Mara-
In Columbus, we are pretty adamant about at least not splitting political jurisdictions. This might sound obvious, but, as you know, the MPO boundary has some relationship with the Urbanized Boundary- which does not necessarily reflect political boundaries. Some of our communities weren’t excited about adding other areas in , because it would have resulted in spreading a set amount of funds, as set by the UA size, among a larger number of players. As staff, we asked to at least expand the minimum boundary to include whole townships. Also, in some instances, because we share a boundary with an adjacent MPO but have communities annexing into their territory, our by-laws now reflect that the MPO boundary changes with annexations—which is a bit cumbersome – hope you can avoid that one!
Nancy
Nancy Reger, AICP
Director, Data & Mapping | Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission
T: 614.233.4154 | M: 614.228.2663 | nreger@morpc.org
111 Liberty Street, Suite 100 | Columbus, OH 43215
From: ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Josie Kressner
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 4:42 PM
To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net
Subject: Re: [CTPP] drawing MPO boundaries
Hi Mara,
I agree with Jonathan that keeping transportation planning boundaries on census tract or block group lines makes many things a little simpler. Note that just following block lines can result in transportation planning boundaries that are cross-county or cross tracts, which can really complicate things when you're trying to calibrate or validate against Census data. There are many MPOs who choose not to for various local reasons though.
Regards,
Josie
| Josie Kressner, Ph.D.
| President + Founder
| Transport Foundry
| 3423 Piedmont Road NE
| Atlanta, GA 30305
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:20 PM, jonathan lupton <jlupton@metroplan.org> wrote:
Ms. Kaminowitz:
I can tell you from 22 years of professional experience with an MPO... The Census Bureau doesn't need (or want) to know about your MPO planning area boundary. Urbanized areas and MSAs, CMSAs, etc are geographic definitions only. The Census Bureau puts them out for general reference purposes, and then other agencies like FHWA and FTA use them for funding allocations etc., or for data gathering (like the BEA and BLS). The Census Bureau stays out of this "political football" territory.
My organization (Metroplan in Little Rock, Arkansas) has generally kept our transportation planning boundary on census tract lines to make data analysis, i.e. estimates and projections, a little simpler. But that is of course your organization's option.
Jonathan Lupton AICP
Research Planner
Metroplan
From: Mara Kaminowitz [mailto:mkaminowitz@baltometro.org]
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 2:40 PM
To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net
Subject: [CTPP] drawing MPO boundaries
Hello,
We are in the process of drawing a new MPO boundary to reflect changes to the 2010 urbanized area. There are several options being looked at for exactly how to set the new boundary but we are not currently considering Census geography. Does an MPO boundary get submitted to the Census bureau, and if so are there requirements to snap it to blocks?
Mara Kaminowitz, GISP
GIS Coordinator
.........................................................................
Baltimore Metropolitan Council
Offices @ McHenry Row
1500 Whetstone Way
Suite 300
Baltimore, MD 21230
410-732-0500 ext. 1030
mkaminowitz@baltometro.org
www.baltometro.org
_______________________________________________
ctpp-news mailing list
ctpp-news@chrispy.net
https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news