CTPP March 2019

ctpp@listserv.transportation.org

6 participants
4 discussions

[CTPP] PSAP participants in every county: https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/partnerships/psap/Primary_PSAP_Participant_Contact_Information.pdf

by Graham

Hi friends of Census Tracts- If it's useful to you... Census Bureau has published a contacts list of 2020 Census PSAP participating agencies, here: https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/partnerships/psap/Primary_PSAP_Participant… This list covers every county in the nation. If the listing for your county points to an erroneous agency or a nonworking phone number/email, I suggest you alert Census's Geog Division: geo.psap(a)census.gov<mailto:geo.psap(a)census.gov> By the way, our office, Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities, has a few upcoming meetings where we'll be describing our review, validation and redrawing of Census Tracts and Block Groups. We are well into the preliminary work. Starting in March we will be pointing interested stakeholders to preliminary, proposed re-tracting for our 7-county region. And we will be inviting stakeholders to comment or express their needs for Census stats tabulations for sub-city zones, service areas, etc. We will consider whether those needs can possibly be met with 2020-vintage Tracts and Block Groups. It's possible we may receive some comments from outside of our region. When that happens, we will be redirecting commenters to the other county governments and regional development commissions in our state... May want to bookmark the participants list mentioned above! Hope that helps. Cheers, Todd Graham [EMAILLOGO.png] Todd Graham Principal Demographer | Metropolitan Council | Research todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us<mailto:todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us> P. 651.602.1322 | F. 651.602.1674 390 North Robert Street | St. Paul, MN 55101 | metrocouncil.org/data<http://www.metrocouncil.org/data> [ConWUs][FaceBook_32x32]<http://www.facebook.com/MetropolitanCouncil>[Twitter_32x32]<http://twitter.com/#!/metcouncilnews>[linkedin]<http://www.linkedin.com/in/toddgraham>[Youtube_32x32]<http://www.youtube.com/user/MetropolitanCouncil> [EmailSU] <https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/MNORGMETC/subscribers/new?preferenc…>

5 years

[CTPP] PSAP -- Other criteria or principles for delineation?

by Reardon

Hi all, I imagine many of us are busy diving into GUPS and getting started with the delineation work. Obviously there are specific Census-defined thresholds for each type of statistical areas, but I’m curious to know if there are other criteria or principles that folks are using as they consider possible adjustments. Historical continuity aside, what makes for a good block group or tract? Should we seek to minimize heterogeneity by drawing boundaries that separate very different neighborhoods/sub-neighborhoods? Or is it better to have block groups/tracts that include a more diverse set of households and residents? I would imagine that the approach taken to these questions will affect not only the confidence intervals of the resulting ACS tables, but also the results of whatever research uses those tables. Any opinions or literature references on this topic would be most welcome! Tim Reardon Data Services Director Metropolitan Area Planning Council, Boston From: Graham, Todd [mailto:todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us] Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019 1:10 PM To: sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu; ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Cc: joshua.wixom(a)census.gov; GEO PSAP (CENSUS/GEO) <geo.psap(a)census.gov> Subject: [State Data Centers] PSAP participants in every county: https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/partnerships/psap/Primary_PSAP_Participant… Hi friends of Census Tracts— If it’s useful to you… Census Bureau has published a contacts list of 2020 Census PSAP participating agencies, here: https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/partnerships/psap/Primary_PSAP_Participant… This list covers every county in the nation. If the listing for your county points to an erroneous agency or a nonworking phone number/email, I suggest you alert Census’s Geog Division: geo.psap(a)census.gov<mailto:geo.psap(a)census.gov> By the way, our office, Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities, has a few upcoming meetings where we’ll be describing our review, validation and redrawing of Census Tracts and Block Groups. We are well into the preliminary work. Starting in March we will be pointing interested stakeholders to preliminary, proposed re-tracting for our 7-county region. And we will be inviting stakeholders to comment or express their needs for Census stats tabulations for sub-city zones, service areas, etc. We will consider whether those needs can possibly be met with 2020-vintage Tracts and Block Groups. It’s possible we may receive some comments from outside of our region. When that happens, we will be redirecting commenters to the other county governments and regional development commissions in our state… May want to bookmark the participants list mentioned above! Hope that helps. Cheers, Todd Graham [EMAILLOGO.png] Todd Graham Principal Demographer | Metropolitan Council | Research todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us<mailto:todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us> P. 651.602.1322 | F. 651.602.1674 390 North Robert Street | St. Paul, MN 55101 | metrocouncil.org/data<http://www.metrocouncil.org/data> [ConWUs][FaceBook_32x32]<http://www.facebook.com/MetropolitanCouncil>[Twitter_32x32]<http://twitter.com/#!/metcouncilnews>[linkedin]<http://www.linkedin.com/in/toddgraham>[Youtube_32x32]<http://www.youtube.com/user/MetropolitanCouncil> [EmailSU] <https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/MNORGMETC/subscribers/new?preferenc…> -- SDC Clearinghouse (http://sdcclearinghouse.wordpress.com) --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu<mailto:sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu>" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sdc_mlist+unsubscribe(a)lists.berkeley.edu<mailto:sdc_mlist+unsubscribe(a)lists.berkeley.edu>. Please be advised that the Massachusetts Secretary of State considers e-mail to be a public record, and therefore subject to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c. 66 § 10.

5 years, 1 month

Re: [CTPP] [Caution: Message contains Redirect URL content] Re: [State Data Centers] PSAP -- Other criteria or principles for delineation?

by Jon Chiappe

I would appreciate your paper please Patty. I was curious what others thought of the continuity as well as it would seem to limit some city planners From: Patricia Becker <pbecker(a)umich.edu> Sent: Monday, March 4, 2019 11:22 AM To: Reardon, Tim <TReardon(a)mapc.org> Cc: sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu; ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net; joshua.wixom(a)census.gov; GEO PSAP (CENSUS/GEO) <geo.psap(a)census.gov>; Graham, Todd <todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us> Subject: [Caution: Message contains Redirect URL content] Re: [State Data Centers] PSAP -- Other criteria or principles for delineation? I wrote a paper about this 20 years ago; I'll be happy to send it to anyone who asks. In general, I think tract boundaries should be something - usually streets but sometimes water - that local people recognize as being a divider. Freeways are the highest priority, since they're difficult to cross. Then major arterial streets/roads. I also believe, and have said many times, that continuity is a shibboleth. That is, it's something everything thinks is of highest importance, but it really isn't. Good tracts for now and the future are more important. I almost completely retracted Detroit before the 1980 census, because when the tracts had originally been drawn -- after the 1930 census -- no one understood their purpose, plus the city had changed enormously with new freeways and urban renewal. I also use housing units rather than population counts as a size criterion. The ideal tract has about 1500 HUs. My reason for using HU counts is twofold: (1) the data are readily available, while pop counts are not, and (2) the sampling errors for ACS data ride on cases, which are households, not people. Hope this is helpful. Patty Becker [https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-anima…]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> Virus-free. www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 12:14 PM Reardon, Tim <TReardon(a)mapc.org<mailto:TReardon(a)mapc.org>> wrote: Hi all, I imagine many of us are busy diving into GUPS and getting started with the delineation work. Obviously there are specific Census-defined thresholds for each type of statistical areas, but I’m curious to know if there are other criteria or principles that folks are using as they consider possible adjustments. Historical continuity aside, what makes for a good block group or tract? Should we seek to minimize heterogeneity by drawing boundaries that separate very different neighborhoods/sub-neighborhoods? Or is it better to have block groups/tracts that include a more diverse set of households and residents? I would imagine that the approach taken to these questions will affect not only the confidence intervals of the resulting ACS tables, but also the results of whatever research uses those tables. Any opinions or literature references on this topic would be most welcome! Tim Reardon Data Services Director Metropolitan Area Planning Council, Boston From: Graham, Todd [mailto:todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us<mailto:todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us>] Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019 1:10 PM To: sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu<mailto:sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu>; ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Cc: joshua.wixom(a)census.gov<mailto:joshua.wixom(a)census.gov>; GEO PSAP (CENSUS/GEO) <geo.psap(a)census.gov<mailto:geo.psap(a)census.gov>> Subject: [State Data Centers] PSAP participants in every county: https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/partnerships/psap/Primary_PSAP_Participant… Hi friends of Census Tracts— If it’s useful to you… Census Bureau has published a contacts list of 2020 Census PSAP participating agencies, here: https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/partnerships/psap/Primary_PSAP_Participant… This list covers every county in the nation. If the listing for your county points to an erroneous agency or a nonworking phone number/email, I suggest you alert Census’s Geog Division: geo.psap(a)census.gov<mailto:geo.psap(a)census.gov> By the way, our office, Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities, has a few upcoming meetings where we’ll be describing our review, validation and redrawing of Census Tracts and Block Groups. We are well into the preliminary work. Starting in March we will be pointing interested stakeholders to preliminary, proposed re-tracting for our 7-county region. And we will be inviting stakeholders to comment or express their needs for Census stats tabulations for sub-city zones, service areas, etc. We will consider whether those needs can possibly be met with 2020-vintage Tracts and Block Groups. It’s possible we may receive some comments from outside of our region. When that happens, we will be redirecting commenters to the other county governments and regional development commissions in our state… May want to bookmark the participants list mentioned above! Hope that helps. Cheers, Todd Graham [EMAILLOGO.png] Todd Graham Principal Demographer | Metropolitan Council | Research todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us<mailto:todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us> P. 651.602.1322 | F. 651.602.1674 390 North Robert Street | St. Paul, MN 55101 | metrocouncil.org/data<http://www.metrocouncil.org/data> [ConWUs][FaceBook_32x32]<http://www.facebook.com/MetropolitanCouncil>[Twitter_32x32]<http://twitter.com/#!/metcouncilnews>[linkedin]<http://www.linkedin.com/in/toddgraham>[Youtube_32x32]<http://www.youtube.com/user/MetropolitanCouncil> [EmailSU] <https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/MNORGMETC/subscribers/new?preferenc…> -- SDC Clearinghouse (http://sdcclearinghouse.wordpress.com) --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu<mailto:sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu>" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sdc_mlist+unsubscribe(a)lists.berkeley.edu<mailto:sdc_mlist+unsubscribe(a)lists.berkeley.edu>. Please be advised that the Massachusetts Secretary of State considers e-mail to be a public record, and therefore subject to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c. 66 § 10. -- SDC Clearinghouse (http://sdcclearinghouse.wordpress.com) --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu<mailto:sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu>" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sdc_mlist+unsubscribe(a)lists.berkeley.edu<mailto:sdc_mlist+unsubscribe(a)lists.berkeley.edu>. -- Patricia C. (Patty) Becker APB Associates/Southeast Michigan Census Council (SEMCC) Note: new address as of 6/5/18: 28332 Franklin Rd, Southfield, MI 48034 office: 248-354-6520 home:248-355-2428 pbecker(a)umich.edu<mailto:pbecker(a)umich.edu> [https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-anima…]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> Virus-free. www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> -- SDC Clearinghouse (http://sdcclearinghouse.wordpress.com) --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu<mailto:sdc_mlist(a)lists.berkeley.edu>" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sdc_mlist+unsubscribe(a)lists.berkeley.edu<mailto:sdc_mlist+unsubscribe(a)lists.berkeley.edu>.

5 years, 1 month

Re: [CTPP] Exploring Jobs/Housing Balance using the American Community Survey: Blog Posts

by Alan E. Pisarski

Chuck somewhere like slides 51-54 of this presentation from earlier this week, is my discussion of workers leaving their res county to work. it is a major national phenomenon which I have tracked over the years and Fairfax County is the poster child with an 8,000 difference between jobs and workers and about a half million flows across the county borders. I have looked at counties in Md where they have similar J/W ratios close to one and there are massive flows – so much for job worker balance as a solution! What we need is the soviet and Chinese approach where the electrical workers cooperative is housed just across the road from the electronics factory. Come to think of that we did that back in the bad old days—remember the pathetic houses clustered around the factory gate – the whistle blew and everyone went to work. I like your index idea – what I have used is the ratio of the potential workers crossing the border to the actual. Best, Alan Alan E. Pisarski alanpisarski(a)alanpisarski.com 703-941-4257 landline 703 650-8925 cell From: ctpp-news <ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net> On Behalf Of Charles Purvis Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 3:05 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] Exploring Jobs/Housing Balance using the American Community Survey: Blog Posts Hello all: I just finished a three-part blog post entitled "Exploring Jobs/Housing Balance using the American Community Survey" I thought it would be of interest to some of you. I'm basically using the commute flow data (county-of-residence, intra-county, county-of-work) from Tables B08007 and B08501. Here are the three posts: https://censusmaven.wordpress.com/2019/02/26/exploring-jobs-housing-balance… https://censusmaven.wordpress.com/2019/02/27/exploring-jobs-housing-balance… https://censusmaven.wordpress.com/2019/02/28/exploring-jobs-housing-balance… The blog home is here: https://censusmaven.wordpress.com/blog/ This is the kind of "mental floss" activities that I do when I'm not watching baseball or going on international trips. I still get a kick out of it, even after being retired for 9 years and 5 months! :) I have other ideas for this master county-level database, and would love to here from you all, as well. Take care, Chuck Purvis, Hayward, Calfiornia (formerly with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in San Francisco) clpurvis(a)gmail.com <mailto:clpurvis(a)gmail.com>

5 years, 1 month

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 March 2019