CTPP April 2011

ctpp@listserv.transportation.org

31 participants
24 discussions

by Elaine.Murakami＠dot.gov

Here is the challenge! I do not know how to do IPF, but I know that many of you out there can do it! Attached are: ACS B08101 ; ACS B08006 for Maricopa County Arizona. You can ignore the MOE cells for this IPF challenge. Also attached is a 3-way tabulation using IPUMS for Maricopa County AZ. All are using 2009 ACS. You will note that carpool is not broken out, as the question is really in 2 parts (what mode, and then how many people), so this table could be re-done by creating a carpool variable, if you wanted. We have an archived webinar on using IPUMS, if you are interested in making your own tabs using ACS PUMS. http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/webinardirectory.aspx Elaine -----Original Message----- From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Erlbaum, Nathan (DOT) Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 11:42 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] 2010 Data Release Watch Noted below is a question and a response that appeared on the list serve earlier today and that suggests a solution method to creating data that almost exists but is needed. I am reposting this to the list serve, because I believe that this might be a worthwhile effort for someone who is adept and familiar with IPF to provide a valuable resources to the CTPP community in much the same way the ACS MOE spreadsheets have evolved to explain how to deal with this statistical concept in an easy to use way for the practitioner. Recently there was a post to the listserve by Jonnette Kreideweis about the Census Conference in California and the call for papers. There was also a recent post about the Planning Methods Conference. A spreadsheet that would answer the question posed is potentially a good basis for a paper. Further it helps share skills with the larger practitioner community based upon solutions and techniques that others have implemented. When presented and discussed on a listserve then many more people perhaps those who might never consider this as an option may now have a solution to the very same problem or may move on to adapt the method to other analysis areas. I want to encourage anyone who has the time to give it a try, maybe a student can use this to apply what they have learned, or a modeler can cannibalize something he/she has already used, many may benefit from you efforts. ---------------------------------------------------------- Nathan Erlbaum Associate Transportation Analyst Office of Policy, Planning & Performance New York State Department of Transportation 50 Wolf Road, 6th Floor Albany, New York 12232 (Tel) 518.457.2967 (Fax) 518.457.4944 (E-mail) nerlbaum(a)dot.state.ny.us (Web) www.nysdot.gov >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Marcus Wigan wrote: > ed > > a terribly simple question > > How best to do age group by gender by travel on the CTTP! > best > marc >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ed Christopher's response: Unfortunately, there is no clean way to get Age by Gender by Mode (Means of travel), that I know about, directly out of the current 3-year CTPP data product nor the Standard Census ACS products for that matter. However, there are some options that will get you close but they will take a little work. Option 1. In CTPP take table 12201 ( Age by Mode to work) and table 11203 (Age by Sex/gender)and run an IPF (Iterative Proportional Fitting-fratar) routine between the two tables to get what you want. At least I think it will work. Option 2. Do the same with standard ACS product tables B08006 (Sex by Mode) and B08101 (Mode by Age). If you go this route I think these tables may even exist in the 5-year ACS so you could do it at smaller than Places over 20K population geography. Option 3. Just make your table using the PUMS data but you would be limited to geographical areas of over 100K people. Over the years we has suggested that people use an IPF routine to make tables that might not exist in the various data products. I would be interested in hearing if anyone has actually done it. Have you?

14 years, 2 months

[CTPP] 2010 Data Release Watch

by Ed Christopher

Next week the Census Bureau is poised to release the local-level 2010 Census population counts for Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota and Tennessee. Based on a quick and cursory review that leaves only MI, SC, WV, NY, MA, NH,ME,RI and PR. http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/ -- Ed Christopher 708-283-3534 (V) 708-574-8131 (cell) FHWA RC-TST-PLN 4749 Lincoln Mall Drive, Suite 600 Matteson, IL 60443

14 years, 2 months

[CTPP] Census Urbanized Area NOTES

by Elaine.Murakami＠dot.gov

This is the same information that was in the attachment yesterday, however, some people told me they could not open the attachment. I have also reduced the spreadsheet file, so that it is now limited to those UA between 40,000 and 299,999 population. ---------------- April 19, 2011, Planning On the Web, UA Notes These notes are limited to the discussion about Census defined urban areas (urbanized areas with population 50,000 and above, and urban clusters with population 2,500 to 49,999). Urban Area Final Criteria Mike Ratcliffe, Census Bureau Geography, reported on the status of the final rules for delineating Urban Areas. He noted that the transportation community was a significant contributor of comments to the Federal Register notice on the proposed criteria ( http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-20808.htm <http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-20808.htm> ). All of the comments have been reviewed and draft criteria written. However, before the criteria are finalized and sent to the Office of Management of Budget (OMB) for posting to the Federal Register (FR), the Census Bureau's Statistical Areas Committee must meet and approve them. The Statistical Areas Committee is an internal Census Bureau Committee. So far the committee has been having difficulty finding a date on which to meet, causing delay. Mike hopes the FR notice with the final criteria will be out this summer. In the meantime, the Census Bureau staff has started to work on the technical process of identifying the Urban Areas under the assumption that the draft criteria will be approved. If the Statistical Areas Committee or OMB makes a change to the criteria, staff will have to revise the process. Mike then reported on some of the criteria that was submitted to the Statistical Areas Committee: Jump criteria - Maintain the 2.5 mile distance. Comments to the FR notice were about 50/50 on whether to return to the 1.5 mile distance from 1990 or keep the 2.5 mile from 2000. Comments to the FR notice also favored maintaining comparability to the 2000 Urban Areas so maintaining the 2.5 distance threshold is recommended. Impervious surface - Comments were overwhelming to use the impervious surface file. The impervious surface file would make sure that built up areas would be included in Urban Areas. It will have to be seen if this might impact jumps to capture more area. Merging or splitting adjacent Urbanized Areas. This topic had the most comments and the most questions. According to Mike, the proposed final criteria will call for using the Urbanized Areas from 2000 as a baseline and keep each as a separate Urbanized Area, even if an Urbanized Area touches or grows into another Urbanized Area using the 2010 Census population. They would remain separate as two Urbanized Areas even though their exact boundaries may change. Question: What if two separate Urbanized Areas are adjoining and one is above the TMA threshold and one is below the TMA boundary. Would FHWA say that both Urbanized Areas would be inside the TMA? Answer: Historically, FHWA has NOT merged Urbanized Areas, even if they are adjacent or touching, to make a combined TMA. FHWA has used the Census Bureau's list of Urbanized Areas with population 200,000 or above. This could possibly change under re-authorization. Question: Can someone predict if an Urbanized Area is likely to reach above the current TMA threshold of 200,000? Answer: The 2007-2009 ACS 3-year data include all urban areas of 20,000 or more. Using this data set provides a sense of which urban clusters might have over 50,000 people when redefined based on 2010 census counts, and thus are potential urbanized areas. A spreadsheet of this data is embedded here. What will be population thresholds for MPOs and TMAs under re-authorization? Harlan Miller, FHWA Office of Planning was on hand and noted that the administration's proposal is expected to be sent to Congress within a month from now (or even sooner). But, he cautioned that one could not anticipate what the House or Senate might include in their version of a transportation bill. Harlan said that for now, it is best to tell people that until we know otherwise, to use 50,000 as the threshold for MPOs, and 200,000 as the threshold for TMAs.

14 years, 5 months

[CTPP] RE: Update on Census Urbanized Areas

by Nancy Reger

Thank you Elaine. This is really important to us. We have taken a stab at mapping the boundary as we have a rural transit district that is concerned that the Columbus UA would connect with Delaware City's UA and affect their funding status- Nancy Nancy Reger, AICP Deputy Director, Transportation Mid Ohio Regional Planning Commission 111 Liberty St, Ste 100, Columbus OH 43215 P: (614) 233-4154 /E: nreger(a)morpc.org -----Original Message----- From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 2:19 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] Update on Census Urbanized Areas Hi Everyone -- On Tuesday, April 19, 2011, there was an internal FHWA/FTA web-meeting on Census-related issues that Ed Christopher put together. As part of the meeting, Mike Ratcliffe from the Census Bureau Geography Division was on hand and discussed Urbanized Area Boundaries. A summary of the current status of new UA delineation and status of the final criteria is attached. Note: "final" criteria is NOT YET complete. Yours truly, for keeping communication open, Elaine Murakami FHWA Office of Planning 206-220-4460

14 years, 5 months

RE: [CTPP] Census Vacant Structure Determination

by Patty Becker

Thanks, Pete, for mentioning the under construction issue. That's definitely also a concern. They used to call it something like "sheltered from the elements," meaning that the roof was up and the windows were in. I also agree that there are big problems with the postal vacancy survey. I've never used those data because I don't trust them, plus they were delivered at the zip code level which is really too large to be of any use in a multi-zip code city. In past censuses, when the bureau claimed to provide "characteristics of vacancies" I never trusted those data either, again because collecting that information is not the decennial census' primary missing. In turn, this means that "vacant for sale" and "vacant for rent" are shaky concepts. Add to that the more modern problem of condos which are sometimes occupied by their owners and sometimes on the vacation rental market...! Impossible to classify. Patty Becker At 06:28 PM 4/26/2011, you wrote: >Content-Language: en-US >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > >boundary="_000_C803D69C9CCBC74D8A3625CC9D78D809A228E24949EXCHMB1mcloca_" > >Im going to respectfully disagree re: HUD >Users USPS Occupancy/Vacancy rates. >Those occupancy/vacancy rates from HUD User are really wacky. > >It was a great idea to leverage the postal >service but its not the mail-carriers >primary mission or duty, so theres very uneven >and inconsistent record-keeping (lots of status >undetermined records). And where status is >determined I think the carriers record-keeping >may be biased toward false positives >(erroneously high occupancy rates) perhaps >based on the simple fact that junk mail never stops coming? > >________________________ > >Todd Graham >Principal Forecaster and Project Manager >Metropolitan Council >390 Robert Street North >Saint Paul, MN 55101 > >ph: 651/602-1322 >email: <mailto:todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us>todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us >in: www.linkedin.com/in/toddgraham >web: http://www.metrocouncil.org/data/ >________________________ > > >From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net >[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Mara Kaminowitz >Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 11:33 AM >To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net >Subject: RE: [CTPP] Census Vacant Structure Determination > >The HUD/USPS dataset may also be of use. The >program is on hold but data is available up to Sept. 2010.

14 years, 5 months

[CTPP] Census Vacant Structure Determination

by Adam Aull

Hello everyone. I am in need of information regarding how the Census Bureau determines the status of vacant structures. Our city has a vacant structure ordinance in place. This ordinance dictates that property owners register their buildings with the city planning department. How does the Census determine which structures are vacant? Thanks for the help. Adam Aull MPO Director/GIS Manager Danville Area Transportation Study 17 West Main Street, Danville, IL 61832 T: 217 - 431 - 2325 F: 217 - 431 - 2237 E: aaull(a)cityofdanville.org <mailto:aaull(a)cityofdanville.org>

14 years, 5 months

[CTPP] AFF and Data Ferrett training May 24 in Washington DC

by Elaine.Murakami＠dot.gov

http://www.census.gov/mso/www/tsw/info.htm I found notice about these 2 classes when I was looking for something on the Census Homepage. Date: May 24 (deadline to register May 10) Location: Bureau of Labor Statistics 2 Massachusetts Ave NE Washington DC 20212 Information: 301-763-4308 Clmso.training(a)census.gov

14 years, 5 months

[CTPP] Census 2000 urban areas

by Brian J. Morton

Background... I am the Principal Investigator for a new project (NCHRP 25-36), funded by the Transportation Research Board, to investigate the land use-transportation interactions in small areas and rural areas in the U.S. (A brief description of the project is available at: http://144.171.11.40/cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=2987. I am working closely with Joe Huegy at North Carolina State University. The Project Officer is Nanda Srinivasan.) One of our first tasks is to develop a typology of those areas, for the specific purpose of guiding development and application of the empirical methods that we will use to quantitatively characterize those interactions. Of course, an excellent starting point for our work on the new typology is the Census Bureau's delineation of Urbanized Areas and Urban Clusters based on the 2000 Census. Question... Where may I find the codes for the 24 Urban Clusters that consist entirely or predominantly of persons living in institutional group quarters, to which the Census Bureau draws attention in its Federal Register notice about the proposed urban area criteria for the 2010 census? See 75 FR 52178. Thanks Brian J. Morton -- /Brian J. Morton, Ph.D. Senior Research Associate Center for Urban and Regional Studies University of North Carolina Campus Box 3410 Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3410 USA (919) 962-8847/

14 years, 5 months

[CTPP] Whole States Available in CTPP Data Access Software

by Weinberger

Hi All, State data files have been added to the CTPP. You may download your entire state in three zip files (part 1, residence; part 2, workplace; and part 3, flows). If your state contains a border or multistate MSA, MSA layer will include all principal cities, including those across the state line. Go to: http://data.ctpp.transportation.org/CTPP/Common/Login/Login.aspx log in or register, and click on <javascript:ExpandFolder('Collapse','True','P');> <javascript:OnFolderClick('Collapse','True','P');> CTPP Full Data Release Sep 2010 <javascript:OnFolderClick('Collapse','True','P');> then <javascript:ExpandFolder('Expand','True','P,11715');> <javascript:OnFolderClick('Expand','True','P,11715');> Source Data Files by State <javascript:OnFolderClick('Expand','True','P,11715');> Select your state and download the three Zip files. Penelope Weinberger CTPP Program Manager AASHTO 202-624-3556 http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx <http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx> It's just as bad to not make a plan as to blindly follow the one you already have.

14 years, 5 months

[CTPP] Join us for "CTPP Data Access Software Basics"

by Weinberger

Hi All, The long awaited and technically fraught Data Access Software training is making another go of it! Please join us tomorrow by VOIP for a one hour session that will include a brief intro to CTPP, a very basic intro to the software, followed by a more advanced exploration, but still for beginners. Registration is required and limited to 100 participants. This training will be repeated. CTPP Data Access Software Basics Join us for a Webinar on April 14 <https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/915050328> Space is limited. Reserve your Webinar seat now at: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/915050328 A guided tour through the CTPP Based on three year ACS, including software demo and Q&A Title: CTPP Data Access Software Basics Date: Thursday, April 14, 2011 Time: 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM EDT After registering you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the Webinar. System Requirements PC-based attendees Required: Windows® 7, Vista, XP or 2003 Server Macintosh®-based attendees Required: Mac OS® X 10.4.11 (Tiger®) or newer

14 years, 5 months

2025

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 April 2011