ctpp-news June 2003

ctpp-news@mailman.chrispy.net

22 participants
20 discussions

New Census Brief reports from sample data

by Chuck Purvis

TO: CTPP-News; Bay Area Census Listserv The Census Bureau has a series of "Census Brief" reports, each about 12 pages in length, in PDF format, with detailed tables, ranking of cities, and national thematic maps for all U.S. counties and states. The most recent reports are based on "long form" sample data, including topics such as: poverty, disability, housing values, renters costs, and veterans. (The poverty brief was just issued this week.) More are yet to come. Congratulations (of sorts) to Sunnyvale, California, for having the highest median housing values among large U.S. cities of 100,000+ population! Sunnyvale is also tied with Irvine, California, in terms of highest median gross rents. The url is: http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/briefs.html ************************************************************** Charles L. Purvis, AICP Principal Transportation Planner/Analyst Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607-4700 (510) 464-7731 (office) (510) 464-7848 (fax) www: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/ Census WWW: http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/ **************************************************************

20 years, 10 months

Re: [CTPP] : County-to-county worker flow data, 200"edc@berwyned.com".GWIA.East_Dom0

by Bill Barlow

here's an excepts from my brief article from 'the core of the rust belt' (Youngstown, Ohio). In 1970 only 700 workers from the Mahoning Valley worked in Geauga County, now 4,000 do. Cuyahoga County drew only 668 workers from the region in 1970 now 3,093 make this daily commute. Portage and Summit Counties each gained 1,700 'Valley' workers over the last 30 years and the 'Valley' commuters headed for Columbiana County doubled from 2,141 to 4,028. Pennsylvania has also become a popular place of work. About 1,900 more people go over the State line to work than did in 1970; this is a change of 38%. The good news is that more employable people still make the Mahoning Valley (core of the rust belt) their home base. They pay their property taxes here and for the most part they still shop locally. The bad news is that more local income taxes go elsewhere. And there's a lot more traffic out even in communities that aren't experiencing growth. >>> ed christopher <edc(a)berwyned.com> 06/03/03 06:25PM >>> it would be nice to see or hear more about "who has done what" with their county flow data. linked below is a piece i worked on focused on the chicago area. one of the things that we here enjoy looking at, are the flows that come into a county (imports), the ones that go out (exports) and the ones that never leave (retains). analyzing how these trend overtime certainly gives one a fuller appreciation of the dynamics of our work travel and urban form. in 30 years we have seen the character of an area (at the county level) change and go from a collection of "bedroom communities" (exporter) to an area that is self sustaining (importer and retainer) in its balance of trips. it will be fun to look at this in more geographic detail "if and when" we ever get our flow data. http://www.berwyned.com/papers/co2cochgo.pdf danielle.cervantes(a)uniontrib.com wrote: > This trend has been amply written about in San Diego. I have the CTPP > data, and I was trained to explore it (thanks Steve and Paul!), but I > haven't had an opportunity yet. Generally, the "regular" Census > releases have answered our questions. Am I missing something?

20 years, 10 months

RE: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000

by danielle.cervantes＠uniontrib.com

This trend has been amply written about in San Diego. I have the CTPP data, and I was trained to explore it (thanks Steve and Paul!), but I haven't had an opportunity yet. Generally, the "regular" Census releases have answered our questions. Am I missing something? -----Original Message----- From: Sirota, Stuart [mailto:SirotaS@pbworld.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 1:08 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 Alan - But you've already given us your answer: "stay and commute", right? So what questions are you asking of the data that have not already been answered? Inquiring minds want to know. :) Stu Sirota Parsons Brinckerhoff Baltimore, Maryland -----Original Message----- From: ALAN E. PISARSKI [mailto:pisarski@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 3:37 PM To: Sirota, Stuart; ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 DOCTRINE RAISES ITS HEAD BEFORE THE ANSWERS ARE IN. THANKYOU. Alan Pisarski ----- Original Message ----- From: Sirota, <mailto:SirotaS@pbworld.com> Stuart To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net <mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 3:07 PM Subject: RE: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 The 2000 CTPP simply confirms what any 6 year old buckled into the back seat of a minivan can plainly see: Americans are being compelled to spend ever-greater amounts of time in cars, over longer distances. The reasons for this unsustainable trend, which are the resulting nexus of land use policy, transportation policy, societal and economic forces, have been well documented. Now that the data is in, what will we as planners do with it?: a) Continue to recommend projects and policies that perpetuate the status quo trendline? b) Develop tools that provide alternative choices? You decide. Stu Sirota Parsons Brinckerhoff Baltimore, Maryland -----Original Message----- From: William Knight [mailto:wknight@ccmpo.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:02 PM To: 'ALAN E. PISARSKI'; 'Sam Granato' Cc: 'ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net' Subject: RE: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 This all is a familiar phenomenon in the Burlington, VT area. Housing in the county is sky rocketing in costs and people are moving out to adjacent and even further away. Commutes are getting longer. William L Knight, Executive Director Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization 30 Kimball Avenue South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 660-4071, Ext. 228 (802) 660-4079 Fax wknight(a)ccmpo.org www.ccmpo.org -----Original Message----- From: ALAN E. PISARSKI [mailto:pisarski@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:50 AM To: Sam Granato Cc: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 All good thoughts. We saw this in New Hampshire also - the family home that is rich in sentiment but cant get much on the market vs a suburban house you cant afford. Answer: Stay and commute. Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: Sam Granato <mailto:Sam.Granato@dot.state.oh.us> To: ALAN E. PISARSKI <mailto:pisarski@ix.netcom.com> Cc: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net <mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:39 AM Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 I had already noted for Wheeling model development that commuting to counties in Pennsylvania doubled from 1990 to 2000! But to address the general point, seems there's two trends at work - in stagnant regional economies, workers try to avoid moving when by choice or force they take that more distant job (in addition to all the "rural community" issues, what kind of price would you get for your house in a stagnant or declining economy?). And in booming regions, the cost of buying a new house becomes the problem. Lack of space and "gov'mint regulation" are the usually-cited culprits, but maybe we've also gotten to the point where NIMBYism and the "growth controls" it leads to are having an impact in the imbalance between housing supply and demand. Sam Granato Ohio DOT, Office of Technical Services 1980 W. Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43223 Phone: 614-644-6796, Fax: 614-752-8646 "The solution to congestion is to put private business in charge of building roads and the government in charge of building cars." Will Rogers "ALAN E. PISARSKI" <pisarski(a)ix.netcom.com> Sent by: owner-ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net 06/03/03 08:07 AM To: "Hartgen, David" <dthartge(a)email.uncc.edu>, <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> cc: <Elaine.Murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov> Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 Dave: This has seen rather dramatic change nationally. Of the 13.2 million new commuters more than half were intercounty, 6.7 meg; raising the share of intercounty from to 23.9% to 26.7%. Some states have seen explosions in this area. Ohio, Va. etc. A lot of this can be an accidental product of geog. (East vs West States) but there is something else going on -- much of it I believe is rural workers heading to the metro suburbs for work. Note W Va had largest increase in trav times - that wasn't congestion in Wheeling.Also think of the car plants in the south. I recall someone saying that all but 3 of the 104 counties in Ky sent workers to the Georgetown car plant. I intend to spend a lot of time on this in Commuting in America III. I will look forward to your work - and steal from it shamelessly. Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hartgen, David" <dthartge(a)email.uncc.edu> To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Cc: <Elaine.Murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 2:39 PM Subject: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 > Colleagues, Elaine Murakami at FHWA has suggested I contact you. I > am working on a county-to-county work flow analysis for North Carolina's 100 > counties, and am interested to know if anyone is/has done something similar > for cities or for other states or US regions. The issues we are addressing > are: > 1. Has inter-county commuting increased as a share of trips, VMT, and fuel > use since 1990? > 2. What percent of state travel and fuel use is in intra- and inter-county > commuting? Is it a declining or increasing share? > My student (Ellen Cervera) has completed the first phase of her > work, for 2000, and is beginning the 1990 analysis. Her problem involves > computing, for all NC co-to-co flows (100*100), the % of vehicle trips > (adjusted for carpooling), the % of VMT (using a distance matrix and 20 % > road circuituity), and % of fuel use (using weighted fuel rates from Hy > Statistics VM-1) that is inter-co versus intra-co; also these %'s as a > function of total state use, and changes in these %'s from 1990 to 2000. The > effects are hypothesized to be compensating: that is, trips are getting > longer and the % of travel that is inter-county is increasing, but fuel use > is declining per mile, so the magnitude of fuel use in inter-county may be > stable or declining over time. My modeling system is TransDAD > (http://www.caliper.com) > Anyone working on a similar problem with the 2000 county-to-county > data? We would appreciate receiving materials at this location or at fax > 704-687-3442. > > Thanks > Prof. David T. Hartgen > UNC Charlotte > 704-687-4308

20 years, 10 months

RE: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000

by Sirota, Stuart

The 2000 CTPP simply confirms what any 6 year old buckled into the back seat of a minivan can plainly see: Americans are being compelled to spend ever-greater amounts of time in cars, over longer distances. The reasons for this unsustainable trend, which are the resulting nexus of land use policy, transportation policy, societal and economic forces, have been well documented. Now that the data is in, what will we as planners do with it?: a) Continue to recommend projects and policies that perpetuate the status quo trendline? b) Develop tools that provide alternative choices? You decide. Stu Sirota Parsons Brinckerhoff Baltimore, Maryland -----Original Message----- From: William Knight [mailto:wknight@ccmpo.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:02 PM To: 'ALAN E. PISARSKI'; 'Sam Granato' Cc: 'ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net' Subject: RE: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 This all is a familiar phenomenon in the Burlington, VT area. Housing in the county is sky rocketing in costs and people are moving out to adjacent and even further away. Commutes are getting longer. William L Knight, Executive Director Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization 30 Kimball Avenue South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 660-4071, Ext. 228 (802) 660-4079 Fax wknight(a)ccmpo.org www.ccmpo.org -----Original Message----- From: ALAN E. PISARSKI [mailto:pisarski@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:50 AM To: Sam Granato Cc: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 All good thoughts. We saw this in New Hampshire also - the family home that is rich in sentiment but cant get much on the market vs a suburban house you cant afford. Answer: Stay and commute. Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: Sam Granato <mailto:Sam.Granato@dot.state.oh.us> To: ALAN E. <mailto:pisarski@ix.netcom.com> PISARSKI Cc: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:39 AM Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 I had already noted for Wheeling model development that commuting to counties in Pennsylvania doubled from 1990 to 2000! But to address the general point, seems there's two trends at work - in stagnant regional economies, workers try to avoid moving when by choice or force they take that more distant job (in addition to all the "rural community" issues, what kind of price would you get for your house in a stagnant or declining economy?). And in booming regions, the cost of buying a new house becomes the problem. Lack of space and "gov'mint regulation" are the usually-cited culprits, but maybe we've also gotten to the point where NIMBYism and the "growth controls" it leads to are having an impact in the imbalance between housing supply and demand. Sam Granato Ohio DOT, Office of Technical Services 1980 W. Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43223 Phone: 614-644-6796, Fax: 614-752-8646 "The solution to congestion is to put private business in charge of building roads and the government in charge of building cars." Will Rogers "ALAN E. PISARSKI" <pisarski(a)ix.netcom.com> Sent by: owner-ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net 06/03/03 08:07 AM To: "Hartgen, David" <dthartge(a)email.uncc.edu>, <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> cc: <Elaine.Murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov> Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 Dave: This has seen rather dramatic change nationally. Of the 13.2 million new commuters more than half were intercounty, 6.7 meg; raising the share of intercounty from to 23.9% to 26.7%. Some states have seen explosions in this area. Ohio, Va. etc. A lot of this can be an accidental product of geog. (East vs West States) but there is something else going on -- much of it I believe is rural workers heading to the metro suburbs for work. Note W Va had largest increase in trav times - that wasn't congestion in Wheeling.Also think of the car plants in the south. I recall someone saying that all but 3 of the 104 counties in Ky sent workers to the Georgetown car plant. I intend to spend a lot of time on this in Commuting in America III. I will look forward to your work - and steal from it shamelessly. Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hartgen, David" <dthartge(a)email.uncc.edu> To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Cc: <Elaine.Murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 2:39 PM Subject: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 > Colleagues, Elaine Murakami at FHWA has suggested I contact you. I > am working on a county-to-county work flow analysis for North Carolina's 100 > counties, and am interested to know if anyone is/has done something similar > for cities or for other states or US regions. The issues we are addressing > are: > 1. Has inter-county commuting increased as a share of trips, VMT, and fuel > use since 1990? > 2. What percent of state travel and fuel use is in intra- and inter-county > commuting? Is it a declining or increasing share? > My student (Ellen Cervera) has completed the first phase of her > work, for 2000, and is beginning the 1990 analysis. Her problem involves > computing, for all NC co-to-co flows (100*100), the % of vehicle trips > (adjusted for carpooling), the % of VMT (using a distance matrix and 20 % > road circuituity), and % of fuel use (using weighted fuel rates from Hy > Statistics VM-1) that is inter-co versus intra-co; also these %'s as a > function of total state use, and changes in these %'s from 1990 to 2000. The > effects are hypothesized to be compensating: that is, trips are getting > longer and the % of travel that is inter-county is increasing, but fuel use > is declining per mile, so the magnitude of fuel use in inter-county may be > stable or declining over time. My modeling system is TransDAD > (http://www.caliper.com) > Anyone working on a similar problem with the 2000 county-to-county > data? We would appreciate receiving materials at this location or at fax > 704-687-3442. > > Thanks > Prof. David T. Hartgen > UNC Charlotte > 704-687-4308

20 years, 10 months

RE: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000

by Sirota, Stuart

Alan - But you've already given us your answer: "stay and commute", right? So what questions are you asking of the data that have not already been answered? Inquiring minds want to know. :) Stu Sirota Parsons Brinckerhoff Baltimore, Maryland -----Original Message----- From: ALAN E. PISARSKI [mailto:pisarski@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 3:37 PM To: Sirota, Stuart; ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 DOCTRINE RAISES ITS HEAD BEFORE THE ANSWERS ARE IN. THANKYOU. Alan Pisarski ----- Original Message ----- From: Sirota, <mailto:SirotaS@pbworld.com> Stuart To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 3:07 PM Subject: RE: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 The 2000 CTPP simply confirms what any 6 year old buckled into the back seat of a minivan can plainly see: Americans are being compelled to spend ever-greater amounts of time in cars, over longer distances. The reasons for this unsustainable trend, which are the resulting nexus of land use policy, transportation policy, societal and economic forces, have been well documented. Now that the data is in, what will we as planners do with it?: a) Continue to recommend projects and policies that perpetuate the status quo trendline? b) Develop tools that provide alternative choices? You decide. Stu Sirota Parsons Brinckerhoff Baltimore, Maryland -----Original Message----- From: William Knight [mailto:wknight@ccmpo.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:02 PM To: 'ALAN E. PISARSKI'; 'Sam Granato' Cc: 'ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net' Subject: RE: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 This all is a familiar phenomenon in the Burlington, VT area. Housing in the county is sky rocketing in costs and people are moving out to adjacent and even further away. Commutes are getting longer. William L Knight, Executive Director Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization 30 Kimball Avenue South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 660-4071, Ext. 228 (802) 660-4079 Fax wknight(a)ccmpo.org www.ccmpo.org -----Original Message----- From: ALAN E. PISARSKI [mailto:pisarski@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:50 AM To: Sam Granato Cc: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 All good thoughts. We saw this in New Hampshire also - the family home that is rich in sentiment but cant get much on the market vs a suburban house you cant afford. Answer: Stay and commute. Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: Sam Granato <mailto:Sam.Granato@dot.state.oh.us> To: ALAN <mailto:pisarski@ix.netcom.com> E. PISARSKI Cc: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:39 AM Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 I had already noted for Wheeling model development that commuting to counties in Pennsylvania doubled from 1990 to 2000! But to address the general point, seems there's two trends at work - in stagnant regional economies, workers try to avoid moving when by choice or force they take that more distant job (in addition to all the "rural community" issues, what kind of price would you get for your house in a stagnant or declining economy?). And in booming regions, the cost of buying a new house becomes the problem. Lack of space and "gov'mint regulation" are the usually-cited culprits, but maybe we've also gotten to the point where NIMBYism and the "growth controls" it leads to are having an impact in the imbalance between housing supply and demand. Sam Granato Ohio DOT, Office of Technical Services 1980 W. Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43223 Phone: 614-644-6796, Fax: 614-752-8646 "The solution to congestion is to put private business in charge of building roads and the government in charge of building cars." Will Rogers "ALAN E. PISARSKI" <pisarski(a)ix.netcom.com> Sent by: owner-ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net 06/03/03 08:07 AM To: "Hartgen, David" <dthartge(a)email.uncc.edu>, <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> cc: <Elaine.Murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov> Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 Dave: This has seen rather dramatic change nationally. Of the 13.2 million new commuters more than half were intercounty, 6.7 meg; raising the share of intercounty from to 23.9% to 26.7%. Some states have seen explosions in this area. Ohio, Va. etc. A lot of this can be an accidental product of geog. (East vs West States) but there is something else going on -- much of it I believe is rural workers heading to the metro suburbs for work. Note W Va had largest increase in trav times - that wasn't congestion in Wheeling.Also think of the car plants in the south. I recall someone saying that all but 3 of the 104 counties in Ky sent workers to the Georgetown car plant. I intend to spend a lot of time on this in Commuting in America III. I will look forward to your work - and steal from it shamelessly. Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hartgen, David" <dthartge(a)email.uncc.edu> To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Cc: <Elaine.Murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 2:39 PM Subject: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 > Colleagues, Elaine Murakami at FHWA has suggested I contact you. I > am working on a county-to-county work flow analysis for North Carolina's 100 > counties, and am interested to know if anyone is/has done something similar > for cities or for other states or US regions. The issues we are addressing > are: > 1. Has inter-county commuting increased as a share of trips, VMT, and fuel > use since 1990? > 2. What percent of state travel and fuel use is in intra- and inter-county > commuting? Is it a declining or increasing share? > My student (Ellen Cervera) has completed the first phase of her > work, for 2000, and is beginning the 1990 analysis. Her problem involves > computing, for all NC co-to-co flows (100*100), the % of vehicle trips > (adjusted for carpooling), the % of VMT (using a distance matrix and 20 % > road circuituity), and % of fuel use (using weighted fuel rates from Hy > Statistics VM-1) that is inter-co versus intra-co; also these %'s as a > function of total state use, and changes in these %'s from 1990 to 2000. The > effects are hypothesized to be compensating: that is, trips are getting > longer and the % of travel that is inter-county is increasing, but fuel use > is declining per mile, so the magnitude of fuel use in inter-county may be > stable or declining over time. My modeling system is TransDAD > (http://www.caliper.com) > Anyone working on a similar problem with the 2000 county-to-county > data? We would appreciate receiving materials at this location or at fax > 704-687-3442. > > Thanks > Prof. David T. Hartgen > UNC Charlotte > 704-687-4308

20 years, 10 months

SPSS program to read PUMS data

by Lipton, Greg

Does anyone have a SPSS syntax file (program) that reads the 2000 Census PUMS ASCII data file? I would appreciate a copy. Thanks Greg Lipton King County Transit Seattle WA 206 263-4673

20 years, 10 months

RE: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000

by William Knight

This all is a familiar phenomenon in the Burlington, VT area. Housing in the county is sky rocketing in costs and people are moving out to adjacent and even further away. Commutes are getting longer. William L Knight, Executive Director Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization 30 Kimball Avenue South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 660-4071, Ext. 228 (802) 660-4079 Fax wknight(a)ccmpo.org www.ccmpo.org -----Original Message----- From: ALAN E. PISARSKI [mailto:pisarski@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:50 AM To: Sam Granato Cc: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 All good thoughts. We saw this in New Hampshire also - the family home that is rich in sentiment but cant get much on the market vs a suburban house you cant afford. Answer: Stay and commute. Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: Sam <mailto:Sam.Granato@dot.state.oh.us> Granato To: ALAN E. <mailto:pisarski@ix.netcom.com> PISARSKI Cc: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net <mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:39 AM Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 I had already noted for Wheeling model development that commuting to counties in Pennsylvania doubled from 1990 to 2000! But to address the general point, seems there's two trends at work - in stagnant regional economies, workers try to avoid moving when by choice or force they take that more distant job (in addition to all the "rural community" issues, what kind of price would you get for your house in a stagnant or declining economy?). And in booming regions, the cost of buying a new house becomes the problem. Lack of space and "gov'mint regulation" are the usually-cited culprits, but maybe we've also gotten to the point where NIMBYism and the "growth controls" it leads to are having an impact in the imbalance between housing supply and demand. Sam Granato Ohio DOT, Office of Technical Services 1980 W. Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43223 Phone: 614-644-6796, Fax: 614-752-8646 "The solution to congestion is to put private business in charge of building roads and the government in charge of building cars." Will Rogers "ALAN E. PISARSKI" <pisarski(a)ix.netcom.com> Sent by: owner-ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net 06/03/03 08:07 AM To: "Hartgen, David" <dthartge(a)email.uncc.edu>, <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> cc: <Elaine.Murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov> Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 Dave: This has seen rather dramatic change nationally. Of the 13.2 million new commuters more than half were intercounty, 6.7 meg; raising the share of intercounty from to 23.9% to 26.7%. Some states have seen explosions in this area. Ohio, Va. etc. A lot of this can be an accidental product of geog. (East vs West States) but there is something else going on -- much of it I believe is rural workers heading to the metro suburbs for work. Note W Va had largest increase in trav times - that wasn't congestion in Wheeling.Also think of the car plants in the south. I recall someone saying that all but 3 of the 104 counties in Ky sent workers to the Georgetown car plant. I intend to spend a lot of time on this in Commuting in America III. I will look forward to your work - and steal from it shamelessly. Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hartgen, David" <dthartge(a)email.uncc.edu> To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Cc: <Elaine.Murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 2:39 PM Subject: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 > Colleagues, Elaine Murakami at FHWA has suggested I contact you. I > am working on a county-to-county work flow analysis for North Carolina's 100 > counties, and am interested to know if anyone is/has done something similar > for cities or for other states or US regions. The issues we are addressing > are: > 1. Has inter-county commuting increased as a share of trips, VMT, and fuel > use since 1990? > 2. What percent of state travel and fuel use is in intra- and inter-county > commuting? Is it a declining or increasing share? > My student (Ellen Cervera) has completed the first phase of her > work, for 2000, and is beginning the 1990 analysis. Her problem involves > computing, for all NC co-to-co flows (100*100), the % of vehicle trips > (adjusted for carpooling), the % of VMT (using a distance matrix and 20 % > road circuituity), and % of fuel use (using weighted fuel rates from Hy > Statistics VM-1) that is inter-co versus intra-co; also these %'s as a > function of total state use, and changes in these %'s from 1990 to 2000. The > effects are hypothesized to be compensating: that is, trips are getting > longer and the % of travel that is inter-county is increasing, but fuel use > is declining per mile, so the magnitude of fuel use in inter-county may be > stable or declining over time. My modeling system is TransDAD > (http://www.caliper.com) > Anyone working on a similar problem with the 2000 county-to-county > data? We would appreciate receiving materials at this location or at fax > 704-687-3442. > > Thanks > Prof. David T. Hartgen > UNC Charlotte > 704-687-4308

20 years, 10 months

Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000

by Sam Granato

I had already noted for Wheeling model development that commuting to counties in Pennsylvania doubled from 1990 to 2000! But to address the general point, seems there's two trends at work - in stagnant regional economies, workers try to avoid moving when by choice or force they take that more distant job (in addition to all the "rural community" issues, what kind of price would you get for your house in a stagnant or declining economy?). And in booming regions, the cost of buying a new house becomes the problem. Lack of space and "gov'mint regulation" are the usually-cited culprits, but maybe we've also gotten to the point where NIMBYism and the "growth controls" it leads to are having an impact in the imbalance between housing supply and demand. Sam Granato Ohio DOT, Office of Technical Services 1980 W. Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43223 Phone: 614-644-6796, Fax: 614-752-8646 "The solution to congestion is to put private business in charge of building roads and the government in charge of building cars." Will Rogers "ALAN E. PISARSKI" <pisarski(a)ix.netcom.com> Sent by: owner-ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net 06/03/03 08:07 AM To: "Hartgen, David" <dthartge(a)email.uncc.edu>, <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> cc: <Elaine.Murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov> Subject: Re: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 Dave: This has seen rather dramatic change nationally. Of the 13.2 million new commuters more than half were intercounty, 6.7 meg; raising the share of intercounty from to 23.9% to 26.7%. Some states have seen explosions in this area. Ohio, Va. etc. A lot of this can be an accidental product of geog. (East vs West States) but there is something else going on -- much of it I believe is rural workers heading to the metro suburbs for work. Note W Va had largest increase in trav times - that wasn't congestion in Wheeling.Also think of the car plants in the south. I recall someone saying that all but 3 of the 104 counties in Ky sent workers to the Georgetown car plant. I intend to spend a lot of time on this in Commuting in America III. I will look forward to your work - and steal from it shamelessly. Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hartgen, David" <dthartge(a)email.uncc.edu> To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Cc: <Elaine.Murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 2:39 PM Subject: [CTPP] RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000 > Colleagues, Elaine Murakami at FHWA has suggested I contact you. I > am working on a county-to-county work flow analysis for North Carolina's 100 > counties, and am interested to know if anyone is/has done something similar > for cities or for other states or US regions. The issues we are addressing > are: > 1. Has inter-county commuting increased as a share of trips, VMT, and fuel > use since 1990? > 2. What percent of state travel and fuel use is in intra- and inter-county > commuting? Is it a declining or increasing share? > My student (Ellen Cervera) has completed the first phase of her > work, for 2000, and is beginning the 1990 analysis. Her problem involves > computing, for all NC co-to-co flows (100*100), the % of vehicle trips > (adjusted for carpooling), the % of VMT (using a distance matrix and 20 % > road circuituity), and % of fuel use (using weighted fuel rates from Hy > Statistics VM-1) that is inter-co versus intra-co; also these %'s as a > function of total state use, and changes in these %'s from 1990 to 2000. The > effects are hypothesized to be compensating: that is, trips are getting > longer and the % of travel that is inter-county is increasing, but fuel use > is declining per mile, so the magnitude of fuel use in inter-county may be > stable or declining over time. My modeling system is TransDAD > (http://www.caliper.com) > Anyone working on a similar problem with the 2000 county-to-county > data? We would appreciate receiving materials at this location or at fax > 704-687-3442. > > Thanks > Prof. David T. Hartgen > UNC Charlotte > 704-687-4308

20 years, 10 months

RE: County-to-county worker flow data, 2000

by Hartgen, David

Colleagues, Elaine Murakami at FHWA has suggested I contact you. I am working on a county-to-county work flow analysis for North Carolina's 100 counties, and am interested to know if anyone is/has done something similar for cities or for other states or US regions. The issues we are addressing are: 1. Has inter-county commuting increased as a share of trips, VMT, and fuel use since 1990? 2. What percent of state travel and fuel use is in intra- and inter-county commuting? Is it a declining or increasing share? My student (Ellen Cervera) has completed the first phase of her work, for 2000, and is beginning the 1990 analysis. Her problem involves computing, for all NC co-to-co flows (100*100), the % of vehicle trips (adjusted for carpooling), the % of VMT (using a distance matrix and 20 % road circuituity), and % of fuel use (using weighted fuel rates from Hy Statistics VM-1) that is inter-co versus intra-co; also these %'s as a function of total state use, and changes in these %'s from 1990 to 2000. The effects are hypothesized to be compensating: that is, trips are getting longer and the % of travel that is inter-county is increasing, but fuel use is declining per mile, so the magnitude of fuel use in inter-county may be stable or declining over time. My modeling system is TransDAD (http://www.caliper.com) Anyone working on a similar problem with the 2000 county-to-county data? We would appreciate receiving materials at this location or at fax 704-687-3442. Thanks Prof. David T. Hartgen UNC Charlotte 704-687-4308

20 years, 10 months

county subdivision flows

by Paul Reim

Any word on when (if?) the county subdivision to county subdivision worker flows are going to be released for the northeastern states? They might keep the hungry hordes here at bay until the CTPP part 3 data is released. ----------------------------------------------------------- Paul Reim Chief Planner, Data Resources / GIS Central Transportation Planning Staff Boston Metropolitan Planning Organization 10 Park Plaza, Suite 2150 Boston, MA 02116 voice: (617) 973-8132 fax: (617) 973-8855

20 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-news June 2003