FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ALL PUBLIC ROAD GEOSPATIAL REPRESENTATIVE STUDY

Transcription

1 FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ALL PUBLIC ROAD GEOSPATIAL REPRESENTATIVE STUDY Project Overview

2 Project Introduction On August 7, 2012, FHWA announced that the HPMS is expanding the requirement for State DOTs to submit their LRS to include all public roads, and to provide facilities that are divided highways or dual carriageways (as independent features where applicable) This requirement will be referred to as the All Road Network of Linear Referenced Data (ARNOLD) Many states will be challenged by this requirement, but this project will produce guidance materials to help implement ARNOLD at the state level 2

3 Project Team US DOT Joe Hausman (Project Manager) Tom Roff (ARNOLD Lead) Justin Clarke (Team Lead) Contractors Applied Geographics, Inc. (Prime Contractor) David R. Fletcher (Subcontractor) Michael Baker Jr., Inc. (Subcontractor) Expert Panel Mark Sarmiento FHWA Planning Mike Neathery FHWA Planning Robert Pollack FHWA Safety Stuart Thompson FHWA Safety Maria Chau FHWA NY Division Dave Blackstone Ohio DOT Frank Pisani Utah DOT Frank DeSendi Pennsylvania DOT Keith Dotson Kentucky Transportation Sharon Hawkins Arkansas HDT James Meyer Arizona DOT Michele Barnes University of Michigan 3

4 Overall Project Workplan Task 1 Work Plan and Compliance complete Task 2 Local Road Collection complete All Tasks inform the final Reference Manual Task 3 LRS Components and Best Practices complete Information gathered builds on previous tasks Task 4 Examine LRS Temporal Maintenance - in progress Task 5 LRS System Component Reference Task 6 Technical Reference Manual 4

5 Task 1 Work Plan and Compliance Complete Detailed Workplan and Project Schedule ARNOLD Risk Assessment Assess TFTN Alignment Build Project Website 5

6 Task 1 Risk Assessment Risks Considered 1. State Compliance with ARNOLD requirements 2. USDOT/FHWA s ability to produce the nationwide ARNOLD 3. Impact on Potential Consumers if ARNOLD does NOT succeed 6

7 Risk 1: State Compliance Most frequently cited challenges Limited resources Data maintenance Data collection LRS technical issues Understanding of methodology and requirements Communicating benefits of program to stakeholders and leadership Likelihood of States Implementing ARNOLD by June 2014 Deadline 31% 59% High Med Low 10% Based on review of State HPMS Plans 7

8 Likelihood of States Implementing ARNOLD Green States are most likely to meet the June 2014 due date for having All Public Roads Linear Referenced Based on review of State HPMS Plans 8

9 Risk 2: USDOT/FHWA s Ability to Produce Nationwide ARNOLD FHWA needs to be able to build and maintain a complex integrated dataset, which requires: FHWA Technology and Methods FHWA Budget ARNOLD FHWA Staff and Expertise FHWA Policy Support and Leadership 9

10 Risk 3: Impact on Potential Consumers of ARNOLD "build once, use many times Certain systems and products are at risk if ARNOLD does NOT succeed Systems at Risk: Internal to USDOT USDOT RITA/BTS: National Transportation Data Atlas USDOT Office of Planning, Environment, and Realty: National Highway Planning Network Systems at Risk: External to USDOT National Spatial Data Infrastructure, the Geospatial Platform, and The National Map US Census Bureau TIGER and LUCA data FCC National Broadband Map Open Street Map Commercial Navigation Data Systems 10

11 Task 1 Project Website 11

12 Task 2 - Local Road Collection Complete Interview FHWA approved entities on Business Processes and viability DOT (5) Local Government (2) MPOs (2) Develop Approach for States for All Public Roads LRS Must include on-going maintenance of roadways Write and Deliver Systematic Approach Report 12

13 Task 2 Supply Chain Patterns Identified 1. Local governments supply geospatial road data to the DOT 2. A third party (non-dot, and potentially non-government) creates statewide data and supplies it to the DOT 3. A hybrid approach exists, whereby the state gathers as much as possible from a non-dot aggregator (e.g., a regional agency or state clearinghouse) and then obtains the rest from locals. 4. The DOT compiles all the data itself Where in the supply chain is interoperability introduced and who pays for it? 13

14 Supply Chain Pattern #1 Federal Land Agency City DOT Local governments supply geospatial road data to the DOT State DOT Private Land Owner MPO County DOT Benefits Getting data directly from those that know it best leads to highest quality Challenges State DOT is responsible for data compilation and edgematching Difficult to maintain and update Can be challenging working with larger cities/counties 14

15 Supply Chain Pattern #2 A third party (non-dot, and potentially non-government) creates statewide data and supplies it to the DOT Benefits The State DOT does not have to manage the data creation Challenges State DOT may have little or no control over the data creation Commercial data licensing terms may be restrictive 15

16 Supply Chain Pattern #3 Hybrid approach whereby the state gathers as much as possible from a non-dot aggregator and then obtains the rest from locals. Benefits Maximizes the data available from a non-dot aggregator, thus minimizing local outreach needed. Challenges State DOT is responsible for data compilation and edge-matching Difficult to maintain and update 16

17 Supply Chain Pattern #4 The DOT compiles all of the data, working internally to coordinate Benefits The State DOT has full control Challenges Internal coordination within the DOT can be challenging across DOT data keepers/providers. The quality of data can suffer without proper local involvement to review and ground truth the data 17

18 Task 2 Key Recommendations Create a conceptual framework based on supply-chain principles and best practices. Reach out to non-dot suppliers of all-road data, and create true partnerships for meeting requirements and creating benefits. Jointly develop repeatable processes and/or systems for data exchanges. Be cognizant of the costs to local levels of government and the burden of, and resistance to, unfunded mandates. Be aware of and participate in statewide initiatives for geospatial data sharing in general. 18

19 Task 3 - LRS Components and Best Practices Complete Literature Review Document Best Overall Practices from Task 2 respondents + private industry Write and Deliver Current Best Practices Assessment Report 19

20 Task 3 Linear Referencing Methods A Linear Reference Method (LRM) defines a specific way in which locations are measured along linear geographic features. 1. Absolute methods measure the total distance from the start of the segment to the event. 2. Relative methods locate events according to their distance from a known reference location. 3. Interpolative (i.e., proportional) methods measure distance as a fraction of the entire section distance. 20

21 Task 3 Roadway Elements needing special consideration Traffic Circle/Rotary can be simply represented as a point intersection, or modeled with complex linework Road Names - Names can be stored as attributes or as a linearreferenced event. Dual Carriageways necessitates two or more sets of linework 21

22 Task 3 LRS Software Capabilities Capabilities for Core Centerline Maintenance Centerline digitizing Geometric line/node snapping Geometric topology rules Object level metadata storage and maintenance Capabilities for Applying and Maintaining LRS Ability to store roadway measures associated with a LRM LRM calibration, based on control points Single LRM logical functions And Others 22

23 Task 3 Key Recommendations Work toward a shared enterprise-wide LRS foundation rather than proliferate multiple LRS implementations within an agency. Build an LRS Incrementally as it must be developed with greater care and accuracy than almost any other data within a DOT. Give proper consideration to specialized roadway elements, such as dual carriageways, ramps and traffic circles. Focus on interoperability in an LRS by identifying a subset of permissible and interoperable LRM and software options. When making LRS software decisions, take current business processes and workflows into consideration. When measuring mileage, actual driven measures are more accurate than calculated measures 23

24 Task 4 Examine LRS Temporal Maintenance Currently in Progress Identify mechanisms (methods, tools, best practices) for ongoing data maintenance Use NCHRP 2027 Develop recommendations informed by tasks 2 and 3 Write and Deliver Maintenance Plan Report Document 24

25 Temporal LRS vs. Temporal Maintenance* Temporal LRS is needed to document or track change-related LRS behavior (movement, aging, etc.). Comparing last year s official aid mileage to this year s Determining whether a certain crash occurred before or after the road was resurfaced Creating or deleting location reference objects (e.g., mile markers) relative to the roads that they reference. Temporal maintenance* is needed when an existing road (with LRS events tied to it) is changed and the corresponding linear geometry and/or descriptive attributes are updated. Existing LRS events and data need to be appropriately managed, either tied to the new road alignment or removed/archived This includes the timing and sequence of these processes and the metadata documenting the maintenance process transaction *This is the focus of Task 4 25

26 Task 4 Focus: Temporal Maintenance 26

27 Temporal Maintenance Overview MAINTENANCE BENEFITS Improved timeliness and accuracy of spatial data Better coordination among different business systems Availability of best available data for use in decision making and planning efforts Potential for cost sharing of maintenance function MAINTENANCE TRIGGERS External roadway realignment, new road, attribute change Internal spatial data improvements, data corrections, MAINTENANCE PROCESSES Typically require updating the following three components: Road centerline geometry One or more route topologies One or more LRS with one or more linear reference methods (LRMs). 27

28 Task 4 Key Recommendations Recognize that many downstream users and business processes depend on LRS. Changes to the LRS will cascade down to them. Design flexibility and scalability into the core system so that later additions of temporal features can be added Use a data structure that tracks inventory projects and roadway changes to answer questions regarding data changes As changes are made to alignment, length, and/or attributes, the prior version of the data should be properly archived. Maintain historical (i.e., archived), current (i.e., production) and proposed (i.e., development) versions of the LRS. Provide education and training for both LRS maintainers and end users 28

29 Task 5 LRS System Components reference Literature review of LRS business rules based on respondents from Task 2 Federal State (DOT) Local Governments MPO s Private Sector Develop technical requirements for LRS systems Research existing best practices and business rules Synthesis and simplification of existing technical instruction manuals Consider impact of enterprise business factors Write and Deliver Technical Instructions Manual 29

30 Task 6 Technical Reference Manual Write and Deliver Final Technical Reference Manual summarizing Tasks 1-5 Quantitative Outcomes and Feasibility Assessment PowerPoint presentation about final Technical Reference Manual 30

31 Questions and Discussion 31