Zak--I hope that it is OK that I am responding to the whole list serve.
For the 5-year product the thinking is that it could be similar to prior
data releases (2000, 1990 and 1980). However, you are right the disclosure
rules played havoc with several of the 2000 tables. Since we can't get rid
of the disclosure rules that is why you are hearing so much talk about the
potential for some synthesized data.
I totally agree that larger zonal data aggregations really will not do much
for transit. In all honesty it would help if the transit planning community
could assert itself and become a little more engaged at the front end of the
process. There was (is) a TCRP proposal in the hopper seeking to do a
guidebook for transit planning using various census data products but I have
not heard how it came out in the selection process. I believe that the
committee that picks the projects was to meet sometime in the middle of
September. Maybe someone on this knows the status.
In thinking about all of this (and showing my age) I keep hearing Mick
Jagger inside my head saying "you can't always get what you want, but if you
try sometimes, you'll find you get what you need"
Thanks for the post
"Zakaria, Thabet" wrote:
Hi Ed:
Excellent CTPP discussion issues. However, I have several questions and
comments for your consideration. Are we going to have TAZ-to-TAZ data in
2010-2011, similar to Part III of the 2000 package? If yes, are the data
going to be subject to the CB's disclosure avoidance process? As you
know, the loss of data due to the threshold requirement in 2000 was
significant and the data became totally useless. TAZ-to-TAZ data are
required for most projects in transportation planning. Geographic units
larger than TAZs, such as the 20,000 population per zone, super zones or
large districts would not provide the data needed to plan individual
transportation facilities, such as transit routes.
According to the ACS program, only the five-year transportation data
products at the zonal level would be useful. The one-year products would
be useful after 2010 because of previous accumulation of data. Based on
our evaluation of 2005 ACS data, the first 3-year product (2005, 2006
and 2007) would be useful for geographic units larger than 65,000
population threshold per zone, not 20,000 as proposed by the CB. The
2005 ACS sample was not large enough to even produce accurate estimates
for all means of transportation to work for Gloucester County, NJ
(277,000 people).
Thabet Zakaria
Deputy Director, Technical Services
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission
Phone: 215-238-2885
Email: tzakaria(a)dvrpc.org
Fax: 215-592-9125
-----Original Message-----
From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of ed christopher
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 11:19 AM
To: ctpp-news maillist
Subject: [CTPP] CTPP Discussion Issues
During the past few months I have received several questions regarding
the need for small area, Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ), data from the
American Community Survey (ACS) so I thought I would provide an update.
GENERAL UPDATE ON CTPP
There are two groups that are working on census data needs for the
transportation community.
First there is the long-standing CTPP Working Group that meets monthly
and has been responsible for the content of the 1980, 1990 and 2000 data
packages. Although the precise membership of this working group has
changed over time it has generally been made up of US DOT staff, Census
Bureau (CB) staff, Dave Clawson from AASHTO, and members of
Transportation Research Board (TRB) committees. The work of the CTPP
Working Group tends to focus on the highly technical aspects of the
data. Since 1997, this group has met at least once a month and has been
chaired by Elaine Murakami of FHWA.
Working in concert with the CTPP Working Group, the AASHTO Standing
Committee on Planning (SCOP) last August (2005) initiated a broader
based Committee called the SCOP Census Work Group. Jonette Kreideweis
of the Minnesota DOT chairs this group. Its main focus has been on
issues that transportation planners need to know to use the ACS and it
has been instrumental in recognizing that a "family" of new data
products will be needed. In June the Work Group proposed a pooled-fund
project that includes data products, research, training, and technical
support. The pooled-fund is currently before SCOP and I hope that it
will be approved by AASHTO in October. The pooled-fund builds upon the
experience gained from the 1990 and 2000 pooled-fund projects and
details on it can be found on the TRB Subcommittee on Census Data
website at
http://trbcensus.com/SCOP/
TAZ DEFINITION for ACS
1. Will MPOs and State DOTs be asked to submit new TAZs?
Assuming that a new CTPP pooled-fund is approved by AASHTO, there will
be an opportunity to define new TAZs for CTPP data products. Questions
to be answered revolve around how many different TAZ systems should
there be, the cost for developing those systems and the mechanical
process for submitting them. To help define TAZs, discussions with the
CB's Geography Division are underway.
2. How will new TAZs be submitted to the Census Bureau (CB) and added
to TIGER?
The CB has a contract with M-cubed and its subcontract Caliper
Corporation for software development to support the "Participant
Statistical Areas Program" (PSAP). The PSAP includes the tract and
block group definition process. The software being developed for this
program can be modified to accommodate TAZ, SuperTAZ or any other
geographic units that the transportation planning community would like
to have. As a result, it makes sense to have tract, block group, and
the TAZ definition efforts be a coordinated process. Of course the
development of any TAZs are premised on and would be paid for by the
pooled-fund.
3. When will the Census Bureau (CB) use the new TAZ definitions to
tabulate ACS data for CTPP?
Since the CB PSAP to define track and block groups is focused on the
2010 regular census, tabulations of ACS data issued in 2010 and after
would follow the new geographies. Any earlier products would use
existing 2000 geography. For example, the pooled-fund calls for
small-area tabulations from ACS data using a required 5-year period --
2005, '06, '07, '08 and '09. The data would not be released until
2010-2011 and we have been assured that it would follow 2010 geography.
However, for our first 3-year product (2005, '06 and '07), we have to
use 2000 geographic units and meet the 20,000 population threshold per
zone.
4. What is the history of TAZ definition for CTPP?
For the 1980 and 1990 data tabulations TAZs were restricted to 6
characters and only one set of TAZs could be defined per region. The
data assigned to these TAZs represented an equivalency process where
MPOs were asked to let the CB know which blocks to assign to which TAZ.
Blocks could not be split and the TAZs really became an aggregation of
blocks and block groups.
In 2000, a major improvement was made where the TAZs were defined early
and placed in the CB TIGER file. With the TAZs in TIGER the CB was then
able to put the actual data for the area the TAZ represented in the
predetermined TAZs. For the first time the "urban" TAZs became a unique
tabulation geography and not just an aggregation of Census geographical
units. While this new process was adopted for TAZs the equivalency
process remained for those areas that crated state-level TAZs. This was
due to size limitation of the TIGER record and other technical
processing issues.
5. WHAT are some items to consider?
As we look toward the future and ACS related transportation data
products, further TIGER improvements are on the horizon. Inside the CB
the Geography Division is undergoing a major overhaul of its TIGER file
data base. Conceptually, TIGER is moving to something akin to a
relational data base and space limitations are a thing of the past. Not
only can we consider adding more characters to the TAZ field, we can
even talk about having different TAZ zone structures. Assuming the
AASHTO pooled-fund is approved, one of the first tasks will be to focus
on defining TAZs for inclusion into the new TIGER system. As a result,
we need to focus on what we want in terms of TAZs.
Other items that are nearing the horizon concern the detail data tables
to be included in the various products. The pooled-fund is calling for
a one, three and five year transportation data product. However, before
we work on the specific details of the product design the pooled-fund
must first be approved and funded.
As Chair of the TRB Urban Data Committee, the sponsoring committee of
the Census Data Subcommittee, I hope to see this list serve used as a
forum to feed these discussions. Currently we have over 550 subscribers
to this list, most who are the active census data users in their MPOs,
states, consulting firms and universities.
Finally, if you have a question about any of this, please post it to the
list serve. We are at a critical time in terms of getting the
information out to our various users. So please share your comments,
questions and experiences.
--
Ed Christopher
Resource Center Planning Team
Federal Highway Administration
19900 Governors Drive
Olympia Fields, Illinois 60461
708-283-3534 (V) 708-574-8131 (cell)
708-283-3501 (F)
_______________________________________________
ctpp-news mailing list
ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news
--
Ed Christopher
Resource Center Planning Team
Federal Highway Administration
19900 Governors Drive
Olympia Fields, Illinois 60461
708-283-3534 (V) 708-574-8131 (cell)
708-283-3501 (F)