CTPP October 2002

ctpp@listserv.transportation.org

17 participants
21 discussions

by ed christopher

for those tracking the ACS, there is a newly released GAO report "The American Community Survey: Accuracy and Timeliness Issues, GAO-02-956R, September 30" posted at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02956r.pdf -- Ed Christopher Metropolitan Activities Midwest Resource Center Federal Highway Administration 19900 Governors Drive Olympia Fields, Illinois 60461 708-283-3534 (V) 708-283-3501 (F)

21 years, 5 months

[CTPP] American Community Survey, Emergency Planning, Small Area Commute Data

by Chuck Purvis

TO: CTPP-News This is a snippet from today's ACS alert from the Census Bureau. Of interest to transportation planners is the first bullet item on the appropriateness of using ACS data on small-area commute flows for emergency planning efforts. Something to keep in mind.... Chuck Purvis, MTC ***************************************************************************************************************************** THE AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY AND EMERGENCY PLANNING How can information from the American Community Survey help emergency response providers? What is the role that current information can play in developing plans for recovery from natural disasters or other catastrophic events, or in assessing the long-term impact of these events on the economy, health, housing, and physical infrastructure, including roads, public buildings, and utilities? Whether it's a chemical spill, earthquake, fire, hurricane, or other event, current information on the affected population is critical for emergency planners involved in emergency response, disaster relief, or long-term recovery. When fully implemented, the American Community Survey will provide federal, state, local, and tribal government officials with up-to-date population and housing information to help them respond to events and determine whether such events are limited in scope or have catastrophic consequences for an area, state, or region. Current information on the numbers and characteristics of the population are essential to develop emergency evacuation plans and identify what kinds of medical assistance and other services are needed. Here are some examples of how the American Community Survey contributes to emergency planning. * The American Community Survey's small-area data on commuting patterns and schooling can provide critical information about the physical location of the population during the day. Knowledge of daytime populations can help planners develop appropriate strategies and procedures to route people through and out of a city in the event of a catastrophic event, identify the best locations for emergency shelters, or assess the need to stockpile vital food and medical supplies. * Information on the languages spoken in an area provides guidance on whether flyers, electronic broadcasts, or other means of disseminating emergency information are needed in languages other than English. * Areas affected by catastrophic events can lose their populations quickly. Measuring the effect of population and job losses requires an ongoing, current source of statistics on households, housing, and characteristics such as the availability of public utilities. As affected areas recover, knowledge of the rate at which the local population rebounds, if and how their characteristics have changed, and the effects of the rebound, can help policy-makers gauge the new needs and resources, as well as any lasting impact of the event on the local economy. Current, accurate information is a first step in planning for and responding to emergencies. The American Community Survey can help. _______________________________________

21 years, 5 months

[CTPP] INNOVATION BRIEFS ADVISORY

by C. Kenneth Orski

INNOVATION BRIEFS Advisory November/December 2002 ========================================== Abstracts of the latest issue of Innovation Briefs are now available on our website at: http://www.innobriefs.com/abstracts/2002/nov02.html + The Reauthorization Campaign Shifts Gears + Expediting Environmental Reviews and Project Delivery + Mass Transit Debate Continues Commentary by Wendell Cox + The New Suburban Frontier Commentary by David Brooks + The Condition and Performance of the Nation's Highways It is Time for National Highway Performance Standards Commentary by David T. Hartgen Also new on the web site ("From the Editor") + Transit Share of the Journey-to-Work Market in Major Metropolitan Areas, 1990-2000 + "Market-Based Approaches to Transportation," Presentation at the Symposium on Market-Based Approaches to Congestion Control, October 7, 2000 ------------------------------------------------------------------- INNOVATION BRIEFS Tel: 301.299.1996; Fax: 301.299.4425 Email: korski(a)erols.com ################################################################# ################################################################# ################################################################# ##### ##### ##### ################################################################# ################################################################# #################################################################

21 years, 5 months

[CTPP] Reminder-State DOT Detailed Geography and MPO Region Definition Forms

by fabian.sanchez＠census.gov

Note: this message is for staff of State Departments of Transportation and Metropolitan Planning Organizations. Other recipients may disregard and delete this message. Thanks you to the State DOTs and MPOs that have already responded to our previous request. As of 3:00pm on 10/28, we have received 64% of the forms back from the State DOTs and MPOs. However, we still need to get forms from the agencies that have not responded. If you have not returned your geography definition forms to us yet, please fill them out and send them back to us by e-email (clara.reschovsky(a)census.gov) or by fax (301)-457-2481 as soon as possible. We would like to receive a response from every State DOT and every MPO in the Nation. If it is not clear to you what to include in your MPO region, select the counties that most closely approximate the MPO planning area boundary. This definition of MPO region does not restrict your access to small area data for other counties. The CTPP2000 Access Tool (CAT) will allow you to have access to detailed data even for counties that are not contained in your MPO region. Please fill out and return the Geography Definition Form soon as possible. If you have any questions, call Fabian Sanchez, Clara Reschovsky, or Phil Salopek at 301-457-2454 Thanks for your cooperation! Fabian Sanchez US Census Bureau Washington, DC PS. I have not received any forms from the Post Office. I hope no one mailed the forms back. If you mailed the forms using the post office, please resubmit your information by e-mail or fax.

21 years, 6 months

[CTPP] Adding email addresses

by Allen Skaggs

I'm not sure if this is the right place to mail this. I've lost most of my email addresses so I'm sending this request here for lack of any other place to send it. Could you please add the following email to the mailing list: jhoffpauer(a)metroplan.org Thanks A. Skaggs

21 years, 6 months

[CTPP] ANOTHER CENTRAL CITIES RENNAISANCE IN THE OFFING

by ALAN E. PISARSKI

I know that this may not be terribly pertinent to those doing single metro areas but at the state and national levels there is this bit of weirdness in the data in which we have multiple central cities in an msa - so a trip from one of these (Rockville Md. ) to another (Arlington or Fredericksburg) is tabbed as a central city to central city trip. For Commuting in America purposes we had to retabulate the files so that there would be comparable data from 80 to 90 - thus ending the central city renaissance of 1990. Now 2000 has a similar attribute. Question: Is there a list of the central cities in each msa/pmsa/cmsa? Wash DC had five last time I think. The message is or ought to be that Some central cities are more central than others! AEP

21 years, 6 months

[CTPP] Case Studies of New MPOS following the 1990 Census

by Elaine Murakami

My apologies for cross-postings! Below, please find the web address for a series of case studies of the administrative, policy, and technical development of a metropolitan transportation planning practice, as experienced by 10 (only 8 are posted so far) active Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) that were designated subsequent to the 1990 Census. Bonneville, ID Cache Metropolitan Planning Organization, Utah Dover/Kent, DE Flagstaff, AZ Fredricksburg, VA Hernando County, FL Ithaca-Thompkins, NY San Luis Obispo Council of Governments , CA www.mcb.fhwa.dot.gov/technical.html These materials may be especially helpful to those areas which have now been designated Urbanized Areas based on the Census 2000 results. This effort was completed under contract to the Federal Transit Administration. Questions may be addressed to Robin Mayhew at 202-366-1454 or robin.mayhew(a)fta.dot.gov Yours truly, for better information dissemination, Elaine Murakami, Federal Highway Administration

21 years, 6 months

[CTPP] CTPP Request to State DOTs and MPOs

by phillip.a.salopek＠census.gov

Note: this message is for staff of State Departments of Transportation and Metropolitan Planning Organizations. Other recipients may disregard and delete this message. Just over a week ago, this office sent email messages to the people on our contact list representing each State Department of Transportation and each metropolitan planning organization. We had spoken on the phone with most of the State DOTs before sending the email, but did not attempt to contact the approximately 340 MPOs. The purpose of the message was to gather information we need to produce Part 1 of CTPP 2000, the place of residence tables. >From the State DOTs, we need to find out which detailed level of geography they want us to tabulate in Part 1 for each county in their state. From the MPOs, we need to find out which counties (minor civil divisions in the six New England states) they want us to tabulate in Part 1 as part of their MPO region. We then also need to have the MPOs tell us which detailed level of geography they want us to tabulate in each of the counties making up their area. We would like to point out that we will tabulate at least one level of detailed geography for every county. Therefore an MPO will have access to detailed data even for counties that are not contained in their MPO region. This is a change from the 1990 CTPP, when only counties that were part of an MPO had data tabulated at the tract or TAZ level. We are creating data for the MPO region as a convenience, so you won't have to sum up the individual counties yourself. However, the CTPP Access Tool software will allow you to browse or manipulate data for whatever collection of geography you want. So if you want to add to or subtract from the counties in your MPO region you will be able to do so with the software, and the data for all the counties will be available for your use. Note that this information is for CTPP 2000 Part 1 tables, i.e., data by place of residence. We are not asking about tabulating origin-destination flows in Part 3 of CTPP 2000. We will cross that bridge later. So, if you are in a State DOT and involved with CTPP 2000, you should have received a message about this topic from this office. If not, please call us at 301-763-2454 and ask to talk to Fabian Sanchez, Clara Reschovsky, or Phil Salopek. If you are in an MPO and involved with CTPP 2000 you may also have received a message on this topic from our office. However, some State DOTs are coordinating this activity, so not every MPO was sent an email. We ask any MPOs that have not heard anything about this issue to first contact their State DOT, to see if the State DOT is taking care of it. If the State is not handling it and the MPO has not been contacted by us, it may be because our contact list is out of date. In this case we ask the MPO to call 301-763-2454 and talk with Fabian Sanchez, Clara Reschovsky, or Phil Salopek. Thank You. Phil Salopek Chief, Journey-to-Work and Migration Statistics Branch Population Division U.S. Census Bureau

21 years, 6 months

[CTPP] upcoming dat release

by ed christopher

Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF1) Final National File: Same as SF1 advance national file released nearly one year ago except that the final national file also contains urban/rural data. (Tentatively scheduled for release in two weeks.)

21 years, 6 months

[CTPP] CTPP End Product

by Bob Paddock

A question was directed to me yesterday for which I had no answer. Since I usually have an answer for everything (right or wrong), it left me feeling incomplete. So I'm posting it here in the hopes that someone may help me out. We were wondering what we will get from the Census Bureau in the form of the CTPP as it relates to the TAZ system in our region. We defined TAZs for not only our 7-county jurisdictional area but for an additional 13 contiguous counties in the hopes that we can receive a bit more information on commutes in the whole Minneapolis-St. Paul region. Adjacent to us is the St. Cloud, MN MSA, a metro area of over 200,000. They also defined a TAZ system that included a portion of Sherburne County. Since the Census Bureau only allows one TAZ definition, we created TAZs for only the remaining portion of Sherburne Co. Upon submitting our TAZ definition using the TAZUP process to the Census Bureau, that part of Sherburne Co. NOT defined by us was given a "ZZZZZZ " label. Now. When the CTPP is released, will we receive ONLY that area we defined? OR... will we receive our defined area PLUS that segment defined by St. Cloud? If we receive the whole package, can we also obtain both metro areas as an interconnected TAZ system? Anyone care to comment? There must be someone out there full of enough bull like me to say a few words!!

21 years, 6 months

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

CTPP October 2002