CTPP June 2007

ctpp@listserv.transportation.org

9 participants
12 discussions

by Jonathan Lupton

Like Ms. Bousefield in Chicago, I find the HUD vacancy figures running very low. The ACS county-level vacancy data appear far more accurate in our area, but they are not available at the tract level yet. However, the HUD data do appear to reflect different characteristics of tracts - they correctly identify areas of generally higher vacancy. Therefore, I may be able to use the HUD figures to identify changes in vacancy by tract over time. The HUD figures do not separate businesses from residences. Therefore, like so many other sources, they are useful but not fully compatible with other data sets. Jonathan Lupton Metroplan - Little Rock AR

16 years, 6 months

[CTPP] CB Center for Economic Studies Discussion papers from Research Data Centers

by Murakami

As some of you know, we (the transportation data community) have not had much success using the CB's Research Data Center program that is housed at the Center for Economic Studies. We attempted to use the RDC to examine early ACS results. The RDCs provide researchers with access to confidential microdata and go through careful review before results are released to ensure that no confidential data are released. While glancing at the CES RDC website today, I noticed that several "discussion papers" over the past few years (2005 through current) have included analysis using the 1990 and 2000 decennial census "long form" data to examine patterns of home-to-work. 2004 ACS data are included on the list of available data at the RDC. Typically, these analyses focus on "labor market outcomes." http://www.ces.census.gov/index.php/ces/1.00/cmshome Here are a few that I found: Hellerstein, Judith K; David Neumark; and Melissa McInerney. "Spatial Mismatch or Racial Mismatch? " CES 07-16. June 2007. Job density and employment rates are compared between black and white population (no break-out for "Hispanic"), The authors use the term "racial mismatch" to mean a "lack of jobs into which blacks are hired," in contrast to "spatial mismatch" that argues that jobs are not located near to where people live contributing to lack of employment. They found that space alone plays a relatively minor role in low black male employment rates. They find that jobs that are "available to blacks" is more important, especially for workers with lower education. Wang, Qingfang "How does Geography Matter in Ethnic Labor Market Segmentation Process? A Case Study of Chinese in the San Francisco CMSA" CES-WP-07-09 March 2007 The authors defined Chinese residence and workplace concentrations in the San Francisco Bay area. They found clear market segmentation by gender and job skill among the Chinese immigrants. They assert that the housing market is limited for immigrant ethnic minorities, but that ethnic social networking will influence employment and therefore job location, beyond commute time considerations. The pattern for Chinese immigrant men and women is very different, with men in skilled computer and electronics jobs, and women in lower skilled factory and assembly line jobs. Bayer, Patrick; Stephen L. Ross, and Giorgio Topa. "Place of Work and Place of Residence: Informal Hiring Networks and Labor Market Outcomes." CES 05-23 October 2005. The 1990 Census "long form" data was used to measure social interaction by comparing the propensity of individuals living in the same vs. nearby blocks to work in the same location. They found that residing on the same block increased the probability of working together by over 33 percent. When the characteristics of persons (age, education and presence of children) matched, these interactions were even stronger. Fu, Shine. "Smart Café Cities: Testing Human Capital Externalities in the Boston Metropolitan Area." CES 05-24 October 2005. "Human Capital Externalities" or "knowledge spillover" are benefits that accrue to workers from being close to a dense skilled labor market. Most work done on these externalities have been at the macro-scale of metropolitan areas. This effort examines microgeographic scale of externalities by using census tracts, block groups and blocks. This paper used the 1990 Census long form data using worker and job characteristics and job location. They found that these benefits are very localized within microgeographic scales. So, the good news is that other people besides the transportation community have benefited from the detailed PLACE OF WORK geocoding in the Decennial Census "long form." What can we learn from this? To get projects approved in the CES RDC system, we would probably have better luck if we discussed our research in terms of economic productivity and labor market benefits, rather than benefiting transportation planning. Also, we can expect that researchers on labor market outcomes will want to use ACS results on place of work in the future. Elaine Murakami

16 years, 10 months

[CTPP] ACS 2006 Data Release Schedule

by Ed Christopher

See the link below for the 2006 ACS release schedule. -------------- The U.S. Census Bureau will release data from the 2006 American Community Survey (ACS) in August and September. This years data release marks the first time that group quarters (such as prisons, college dorms, military barracks and nursing homes) are included in the data products. Closer to the release date, the Census Bureau will provide guidance on making comparisons between annual ACS data products, as well as comparisons between ACS and Census 2000 data. Data will again be available for the nation, 50 states and the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, every congressional district and all counties, places and metropolitan areas with populations of 65,000 or more. http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/american_communit… -- Ed Christopher 708-283-3534 (V) 708-574-8131 (cell) FHWA RC-TST-PLN 19900 Governors Dr Olympia Fields, IL 60461

16 years, 10 months

Re: [CTPP] Vacancy Rates by quarter

by Richard Lin

Dear Marie, It is very simple: 1. HUD (by USPS): A unit is vacant only after mails had not been collected for 90 days. If the mails were picked up (collected) in 30 day for example, it is not a vacant unit. 2. ACS: On survey day, a unit is treated as a vacant unit if it is not occupied. A one-day definition by ACS compares to USPS's 90-day definition. ________________________________ Richard Lin, Ph.D. Demographer Colorado Department of Local Affairs Division of Local Government 1313 Sherman Street, Room 521 Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303)866-4989 Fax:: (303)866-2660 richard.lin(a)state.co.us www.DOLA.Colorado.Gov >>> <mbousfield(a)cityofchicago.org> 6/19/2007 12:50 PM >>> I compared the HUD vacancy rates with the ACS vacancy rates. The former are low and the latter very high. Have others found this too and is there an explanation? Thanks, Marie Bousfield City of Chicago _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news

16 years, 10 months

Re: [CTPP] Vacancy Rates by quarter

by Richard Lin

Are you satisfied with a definition of vacant unit as "mails had not been collected for 90 days? ________________________________ Richard Lin, Ph.D. Demographer Colorado Department of Local Affairs Division of Local Government 1313 Sherman Street, Room 521 Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303)866-4989 Fax:: (303)866-2660 richard.lin(a)state.co.us www.DOLA.Colorado.Gov >>> <alanpisarski(a)alanpisarski.com> 6/19/2007 10:28 AM >>> Big tourism payoff Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless -----Original Message----- From: <Nanda.Srinivasan(a)dot.gov> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:58:06 To:<ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Subject: [CTPP] Vacancy Rates by quarter This is with regard to questions on vacancy rates by season. I recently had a chat with Jon Sperling at HUD (during a walk on the mall) and he pointed me to these datasets (acquired from USPS) that list vacancy rates for each census tract by quarter and year. http://www.huduser.org/datasets/usps.html <http://www.huduser.org/datasets/usps.html> I have not used these much, but am intrigued. The datasets are comparatively new (introduced in December 2006). HUD is looking for user feedback. I found that the data can be joined and easily plotted using a nationwide Census Tract shapefile. I can see quite a few applications in examining these data for transportation planning applications. Also see the data dictionary at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/usps/USPS_Data_Dictionary.pdf The contact person for these datasets is Robert Renner. Thank you Nanda Srinivasan _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news

16 years, 10 months

[CTPP] Vacancy Rates by quarter

by Nanda.Srinivasan＠dot.gov

This is with regard to questions on vacancy rates by season. I recently had a chat with Jon Sperling at HUD (during a walk on the mall) and he pointed me to these datasets (acquired from USPS) that list vacancy rates for each census tract by quarter and year. http://www.huduser.org/datasets/usps.html I have not used these much, but am intrigued. The datasets are comparatively new (introduced in December 2006). HUD is looking for user feedback. I found that the data can be joined and easily plotted using a nationwide Census Tract shapefile. I can see quite a few applications in examining these data for transportation planning applications. Also see the data dictionary at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/usps/USPS_Data_Dictionary.pdf The contact person for these datasets is Robert Renner <mailto:Robert.N.Renner(a)hud.gov> . Thank you Nanda Srinivasan

16 years, 10 months

RE: [CTPP] Brainstorming about INCOME variable for thefutureCTPP(using ACS records)

by Richard Lin

Dear Elaine, Thank you very much for the information. Now we expect better quality of the migration statistics from the 2008 ACS survey estimates and the Census 2010 census counts. ________________________________ Richard Lin, Ph.D. Demographer Colorado Department of Local Affairs Division of Local Government 1313 Sherman Street, Room 521 Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303)866-4989 Fax:: (303)866-2660 richard.lin(a)state.co.us www.DOLA.Colorado.Gov >>> "Murakami, Elaine" <Elaine.Murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov> 6/13/2007 2:14 PM >>> At the recent ACS Peer Exchange, sponsored by the FHWA/FTA Transportation Planning Capacity Building program, held May 10-11, 2007; Nancy Torrieri shared a paper copy of some of the question changes for the 2008 ACS content. I just noticed that Question 14 "Did this person live in this house or apartment 1 year ago?" has a NEW line for STREET ADDRESS, in addition to city/town; county; State; and zipcode. If respondents complete this line, then, coding to a "real" PUMA, not just to county should be possible. Elaine Murakami FHWA Office of Planning -----Original Message----- From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of mbousfield(a)cityofchicago.org Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 8:52 AM To: Ed Christopher; Murakami, Elaine Cc: ctpp-news maillist; douglas.w.hillmer(a)census.gov Subject: RE: [CTPP] Brainstorming about INCOME variable for thefutureCTPP(using ACS records) To CTPP-News Maillist and Other Census Groupies, Much thanks to all who shared their migpuma concerns. The attached file defines the migpumas and the powpumas in function of the pumas (all 5%). I downloaded it from Blodgett's Mable database. For instance, for Illinois (17), the pumas 3501-3519 cover the City of Chicago and pumas 3401-3414 cover the remainder of Cook County which we call suburban Cook County. The file shows that powpuma 3500 coincides with the city of Chicago and that migpuma 3490 coincides with Cook County. We at the City defined the pumas but the definitions of the powpumas and migpumas were done by the CB. In 1990, Chicago was a migpuma but in 2000 the CB decided it was no longer. According to Clara, no county remainders were migpumas except Los Angeles city, why not Chicago city? I planned to extract the population sizes off all the migpumas and show that there are many migpumas that are smaller than the City of Chicago thereby showing a lack of equal access to data. According to "Principles and Practices for Federal Statistical Agencies" by Martin, Straf, and Citro, federal statistical agencies have to ensure equal access to data. Are large subcounty cities with concentrations of minority persons getting equal access to data? Thank you, Marie Bousfield, Demographer City of Chicago Department of Planning and Development City Hall, Room 1003 121 North LaSalle Street Chicago, Illinois 60602 Tel. (312) 744-6536 Fax. (312) 744-0759 Email mbousfield(a)cityofchicago.org http://www.cityofchicago.org _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news

16 years, 10 months

[CTPP] Brainstorming about INCOME variable for the future CTPP (using ACS records)

by Murakami

The first CTPP product from ACS we hope will be a 3-year summary (ACS records from 2005 thru 2007). Clearly, people want a flow tabulation. The 3-year tabulations are limited to geographic units of 20,000 persons or more. We currently don't have a DIFFERENT population threshold for FLOW tabulation based on 3-years of ACS records, but the CTPP Technical Group has been assuming we would want: County -to- County Place -to-Place Perhaps: County - to-Place Place -to- County Using the same 20,000 population threshold. AND THEN, AFTER WORKPLACE ALLOCATION IS COMPLETE, TO HAVE PUMA-TO-PUMA where PUMA of work is not limited to COUNTY, but is a "real" sub-county PUMA where available. The geography for tabulation for this first 3-yr ACS would be restricted to Census 2000 geography, so we can't include "new" PUMAs defined for Census 2010 until probably 2011 or 2012. http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2004/11November/1104Econ-Areas.pdf by Kenneth P. Johnson and John R. Kort There are 179 BEA Economic areas which are county-based. There are 344 component economic areas, which are merged into the 179 Economic Areas. I am wondering if we might use either BEAs or CEAs to calculate either quartile or quintiles to tabulate income for CTPP. I like the CEAs because, for example in the Seattle area, the CEAs separates out the western counties that are fairly rural in nature from the main urban core counties. Therefore the Part 3 tables might look like this: TABLES for FLOW: Table 1. Total workers Table 2. Workers in group quarters (no characteristics) Table 3. Means of Transportation to Work (7) (all workers) Table 4 Income quartiles (4) or Income quintiles (5) (workers in households) (Then, we would have to include a CHART documenting the quartile or quintile values for each of the Economic areas, since they would not be the same # from one area to the next). Therefore, no crosstab of means of transportation by income in the FLOW tabulation. Nandu has been researching using IPF routines to synthesize a crosstab of means of transportation by income for FLOW for "base" TAZs. Because the BEA Economic Areas are large enough, there should be sufficient ACS samples from which to calculate quartiles or quintiles for household income. If there are approx 2 million completed h.u. ACS forms each year, there would be about 11,000 households per BEA economic area (BEA), or 5,800 households per Component economic area (CEA). This avoids the problem of "too many" income categories that result from trying to address variability between places like San Francisco-Oakland and Nashville. Therefore a 3-year accumulated ACS would give us approx 33,000 households for BEA, and 17,400 households for CEA. So, the first step would need to be to calculate the values for each BEA or CEA, and then tabulate the ACS records based on those values. One of the biggest problems with this approach is that it would be up to the data user to KNOW which BEA or CEA area was used. And, we would have to check to see if there are MPOs that cross BEA or CEA boundaries. Let me know what you think about this idea. Elaine Murakami FHWA Office of Planning 206-220-4460

16 years, 10 months

RE: [CTPP] Census Data in High Vacation Rental Areas

by Fernando DePaolis

Richard is absolutely right... The problem as I see it, it's the lack of consistent, cross-tab records to understand why a unit is vacant... Is it due to a tough rental market? Or is it because the unit it's never for rent in the 1st place? Unless there is a specific reason to associate housing units to number of people (such as physical infrastructure inference), housing stock should never be used as a proxy for person counts...AND, YES, Richard is right again about IRS records...it has a few (or too many, depending on how you see it) incongruencies and too much room for interpretation/error... Again, if it were easy there wouldn't be any demographers, right??? Thanks everybody... ******************************************************* Fernando DePaolis Regional Economist Denver Regional Council of Governments 4500 Cherry Creek Dr South Suite 800 Denver CO 80246-1531 (303)480-6728 fdepaolis(a)drcog.org www.drcog.org ******************************************************* > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Lin [mailto:richard.lin(a)state.co.us] > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 12:16 PM > To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net; Fernando DePaolis; djbeaty(a)pbsj.com > Cc: Cindy DeGroen; Elizabeth Garner; Jim Westkott > Subject: RE: [CTPP] Census Data in High Vacation Rental Areas > > Dear Fernando and All, > In population statistics, a person can only be counted > once and only once. Therefore, if a person lives in his/her > usual (permanent) residence but also owns a second home > (vacation home), his/her second home should be counted as > vacant except it is rented out as permanent (long term; such > as one-year lease) residence for the renters. > Unless you have an annual updated formal report of the > rental list by number of residents, the IRS income tax report > (or county-to-county IRS migration flow) is the best > administrative record for the estimates of population change. > The only shortcoming of the IRS report is that it does not > cover the illegal immigrants and those who either do not file > income tax report or who do file income tax report using > address other than the rental address. > Underestimated second home renters? Maybe. Overestimated? > Possible. The best solution is to have a census count (or > canvass; or administrative record) by well defined residence > rule (a person can only be counted once and only once). > Hope the difficult issue keep demographers alive. > > > ________________________________ > Richard Lin, Ph.D. > Demographer > Colorado Department of Local Affairs > Division of Local Government > 1313 Sherman Street, Room 521 > Denver, CO 80203 > Phone: (303)866-4989 > Fax:: (303)866-2660 > richard.lin(a)state.co.us > www.DOLA.Colorado.Gov > > >>> "Fernando DePaolis" <FDePaolis(a)drcog.org> 6/7/2007 8:58 AM >>> > We have the same problem in the mountain communities where > there is a large proportion of "second" homes, not > necessarily for rent... it's been quite frustrating but at > some point we'll have a method to deal with that... probably > based on reports from local governments... the main problem > in forecasting those figures is the high volatility of such markets... > > Our view is that "the Census" doesn't deal with the > underlying cause of vacancy very well... > > Regards, > > Fernando DePaolis, Ph.D. > Regional Economist > DRCOG - Denver Regional Council of Governments 4500 Cherry > Creek Dr South Suite 800 Denver CO 80246-1531 > (303)480-6728 fdepaolis(a)drcog.org www.drcog.org > <http://www.drcog.org/> > This is a private message sent on my DRCOG email account > pursuant to DRCOG's Internet Policy. This email and any files > transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for > the use of the individual or entity to whom they are > addressed. If you have received this email in error please > disregard. Any views or opinions presented in this email are > solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent > those of DRCOG. > > > _____ > > From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net > [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Beaty, Daniel J > Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 2:50 PM > To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net > Subject: [CTPP] Census Data in High Vacation Rental Areas > > > I want to know if anyone else has had experience with > Census data seeming to under represent population and vacancy > rates in areas with high concentrations of vacation rental > property that tends to be seasonal in nature. I am working > on a project that has this situation and I'm would like to > know if this is an anomaly or if others have seen this also. > > Thanks, > > Daniel J. Beaty, AICP > PBS&J > Transportation Planning Program Manager > 1901 Commonwealth Lane > Tallahassee, Florida 32303 > Phone: 850.575.1800 Ext. 7914 > Fax: 850.574.2428 > >

16 years, 10 months

RE: [CTPP] Census Data in High Vacation Rental Areas

by Richard Lin

Dear Fernando and All, In population statistics, a person can only be counted once and only once. Therefore, if a person lives in his/her usual (permanent) residence but also owns a second home (vacation home), his/her second home should be counted as vacant except it is rented out as permanent (long term; such as one-year lease) residence for the renters. Unless you have an annual updated formal report of the rental list by number of residents, the IRS income tax report (or county-to-county IRS migration flow) is the best administrative record for the estimates of population change. The only shortcoming of the IRS report is that it does not cover the illegal immigrants and those who either do not file income tax report or who do file income tax report using address other than the rental address. Underestimated second home renters? Maybe. Overestimated? Possible. The best solution is to have a census count (or canvass; or administrative record) by well defined residence rule (a person can only be counted once and only once). Hope the difficult issue keep demographers alive. ________________________________ Richard Lin, Ph.D. Demographer Colorado Department of Local Affairs Division of Local Government 1313 Sherman Street, Room 521 Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303)866-4989 Fax:: (303)866-2660 richard.lin(a)state.co.us www.DOLA.Colorado.Gov >>> "Fernando DePaolis" <FDePaolis(a)drcog.org> 6/7/2007 8:58 AM >>> We have the same problem in the mountain communities where there is a large proportion of "second" homes, not necessarily for rent... it's been quite frustrating but at some point we'll have a method to deal with that... probably based on reports from local governments... the main problem in forecasting those figures is the high volatility of such markets... Our view is that "the Census" doesn't deal with the underlying cause of vacancy very well... Regards, Fernando DePaolis, Ph.D. Regional Economist DRCOG - Denver Regional Council of Governments 4500 Cherry Creek Dr South Suite 800 Denver CO 80246-1531 (303)480-6728 fdepaolis(a)drcog.org www.drcog.org <http://www.drcog.org/> This is a private message sent on my DRCOG email account pursuant to DRCOG's Internet Policy. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please disregard. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of DRCOG. _____ From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Beaty, Daniel J Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 2:50 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] Census Data in High Vacation Rental Areas I want to know if anyone else has had experience with Census data seeming to under represent population and vacancy rates in areas with high concentrations of vacation rental property that tends to be seasonal in nature. I am working on a project that has this situation and I'm would like to know if this is an anomaly or if others have seen this also. Thanks, Daniel J. Beaty, AICP PBS&J Transportation Planning Program Manager 1901 Commonwealth Lane Tallahassee, Florida 32303 Phone: 850.575.1800 Ext. 7914 Fax: 850.574.2428

16 years, 10 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 June 2007