This is the link to the CTPP listserv archive: http://www.chrispy.net/pipermail/ctpp-news/ please read the note from August 5 by Chris Henrie from CB Geography. As I understand it, in response to the FR notice on the PROPOSED criteria, the CB received MANY MORE comments asking that the areas NOT be combined, including some comments from Congressional representatives. Elaine From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Jami Garrison Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 3:35 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] RE: If you are interested in CB Urban Areas delineation We are likewise in the same situation here in Phoenix with the Phoenix-Mesa UA and Avondale UA (created from a split in 2000) being combined. We also provided comment during the public comment period for the Federal Register Notice supporting the agglomeration of the Phoenix-Mesa and Avondale UAs and not keeping the split from 2000. I have an inquiry in to the Geographic Areas and Criteria branch of the Census Bureau in Washington regarding this issue and am waiting to hear back from them. I will be happy to report back any update that I get from them. Thanks, Jami ============================= Jami Garrison, GISP Socioeconomic Research Program Manager Maricopa Association of Governments 302 N 1st Ave, Ste 300 Phoenix, AZ 85003 (602) 452-5006 jgarrison(a)azmag.gov <mailto:jgarrison@mag.maricopa.gov> From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Mark Sattler Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 2:50 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] If you are interested in CB Urban Areas delineation Our MPO policy committee took a position supporting the concept of the multiple urbanized areas within our region being agglomerated and were encouraged by the August 24, 2010 Federal Register notice indicating that the Census 2000 UAs (Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, Denton-Lewisville, and McKinney) would potentially be combined. Therefore, we are disappointed and a bit confused by the August 4-5 listserv statements indicating that new criteria may have since been developed. Our policy officials have seen these discussions and are asking us to respond. Can you let us know what is going on with regard to these criteria and perhaps provide the rationale behind keeping the urbanized areas from 2000 (when the other criteria indicate that they should be combined)? Thanks.

Please note that there are some very strong concerns regarding some of the proposed "agglomerations", and I hope that there is some flexibility in determining these creations - either based on the minimum threshold idea mentioned in the FR, or other/more appropriate criteria than simply contiguity over a vast area of urban regions. Some of these go beyond simply reconnecting urban areas that were split during the 2000 UA process. Lumping some of these areas together - for example, Worcester MA with Boston MA with Dover-Rochester NH and Portsmouth NH - frankly makes no sense from a MPO or transportation planning perspective. We are particularly concerned with the potential effects on FTA urbanized area funding in New England, as this is directly related to the definition, size, number and population of the urbanized areas - regardless of the process as to how these areas are ultimately defined. -Tom Tom Reinauer Transportation Director Southern Maine RPC and Kittery Area MPO 21 Bradeen Street, Suit 304 Springvale, ME 04083 (207)324-2952 ext. 18 www.smrpc.org From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Frank Lenk Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 6:48 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] RE: If you are interested in CB Urban Areas delineation We also have the same concern in Kansas City, where a Lee's Summit urbanized area was created mainly because a general aviation airport separated it from the Kansas City urbanized area. The city of Lee's Summit extends both north and south of this airport, so the northern part of the city is in one urbanized area while the southern part is in another. The originally proposed 2010 urbanized area criteria indicated the two areas would be recombined, as they had been in 1990. Most people here would agree that recombining the two provides a more accurate description of the areas pattern of urbanization. Frank Lenk Director of Research Services Mid-America Regional Council Kansas City, MO From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Mark Sattler Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 4:50 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] If you are interested in CB Urban Areas delineation Our MPO policy committee took a position supporting the concept of the multiple urbanized areas within our region being agglomerated and were encouraged by the August 24, 2010 Federal Register notice indicating that the Census 2000 UAs (Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, Denton-Lewisville, and McKinney) would potentially be combined. Therefore, we are disappointed and a bit confused by the August 4-5 listserv statements indicating that new criteria may have since been developed. Our policy officials have seen these discussions and are asking us to respond. Can you let us know what is going on with regard to these criteria and perhaps provide the rationale behind keeping the urbanized areas from 2000 (when the other criteria indicate that they should be combined)? Thanks.