Make your own free website on Tripod.com
TRB Statewide Data and Information Systems Committee
Catagories

Main Page
Members
Friends
Peer Exchanges
Sessions
Related Conferences
Publications
Favorite Links
Current Assignments
Contact Us
Chair Person
Secretary
TRB Staff Representative
 
 
 
 
 

 

Bobby Approved 3.2

Statewide Transportation Data and Information Systems

A1D09

Mid-year Meeting

Rosen Plaza Hotel, Salon #18

May 12, 2002

Summary of Committee Meeting

              

Anita Vandervalk, Chair, opened the meeting at 1:00 p.m. and adjourned the meeting at 3:30 p.m.   The participant total was 17 (11 members and 6 friends).   The agenda and list of participants are attached.   This meeting was held prior to the meeting of the North American Travel Monitoring Exhibition and Conference (NATMEC).  

There were several handouts provided at the meeting.    Copies of the handouts are available from the presenters or Kim Hajek, as needed.  The Agenda was adjusted during the meeting.   The minutes of the meeting are as follows:

1. Agenda Item #I, Introductions – Anita Vandervalk

 
Anita provided the attendees with a handout entitled “Peer Exchange Summary”.   This is a list of the Peer Exchanges from August, 2000 through March, 2002.  In addition, topics for potential future Peer Exchanges were also listed.   There are no new Peer Reviews scheduled at this time.

 
Anita was going to make a presentation on Data Integration during NATMEC.   Also, she will be reporting on this Committee’s recommendations for what the future holds on data issues.   These are data issues relative to the “TRB Critical Issues” list developed by the TRB Executive Board.   Fourteen items are on the list and are discussed further in these minutes.

 
A discussion followed on what is use of GASB funds at state DOTs?

 
The consensus was that a lot of information about the use of these funds in the state DOTs was primarily coordinated by the Finance Divisions of the Agencies.

 
2. Agenda Item #3, Summary of Peer Exchange, “Using Spatial Data, Tools and Technologies to Improve Program Delivery”   – Ron Tweedie

 
Ron Tweedie reported on the recent Peer Exchange held in South Carolina in March, 2002.  The topic of the Peer Exchange was “Using Spatial Data, Tools and Technologies to Improve the Delivery of Transportation Programs”.   Tom Palmerlee requested a copy of the report from the final peer review.  Jim Hall has completed the draft of the report, however, we are still in need of the reports from the states on GIS uses in their DOTs.  Please send this information to Jim Hall as soon as possible.   When the report is completed, it will be available on the committee web-site. (http://members.tripod.com/~trbstate).

 
Ron recommended that the Committee may want to send the summary report of the March meeting to other state DOTs for their use, as needed.

 
A recommendation from the March meeting was that national standards may need to be established for data sets used at the federal level.

 
If states want to have data in the national database, the data would have to meet the federal data standards.   The Governor of Kansas is pushing for national standards.

3.        Agenda Item #6 - AASHTO SCOP Data Task Force Activities –

Anita provided the participants with a copy of the Status Report prepared by Jonette Kreideweis on the latest SCOP Data Task Force Activities .

Alan discussed the issue of Urban Area boundaries.   There is a need to know how it works and how to make it work better.  Two-thirds of road changes in urban areas are basically due to boundary shifts, about one-third is due to new roads. 

Barna Juhasz explained that the reason for the urban area boundaries was because of the federal monies to be used for the roads within the boundaries.   Since, some roads were partly rural, then urban, then rural again, there was a need to keep them within an urban boundary.   With ISTEA, this was no longer necessary.   May need to come up with another method for setting the boundaries.

This may be modified in the next reauthorization.

Two major issues –

1.       Does dropping a federal urban area boundary affect funding for the states?   No.

2.       Use Federal Aid Urban boundary for each states’ own purposes at the state level.  In the case of states like Michigan, they can keep using the federal aid urban boundaries, but it is not necessary to require the other states to do so.

3.       However, for HPMS this year, existing urban area boundaries will be used.  

4.       Agenda Item #7, Reports from States -

Ron Tweedie – Reported on freight data issues.   A report from New York will be up on the NYDOT web-site soon.  

Pat Hu – Oak Ridge Labs – trying to identify alternative routes in case of emergency evacuations (Louisiana State University is interested in determining how this can be done.)

 
Tremain Downey – California DOT – not in attendance

Jack Stickel – Alaska DOT - has a new MPO in Fairbanks.   Functional class will be a specific area of focus for Alaska DOT.  The current highway inventory program underway will collect GPS centerline coordinates.   Alaska DOT is working with Washington State to get the data editing phase of the project coordinated.

Alaska DOT joined a pool fund study on the CARS System.   Should have first prototype delivered in June.

Also, a road weather information system was deployed on the DOT web-site.
 

Kim Hajek – Texas DOT – Texas is moving forward with the development of the Trans Texas Corridor with SH130 being the first “leg”.   This requires road inventory data and maps for planning and design of the corridor. 
 

One of the Transportation Commissioners is looking at ways to reduce the number of performance measures for the agency.   However, Asset Management will likely be a new measure included in the future.
 

A GIS-T workshop was held in Austin for TxDOT Districts and MPOs and was sponsored by the FHWA Southern Resource Center.   Representing FHWA were Ben Williams and Kirk Fauver.   The workshop was very successful.

A GIS component of the Texas Transportation Plan is also under development.   The Plan is due to the Texas Legislature by January 1, 2003.  
 

TxDOT continues to partner with the Texas Department of Public Safety, via inter-agency contract, in the development of a Crash Records Information System (CRIS).  
 

The Statewide Traffic Analysis and Reporting System (STARS) is under development at TxDOT and a presentation was scheduled at NATMEC on the STARS Project.
 

Bill Cloud – Montana DOT–

A GPS inventory of the on-system roads was completed 3 – 4 years ago.

Now Montana is working to GPS the off-system roads.
 

Weigh-In-Motion programs are also being developed.   Montana is looking at accuracy of Bending plate vs. Piezo technology.   The Piezo is far outperforming the bending plate technology.   Looking for cheapest way to gather this data.   There will be a report published prior to the end of this calendar year.
 

State Truck Activity Reporting System (STARS) – 2.2 million dollars to install piezo sensors around the state and collect the data for one year.    Vehicle weights are tracked by time of day.   They are looking at scale avoidance and have seen significant reductions in violations. 
 

University of Montana is doing this report.   Pavement savings have been noted in millions of dollars by using this program, estimated at about ¼ million dollars a year.  
 

Congressional earmark money has now made it possible to do the weigh-in-motion system.
 

Barna asked if the final report was going to explain how the installation was done to get the good results?  Bill will talk to the contractors about including this in the final report.
 

Gaye F. Liddick – Pennsylvania Dot -
 

PennDOT is looking at 2000 Design for weight data.   Heavy Truck Traffic program has them looking at installing 50 AVC sites in the state.  They are also installing WIM sites for 6 overlay and construction sites.
 

A Traffic Information System is being developed to edit class and volume data.  Includes a module for field traffic monitoring, and reporting module to create the information needed for management decisions.
 

Roemer Alfelor – FHWA, HIAM-30- On the issue of Asset Management, in December, representatives from 10 state DOTs will meet and will develop the long term vision for this issue.
 

5. Agenda Item #2, TRB Report – Tom Palmerlee
 

A listserve will be set up for committees to handle paper calls.

 
TRB is working on getting a directory of contact information about committee members.   However, you have to be a committee member to get access to the directory.

Several folks are sending emails asking about issues related to the committees, i.e. statewide data and the committees can decide how to handle.

Alan - On the agenda for the next meeting is discussion of how cross-committee interaction will occur and data committees can talk to one another.   Want enough liaison members with other committees.

Tom – how can we make TRB deal with cross-cutting issues?

Alan – need to have every committee member identify every other committee with which they interact.  Tom – data is usually wrapped in the other committees, Environmental data is within the ENV Committee, for instance.

May need to look at ways to schedule the meetings so that members can attend other committee meetings.

Tom – Smart Growth Conference Coming up.

Next May – SCOP will meet in Florida Keys.

However the Planning, Environment, Management and Freight Committees – will meet in Portland, Oregon next summer, perhaps in July.

6.       Agenda Item #4, TRB Division Summit Activities –

Agenda Item #4.a:

James Pol – FHWA – ITS Joint Program Office - Workshop to be scheduled.   More information to be forthcoming.   Looking at data quality issues for real-time and strategy-based.

Tom Palmerlee - TRB’s Policy Division, just beginning to look at who are users of freight data.

Agenda Item #4.b:

Anita – Data Committee liaisons –   A1D09 Committee liaisons will attend other committee meetings at the annual TRB meeting if available and report back to the A1D09 Committee on status of work by other committees.  

Anita commented that the committee liaisons from A1D09 to other committees are not limited to those in attendance at this meeting.   If others on the A1D09 Committee want to be liaisons, please contact Anita.


Horizontal liaisons were defined as those with other data committees, they are as follows:

Ron Tweedie – Freight Committee

Ed Christopher – Urban Data Committee

Mark Hallenbeck – Traffic Monitoring Committee

Pat Hu – Safety

Travel Survey Committee (need a liaison)

Anita Vandervalk - Spatial Data

Jack Stickel - Sub-Committee of Spatial Data - Data Integration Committee  

Ron Tweedie – Planning Committee for Mid-year Meetings

Customers of the A1D09 Data Committee were identified as Vertical liaison types. They are   as follows:

Kim Hajek - Performance Measures

Rob Bostrom - Statewide Planning

James Pol, friend – Operations

May add other groups to the “vertical” list, other customers,   Environment, etc. ??

Alan Pisarski – BTS also looking at freight issues.

7. Agenda Item #5, TRB Critical Issues – Develop Data Committee positions for each issue area.   (Anita and Alan)
 

Alan will try to put a summary together of data needs for each issue.
 

Anita led the discussion on each critical issue, including the strengths and weaknesses in the availability of data to respond to each issue.
 

Critical Issues:

Security – In 50s and 60s security was an issue and then we got lax in the 70s and 80s.  Now, events of 9/11 have made security a top priority again.

 

Road Inventory files must be kept up to date with NHS, StrahNet routes, emergency closings, etc.  Therefore, State DOTs play a major role in providing this type of information for security of the national and state transportation network.
 

Ron – We need to know where the redundancies are in the system. After 9/11 ferries were used to carry a lot folks out of the area.   Need to identify multi-modal methods for evacuation, ferries? Rail?

The Military is talking about developing access to real-time weather, work-zone type of data.

Jack – Western states and Alaska stress the importance of having data for a seamless road network for communication purposes.   There is no network available now for communication purposes.

Due to time constraints on addressing all other “Critical Issues”, assignments were given to committee members to write a paragraph on the critical issues.   Of the fourteen issues identified by the TRB Executive Committee, the A1D09 Committee will comment on the following five Critical Issues: Security, Safety, Congestion, Aging Infrastructure, Human Resources.   These comments from the A1D09 Committee will be included in a report from Alan Pisarski on the recommendations of the various data committees regarding the Critical Issues list.

 

Anita will let us know the time frames that the paragraphs are due back to the committee.

Kim   - Security, Safety.

Anita - Congestion

Roemer   Alfelor – Aging Infrastructure

Barna – Human Resources side needs to be looked at.   States need to have ways to collect data and retain people.

Ed Kashuba – National Issues such as Data quality issues, standards issue, pulling data together from all states. 

8.  Agenda Item #8, Committee Business Meeting – Anita

a.       Next Peer Exchange - A1D09 will probably not have another Peer Exchange for now.

b.       Next Mid-year meeting- Will probably be in mid-July in Portland to coincide with the meetings of the Planning, Environment and other committees closely aligned with A1D09.

c.        Call for Papers for 2003 Annual meeting - Any ideas?  Anita will set up a sub-committee for calls on these papers, Ron, Kim, Jonette, Anita and Bill Cloud.

Ron noted that we usually get two sessions and one of those is a paper session, but if we don’t get papers, we don’t get plans.

 

d.   A1D09 Strategic Plan – Nothing to report on this issue.

 

e.       Committee Rotation – Anita has requested the addition of the following members: Jim Altenstadter, Ed Kashuba, James Hall, Jack Stickel, Susan Lapham, Mark Hallenbeck, Tzveta Dobreva-Martinova, Harshad Desai and Tremain Downey. The following will be removed as members: Tony Esteve. The paperwork is being processed at TRB.

f.         Committee Resumes need to be sent to Anita, if you have not already  

      provided a resume.

 
Anita announced that there would be a data operations luncheon on Tuesday, at the NATMEC Conference.

There being no further business, the A1D09 Committee Meeting adjourned at 3:3 p.m.

Follow-Up Items

 
1. Agenda Item #3, Summary of Peer Exchange, “Using Spatial Data, Tools and Technologies to Improve Program Delivery” - We are still in need of the reports from the states on GIS uses in their DOTs.   For those members who attended the GIS peer….please send this information to Jim Hall as soon as possible.

 
2. Agenda Item #4.b: Data Committee liaisons –   We still need a liaison for the Travel Survey Committee. Please let Anita know if you are interested.

 
3. Agenda Item #5, TRB Critical Issues – A1D09 Committee will comment on the following five Critical Issues: Security, Safety, Congestion, Aging Infrastructure, Human Resources.  These comments from the A1D09 Committee will be included in a report from Alan Pisarski on the recommendations of the various data committees regarding the Critical Issues list. Please send a paragraph to Anita by August 15 for inclusion in Alan’s report:

Kim   - Security, Safety.

Anita - Congestion

Roemer  Alfelor – Aging Infrastructure

Barna – Human Resources side needs to be looked at.   States need to have ways to collect data and retain people.

Ed Kashuba – National Issues such as Data quality issues, standards issue, pulling data together from all states.  

 
4. Committee Resumes need to be sent to Anita, if you have not already done so, please provide a resume.

 
5. Anita will set up a sub-committee for calls on these papers, Ron, Kim, Jonette, Anita and Bill Cloud

_________________________________________________________

Attendees List for the A1D09 Committee Mid-Year Meeting, May 12, 2002, Rosen Plaza Hotel, Salon #18, 1:00 p.m. – 3:30 p.m.

 
Anita Vandervalk – Chair, Cambridge Systematics

 

Roemer Alfelor – FHWA, HIAM-30

Bill Bannister – BTS

Bill Cloud – Montana DOT

Harshad Desai – Florida DOT

Tony Esteve – FHWA, OHPI

Kim Hajek, Secretary - Texas DOT

Mark Hallenbeck – TRAC

Pat Hu – Oak Ridge National Laboratories

Barna Juhasz – FHWA, HPPI-1

Ed Kashuba – FHWA, HPPI-30

Gaye F. Liddick – Pennsylvania DOT

Tom Palmerlee – TRB

Alan Pisarski – Consultant

James Pol – FHWA ITS Joint Program Office

Jack Stickel – Alaska DOT

Ron Tweedie – Consultant

___________________________________________________

TRB Committee on

Statewide Transportation Data and Information Systems

A1D09

Peer Exchange Summary

Previous Peer Exchanges:

1. August, 2000 – Performance Measures – Madison, WI

2. March, 2001 – Data Integration – Washington DC

3. July, 2001 – Adding Value with Data Collection Programs – Vail, CO

4. March, 2002 – Using Spatial Data, Tools and Technologies to Improve the Delivery of Transportation Pogroms – Charleston, SC

Future Peer Exchange Ideas:

1. State Roadway Information Systems: State of the Practice in Collection, Integration and Access

2. Data Quality

3. Data Interjurisdictional Issues

4. Measuring/Evaluating Data Programs

5. Data Foundations for Safety Conscious Planning

6. Data Systems for Integrating Project Selection on the Statewide Transportation Improvement Programs

7. Data Access in a Security Conscious World

______________________________

ASHTO SCOP Data Task Force

Activity Status Report

Thus far in 2002, the AASHTO SCOP Data Task Force has worked on and participated in the following activities:

 

§          Providing feedback and comments to AASHTO SCOP staff on the CTPP.

 

§          Distributing and sharing information on transportation data related topics.

 

§          Preparing a formal response to the Department of Commerce, Census Bureau on the American Community Survey.

 

§          Assisting in the planning of the Statewide Data Committee Peer Exchange on Using Spatial Data, Tools and Technologies To Improve Program Delivery.

 

Other potential areas for SCOP Data Task Force involvement include:

 

§          Proposing data related research topics for the next round of NCHRP 8 – 36 projects.

 

§          Identifying data related topics that warrant AASHTO SCOP study and   discussion.

 

 

Jonette Kreideweis

May 8, 2002