugatuck 1,1932.8% 1,4493.3% -256-17.7% Oxford 2760.6% 1480.3% 12886.5% Prospect 4611.1% 4441.0% 173.8% Southbury 7871.8% 1,3893.1% -602-43.3% Thomaston 3920.9% 5361.2% -144-26.9% Waterbury 13,41531.4% 18,17041.1% -4,755-26.2% Watertown 1,6863.9% 2,6045.9% -918-35.3% Wolcott 6201.5% 1,0802.4% -460-42.6% Woodbury 1500.4% 1790.4% -29-16.2% Capitol Region 4,0809.6% 1,9184.3% 2,162112.7% Hartford 1,2422.9% 6961.6% 54678.4% Other 2,8386.6% 1,2222.8% 1,616132.2% Central Connecticut Region 2,4645.8% 1,6973.8% 76745.2% Bristol 7041.6% 4761.1% 22847.9% Southington 755 1.8% 5851.3% 17029.1% Other 1,0052.4% 6361.4% 36958.0% Greater Bridgeport Region 1,6463.9% 8712.0% 77589.0% Bridgeport 5981.4% 3300.7% 26881.2% Stratford 5771.4% 1840.4% 393213.6% Other 4711.1% 3570.8% 11431.9% Housatonic Valley Region 1,0032.3% 1,6053.6% -602-37.5% Danbury 1,1192.6% 7731.7% 34644.8% Newtown 2540.6% 2850.6% -31-10.9% Other -370-0.9% 5471.2% -917-167.6% Litchfield Hills Region 7941.9% 8351.9% -41-4.9% Torrington 8522.0% 5511.2% 30154.6% Other -58-0.1% 2840.6% -342-120.4% South Central Region 4,1149.6% 5,65112.8% -1,537-27.2% Hamden 3480.8% 4711.1% -123-26.1% Meriden 7731.8% 7291.6% 446.0% Milford 3910.9% 6911.6% -300-43.4% New Haven 8291.9% 1,3803.1% -551-39.9% North Haven 4291.0% 4561.0% -27-5.9% Wallingford 6441.5% 6851.5% -41-6.0% West Haven 1700.4% 3350.8% -165-49.3% Other 530 1.2% 9042.0% -374-41.4% 2000 – 20102010 2000 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Waterbury (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 2,1335.0% 6521.5% 1,481227.1% Stamford 3410.8% 2050.5% 13666.3% Other 1,7924.2% 4471.0% 1,345300.9% Valley Region 8301.9% 9532.2% -123-12.9% Seymour 1970.5% 2580.6% -61-23.6% Shelton 3890.9% 3960.9% -7-1.8% Other 2440.6% 2990.7% -55-18.4% Remainder of State 1,1522.7% 7491.7% 40353.8% Out of State 2,7056.3% 5791.3% 2,126367.2% Total Trips 42,690100.0% 44,256100.0% -1,566-3.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Waterbury Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 24,04058.9% 29,96374.0% -5,923-19.8% Beacon Falls 1890.5% 2300.6% -41-17.8% Bethlehem 1970.5% 2370.6% -40-16.9% Cheshire 7131.7% 1,1052.7% -392-35.5% Middlebury 6531.6% 7471.8% -94-12.6% Naugatuck 1,8874.6% 2,1625.3% -275-12.7% Oxford 1962.0% 2050.5% 623303.9% Prospect 8280.5% 1,0032.5% -807-80.5% Southbury 5271.3% 6001.5% -73-12.2% Thomaston 6951.7% 6231.5% 7211.6% Waterbury 13,41532.9% 18,17044.9% -4,755-26.2% Watertown 2,4636.0% 2,3855.9% 783.3% Wolcott 1,8144.4% 1,9784.9% -164-8.3% Woodbury 4631.1% 5181.3% -55-10.6% Central Connecticut Region 3,0327.4% 1,9564.8% 1,07655.0% Bristol 9162.2% 5021.2% 41482.5% Plymouth 5521.4% 3790.9% 17345.6% Southington 8692.1% 7041.7% 16523.4% Other 695 1.7% 3710.9% 32487.3% Housatonic Valley Region 1,0562.6% 5041.2% 552109.5% Danbury 3690.9% 1490.4% 220147.7% Other 6871.7% 3550.9% 33293.5% Litchfield Hills Region 1,8744.6% 1,1232.8% 75166.9% Litchfield 3050.7% 2750.7% 3010.9% Torrington 8432.1% 4101.0% 433105.6% Other 7261.8% 4381.1% 28865.8% South Central Region 3,5168.6% 4,04210.0% -526-13.0% Hamden 4731.2% 4301.1% 4310.0% Meriden 7691.9% 6851.7% 8412.3% Milford 1990.5% 2250.6% -26-11.6% New Haven 5081.2% 1,0752.7% -567-52.7% Wallingford 4441.1% 3110.8% 13342.8% West Haven 2560.6% 2840.7% -28-9.9% Other 8672.1% 1,0322.5% -165-16.0% Valley Region 5571.4% 6511.6% -94-14.4% Seymour 1810.4% 2150.5% -34-15.8% Other 3760.9% 4361.1% -60-13.8% Capitol Region 2,456 6.0% 8192.0% 1,637199.9% Remainder of State 2,9417.2% 1,0912.7% 1,850169.6% Out of State 1,3333.3% 3550.9% 978275.5% Total Trips 40,805100.0% 40,504100.0% 3010.7% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2010 2000 2000 – 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Waterbury Empl oyees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Waterbury Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of Waterbury Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Waterbury Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Watertown Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 6,05353.6% 7,35066.1% -1,297-17.6% Beacon Falls 250.2% 200.2% 525.0% Bethlehem 640.6% 340.3% 3088.2% Cheshire 2722.4% 3753.4% -103-27.5% Middlebury 2782.5% 3673.3% -89-24.3% Naugatuck 3032.7% 1791.6% 12469.3% Oxford 830.7% 110.1% 72654.5% Prospect 790.7% 570.5% 2238.6% Southbury 2352.1% 3963.6% -161-40.7% Thomaston 2031.8% 2051.8% -2-1.0% Waterbury 2,46321.8% 2,38521.4% 783.3% Watertown 1,77015.7% 3,07227.6% -1,302-42.4% Wolcott 1131.0% 930.8% 2021.5% Woodbury 1651.5% 1561.4% 95.8% Capitol Region 1,18310.5% 5134.6% 670130.6% Hartford 3803.4% 1841.7% 196106.5% Other 8037.1% 3293.0% 474144.1% Central Connecticut Region 6005.3% 3533.2% 24770.0% Bristol 1691.5% 750.7% 94125.3% Southington 1361.2% 780.7% 5874.4% Other 2952.6% 2001.8% 9547.5% Greater Bridgeport Region 2292.0% 1441.3% 8559.0% Bridgeport 680.6% 400.4% 2870.0% Stratford 490.4% 460.4% 36.5% Other 1121.0% 580.5% 5493.1% Housatonic Valley Region 7376.5% 4373.9% 30068.6% Danbury 3663.2% 2342.1% 13256.4% Newtown 1000.9% 700.6% 3042.9% Other 2712.4% 1331.2% 138103.8% Litchfield Hills Region 3963.5% 6105.5% -214-35.1% Torrington 2151.9% 3162.8% -101-32.0% Other 1811.6% 2942.6% -113-38.4% South Central Region 6946.1% 9718.7% -277-28.5% Hamden 550.5% 500.4% 5— Meriden 1341.2% 1771.6% -43-24.3% Milford 620.5% 1301.2% -68-52.3% New Haven 78 0.7% 3022.7% -224-74.2% North Haven 1091.0% 570.5% 5291.2% Wallingford 1511.3% 920.8% 5964.1% West Haven 160.1% 230.2% -7-30.4% Other 890.8% 1401.3% -51-36.4% 2000 – 20102,010 2000 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Watertown (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 2362.1% 1821.6% 5429.7% Stamford 770.7% 650.6% 1218.5% Other 1591.4% 1171.1% 4235.9% Valley Region 2292.0% 2031.8% 2612.8% Seymour 430.4% 240.2% 1979.2% Shelton 800.7% 940.8% -14-14.9% Other 1060.9% 850.8% 2124.7% Remainder of State 3613.2% 2272.0% 13459.0% Out of State 5715.1% 1301.2% 441339.2% Total Trips 11,289100.0% 11,120100.0% 1691.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Watertown Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 4,89461.6% 7,42575.4% -2,531-34.1% Beacon Falls 250.3% 210.2% 419.0% Bethlehem 1301.6% 1151.2% 1513.0% Cheshire 710.9% 500.5% 2142.0% Middlebury 951.2% 1211.2% -26-21.5% Naugatuck 3604.5% 5085.2% -148-29.1% Oxford 590.7% 530.5% 611.3% Prospect 901.1% 730.7% 1723.3% Southbury 951.2% 650.7% 3046.2% Thomaston 1962.5% 4324.4% -236-54.6% Waterbury 1,68621.2% 2,60426.4% -918-35.3% Watertown 1,77022.3% 3,07231.2% -1,302-42.4% Wolcott 1932.4% 1571.6% 3622.9% Woodbury 1241.6% 1541.6% -30-19.5% Central Connecticut Region 5597.0% 5505.6% 91.6% Bristol 1682.1% 1641.7% 42.4% Plymouth 1521.9% 1761.8% -24-13.6% Southington 1371.7% 1551.6% -18-11.6% Other 102 1.3% 550.6% 4785.5% Housatonic Valley Region 2603.3% 2142.2% 4621.5% Danbury 761.0% 610.6% 1524.6% Other 1842.3% 1531.6% 3120.3% Litchfield Hills Region 5386.8% 9169.3% -378-41.3% Litchfield 1161.5% 1691.7% -53-31.4% Torrington 2122.7% 4224.3% -210-49.8% Other 2102.6% 3253.3% -115-35.4% South Central Region 4355.5% 1451.5% 290200.0% Hamden 550.7% 50.1% 501000.0% Meriden 991.2% 270.3% 72266.7% Milford 340.4% 120.1% 22183.3% New Haven 390.5% 210.2% 1885.7% Wallingford 620.8% 240.2% 38158.3% West Haven 400.5% 250.3% 1560.0% Other 1061.3% 310.3% 75241.9% Valley Region 761.0% 450.5% 3168.9% Seymour 240.3% 20.0% 221100.0% Other 520.7% 430.4% 920.9% Capitol Region 395 5.0% 1151.2% 280243.5% Remainder of State 5456.9% 3083.1% 23776.9% Out of State 2433.1% 1321.3% 11184.1% Total Trips 7,945100.0% 9,850100.0% -1,905-19.3% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Watertown Employees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Watertown Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of Watertown Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Watertown Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Wolcott Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 3,84343.3% 4,50457.6% -661-14.7% Beacon Falls 190.2% 70.1% 12171.4% Bethlehem 50.1% 00.0% 5— Cheshire 4014.5% 4015.1% 00.0% Middlebury 710.8% 590.8% 1220.3% Naugatuck 1541.7% 1982.5% -44-22.2% Oxford 310.3% 250.3% 624.0% Prospect 660.7% 1031.3% -37-35.9% Southbury 760.9% 1501.9% -74-49.3% Thomaston 690.8% 640.8% 57.8% Waterbury 1,81420.5% 1,97825.3% -164-8.3% Watertown 1932.2% 1572.0% 3622.9% Wolcott 91910.4% 1,34617.2% -427-31.7% Woodbury 250.3% 160.2% 956.3% Capitol Region 92710.5% 82310.5% 10412.6% Hartford 2592.9% 3003.8% -41-13.7% Other 6687.5% 5236.7% 14527.7% Central Connecticut Region 1,16613.1% 90411.6% 26229.0% Bristol 4284.8% 3925.0% 369.2% Southington 3243.7% 1532.0% 171111.8% Other 4144.7% 3594.6% 5515.3% Greater Bridgeport Region 3934.4% 971.2% 296305.2% Bridgeport 1742.0% 690.9% 105152.2% Stratford 1151.3% 00.0% 115— Other 2192.5% 280.4% 191682.1% Housatonic Valley Region 2903.3% 2282.9% 6227.2% Danbury 1231.4% 1031.3% 2019.4% Newtown 460.5% 470.6% -1-2.1% Other 1211.4% 781.0% 4355.1% Litchfield Hills Region 1431.6% 1041.3% 3937.5% Torrington 951.1% 650.8% 3046.2% Other 480.5% 390.5% 923.1% South Central Region 1,05611.9% 7499.6% 30741.0% Hamden 1031.2% 220.3% 81368.2% Meriden 1882.1% 1251.6% 6350.4% Milford 961.1% 1011.3% -5-5.0% New Haven 2032.3% 1732.2% 3017.3% North Haven 1311.5% 540.7% 77142.6% Wallingford 1732.0% 1401.8% 3323.6% West Haven 500.6% 490.6% 12.0% Other 112 1.3% 851.1% 2731.8% 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Wolcott (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 2723.1% 901.2% 182202.2% Stamford 931.0% 430.5% 50116.3% Other 1792.0% 470.6% 132280.9% Valley Region 1681.9% 1071.4% 6157.0% Seymour 240.3% 340.4% -10-29.4% Shelton 901.0% 170.2% 73429.4% Other 540.6% 560.7% -2-3.6% Remainder of State 2813.2% 1171.5% 164140.2% Out of State 3283.7% 971.2% 231238.1% Total Trips 8,867100.0% 7,820100.0% 1,04713.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Wolcott Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 1,91468.9% 2,85879.3% -944-33.0% Beacon Falls 60.2% 200.6% -14-70.0% Bethlehem 60.2% 140.4% -8-57.1% Cheshire 411.5% 290.8% 1241.4% Middlebury 190.7% 70.2% 12171.4% Naugatuck 873.1% 1574.4% -70-44.6% Oxford 50.2% 70.2% -2-28.6% Prospect 421.5% 411.1% 12.4% Southbury 170.6% 491.4% -32-65.3% Thomaston 291.0% 150.4% 1493.3% Waterbury 62022.3% 1,08030.0% -460-42.6% Watertown 1134.1% 932.6% 2021.5% Wolcott 91933.1% 1,34637.3% -427-31.7% Woodbury 100.4% 00.0% 10— Central Connecticut Region 33312.0% 2742.2% 254321.5% Bristol 1093.9% 792.9% 54.8% Plymouth 622.2% 1041.2% 1944.2% Southington 712.6% 431.3% 2347.9% Other 91 3.3% 480.0% 91— Housatonic Valley Region 230.8% 220.6% 14.5% Danbury 70.3% 00.0% 7— Other 160.6% 220.6% -6-27.3% Litchfield Hills Region 652.3% 451.2% 2044.4% Litchfield 140.5% 90.2% 555.6% Torrington 281.0% 180.5% 1055.6% Other 230.8% 180.5% 527.8% South Central Region 1224.4% 2156.0% -93-43.3% Hamden 100.4% 00.0% 10— Meriden 311.1% 531.5% -22-41.5% Milford 90.3% 00.0% 9— New Haven 140.5% 411.1% -27-65.9% Wallingford 210.8% 351.0% -14-40.0% West Haven 40.1% 140.4% -10-71.4% Other 331.2% 722.0% -39-54.2% Valley Region 170.6% 240.7% -7-29.2% Seymour 70.3% 90.2% -2-22.2% Other 100.4% 150.4% -5-33.3% Capitol Region 121 4.4% 912.5% 3033.0% Remainder of State 1174.2% 501.4% 67134.0% Out of State 672.4% 270.7% 40148.1% Total Trips 2,779100.0% 3,606100.0% -827-22.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Wolcott Employees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Wolcott Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Percent of Wolcott Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Wolcott Employees Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Woodbury Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 1,84042.0% 2,71954.7% -879-32.3% Beacon Falls 190.4% 00.0% 190.0% Bethlehem 701.6% 551.1% 1527.3% Cheshire 471.1% 340.7% 1338.2% Middlebury 1383.2% 641.3% 74115.6% Naugatuck 912.1% 761.5% 1519.7% Oxford 691.6% 380.8% 3181.6% Prospect 210.5% 120.2% 975.0% Southbury 2235.1% 57511.6% -352-61.2% Thomaston 270.6% 00.0% 27— Waterbury 46310.6% 51810.4% -55-10.6% Watertown 1242.8% 1543.1% -30-19.5% Wolcott 100.2% 00.0% 10— Woodbury 53812.3% 1,19324.0% -655-54.9% Capitol Region 47210.8% 1663.3% 306184.3% Hartford 1463.3% 881.8% 5865.9% Other 3267.4% 781.6% 248317.9% Central Connecticut Region 1383.2% 681.4% 70102.9% Bristol 380.9% 30.1% 351166.7% Southington 22 0.5% 230.5% -1-4.3% Other 781.8% 420.8% 3685.7% Greater Bridgeport Region 1282.9% 1963.9% -68-34.7% Bridgeport 300.7% 470.9% -17-36.2% Stratford 240.5% 260.5% -2-7.7% Other 741.7% 1232.5% -49-39.8% Housatonic Valley Region 82618.9% 88617.8% -60-6.8% Danbury 3698.4% 4068.2% -37-9.1% Newtown 1182.7% 1022.1% 1615.7% Other 3397.7% 3787.6% -39-10.3% Litchfield Hills Region 1042.4% 2124.3% -108-50.9% Torrington 651.5% 1222.5% -57-46.7% Other 390.9% 901.8% -51-56.7% South Central Region 2305.3% 2144.3% 167.5% Hamden 210.5% 190.4% 210.5% Meriden 370.8% 70.1% 30428.6% Milford 210.5% 190.4% 210.5% New Haven 410.9% 200.4% 21105.0% North Haven 300.7% 370.7% -7-18.9% Wallingford 41 0.9% 300.6% 1136.7% West Haven 80.2% 00.0% 8— Other 310.7% 821.6% -51-62.2% 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D1. Place of Employment of CNVR Residents, By Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Residence: Woodbury (Continued) Place of Employment NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent Southwestern Region 1172.7% 671.3% 5074.6% Stamford 431.0% 320.6% 1134.4% Other 741.7% 350.7% 39111.4% Valley Region 912.1% 982.0% -7-7.1% Seymour 300.7% 100.2% 20— Shelton 461.1% 691.4% -23-33.3% Other 150.3% 190.4% -4-21.1% Remainder of State Region 1814.1% 2014.0% -20-10.0% Out of State 2525.8% 1432.9% 10976.2% Total Trips 4,379100.0% 4,970100.0% -591-11.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 Table III-D2. Place of Residence of CNVR Employees, by Municipality: 2000 and 2010 Place of Employment: Woodbury Place of Residence NumberPercent NumberPercent ChangePercent CNVR 1,42273.2% 2,14078.9% -718-33.6% Beacon Falls 160.8% 80.3% 8100.0% Bethlehem 1296.6% 1013.7% 2827.7% Cheshire 160.8% 150.6% 16.7% Middlebury 613.1% 873.2% -26-29.9% Naugatuck 824.2% 923.4% -10-10.9% Oxford 462.4% 632.3% -17-27.0% Prospect 50.3% 00.0% 5— Southbury 1708.8% 2037.5% -33-16.3% Thomaston 191.0% 271.0% -8-29.6% Waterbury 1507.7% 1796.6% -29-16.2% Watertown 1658.5% 1565.7% 95.8% Wolcott 251.3% 160.6% 956.3% Woodbury 53827.7% 1,19344.0% -655-54.9% Central Connecticut Region 452.3% 281.0% 1760.7% Bristol 70.4% 150.6% -8-53.3% Plymouth 150.8% 90.3% 666.7% Southington 130.7% 00.0% 13— Other 100.5% 40.1% 6150.0% Housatonic Valley Region 1085.6% 1676.2% -59-35.3% Danbury 201.0% 471.7% -27-57.4% Other 884.5% 1204.4% -32-26.7% Litchfield Hills Region 914.7% 1766.5% -85-48.3% Litchfield 231.2% 331.2% -10-30.3% Torrington 291.5% 792.9% -50-63.3% Other 392.0% 642.4% -25-39.1% South Central Region 432.2% 170.6% 26152.9% Hamden 90.5% 00.0% 9— Meriden 60.3% 110.4% -5-45.5% Milford 50.3% 00.0% 5— New Haven 40.2% 60.2% -2-33.3% Wallingford 10.1% 00.0% 1— West Haven 50.3% 00.0% 5— Other 130.7% 00.0% 13— Valley Region 351.8% 431.6% -8-18.6% Seymour 150.8% 431.6% -28-65.1% Other 201.0% 00.0% 20— Capitol Region 461.0% 311.7% 1548.4% Remainder of State 1091.0% 791.7% 3038.0% Out of State 432.2% 331.2% 1030.3% Total Trips 1,942100.0% 2,714100.0% -772-28.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Journey-to-Work; LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics 2010, COGCNV Staff Analysis 2000 – 201020002010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London ¯ 01020 Miles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Journey-to-Work: 2010 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Ea st Lyme Milford K illing- worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Figure III-D4. Place of Residence of Woodbury Employees, by Municipality: 2010 Figure III-D3. Place of Employment of Woodbury Residents, by Municipality: 2010 Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Woodbury Residents Out of State ¯ 01020Miles Regions To w n s Regions To w n s Out of State Up to 1% 1% – 1.9% 2% – 2.9% 3% – 4.9% 5% or Higher Percent of Woodbury Employees [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] IV. CONCLUSIONS Waterbury continues to be the employment center of the region with 42.6% of the region’s employment. However, CNVR residents make up a smaller portion of the Waterbury workforce (58.9%) than in 2000 (74.0%). With the exception of Cheshire, which had equal numbers of employed residents and employees, all of the municipalities in the CNVR had fewer jobs than employed residents. Since 2000 this gap between employed residents and employment has grown. Because there aren’t enough jobs in the region to employ the region’s working population, the CNVR is becoming increasingly tied to other regions of Connecticut. In 2010, a majority of CNVR residents were working outside of the region, and CNVR employees are increasingly living outside of the region. In addition, the CNVR is seeing more travel to and from neighboring states. Virtual office commutes to out of state companies may partially explain the increase in CNVR residents working in other states. The increased exchange of commuters between the CNVR and other regions of Connecticut can be partially explained by regional economic and housing trends . From 2000 to 2010, the number of employed CNVR residents increased from 126,330 to 128,652, while regional employment declined from 100,697 to 95,883 . Because of declining employment opportunities and the high unemployment rate (10.3%) in the region, many CNVR residents have been forced to seek employment outside of the region . Stagnant home sales may also lead to an increase in inter-regional commuting. CNVR residents and CNVR employees may not be able to move closer to work because they are unable to sell their homes. The CNVR may also be seen as an affordable alternative to more expensive regions of the state. Five municipalities in the region have median home values below the state average. 6 Coinciding with the growth in inter-regional commuting, average travel time to work increased from 2000 to 2010, although at a smaller rate than previous decades. In 2010, a vast majority of CNVR residents (85.0%) drove alone to work. With few alternative options, most CNVR residents will continue to drive alone in the foreseeable future. Improvements in technology have also led to an increase in CNVR residents working from home (3.2%). This trend is likely to continue as technology improves and fuel prices increase. 6 Naugatuck, Thomaston, Waterbury, Watertown and Wolcott. U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey 2006- 2010, 5-Year Averages, B25077 CAPITOL REGION WINDHAM LOWER CONNECTICUT RIVER SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT LITCHFIELD HILLS NORTH EASTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT HOUSATONIC VALLEY CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY VALLEY NORTH- WESTERN CONNECTICUT SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT CENTRAL CONNECTICUT GREATER BRIDGEPORT KentSharon Stafford Salisbury Litchfield Killingly Newtown Norfolk Lebanon Guilford LymeWoodstock Goshen Suffield New Milford Granby HaddamTolland Cornwall Danbury Pomfret Ashford Montville Hebron Ledyard Enfield MansfieldUnion Oxford Plainfield Colchester Thompson Greenwich Groton Glastonbury Salem Berlin East HaddamCoventry Griswold Avon Wilton Canaan Shelton Bristol Preston Hartland Torrington Ellington Southbury Easton Redding Stonington Fairfield Windsor Canterbury Wallingford Simsbury Woodbury Warren Somers WaterfordNorwich Ridgefield North Stonington Monroe Washington Canton Brooklyn Colebrook Harwinton Roxbury Winchester Burlington Barkhamsted New Hartford Windham Portland Durham Meriden Waterbury Morris Bozrah Wolcott Farmington Putnam Bethany Branford Bethel Manchester Vernon Orange Chester Madison Stamford Hamden Voluntown Middletown Cheshire Sterling Willington Eastford Eas t Lyme Milford Killin g – worth Southington Watertown Hampton Norwalk East Hampton Trumbull Weston Old Lyme Sherman Bloomfield Chaplin Franklin Lisbon Plymouth Columbia Clinton Westport Bolton Hartford Strat- ford Scotland East Windsor Brookfield South Windsor New Fairfield Marlborough North Branford Bethlehem Andover Darien Essex New Canaan North Haven Middlebury West Hartford New Haven Seymour WoodbridgeProspect Bridgeport Sprague Naugatuck West-brook Bridgewater East Hartford North Canaan East Granby Rocky HillCromwell Deep River Newington Middlefield Old Saybrook New Britain East Haven Plainville Thomaston Wethersfield West Haven Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Windsor Locks New London Regional Planning Organizations in Connecticut ¯ 01020 Miles Appendix A Municipality Chief Elected AlternateRegional Planning Official CommissionBeacon Falls Gerard Smith Dominick SorrentinoDavid Chadderton First Selectman Richard MinnickBethlehem Jeff Hamel Ellen SamoskaEllen Samoska First Selectman Maria HillCheshire Timothy Slocum Michael MiloneMartin Cobern Chrm, Town Council VacantMiddlebury Edward St. John Joseph SalviniKen Long First Selectman Mary BartonNaugatuck Robert Mezzo Tamath RossiAnthony Malone Mayor Joseph McAvoyOxford George Temple Joanne PeltonHarold Cosgrove First Selectman VacantProspect Robert Chatfield Tom GalvinGil Graveline Mayor VacantSouthbury Edward Edelson Carol HubertLeslie Maclise-Kane First Selectman Nancy ClarkThomaston Edmond Mone Roger PerraultBill Guererra First Selectman Robert FlanaganWaterbury Neil O’Leary Ronald PuglieseJames Sequin Mayor Geoffrey GreenWatertown Raymond Primini Charles FrigonRuth Mulcahy Chrm, Town Council Rosalie LoughranWolcott Thomas Dunn VacantSteven Bosco Mayor Cathe ShermanWoodbury Gerald Stomski Barbara PerkinsonMartin Overton First Selectman VacantSenior Planner, Joseph Perrelli Administrative Assistant, Lauren Rizzo Regional Planner, Patrick Gallagher COUNCIL MEMBERS, ALTERNATES, & REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION COGCNV Staff Executive Director, Peter Dorpalen GIS Coordinator, Glenda Prentiss Senior Planner, Samuel Gold Financial Manager, Patricia Bauer