tftn executive steering committee (10-20-2010)
Post on 19-Jan-2015
397 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Strategic Planning for Transportation for the Nation (TFTN)
Executive Steering Committee Meeting
October 20th, 2010
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 2
TFTN Concept“Creation and maintenance of high-quality, nationwide
transportation data that is in the public domain”
An initial focus on street centerlines, but eventually multi-modal Nationwide data spanning all states and territories All roads, not just Federally funded roads Provides a common geometric baseline
Road namingPersistent segment ID numberingAdvanced functionality is built on top of baseline
Data is in the public domain and readily shareable
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 4
TFTN Strategic Planning Effort Identify and engage stakeholders Define requirements, challenges and opportunities Document progress already made
Existing Datasets Best Practices New Ideas
Explore implementation issues Evaluate funding sources
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 5
Steering Committee Roles and Responsibilities
“At Large” Steering Committee
Participate in periodic teleconferences and webinars
Listen and advise during the planning process
Option to receive and review all documents
Prepare to adopt the resulting plan as a product in some fashion
Executive Steering Committee
Same as members of the at-large group, plus
Document review and feedback
Sounding board on difficult issues or questions
Adjudicating differences of opinion coming from different stakeholders
Support in gathering input and promoting the planning process
Stakeholder Outreach
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 7
Presentations & Workshops
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 8
Interviews
Trends and Findings
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 10
Interview TrendsCommonalities we have found
General consensus and support for the concept– All the interviewees so far have indicated their support for this effort Identified several existing national data sets and potential business
models Several stakeholders observed that ‘the time was right’ for this kind of
initiative
Road safety opens opportunities– DOT Safety group is interested in all roads. Road safety provides a
significant funding opportunity Will allow Emergency Managers to see outside their state’s “Keyhole”
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 11
Interview TrendsCommonalities we have found
Trending Toward “Think Regionally Act Locally” – States are beginning to look beyond their bordersStates are the authoritative data source for their transportation
data
“Can you live with that”– All interviewees have different needsNeed to find a baseline that works with everyoneOnce the baseline is established, then consumers can add their
own “special sauce”
Baseline Geometry
With Initial Minimal
Requirements…
……and “Special Sauce”
TFTN: Common baseline foundation of geometry, basic attributes
US & State DOTs: Full routability, Linear Referencing System (LRS) & advanced attributes
Private Sector: Full routability and immersive imagery
USGS: Enhanced cartographic display and labeling
US Census: Polygon topology for census geographic units
State E911: Addresses
Geospatial Transportation Data Requirements Collected from Federal Agencies
Census and USGS Survey on road requirements - October 2010Meeting October 19, 2009
18 Federal Agencies
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 17
Examples of road features & attributes required by Federal Agencies
Feature Majority
Unpaved Roads Required
Road Tunnels Required
Road Bridges/Culverts Required
Entry/Exit Ramps Required
Major Highways (non-interstates) Required
Local Streets and Roads Required
Attributes Majority
Speed Limits Desired
Pavement Types Desired
Administrative Classification Required
Functional Classification Required
Names Required
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 18
Examples of road geometry characteristics required by Federal Agencies
Road Geometry Majority
Linear Referencing Required
Directional Routing Info Required
Address Points Required
Address Ranges Required
Potential Data Sources
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 20
FHWA Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS)
Pros: Cons:
Annual data update process HPMS covers federally aided roads not all roads
US-DOT works with states to develop basic standards
No US-DOT resources currently available for aggregation, assembly and publication of nationwide data set
FHWA funding enables states to create and maintain inventory
The level of quality, accuracy and readiness varies from state to state. Is not resourced to make a seamless nationwide data set
States develop their own plans and data management strategies
Business process would have to be enhanced to collect more detailed data
US-DOT facilitates information exchange on state “best practices”
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 21
TIGERPros: Cons:
Pre-existing business processes to collect data
Currently only updated every 10 years. More frequent updates dependent on funding and population growth.
TIGER is a mature product TIGER did not meet USGS The National Map requirements
Widely used product Positional accuracy
Significant improvements in latest TIGER files
Depictions of interchanges and dual-carriageways attributes
Product maintains fidelity to source materials. e.g., if source shows dual-carriageways, so does TIGER
High costs to retrofit TIGER were prohibitive
Substantial input from local sources The Census Bureau considers itself to be a “Data Integrator,” not a Data Producer
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 22
Private/Public PartnershipsPros: Cons:
Mutually beneficial relationships Intellectual property and licensing issues
Ability to utilize the contracting flexibility of the private sector
Puts other private firms at a disadvantage
Brand recognition Cultural and ideological differences with using specific data sources
Regular update schedules Inefficiencies in long term contracts
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 23
OpenStreetMap (OSM) & Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI)
Pros: Cons:
“Free” data Majority of community lacks in depth knowledge on how to “map” their surrounding area
Talent comes to you! Community as a whole may not always be motivated to provide content
Harness enormous workforce Difficult to schedule updates
Identify new and innovative ideas Level of trust of the community vs. an “authoritative source”
Provides near real-time data updates No official data moderators e.g. “OSM vs. Wikipedia” (OSM is a Spatial-wiki)
Reducing costs of innovation Potential for data vandalism or intentionally erroneous postings
Private sector may adapt ideas from the community
The “crowd” isn’t always right
The Road
Ahead!
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 25
Interviews (Forest Service), meetings, case studies, etc. Through these, we will:
Identify what’s working, what’s needed – current practices, requirements, strategies, standards, documentation
State use casesCharacterize existing data sets and business models Identify institutional constraints, capacity, operational authority,
motivation, benefits, etc. Formulate strategies for implementation Identify potential sources of funding
Final Report Timeline Draft Report to Steering Committee by mid December Final Report mid-January
The Road Ahead…
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 26
Executive Steering Committee Input
TFTN Minimum requirements vs. "add-ons" or special sauce?
Criteria to measure TFTN Strategic Planning project success.
What are your reactions to the notion of a public/private partnership?
04/10/2023 http://www.tftn.org 27
Open Discussion
top related