25 May
2011
25 May
'11
9:28 a.m.
Could someone shed some light on how reliable TAZ to TAZ flow
comparisons will be between the 2000 CTPP data and the 2006 - 2010
release? I am asking because as I delineate TAZ's I am trying to
prioritize my "rules" for delineation and wonder if TAZ continuity will
really be useful if the data won't be comparable anyway.
Of course we are keeping our smaller travel model zones as consistent as
possible, but our Census TAZ's will be in many cases quite a bit larger.
Kendra Watkins
Senior Planner
Mid-Region Council of Governments
809 Copper Ave. NW
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Phone: (505)724-3601
Fax: (505)247-1753
Email: kwatkins(a)mrcog-nm.gov <mailto:tgaudette@mrcog-nm.gov>
25 May
25 May
11:29 a.m.
Here are some questions to ask yourself:
1. How much growth (residential population and employment) has
occurred and WHERE. If there is a lot of growth, you should make new
TAZs and not worry about keeping the same geography.
2. How big or small were the TAZs for CTPP 2000? (In a few cases
nationwide in 2000, the TAZs were very very small and the results were
probably not reliable). We have never controlled the size of TAZs, and
even this time, it is a suggested threshold, not a firm threshold. The
software allows you to define very small TAZs, but gives you a warning.
You probably DON'T want to compare TAZ-to-TAZ flows between 2000 and the
2006-2010. Most likely, I think that people will use the 2006-2010 CTPP
TAZ-to-TAZ flows as a validation data source for their travel demand
model. And in some cases, will use an adjusted TAZ-to-TAZ flow as inputs
into HB-Work trips (after accounting for the fact that this represents
only the journey-TO-work).
For comparing between the 2 timeframes, one which is point-in-time and
the other a "period estimate", given the ACS sample size, you would be
better off to make SuperTAZs (combinations of TAZs) to do the
comparison.
The UNWEIGHTED sample size after five years of ACS data collection
(2006-2010) is about one-half the sample size from the Census 2000 long
form, therefore the margin of error is much higher.
We are asking MPOs (and State DOTs) to also define TADs, which is
another word for a Super TAZs, using a minimum of 20,000 population.
This would be approximately the size of 4 or 5 census tracts. For your
comparison task, you might want SuperTAZs that are smaller than that.
Glad to hear that you understand the difference between your model TAZs
and the Census-TAZs defined for CTPP.
Elaine Murakami
FHWA Office of Planning
206-220-4460
From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Kendra Watkins
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 7:29 AM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: [CTPP] taz delineation
Could someone shed some light on how reliable TAZ to TAZ flow
comparisons will be between the 2000 CTPP data and the 2006 - 2010
release? I am asking because as I delineate TAZ's I am trying to
prioritize my "rules" for delineation and wonder if TAZ continuity will
really be useful if the data won't be comparable anyway.
Of course we are keeping our smaller travel model zones as consistent as
possible, but our Census TAZ's will be in many cases quite a bit larger.
Kendra Watkins
Senior Planner
Mid-Region Council of Governments
809 Copper Ave. NW
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Phone: (505)724-3601
Fax: (505)247-1753
Email: kwatkins(a)mrcog-nm.gov <mailto:tgaudette@mrcog-nm.gov>
11:35 a.m.
How can I get off this list
From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of
Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 12:30 PM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: RE: [CTPP] taz delineation
Here are some questions to ask yourself:
1. How much growth (residential population and employment) has
occurred and WHERE. If there is a lot of growth, you should make new
TAZs and not worry about keeping the same geography.
2. How big or small were the TAZs for CTPP 2000? (In a few cases
nationwide in 2000, the TAZs were very very small and the results were
probably not reliable). We have never controlled the size of TAZs, and
even this time, it is a suggested threshold, not a firm threshold. The
software allows you to define very small TAZs, but gives you a warning.
You probably DON'T want to compare TAZ-to-TAZ flows between 2000 and the
2006-2010. Most likely, I think that people will use the 2006-2010 CTPP
TAZ-to-TAZ flows as a validation data source for their travel demand
model. And in some cases, will use an adjusted TAZ-to-TAZ flow as inputs
into HB-Work trips (after accounting for the fact that this represents
only the journey-TO-work).
For comparing between the 2 timeframes, one which is point-in-time and
the other a "period estimate", given the ACS sample size, you would be
better off to make SuperTAZs (combinations of TAZs) to do the
comparison.
The UNWEIGHTED sample size after five years of ACS data collection
(2006-2010) is about one-half the sample size from the Census 2000 long
form, therefore the margin of error is much higher.
We are asking MPOs (and State DOTs) to also define TADs, which is
another word for a Super TAZs, using a minimum of 20,000 population.
This would be approximately the size of 4 or 5 census tracts. For your
comparison task, you might want SuperTAZs that are smaller than that.
Glad to hear that you understand the difference between your model TAZs
and the Census-TAZs defined for CTPP.
Elaine Murakami
FHWA Office of Planning
206-220-4460
From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Kendra Watkins
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 7:29 AM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: [CTPP] taz delineation
Could someone shed some light on how reliable TAZ to TAZ flow
comparisons will be between the 2000 CTPP data and the 2006 - 2010
release? I am asking because as I delineate TAZ's I am trying to
prioritize my "rules" for delineation and wonder if TAZ continuity will
really be useful if the data won't be comparable anyway.
Of course we are keeping our smaller travel model zones as consistent as
possible, but our Census TAZ's will be in many cases quite a bit larger.
Kendra Watkins
Senior Planner
Mid-Region Council of Governments
809 Copper Ave. NW
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Phone: (505)724-3601
Fax: (505)247-1753
Email: kwatkins(a)mrcog-nm.gov <mailto:tgaudette@mrcog-nm.gov>
11:57 a.m.
New subject: how to unsubscribe to the CTPP listserv
Please follow the directions on this page to unsubscribe, or change your
listserv preferences.
http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news
From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Dennis Hooker
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 9:36 AM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: RE: [CTPP] taz delineation
How can I get off this list
From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of
Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 12:30 PM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: RE: [CTPP] taz delineation
Here are some questions to ask yourself:
1. How much growth (residential population and employment) has
occurred and WHERE. If there is a lot of growth, you should make new
TAZs and not worry about keeping the same geography.
2. How big or small were the TAZs for CTPP 2000? (In a few cases
nationwide in 2000, the TAZs were very very small and the results were
probably not reliable). We have never controlled the size of TAZs, and
even this time, it is a suggested threshold, not a firm threshold. The
software allows you to define very small TAZs, but gives you a warning.
You probably DON'T want to compare TAZ-to-TAZ flows between 2000 and the
2006-2010. Most likely, I think that people will use the 2006-2010 CTPP
TAZ-to-TAZ flows as a validation data source for their travel demand
model. And in some cases, will use an adjusted TAZ-to-TAZ flow as inputs
into HB-Work trips (after accounting for the fact that this represents
only the journey-TO-work).
For comparing between the 2 timeframes, one which is point-in-time and
the other a "period estimate", given the ACS sample size, you would be
better off to make SuperTAZs (combinations of TAZs) to do the
comparison.
The UNWEIGHTED sample size after five years of ACS data collection
(2006-2010) is about one-half the sample size from the Census 2000 long
form, therefore the margin of error is much higher.
We are asking MPOs (and State DOTs) to also define TADs, which is
another word for a Super TAZs, using a minimum of 20,000 population.
This would be approximately the size of 4 or 5 census tracts. For your
comparison task, you might want SuperTAZs that are smaller than that.
Glad to hear that you understand the difference between your model TAZs
and the Census-TAZs defined for CTPP.
Elaine Murakami
FHWA Office of Planning
206-220-4460
From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Kendra Watkins
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 7:29 AM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: [CTPP] taz delineation
Could someone shed some light on how reliable TAZ to TAZ flow
comparisons will be between the 2000 CTPP data and the 2006 - 2010
release? I am asking because as I delineate TAZ's I am trying to
prioritize my "rules" for delineation and wonder if TAZ continuity will
really be useful if the data won't be comparable anyway.
Of course we are keeping our smaller travel model zones as consistent as
possible, but our Census TAZ's will be in many cases quite a bit larger.
Kendra Watkins
Senior Planner
Mid-Region Council of Governments
809 Copper Ave. NW
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Phone: (505)724-3601
Fax: (505)247-1753
Email: kwatkins(a)mrcog-nm.gov <mailto:tgaudette@mrcog-nm.gov>
4962
days inactive
4962
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Dennis Hooker -
Elaine.Murakami＠dot.gov -
Kendra Watkins