ctpp-news

ctpp-news@mailman.chrispy.net

2560 discussions

by ed c

Vol. 2 - No. 46 Dec. 4, 1998 A newly redesigned section of the Census Bureau's Internet site contains a storehouse of information about Census 2000 news and articles, plans and operations, promotional ideas, business opportunities and job postings. The United States Census 2000 page http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/2khome.htm is divided into the following six subsections: What's New; General Information; Partnerships and Promotion; Plans and Operations; Contracts and Procurement; and Jobs and Employment. With Census 2000 more than a year off, the Census 2000 section is still in the early stages of construction, but it already contains a wide array of information about the decennial census. Under What's New, links take the browser to a listing of Census 2000 news releases and drop-in articles that can be used in organizational newsletters or magazines. To be added in the future are partnership agreements with national media organizations, B-roll video clips for television stations, stock photos and the Census 2000 logo and taglines. The General Information subsection includes fact sheets on a variety of topics, reports on the census advisory committees, frequently asked questions, a glossary of acronyms, 1990 census data files and adjusted and unadjusted data from the 1990 census down to the census block level. Articles describing what partnership organizations, both governmental and nongovernmental, can do to promote the census, a list of partnership contacts at the Census Bureau headquarters and regional offices and a list of publications and articles fall under Partnerships and Promotion. The Plans and Operations heading contains the Census 2000 operational plan (April 1998), a report to the Congress, and discussions of sampling, address list development, congressional apportionment and legislative redistricting, as well as early reports on the Census 2000 Dress Rehearsal. Contracts and Procurement covers statements of need, requests for proposal, lists of bidders and other procurement information on Census 2000's major contracts: advertising services; automation infrastructure, data-capture services and data-capture system, data dissemination, laptop computer acquisition, telephone questionnaire assistance, etc. The job postings are for positions at headquarters and in the regional offices, at the data capture centers, the telephone centers and the National Processing Center in Jeffersonville, Ind. In the future, links to the Census Bureau's new data dissemination system, the American FactFinder, as well as to the American Community Survey and other Census 2000-related activities will be added to the Census 2000 page. For further information about this bulletin, contact J. Paul Wyatt of the Public Information Office on 301-457-3052 (fax: 301-457-3670; e-mail: pwyatt(a)census.gov).

26 years

Re: [Re: [CTPP] defining TAZs]

by lmugler.drcog＠usa.net

Today, we in Denver received a telephone call from FHWA to obtain our contact information. Guess they have defined a Plan B and are calling MPOs directly. Larry Mugler owner-ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net wrote: > SHS wrote: > > > Is every MPO supposed to receive the TAZ Update forms by now? If yes, we have > not received any yet. > > Memphis MPO > > I am cross posting this to the ctpp listserve because i think it is a broad > issue. > > Yes, it is my understanding that the introduction letter explaining the TAZ > update process and > soliciting some info, like agency contact went out in the beginning of October > to all the usdot > divisional offices. They were instructed to pass it to their state which inturn > was to pass it to the > MPOs. > > Right now all i can say is don't worry, you are not alone, and the originators > of the letter are on this > list serve. I don't want to make any recommendation like call Tom Mank of FHWA > since I do not (as yet) > know what plan B is. I can tell you that the MPO in northeastern Illinois has > not seen it yet either. I > just asked around the agency today and no one has seen it. > > ed christopher > director or information services > chicago area transportation study ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1

26 years

RE:[CTPP] TAZs and BBSP (Block Boundary Suggestion Program)

by Dave Aultman

Hello out there in CTPP land, this is Dave Aultman in the Geography Division at the Census Bureau. I am involved in both the Census 2000 Participant Statistical Areas Program and the 2000 CTPP TAZ Update Program. I would like to pass on some information that will clarify the situation. 1. To confirm what Phil Salopek stated, participants in the 2000 TAZ program will receive 98 TIGER/Line files (not 99 TIGER/Line files) to do the initial delineation of the 2000 TAZs. These files WILL NOT CONTAIN THE APPROVED CENSUS 2000 STATISTICAL AREAS. These files are being created this month and next. At present the Census Bureau has received only a handful of Census 2000 statistical area plans. It is possible that some files may contain the approved statistical areas, but that number is very small. In almost every county the census tracts, block groups, CDPs, and CCDs that are contained in the 2000 area of the 98 TIGER/Line files are copies of the statistical areas used for the 1990 census, not the approved Census 2000 statistical areas. 2. Participants in the TAZ Program will receive 1999 TIGER/Line files in November and December 1999. These files WILL CONTAIN THE CENSUS 2000 STATISTICAL AREAS, and their 2000 TAZs. The Census Bureau is providing participants with these files to verify the capture and insertion of their TAZs. Participant can submit changes to 1) correct errors that the Census Bureau made, 2) make adjustments to TAZ boundaries that are affected by the changes to political boundaries, and 3) redefine their TAZs for purposes such as conforming to the Census 2000 statistical areas. Participants in the Census 2000 Participant Statistical Areas Program also will receive 1999 TIGER/Line files to do essentially the same verification of their statistical area boundaries. However, unlike the TAZ Verification, the Census Bureau WILL NOT accept wholesale changes of their statistical areas. We will limit particpant to making only a few changes that are not due to Census Bureau error or changes brought about by changes in polictical boundaries. Please contact me at (301) 457-1099 if you any questions or comments. On 12/2/98, phillip_a_salopek wrote: > ____________________________ Forward Header >________________________________ > Subject: 2000 CTPP TAZ-UP > Author: Don Burrell <DBURRELL(a)oki.org> at SMTP- >GATEWAY Date: 11/25/98 > 5:12 PM > > > The Journey-to-work and FHWA folks are currently >working on > a program to prepare the CTPP TAZ geography in >advance of the census, > specifically by next summer. This is to be done >using a program called > TAZ-UP, TIGER/Line 99 and ArcView GIS software. > > Today, I shipped the results of the 2000 Census >Statistical Areas Review > process for 2 of the Cincinnati area counties to >the Detroit regional > office. This work, which is underway throughout >the country, has identified > census tract and block group boundary changes to >be used for the 2000 > census. > > Having just now put 2 + 2 together, my question >is whether or not the Bureau > will have our new local recommendations for >census boundary changes in the > TIGER/Line 99 file that is to be shipped to us >for the TAZ-UP work? OKI > plans to revise many of our TAZ boundaries to >conform to the 2000 census > geography. It would be helpful to have the 2000 >census geography shown. > > Don Burrell > OH-KY-IN Regional Council of Govmts. > > _________________________________________________ >___________________________ > > Response from P. Salopek > > Don: > > I could not answer this question on my own, so I >spoke with Bob LaMacchia in > Geography Division of the Census Bureau. The >first point is that for the > TAZ-UP program, TIGER/Line 98 will be the base, >not T/L 99. T/L 98 will NOT > include the local recommendations for block >boundaries that you just > submitted. Bob L. says that the verification >phase for both programs will > occur at the same time. This means that the T/L >99 that I guess > participants in both activities will receive to >review will contain both the > new TAZ boundaries and the new block boundaries >(collection blocks, not > tabulation blocks). One point to remember is >that in defining TAZs for 2000 > you will not be constrained to build them from >blocks, since blocks won't be > defined yet. You will in fact have a wider array >of lines/features to use > as TAZ boundaries than has been available in the >past. We think this is an > improvement and should allow closer approximation >to true TAZ boundaries. > > --Phil > > > >RFC822 header >----------------------------------- > Return-Path: <owner-ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> > Received: from it-relay1.census.gov (it- >relay1.census.gov [148.129.126.70]) > by postal.geo.census.gov (8.8.8/8.8.6/2.6) >with ESMTP id SAA13862; > Wed, 2 Dec 1998 18:02:43 -0500 (EST) > Received: from info.census.gov (info.census.gov >[148.129.129.10]) > by it-relay1.census.gov (8.8.8/8.8.7/v2.5) >with ESMTP id SAA29738; > Wed, 2 Dec 1998 18:02:41 -0500 (EST) > Received: from ryoko.chrispy.net >(chrisp.pr.mcs.net [205.253.103.164]) > by info.census.gov (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP >id SAA03303; > Wed, 2 Dec 1998 18:02:28 -0500 (EST) > Received: (from daemon@localhost) > by ryoko.chrispy.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) id >QAA16367 > for ctpp-news-list; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 16:25:57 >-0600 > Received: from info.census.gov (info.census.gov >[148.129.129.10]) > by ryoko.chrispy.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP >id QAA16364 > for <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net>; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 >16:25:52 -0600 > From: phillip_a_salopek(a)ccmail.census.gov > Received: from it-relay1.census.gov (inet- >gw.census.gov [148.129.129.8]) > by info.census.gov (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP >id RAA00920; > Wed, 2 Dec 1998 17:24:59 -0500 (EST) > Received: from smtp-gw1.census.gov (smtp- >gw1.census.gov [148.129.126.72]) > by it-relay1.census.gov (8.8.8/8.8.7/v2.5) >with SMTP id RAA27871; > Wed, 2 Dec 1998 17:24:58 -0500 (EST) > Received: from ccMail by smtp-gw1.census.gov >(ccMail Link to SMTP R8.20.00.25) > id AA912637553; Wed, 02 Dec 1998 17:25:53 - >0500 > Message-Id: <9812029126.AA912637553@smtp- >gw1.census.gov> > X-Mailer: ccMail Link to SMTP R8.20.00.25 > Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 17:23:58 -0500 > To: <dburrell(a)oki.org> > Cc: <berwyned(a)mcs.com>, <cpurvi(a)mtc.dst.ca.us>, ><ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net>, > <elaine.murakami(a)fhwa.dot.gov>, ><jerry.everett(a)fhwa.dot.gov>, > <tom.mank(a)fhwa.dot.gov>, ><wende.oneill(a)bts.gov>, > <ernest_wilson_jr(a)ccmail.census.gov>, > <ernest_wilson_jr(a)ccmail.census.gov> > Subject: [CTPP] TAZs and BBSP (Block Boundary >Suggestion Program) > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Description: "cc:Mail Note Part" > Sender: owner-ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net > Precedence: bulk > X-UIDL: 67fe04ab6870fff290b9497e1e47ed56 > >

26 years

Re: [CTPP] defining TAZs

by ed c

SHS wrote: > Is every MPO supposed to receive the TAZ Update forms by now? If yes, we have not received any yet. > Memphis MPO I am cross posting this to the ctpp listserve because i think it is a broad issue. Yes, it is my understanding that the introduction letter explaining the TAZ update process and soliciting some info, like agency contact went out in the beginning of October to all the usdot divisional offices. They were instructed to pass it to their state which inturn was to pass it to the MPOs. Right now all i can say is don't worry, you are not alone, and the originators of the letter are on this list serve. I don't want to make any recommendation like call Tom Mank of FHWA since I do not (as yet) know what plan B is. I can tell you that the MPO in northeastern Illinois has not seen it yet either. I just asked around the agency today and no one has seen it. ed christopher director or information services chicago area transportation study

26 years

C E N S U S 2 0 0 0 B U L L E T I N

by ed c

********** C E N S U S 2 0 0 0 B U L L E T I N ********** Vol. 2 - No. 45 Nov. 24, 1998 Citing a need to reduce the workload for "the large household followup" and expected overall coverage improvements, especially among hard-to-enumerate populations, the Census Bureau has decided to adopt a six-person questionnaire design. This will apply to both the short and long forms in the Census 2000 plan, which includes scientific sampling, and in an alternative plan, which calls for traditional census-taking methods. The Census Bureau anticipates that the change from a five-person to a six-person questionnaire for forms that are mailed out or delivered by enumerators to housing units for mailback will cut followup workload for large households in half. Planning estimates put the number of mailback households with seven or more persons at slightly more than 1 million households versus about 4 million households with six or more. The issue was revisited recently during discussions about ways that the Census Bureau might increase coverage in a census that does not include statistical sampling to supplement traditional methods. With deadlines for advertising printing specifications scheduled for October 1998, it was found to be more cost-effective to require six-person forms only, notwithstanding a final decision on sampling. The alternative would have necessitated printing two sets of questionnaires for the entire country, a prohibitive expense. Other advantages of the six-person questionnaire: --it retains the design initiatives developed in the commercially designed form to make an easy-to-complete, respondent-friendly questionnaire. --it can be introduced into the Census Bureau's basic system for data capture and mailback questionnaire processing without major disruption. --it provides for a slight positive advantage in the Integrated Coverage Measurement survey one of the components in the current sampling plan through more timely data capture of complete large households. --it reduces respondent burden by requiring six-person households to respond only once by using a mailback questionnaire designed for households with six persons, rather than one for five (which would have required additional reporting by the six-person households). Disadvantages of the six-person mailback questionnaire are few. Although followup is reduced by an estimated 50 percent, there are overall higher costs associated with the six-person mailback questionnaire due to the long form data capture method, which involves capture of each page regardless of the number of persons in the household. Also, the additional width of the short-form is another area of higher costs. Both, however, were considered to be relatively minor cost increases when balanced against data quality erosion and losses resulting from the two-stage enumeration for large households. For further information about Census 2000 Bulletins, contact J. Paul Wyatt of the Public Information Office on 301-457-3052 (fax: 301-457-3670; e-mail: pwyatt(a)census.gov).

26 years

RE: [CTPP] TAZ definition for CTPP--reply to Chuck's message -Reply

by Murakami, Elaine <FHWA>

Statewide TAZs. TIGER/Line can only take ONE definition of a TAZ, so we thought that the metropolitan TAZs were the most important to include in TIGER/Line. So, definition of state TAZ is a tabulation question for CTPP that will be handled by Phil Salopek in Journey to Work, and not the Census Bureau GEOGRAPHY division. We are trying to get an estimate for how many areas will WANT to define state TAZs--this question is part of the letter that went out through the FHWA Division office. We hope that you have included this information in your response. thanks for your input!

26 years

TAZ definition for CTPP--reply to Chuck's message

by Murakami, Elaine <FHWA>

1. when?--we are hoping that the software and the TIGER/Line 98 CDs will ship at the end of January. MPOs and State DOTs will have six months to return the files to the Census Bureau. 2. Minimum threshholds? We are still waiting to hear from the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board. When I went to APDU, there was some discussion that Block Group recommendation was to have threshhold of about 600 persons. However, Phil Salopek of Census Bureau Journey to Work thinks that CTPP may not have to meet the same requirements.

26 years

RE: [CTPP] defining TAZs

by Larry Mugler

Ed: Here in Denver we have had a few problems with county boundaries because Denver is a consolidated city/county. Back when they could annex, they created weird boundaries. We have one area where the county line goes through an apartment building! Therefore, we have a few zones that cross county lines. We have dealt with this in the past by creating partial zones in each county and will plan on doing that again for 2000. Larry Mugler -----Original Message----- From: ed c [SMTP:berwyned@mcs.com] Sent: Monday, November 23, 1998 4:03 PM To: ctpp maillist Subject: [CTPP] defining TAZs As many of you know we (MPOs) will soon be in the throws of defining our Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) within our urban areas. When working through that process one constraint, that is new for 2000, will be that TAZs respect county boundaries. That is, a TAZ can not cross a county boundary. Is this something that you can live with? Will this be a big problem for any regions? Here in northeastern Illinois we have tended to cross over many different political boundaries over the years but we do respect county boundaries in our planning work. thanks ed christopher please respond to the list (all recipients) so others may benefit from any comments.

26 years, 1 month

Minimum size for TAZs

by Patty Becker

Hi folks, If perhaps you're interested in the opinion of someone who knows more about census geography/data than about TAZs specifically: I think TAZs should nest to census tracts (which by definition will then follow county lines). Tracts need more than one TAZ where there are employment concentrations; more than one tract may constitute a TAZ when you're in homogenous residential areas within a municipality. I also think you should be worrying, or at least thinking, about the sampling errors involved in small population TAZs. Block group data, even with an average of 600 housing units, are too small to deliver decent data. This is especially true for the journey to and place of work data, which have additional non-response errors beyond the overall sampling and non-response errors for the long form. I have never reported or relied on census-based place of work counts unless there were at least 1000 workers in the geographic area being reported. My guess is that census will end up permitting data to be delivered on a CTPP/UTPP for whatever geography you draw; disclosure will probably not be a problem unless you start using the finely drawn race/ethnic groups which will now be possible. But just because you can get the data doesn't mean the numbers are worth anything. One final word--at the risk of incurring the wrath of at least some of you--I really don't see why it's so important to maintain complete comparability from one set of TAZs to the next. The most important thing, I would think, is to have TAZs which reflect the current land use/population distribution/etc. to make good forecasts. If they need changing for whatever reason, they should be changed. Patty Becker ============================= Patricia C. (Patty) Becker 313/535-2077 APB Associates/SEMCC FAX 313/535-3556 17321 Telegraph #204 Home 248/355-2428 Detroit, MI 48219 pbecker(a)umich.edu

26 years, 1 month

TAZ-UP testing and related items

by Murakami, Elaine <FHWA>

Those of us who were part of the Alpha Test of the TAZ-UP (TAZ definition software) are now reviewing the first draft of the User Guide. One item that I am trying to draft right now is about why a TAZ for CTPP may be different than a TAZ that you have for your regional model. This is my current draft, which I am sure will change, with your input. Also, IMPORTANT NOTE--we still have not heard from the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board what kind of population threshholds or "average" populations they may require for tabulation. Oh, and finally, the plan is for the TAZ submissions to Census Bureau to occur around June/July of 1999. Then the TAZs will be added to TIGER/Line 99, which will be distributed for you around early 2000 to validate that what you submitted was correctly input to TIGER. ------------------------------- Geographic units Standard Census products use standard Census geography. That is, tabulations are prepared by State, county, munipality, census tract, and block group. The CTPP allows users to define their own geography. In this case, traffic analysis zones (TAZ). A TAZ defined for CTPP may differ from a TAZ defined for a local model. Reasons why this may occur: 1. A TAZ defined for CTPP 2000 is required to be composed of the smallest allowable polygons in the Census TIGER/Line file. Typically, in the TIGER/Line file, block boundaries are limited to physical features such as streets, power lines, streams and rivers, etc. TIGER/Line does NOT have parcel boundaries. A local GIS may have more detailed geography, e.g. parcels and lot lines that allow TAZs to be defined by unique parcels. You will want to try to make your TAZs for CTPP 2000 as close to your own TAZs as possible. Issues: You may want to include businesses on both sides of a street. You cannot create another TIGER line segment to break up the smallest allowable polygon to capture both sides of the street. You are limited to selecting the entire smallest allowable polygons on both sides of the street segment. DRAW A PICTURE HERE. 2. Small TAZs with little or no resident population or employment population. For your local model, you may have defined TAZs where you expect future growth to occur. This makes it better for you to display your forecasted data to 2010 or 2020. However, for the tabulation of Census responses in year 2000, for areas with very small populations, there is a risk that the data will be suppressed by the Census Bureau. You may want to aggregate areas to create somewhat larger TAZs for CTPP so that you can take advantage of the large sample (1 in 6 households nationwide) from the decennial long form. That is, you will get data reported in the CTPP for a larger geographic area, and will have to disaggregate it to your *real* TAZs later on. Similarly, if ALL your TAZs are defined with very small populations, you risk the chance that likewise, ALL your data will be suppressed by the Census Bureau. For example, your local model has 300 zones, but the average population or employment is less than 300 persons. You run a high risk of having all your data suppressed due to confidentiality requirements of the Census. For the CTPP, you may want to have a *super-district* system that reduces the number of zones to 150 zones. With your best guess, this increases the average population and employment to 500 persons. This would likely not be suppressed by the Census Bureau.

26 years, 1 month

Jump to page:

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