Re: [CTPP] REMINDER: Comments due Nov 22 on Fed Reg notice onCriteria for Urban Areas

Hi Wendell – I think it would be perfectly appropriate to submit your thoughts about the economic connectivity of Mission Viejo to LA UZA as a response to the FR notice. Comments to the CB’s FR notice are to be submitted in writing to: Tim Trainor, Chief Geography Division US Census Bureau Washington, DC 20233-7400 *From:* ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] *On Behalf Of *wendell cox *Sent:* Thursday, October 14, 2010 3:53 PM *To:* ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net *Subject:* Re: [CTPP] REMINDER: Comments due Nov 22 on Fed Reg notice onCriteria for Urban Areas Elaine... Thank you for this info. I notice that the FR notice of 8/24 shows a San Diego agglomeration that includes Mission Viejo. This seems wrong. Only if Camp Pendleton is considered urban could one possibly have continuous urbanization between San Diego and Mission Viejo. Moreover, Mission Viejo is in the Los Angeles MSA and is far more economically tied to the LA UZA than to SD. Indeed, I suspect that the continuous urbanization criteria will show Mission Viejo to be a part of the LA UZA in 2010. Is this a comment that would be appropriate for the 11/22 deadline, or is there some other place it should be directed? Thank you. Best regards, Wendell Cox On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 9:39 PM, <Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov> wrote: Hi Everyone: I posted a link to the FR notice on August 24. (a copy of that post is at the bottom of this message) The CB proposed criteria are best evaluated at the local level, as the impacts will vary widely, based on how much the jump criteria influenced the existing urbanized areas, population growth and decline over the last decade, and the proximity to other urbanized areas and urban clusters. As a starting point, people might want to review the existing UAs by using HEPGIS. http://hepgis.fhwa.dot.gov/hepgis_v2/UrbanBoundaries/Map.aspx This GIS was created by Bruce Spear, and is now maintained by Supin Yoder at FHWA. The link above takes you to the part showing the Census urbanized areas (50k+) and urban clusters (below 50k). It also includes an approximation of MPO planning areas. You can use the “info” button and click on specific areas, and the Census 2000 population for that area will be shown in a box below the map (you might have to scroll down to see it). You can use American FactFinder to see an ESTIMATED population for the existing urbanized areas (current boundaries). http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DatasetMainPageServlet?_program=ACS&am… By using the 2005-2007 (3-year) ACS you will have more geographic areas included. Again, this ACS estimate does NOT have the results of the 2010 Census incorporated into it. HEPGIS does NOT have the 2010 Census population counts that will be used by the Census Bureau to define the new urbanized areas, however, you will be able to review areas that the CB is expecting to fall into an “agglomeration” (see pages 52180 and 52181 in the FR notice). I (Elaine) checked a couple a “potential agglomerations” and they looked like they were either already touching, or very close to touching, so it would make sense to combine the areas, especially if the entire region experienced population growth in the last decade. Combining some of these areas could result in a total urbanized population exceeding 200,000 (current threshold for TMA), but at least in one case that I checked, one of the two urbanized areas in the potential agglomeration was already over the TMA threshold. At previous sessions on this topic, the question of whether FHWA would force MPOs to combine, the answer was “no, there are existing cases of multiple MPOs in one urbanized area.” http://ctpp.transportation.org/Documents/UA%20Q-A.pdf For the Jump criteria to shift from 2.5 miles to 1.5 miles. This could potentially reduce some urban areas to below 50,000 or 200,000 population. But, without the benefit of the 2010 Census block data, guessing at specific cases is impossible. Hope this information is helpful to you. Elaine ------COPY of Elaine’s post to the CTPP listserv on August 24, 2010--- The Federal Register notice from the Census Bureau is now posted. The due date for comments is November 22. You may want to listen to Mike Ratcliffe's web presentation from June 11, 2010 that is available at: http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/webinardirectory.aspx The Census Bureau announces publication of the "Proposed Urban Area Criteria for the 2010 Census" in the Federal Register of August 24, 2010, available on the Federal Register's website at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/ The Census Bureau is seeking public comment on these proposed criteria. Comments, suggestions, or recommendations regarding the criteria should be submitted in writing, no later than November 22, 2010, to Timothy Trainor, Chief, Geography Division, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC 20233-7400. The Census Bureau's urban-rural classification is fundamentally a delineation of geographical areas, identifying individual urbanized areas of 50,000 or more people and urban clusters of at least 2,500 and less than 50,000 people; "rural" encompasses all population and territory not included in urban areas. The Census Bureau's urban areas represent densely developed territory, and encompass residential, commercial, and other non-residential urban land uses. Additional information about the Census Bureau's urban-rural classification is available on the Census Bureau's website at http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/urbanruralclass.html The proposed urban area criteria for the 2010 Census as well as summaries of the proposed changes, are available on the Census Bureau's website at http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/2010urbanruralclass.html Changes proposed for the 2010 Census include: * Use of census tracts as analysis units in the initial phase of delineation * Potential return to a maximum jump distance of 1.5 miles (the distance was increased to 2.5 miles in the Census 2000 criteria). * Use of land use/land cover data to identify territory containing non-residential urban land uses or land cover that restricts urban development, such as marshland and wetlands. * Lowering the minimum number of enplanements (departing passengers) from 10,000 to 2,500 to qualify airports for inclusion in urban areas. * Elimination of the central place concept. * Requirement that, in addition to at least 2,500 total population, an area must contain at least 1,500 persons residing outside institutional group quarters to qualify as urban. * Splitting urban agglomerations of 1,000,000 or more population Based on metropolitan statistical area boundaries, or, in New England, along metropolitan New England city and town area boundaries. (Note: the FR notice on pages 52180 and 52181 includes potential urban agglomerations) For further information about the Census Bureau urban-rural classification, or the proposed criteria for the 2010 Census, please contact Vincent Osier, Chief, Geographic Standards and Criteria Branch, Geography Division, U.S. Census Bureau, via e-mail at vincent.osier(a)census.gov or telephone at 301-763-9039. _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news -- -- Wendell Cox Demographia | Wendell Cox Consultancy - St. Louis Missouri-Illinois metropolitan region Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris +1.618 632 8507 www.demographia.com | www.publicpurpose.com | www.rentalcartours.net Books & Publications WAR ON THE DREAM: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life http://www.demographia.com/wod1.pdf 6th ANNUAL DEMOGRAPHIA INTERNATIONAL HOUSING AFFORDABILITY SURVEY ( http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf) THE WAL-MART REVOLUTION: How Big-Box Stores Benefit Consumers, Workers, and the Economy By Richard Vedder & Wendell Cox _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news