Lewis tftn fgdccg_08102010


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Lewis tftn fgdccg_08102010

  1. 1. Strategic Planning for Transportation for the Nation (TFTN)<br />Steve Lewis<br />Geospatial Information Officer, USDOT<br />Director, Office of Geospatial Information Systems, USDOT/RITA/BTS<br />August 10, 2010<br />
  2. 2. Background<br />Influenced by several different efforts:<br />NSGIC’s For the Nation (FTN) initiatives that called for the development of TFTN and Imagery For the Nation (IFTN) <br />OMB Circular A-16 identifies the USDOT as the “lead agency” for the “transportation theme” of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI). <br />Emerging USDOT data requirements for geospatial data for all roads, such as accident reporting for enhanced safety and bridge inventory.<br />Aligned with several initiatives such the emerging federal Geospatial Platform concept. - one element of the “geospatial portfolio”<br />
  3. 3. TFTN Concept<br />“Creation and maintenance of high-quality, nationwide transportation data that is in the public domain”<br />An initial focus on street centerlines, but eventually multi-modal<br />Nationwide data spanning all states and territories<br />All roads, not just Federally funded roads<br />Provides a common geometric baseline<br />Road naming<br />Persistent segment ID numbering<br />Advanced functionality is built on top of baseline<br />Data is in the public domain and readily shareable<br />
  4. 4. Strategic Planning Effort - History<br />RITA/BTS agreed to fund and manage the effort<br />Funds obligated and contractor selected in October 2009<br />Koniag Technology Solutions<br />Applied Geographics<br />Suffered through many contracting glitches associated with “end-of-year” money<br />Contract finally awarded in March 2010<br />
  5. 5. Strategic Planning Effort – The Process<br />Identify and engage the entire stakeholder community<br />All levels of government<br />Private Sector<br />Citizens (e.g. OpenStreetMap community)<br />Define requirements, challenges and opportunities<br />Document progress already made, good ideas & challenge current assumptions<br />Explore implementation issues<br />Evaluate funding requirements and sources<br />
  6. 6. What Has Been Done?<br />USGS/Census Bureau sponsored meeting of federal stakeholders, October 2009<br />Presentation at the NSGIC Annual Conference, October 2009<br />Presentation at the Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, January 2010<br />Presentation at the ESRI Federal User Conference, February 2010<br />Presentation at the NSGIC Midyear Conference, February 2010<br />Creation of TFTN Website, Spring 2010: http://www.transportationresearch.gov/TFTN/default.aspx<br />Press Releases, Spring 2010<br />Workshop at the AASHTO GIS for Transportation Symposium, April 2010<br />Creation of TFTN Steering Committee, June 2010<br />Initial Stakeholder Interviews, June 2010<br />Workshop at the ESRI User Conference, July 2010<br />
  7. 7. The Road Ahead<br />More interviews, workshops, meetings, surveys, case studies, etc.<br />Workshop at the NSGIC Annual Conference, September 2010<br />Workshop at the URISA GIS Pro Conference, September 2010<br />Through these, we will:<br />Identify what’s working, what’s needed – current practices, requirements, strategies, standards, documentation<br />Identify institutional constraints, capacity, operational authority, motivation, benefits, etc.<br />Formulate strategies for implementation<br />Identify potential sources of funding<br />
  8. 8. Trends from the Workshops and Interviews<br />Near Unanimous Support<br />All of those interviewed and most of those who attended the workshops have indicated their support for this effort<br />Learned of a number of similar efforts underway that benefit from TFTN<br />Safety could be a key to the success of TFTN<br />A geospatial representation of ALL ROADS is needed to meet many of the USDOTs Safety Initiatives<br />A geospatial representation of ALL ROADS is needed for emergency response<br />Lots of federal money for safety initiatives<br />
  9. 9. Trends from the Workshops and Interviews<br />“Think Regionally Act Locally”<br />States and counties are beginning to look beyond their borders<br />States and counties are the authoritative data source for their transportation data<br />“Can you live with that?”<br />The Stakeholders have different needs<br />Need to find a baseline that works with everyone<br />Once the baseline is established, the consumers can add their own “special sauce”<br />
  10. 10. Baseline Geometry with “Special Sauce”<br />“Special sauce” can be content and/or capabilities<br />The specifics of what’s included in “baseline geometry” requires further definition<br />We need ideas and input from stakeholders on what’s feasible<br />Initial, minimal components might be:<br />Road naming<br />Basic attributes (e.g. functional classification)<br />Persistent segment ID numbering<br />
  11. 11. Additional Potential Components<br />Address ranges/geocoding (could be a minimal component?)<br /><ul><li>Advanced attributes (e.g. width, lanes)</li></ul>Full routability (e.g. speeds, turn restrictions, etc.)<br />Enhanced cartographic display (e.g. annotation, symbolization, etc.)<br />Linear referencing systems (LRS)<br />Integration with photo/imagery catalogs<br />
  12. 12. A Potential Model for TFTN - HPMS<br />FHWA reporting requirements for the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) include the submission of a geospatial network of all Federal-aid roads by each State DOT<br />Current reporting requirements for the HPMS could be expanded to require all roads<br />Detailed HPMS attributes would continues to be provided for only Federal-aid roads<br />Annual nature of HPMS reporting provides a data update mechanism<br />USDOT works with states to develop basic standards<br />Reporting requirement would enable states to utilize FHWA funding for creation and maintenance of inventory<br />
  13. 13. Obstacles Associated With This Model<br />FHWA has to change the HPMS Reporting Requirements to include all roads in the geospatial submission<br />States are not required to work with neighbors for connectivity<br />The level of quality/accuracy varies from State to State<br />
  14. 14. How Can These Obstacles Be Overcome?<br />State-level Best Practices for Creating Statewide Road Inventories<br />Activate government partners at County and Local level<br />Provide funding and technical support<br />State collects and aggregates into statewide data<br />Examples of this approach include: AR and OH<br />Public-Private partnership with commercial mapping firms<br />State contracts with private sector for creation and maintenance of statewide inventories<br />State obtains licensed data and a mechanism for posting update requests<br />Examples of this approach include: NY and MA<br />
  15. 15. Potential Benefits of TFTN<br />Core business benefits to the USDOT<br />To the HPMS program: see HPMS in the context of complete transportation<br />To Highway Safety for nationwide accident mapping<br />To bridge inventory effort<br />Benefits to “sister” federal agencies<br />Reduces costs from redundant nationwide data sets<br />Provides public domain data for sharing with partners<br />Potential collaboration and synergy with other significant mapping programs at USGS and US Census<br />
  16. 16. Potential Benefits of TFTN<br />Benefits to State and Local Governments <br />Potentially opens up FHWA resources for statewide road inventories<br />Streamlined requests for data<br />Provides public domain data <br />Facilitates sharing with partners<br />Better data – particularly for rural areas – for GPS-based navigation<br />Easier cross border /multi-jurisdiction coordination and collaboration<br />Benefits to the General Public<br />Consistent data across agencies and programs to support citizen services<br />Publically accessible data for citizen and commercial innovation<br />
  17. 17. Questions?<br />Steve Lewis<br />(202) 366-9223<br />steve.lewis@dot.gov<br />