Re: [CTPP] ACS: Means of Transportation Categories

If I were King:: __ Rail: light rail, streetcar, or trolley (a change from the current ?Streetcar or trolley car?) __ Rail: subway or elevated (a change from the current ?Subway or elevated?) __ Rail: commuter rail, Amtrak (a change from the current ?Railroad?) But since I'm not King I'll be delighted with whatever you work out as it's an improvement. Now if you folks would get on board to ask about the "most recent" commute trip versus the "usual" I'd be even happier. Steven E. Polzin, PhD Director, Mobility Policy Center for Urban Transportation Research polzin@cutr.usf.edu<mailto:polzin@cutr.usf.edu> (813) 974-9849 (w) 813 416-7517 (c) http://www.cutr.usf.edu/about/about_subscribe.shtml From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Gorski, Susan (MDOT) Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 9:41 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] ACS: Means of Transportation Categories My staff general agrees with Alan Pisarski' s comment below that the third option should include railroad and long distance commuter rail, but for a different reason. If the question is left as shown in Ken Cervenka' s message we think the few people in Michigan who take Amtrak may be confused because they probably don't think of it as "long distance commuter rail". [cid:image001.jpg@01CE5189.7D5BCA20]<https://www.research.net/s/ZKC9H99> Susan A. Gorski, Section Manager Statewide & Urban Travel Analysis Section Michigan Department of Transportation Van Wagoner Building - B340 425 W. Ottawa Street P.O. Box 30050 Lansing, MI 48909 E-mail: gorskis@michigan.gov<blocked::mailto:gorskis@michigan.gov> phone: 517-335-2958 cell: 517-243-0734 fax: 517-373-9255 From: ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of wendell cox Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 8:13AM To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Subject: Re: [CTPP] ACS: Means of Transportation Categories Havn't been in this discussion... but this issue with respect to railroad is, in my view, irrelevant with respect to carrier. An Amtrak commuter from Baltimore is, from a transportation perspective, no different than a MARC commuter, for example. Hope the question can be framed to make that clear. Could have the same problem, obviously, especially in the Phila, and Boston areas. On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:22 AM, <alanpisarski@alanpisarski.com<mailto:alanpisarski@alanpisarski.com>> wrote: Ken: re Railroad I would make it both railroad and long distance commuter rail service. people in Balt take Amtrak to DC as well as MARC. use a comma. Alan -----Original Message----- From: Ken.Cervenka@dot.gov<mailto:Ken.Cervenka@dot.gov> [mailto:Ken.Cervenka@dot.gov<mailto:Ken.Cervenka@dot.gov>] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 07:59 PM To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Subject: [CTPP] ACS: Means of Transportation Categories Hello Tom and all, Agencies must send justification for proposed revisions or new content to OMB and the Census Bureau by June 14, 2013. The intent is for U.S. DOT (via BTS) to formally submit the ?please include light rail? request. Based on various discussions that have taken place (particularly those on this listserv), here are the (current) proposed modifications to the three rail transit categories in the Means of Transportation Question 31 (with all other modal groups to be unchanged): __ Rail: light rail, streetcar, or trolley (a change from the current ?Streetcar or trolley car?) __ Rail: subway or elevated (a change from the current ?Subway or elevated?) __ Rail: long-distance commuter service (a change from the current ?Railroad?) Assuming OMB approves a ?cognitive testing? program, the exact wording of whatever eventually goes ?final? will of course depend on the test results. I sure don?t want to stretch this out to the point of missing the June 14 deadline, but it may be useful to subject this to another round of public vetting on the CTPP listserv. So: what do you all think? Ken Cervenka FTA Office of Planning and Environment From: ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net>] On Behalf Of TMarchwinski@njtransit.com<mailto:TMarchwinski@njtransit.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 2:38 PM To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Subject: Re: [CTPP] County Commuting Flows Penelope- I found this email from a few months ago, and would like to let you know that NJT uses CTPP 3 year data to show broad county to county flows for Trans-Hudson transit planning. We used the 2006-08 data to show trends since 2000 in where commuting to Manhattan and other key areas has changed. We also saw that there was a shift to bus and rail commuting, vs. auto for this market in most counties. The 3 year is helpful for understanding broad trends, and specific changes. I noticed with the 5 year flow data at the county level that we saw changes related to the Great Recession. Since the 5 year data has the 3 year data imbedded as part of the 5 year data, I have looked at the difference between the 5 year and 3 year data to surmise changes between 2008 and 2010. I know statistically this may not be totally accurate, but we have seen a drop in total work trips from some counties from the 3 year to the 5 year data, and some increases in others. The numbers made sense because close in, more urban counties still increased the number of work trips to Manhattan, while mostly further out areas which were hit hard in the recession by defaults, and aging population showed a decline compared to 3 year data, but still an increase compared to 2000. The new procedure to make CTPP continue as a research project is a good one. Also I am happy to see Light Rail will be tested for inclusion in the Census. I brought this up back in 2007/2008 with Elaine Murakami of FHWA who was supportive, but we could not get FTA interested. I had and extensive conversation and email exchange with FTA on this issue (Ken Cervanka), and was involved in an online debate on this. My understanding is that the census will not allow an increase in the number of modes, but will allow Light Rail to be added. The issue was how do you classify all of the other modes, and my point was that railroad should be changed to commuter or regional rail (including Intercity), then there was bus; Light rail , Trolley, or streetcar; subway or elevated; and then Ferry I believe. Can you tell me of the status of when Light Rail will be tested, and also how it will be shown, as a separate mode, or with trolley or streetcar (which is where it belongs in my opinion). Some of the federal types wanted streetcar as a separate mode, which I did not believe made sense given its small amount of ridership, and also the fact that its more like light rail and Light Rail is much bigger in usage. Thanks for any information you can provide. Thomas Marchwinski Senior Director, Forecasting and Research NJ Transit, Newark, NJ From: ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Weinberger, Penelope Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 10:54 AM To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Subject: Re: [CTPP] County Commuting Flows As Liang said, the next CTPP is due in mid 2013. It will be based on five year ACS from 2006 ? 2010 and include small area data. In answer to the larger question; the CTPP program at AASHTO was recently transformed to an ongoing technical services program. As you rightly point out, this follows the change at CB to an ongoing survey methodology. The CTPP is historically user directed and wishes to continue to be so. So I have two things to throw out there: One, please share the value of the program with your decision makers ? when we come for funding, help them get to yes! Two, please let me know how you have used the three year data and if it is useful to have along with the planned five year data ? the difference between the sets is the three year is more frequent, while the five year covers all geography. Thanks! Penelope Z. Weinberger CTPP Program Manager AASHTO 202-624-3556<tel:202-624-3556> ctpp.transportation.org<http://ctpp.transportation.org> From: ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Estersohn Dan Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 9:55 PM To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Subject: [CTPP] County Commuting Flows Is there any information about production of the CTTP or the county-to-county commuting flows more than once every ten years? Since they are based on the annual ACS there is an opportunity for more frequent updates than in the past. What are the current plans? Dan Estersohn Senior Demographer [cid:image002.jpg@01CE5189.7D5BCA20] Arbitron Inc 9705 Patuxent Woods Drive Columbia, MD 21046 410-312-8434<tel:410-312-8434> Dan.Estersohn@Arbitron.com<mailto:Dan.Estersohn@Arbitron.com> _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news@ryoko.chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@ryoko.chrispy.net> http://ryoko.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news -- -- Wendell Cox +1.618 632 8507 Demographia | Wendell Cox Consultancy - St. Louis Missouri-Illinois MSA Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris Contributing Editor newgeography.com<http://www.newgeography.com/> www.demographia.com<http://www.demographia.com> | www.publicpurpose.com<http://www.publicpurpose.com> | www.rentalcartours.net<http://www.rentalcartours.net> BOOKS & PUBLICATIONS War on the Dream demographia.com/wod1.pdf<http://www.demographia.com/wod1.pdf> International Housing Affordability Survey demographia.com/dhi.pdf<http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf> The Wal-Mart Revolution (with Richard Vedder) Demographia World Urban Areas demographia.com/worldua.pdf<http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf>