Perhaps someone with Census can answer these two questions.
The new urban/rural classification method had some interesting results in
South Carolina. One of our UAs (Greenville) was split into two UAs, with a
very narrow band of "rural" area (along the I-85 corridor, where there's
little or no population in the blocks adjacent to the freeway) dividing the
new Mauldin-Simpsonville UA from the Greenville UA, which it was part of in
1990. I assume that the two UAs were not combined because contiguity could
only have been achieved with a "hop" connection, and the urban/rural
classification rule specifies that otherwise separate UAs won't be combined
using a "hop". 1) Is that correct? And, 2) does the "no hop" rule
apply
for UA-UC combinations and UC-UC combinations? We have what appears to be a
single block discontiguity between the Greenville UA and Clemson UC, also.
Now, a general question for the list:
The Rock Hill, SC UA lost a significant part of its 1990 urban area to
Charlotte, NC. Transportation planning for the portion of the Rock Hill UA
that was "lost" to Charlotte is currently handled by the Rock Hill MPO.
This creates some interesting and potentially troublesome planning and
political issues. Has anyone else had a similar experience, where part of a
small UA was "absorbed" by an adjacent larger one?
John Gardner, AICP
SCDOT Office of Planning
PO Box 191
Columbia, SC 29202-0191
(803) 737 - 1444
gardnerjf(a)dot.state.sc.us
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Bash [mailto:jbash@uic.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 5:31 PM
To: Patty Becker
Cc: Andrew PICKARD; ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: Re: [CTPP] 2000 demo. profiles: 100% data
CMSA/MSA/PMSA are in the text file. I'm 99% sure that the Chicago PMSA was
also a PDF profile but I don't want to dig into the 91meg zipped profiles
for Illinois right now to find out:-) Of course only the portion of
MSA/CMSA within a state is reported. There is supposed to be a national
file out eventually with the full CMSAs.
jim b
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Patty Becker wrote:
I don't think we're going to get tables for
CMSA/MSA/PMSAs. Nothing on an
MA basis has been released to date, as far as I know.
All states should
have the data for cities (places) and counties, but they have been coming
out on a flow basis and they may be getting states up before they get the
substate areas.
The last sets of the data, including Michigan and Ohio, are to be
released
on June 4,and I hope all the tables are up on the web
site by the end of
next week.
Patty Becker
At 03:39 PM 05/29/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Why is it that some of the 2000 Demographic Profile summaries currently
>being released include summaries for metro areas in addition to statewide
>summaries? As an example, Illinois includes
summaries for the state,
Cook
>County, and Chicago City. Yet Georgia only
includes a state report (you
>might expect Atlanta to have a summary). I am specifically interested in
metro areas of
Virginia. The web page I am referring to is
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/2002/demoprofiles.html
Thanks for the help.
Andrew Pickard
Senior Transportation Engineer
Hampton Roads Planning District Commission
723 Woodlake Drive
Chesapeake, VA 23320
Phone: (757) 420-8300 Fax: (757) 523-4881
E-mail: apickard(a)hrpdc.org
Web:
www.hrpdc.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------
Patricia C. (Patty) Becker 248/354-6520
APB Associates/SEMCC FAX 248/354-6645
28300 Franklin Road Home 248/355-2428
Southfield, MI 48034 pbecker(a)umich.edu