Tuesday, 26 August 2003

Research and Advisory Board MeetingNational Consortium on Remote Sensing in TransportationEnvironmental AssessmentAugust 26-27, 2003

Tuesday, 26 August 2003 2:30 Welcome & Introductions – Roger King, Director, NCRST-E

2:45 Review of program 3:00 Transportation Corridor Workshop Recap and Discussion5:00 Wrap-Up5:30 Catfish Dinner

Wednesday, 27 August 2003

7:30 Continental Breakfast8:15 Welcome, Introductions, and Agenda Review8:25 Agenda Review8:30 Multimodal Vulnerability -- Case Study in Pipeline Vulnerability and Ecosystem Response (Gunnar Olson)9:00 Intergraph RRL Presentation9:15 Future Research Directions: Setting the Stage (KT and Roger)9:50 Break10:10 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- Z/I Imaging (Phil Kern)10:30 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- RESOURCE21 (Tom Koger)10:50 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- SimWright (Lonnie Hearne)11:10 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- HSA (Gay Smith)11:30 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- GeoKnowledge Group (Karen Schuckman)11:50 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- Intergraph and Keigan Systems (Orlando McDowelle)12:10 Lunch (Barbeque -- Please email Chuck with your preference of pork, chicken or vegetarian) 1:15 Future Research Discussions -- (Chuck O'Hara, Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz, Charlotte Coker)

Deploying RSSI in Transportation Corridor Impact Assessment and Planning Decision Support Systems and Analysis Tools Policy and Data Products 2:00 Background: The CSX Relocation EIS Project – K. Thirumalai and Claiborne Barnwell

2:15 Break2:30 Distributed Learning Seminar: Remote Sensing and the CSX Railroad Relocation EIS Project3:20 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- DMJM + Harris (Barry Brupbacher)3:40 Discussion: Research Deployment Activities for NCRST-E -- Advisory Committee Input 4:40 Action Items, Plans, and Follow Up Tasks5:00 Finish

Geospatial Information for Corridor Analysis and PlanningGICAP 2002Radisson Hotel, Memphis, Tennessee7-9 August, 2002

Presentation Session 1: High Priority and Special System Corridors David Ekern: Context Sensitive Design, A Role for Remote SensingPresentation Session 2: NAFTA Corridor (I-69) EPA Region 4: Streamlining the NEPA Process, A Collaborative Effort Benefits of a Regional Remote Sensing DatabasePresentation Session 3: Mississippi I-10 Corridor and CSX Rail Relocation EIS, DMJM + Harris: Remote Sensing and the CSX Railroad Relocation EIS MDOT Corridor Analysis Major ProjectsPresentation Session 4: Corridor Working Session Alaska Transportation Corridors: Current Status and Proposed Expansions Fast-Track Utility Corridor MappingPresentation Session 5: Future Directions in Data and Applications Virginia Future Directions Interoperability Future Directions in Transportation Application of Remote Sensing/GIS

Breakout Session: Technical and Operational Challenges and OpportunitiesBreakout Session: Institutional and Policy Challenges and OpportunitiesBreakout Session: Economic Challenges and OpportunitiesBreakout Session: Technology Outreach DirectionsBreakout Session: Educational/Training Outreach DirectionsBreakout Session: Research and Development Directions

Summary and Wrap Up

http://www.ncrste.msstate.edu/new/ncrste/corridors/GICAP2002/presentations/Ekern.ppt



http://www.ncrste.msstate.edu/new/ncrste/corridors/GICAP2002/presentations/epa_frmwk.ppt

http://www.ncrste.msstate.edu/new/ncrste/corridors/GICAP2002/presentations/regional_database.ppt

http://www.ncrste.msstate.edu/new/ncrste/corridors/GICAP2002/presentations/dmjm_harris.ppt

http://www.ncrste.msstate.edu/new/ncrste/corridors/GICAP2002/presentations/msdot.ppt

http://www.ncrste.msstate.edu/new/ncrste/corridors/GICAP2002/presentations/wiltse_alaska.ppt

http://www.ncrste.msstate.edu/new/ncrste/corridors/GICAP2002/gross/p0580.htm

http://www.ncrste.msstate.edu/new/ncrste/corridors/GICAP2002/presentations/vadot.ppt

http://www.ncrste.msstate.edu/new/ncrste/corridors/GICAP2002/presentations/interoperability.ppt

http://www.ncrste.msstate.edu/new/ncrste/corridors/GICAP2002/presentations/rs_futures.ppt

CONTEXT SENSITIVE CONTEXT SENSITIVE DESIGNDESIGN

A Role for Remote SensingA Role for Remote Sensing

GICAP 2002 WORKSHOPGICAP 2002 WORKSHOP

August 8, 2002August 8, 2002David S. Ekern, P.E. - Assistant David S. Ekern, P.E. - Assistant

CommissionerCommissioner

Minnesota Department of TransportationMinnesota Department of Transportation

DEFINING SUCCESSDEFINING SUCCESS

Creating a project which will Creating a project which will leave a lasting positive leave a lasting positive impact on the people it serves impact on the people it serves and the area it affects.and the area it affects.

A philosophy defining success A philosophy defining success as being in harmony with the as being in harmony with the community and the community and the environment.environment.

SUCCESSFUL PROJECTSUCCESSFUL PROJECTELEMENTSELEMENTS

Community Community Acceptance Acceptance

Environmental Environmental Compatibility Compatibility

Engineering andEngineering and

Functional CredibilityFunctional Credibility

Financial FeasibilityFinancial Feasibility

MAKING SUCCESSMAKING SUCCESSHAPPENHAPPEN

Visionary Leadership/ Visionary Leadership/ Attitude of ExcellenceAttitude of Excellence

Personal Personal PerseverancePerseverance

Planning with Public Planning with Public InvolvementInvolvement

Creative Funding Creative Funding AttitudeAttitude

Integration of Integration of ExpertsExperts

Flexible/Innovative Flexible/Innovative DesignDesign

Learning from Learning from Success and FailureSuccess and Failure

Sharing the ResultsSharing the Results

USING THE TOOLSUSING THE TOOLS

PLANNINGPLANNING– Department Strategic PlanDepartment Strategic Plan– District Long Range Corridor District Long Range Corridor

PlansPlans– Performance Goals/TargetsPerformance Goals/Targets

FUNDINGFUNDING– Area Transportation PartnershipsArea Transportation Partnerships

TECHNOLOGYTECHNOLOGY– CADCAD– Remote SensingRemote Sensing

FASTER-CHEAPER-FASTER-CHEAPER-BETTERBETTER

Internal Re-engineeringInternal Re-engineering Streamlining the Streamlining the

Conventional ModelConventional Model Innovations in ContractingInnovations in Contracting Utilizing the Private SectorUtilizing the Private Sector PartneringPartnering Cooperative RelationshipsCooperative Relationships

– Public/PublicPublic/Public– Public/PrivatePublic/Private

MS Delta I-MS Delta I-6969

Identify High Priority Ecological Areas

Project Project GoalsGoals

Identify Potential Mitigation Areas

Streamline NEPA process

Urban areas

Find the best “ecological pathway” between the hubs.

Eco-HubEco-Hub

Eco-HubEco-Hub

Ecological Cost Surface AnalysisEcological Cost Surface Analysis

Agriculture

Where are the best places to restore wetlands?

Benefits of New Approach

• Shared Baseline Data Early in Process leads to:

• Better Analyses Earlier in Process – Higher Quality Work

• Better Partnerships and Communication

• Early Identification of Key Eco Issues

• Avoidance of Project Delays

• Avoidance of Duplicated Efforts

• Supporting EIS info meets Agency Expectations

• Quicker Turnaround and Timely EIS Reviews

• Baseline data for future projects

BENEFITS OF A REGIONAL REMOTE SENSING / GIS DATA

BASE

Tools to help us to make better decisions, save time

and money in planning and developing

Transportation Projects.


BASE• Use Available Imagery from Public Archives

accessible via World Wide Web where possible• Avoid Redundant Data Acquisition if possible• Coordinate Between Agencies to Acquire New

Data For Multiple Uses with one Flight Plan• Analyze Data Using Automated Image

Classification Systems• Store Data in Web Retrievable Formats• Collect and store prepared data layers• Revise Imagery on Routine Cycle

• Information available to State DOTs, FHWA, EPA, Corps of Engineers, TVA, USGS, USFS,

NPS, etc.• Information centralized with easy on-line

retrieval• Proposed information for support of multiple

studies– Synoptic view medium resolution satellite imagery– High resolution (1-meter) satellite imagery– Prepared products:

• Theme maps• Contour maps• Flood zone maps, etc.

• More intensive data for special study areas– Multispectral imagery and Lidar elevational data


BASE

A Regional Data Base Is A Solution To A Recognized Concern

• new high-resolution satellites• high-altitude airborne sensors• low-altitude airborne sensors• State GIS Archives• The Internet, the World-Wide-Web, and Public Data Sources

These technologies support Applications in Transportation Development, Environmental Conservation, and Natural Resource Management

• GPS for location• digital cameras• digital image processing

and distribution

“One of the Biggest Difficulties in Using Remote Sensing and GIS is Getting the Right Data, in the Right Format, at the Right Time”

There is a convergence of accessible technologies:

Imagery Acquisition May RequireMulti-agency Partnering

• Imagery acquisition costs may be reduced by multi-agency partnerships

– National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) and– USGS Geospatial Data Clearinghouse

• Partnerships may be:– State/Federal– In-state– Multi-state– Consortia

• Partnering involves costs and trade-offs;– Cooperation required on image scale, format, dates, etc.

Once Imagery Received, It Must Be Processed to Be Useful

• Imagery is unlike tabular Census Bureau data

• “Value-added” operations required to produce useful information:

land use mapping or geo-information requires interpretation

• May not have required technical skills within existing staff

• Imagery processing may require new computer software/hardware

Strategies for Overcoming the Strategies for Overcoming the BarriersBarriers

• Training and Continued Education• Outreach programs to assist in technology

transfer• Vendors need to highlight and promote

transportation applications• Research funding to promote applications• Transportation professionals need to

document and publish results of applications

Future Uses of ImageryFuture Uses of Imagery

• Socio-economic characteristics– demographics– travel demand and forecasting

• Natural environmental conditions• Infrastructure inventory/management• AND, with other information:

– property values– R-O-W analysis– construction impacts– vegetation species classification

New sources of high-resolution imagery canprovide valuable information concerning:


BASE• Use Remote Sensing Imagery and

Data to:– Save Money– Save Time– Make and Support Better Decisions– Better Communicate Decisions,

Criteria, and Tradeoffs to Public and Customers

CSX Railroad Corridor Analysis

REMOTE SENSING and the CSX RAIL RELOCATION EIS NCRST-E GICAP 2002 Workshop Session 3


What are our Tasks?

What data do we need and in what sequence?


Our No. 1 Task is to begin recording constraints and possible alignments. We cannot prepare an Environmental Impact Statement without a physical description of the project.

The No. 1 item that we need is a digital image of the corridor under study.


The No. 2 item that we need would be contours at intervals of 5 feet or

less.

In Remote Sensing terms, we need a digital terrain model as soon as possible.


The No. 3 task is the Agency and Public Involvement process


What other data is needed as soon as possible?

The existing roadway traffic counts, intersections and links, and the most up-to-date forecasts

Similar data for other modes

Land Use, especially to determine sensitive noise and air receptors

Wetlands

Floodplains

Water Quality

Air Quality

Ambient Noise

Environmental Justice


Continued…Recreation and other public lands,

especially Section 6(f) properties.Cultural Resources and other Section 4(f)

propertiesPublic FacilitiesFarmlandFloral and Faunal HabitatsExisting Hazardous sitesAnd more…


How do we usually obtain this data?Local, State, and Federal resource agencies

Environmental documents for recent projects in the area

Original Research, usually by specialist sub-consultants

ALASKA TRANSPORTATION ALASKA TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORSCORRIDORS

CURRENT STATUS & PROPOSED EXPANSIONS

Current Highway SystemCurrent Highway System

95% of Alaska = Wetlands95% of Alaska = Wetlands

Disturbed Permafrost Always Disturbed Permafrost Always ThawsThaws

ice

Inadequate Analysis and Inadequate Analysis and DesignDesign

Alaska Transportation ProjectsAlaska Transportation Projects

Past– Alaska Railroad– Alaska Highway– Parks Highway– TAPS & Dalton Highway– Fiber Optics

Future– ANGTS– ARR Extension

Alaska’s Commercial CorridorAlaska’s Commercial Corridor

Hurdles for Transportation Hurdles for Transportation DevelopmentDevelopment

Land StatusNational Interest Economic Justification Lack of Modern Corridor Analysis

NCRST-E GICAP 2002 Workshop

Future Directions in Data and Applications

Dan WidnerVirginia Department of Transportation

Future Directions in Data and Applications

Highlight Two Efforts in Spatial Data Development and Associated Applications

1. Virginia Base Mapping Project

2. I-81/I-77 Interchange Visualizations

Virginia Base Mapping Program

• Wireless E 911 Board funded• Fly entire state in Spring 2002• Products:

– True color digital orthos at 3 scales– “break lines” for hydrography data set– Digital Terrain Model

• VDOT centerlines, Orthos, DTM, hydrography and address file supply statewide base map data for future spatial data development

²²

²

²

²

22 23 24 25 26 27 28

4142 43 44 36Addresses – E 911

Planimetrics & Cadastre

Stakeholder Driven Guidelines, Standards, and Leadership guide

local government data development

22 23 24 25 26 27 28

4142 43 44 36

VDOT Street Centerline

Digital Orthophotography

Base Imagery

Hydrography

R-2

R-1

R-15

Digital Orthophoto Base

I-81/I77 Interchange Visualizations

• Desire to use spatial data and GIS tools to provide accurate and realistic visualization of a construction project.

• Provided by Prof. Randy Dymond, Virginia Tech University, Civil and Environmental Engineering GIS (CEEGIS)

How Geospatial Interoperability can enable NCRST-E

How Geospatial Interoperability can enable NCRST-E

•Myra Bambacus•Program Manager

•Geospatial Interoperability Office•NASA ESE Applications Division

49

Pu

bli

c

Tools &Tools &TechnologyTechnology

InteroperabilityInteroperability

Pri

vate

Geospatial Interoperability

Digital Digital ResourcesResources

Collecting Collecting DataData

Enabling Citizens Enabling Citizens and Communitiesand Communities

EarthEarth

ApplicationApplicationss

50

Geographic Imagery Vision

• Imagery is dominant form of geographic info

– Archives approaching petabyte; ingesting a terabyte per day

– Tens of thousands of datasets, catalogued but not yet on-line

• Most imagery will never be directly accessed by humans

– Information communities: auto-summarization, Mining based on geographic concepts

• Hurdles to moving imagery online: technical, legal, business

– Existing standards for exchange of imagery

– Commercialization of imagery acquisition

• The ultimate challenge:to enable geographic imagery from many sources to become an integrated digital representation of the Earth widely accessible for humanities critical decisions

51

Standards Terminology Distributed ServicesProtocols

Pu

bli

cP

riva

te

… simultaneous use of multiple geo-spatial data sets …

Interoperability

InteroperabilityInteroperability

FUTURE DIRECTIONS IN TRANSPORTATION

APPLICATIONS OF REMOTE SENSING / GIS

Coming Opportunities to make better decisions, save

time and money.

Indicators of Trends

• FHWA National Strategic Goals– The Vital Few

• Reauthorization Hearings for TEA-21

Opportunities for Applications of Remote Sensing

• Highway Safety Analyses• Baseline and Historical Environmental or Natural

Resources Analyses and Prospective Monitoring• Impact Analyses for Alternatives and Project—

Project GIS– Direct Impacts– Secondary and Cumulative Impacts

• Traffic Flow Analyses• Congestion Mitigation Analyses

Opportunities for Applications of Remote Sensing, Continued

• Analyses for Context Sensitive Design / Solutions

• Data Acquisition for Transportation Planning and Modeling

• Data Base for Land Use Analyses and Models• Air Quality Analyses• Water Quality Analyses

Major Needs

• Infrastructure to Support Regional or National Datasets

• Comprehensive and Reliable Database on Cost-Effectiveness of RS / GIS Solutions in Transportation

• Clearinghouse for Multiple Agencies on Data Sharing and Data Acquisition

Break Out Sessions

GICAP 2002

August 7-9, 2002

Breakout Topics

Research and Development Directions Institutional and Policy Challenges Technical and Operational Challenges Economic Challenges Education and Training Challenges Technology Outreach Challenges

Research and Development Directions

GICAP 2002

August 7-9, 2002

Brainstorm Challenges

Methodology for remote sensing data applications, and tools and a library for central distribution (pathfinder/NIMA)

Means for non-remote sensing users to find out about data and uses

Matching tools with data Opportunities and barriers presented by relevant laws,

policies, and regulations in the jurisdictions in which a particular corridor exists or will exist


A Data Acquisition Planning Tool to determine optimal acquisition data needed (accuracies, cost, resolution, etc.)

Examine strategies to integrate data across scales throughout the project life cycle

Survey the educational pipeline for remote sensing and mapping science professionals in training

Survey projected needs for professionals


High resolution data: who is using, how is it being used, who has tool kits, how is it being acquired and archived? If not being used, why?

Better standardization of generally accepted professional practices (land cover land use classes and methods, etc.)

Characteristics of a model remote sensing and geospatial technologies program for a state DOT

Institutional and Policy

GICAP 2002

August 7-9, 2002

Brainstorm: Institutional Challenges

Insufficient interagency coordination among agencies that acquire remotely sensed data.

Agency inability to understand missions of other agencies.

Lack of resident remote sensing expertise within agencies.

University departmental structure does not provide rewards and or incentives for multi-disciplinary collaborations.

Lack of institutional education regarding intellectual property and licensing.


Lack of trust among institutions. Lack of vertical communication and commitment within

an agency. Dysfunctional data sharing mechanisms among

agencies with aligned goals. Lack of implementation of spectral, spatial, temporal,

and usage data standards Lack of institutional data standards causes major data

portability problems


Lack of knowledgeable senior level leadership. Lack of long term commitment to maintaining a data

infrastructure. Lack of understanding of the long term. Institutional inertia which leads to resistance to change.


Lack of implementing technology to exploit data. Inconsistent goals among academia, industry, and

government. Political interruption of long term goals. Inconsistent requirements among resource agencies

for level of detail at the same stage of environmental analysis.

Brainstorm: Policy / Legal Challenges

Government personnel responsible for acquiring and using data are very often uninformed about laws and policies relevant to the data.

Evolution of laws and policies are in flux within increased national security concerns.

Failure of the procurement framework to recognize the unique needs of technology and data acquisition.


Need to redefine privacy interests within rapidly changing technological environment.

Use of customary practices in the absence of formal policies (“Because we have always done it this way, that’s why.”)

Need to encourage development of data sharing mechanisms among federal, state, and local governments.


Complexity of responding to FOIA requests for data that also contain proprietary data or which have national security implications.

Lack of interagency policies and procedures for costing and expensing resources in joint projects.

Inconsistent interpretation of policies for projects that inherently require multiple agencies to take action.

Technical and Operational Challenges and Opportunities

GICAP 2002

August 7-9, 2002


Quality data for historical datasets (lack of metadata)

Lack of upper management knowledge and support

Lack of necessary computer hardware or tools Training of staff, acquiring new expertise,

versus outsourcing alternative


Accuracy needed for design, planning, and construction (disparities?)

Better characterize the accuracy of remotely sensed data needed for various applications


Lack of upper management knowledge and support


Lack of necessary computer hardware or tools Training of staff, acquiring new expertise,

versus outsourcing alternative Accuracy needed for design, planning, and

construction (disparities?) Better characterize the accuracy of remotely

sensed data needed for various applications


Educate potential users on the accuracy and characteristics of remotely sensed datasets

Filter remote sensing and application choices with common sense

Operational policy related to data sharing and licensing


Items of data security, i.e. endangered species and archaeological sites

Remote sensing technology development and associated applications (many issues)

Benchmark case studies to define process standards


Asynchronous temporal considerations Cost constraints, especially for potential local

users – are national datasets a potential solution?

How good is good enough? (over engineering issues)


Solutions of technical challenges are coupled with institutional, policy, and economic solutions

Increasing data complexity, such as hyperspectral, will require continued staff training

Licensing and certification of professional staff

Brainstorm Opportunities

Gain acceptance of remote sensing data, products and tools by major federal agencies for use in mainstream tasks (high priority)

Encourage the development of benchmark demonstration projects (high priority)

Distribution of products and results via the internet

Prioritize Items

Gain acceptance of remote sensing data, products and tools by major federal agencies for use in mainstream tasks (high priority)

Encourage the development of benchmark demonstration projects (high priority)


Break Out SessionEconomic Challenges and Opportunities

in Transportation Corridors

GICAP 2002

August 7-9, 2002

Topic Description: Discuss the topic and frame a description.

Types of Economic Impacts Spatially Defined Impacts Spatial Data Needs Role for remote Sensed Data


Innovative Treadmill Political Incentive State/Country Partnerships – value added products Inflexibility of funding sources Define corridors from an economic perspective


Redefining effective markets Cumulative effects transportation projects Transportation and international trade Ex Post analysis –

– what type of info needed to help with analysis? – Calibrate or update census/other economic data with RS.– Develop economic grids based on economic development with

RS. – Economic classification. – Employment growth in relation to highway.


What is a corridor? Freight movement Ex Ante analysis –

– Type of image required? – Developable land? – Build out analysis? – Landform analysis?

Remote Sensed Economic Data

Ex Ante / Ex Post analysis Population: density, spatial distribution, intercensal

years Business location (1 digit SIC code) Inventories of developable sites Spatial border effects

Remote Sensed Economic Data

Traffic mix VALUE ADDED PRODUCTS Build-out analysis Redefinition of effective markets Define areas of impacts

Break Out SessionEducational/Training Outreach Directions

GICAP 2002

August 7-9, 2002

Topic Description: Discuss the topic and frame a description.

Professional education/re-education Certification & training (University, technical)


Distance Learning (pre-taped lectures, remote videoconferencing)– integrity/credibility and qualifications; identity of

participants– accessibility incl. hardware + software– appropriate & current technology approach– acceptance as valid means of instruction


Life-long Continuing Education– Applicable to instructors and students– Support/allowance for training (varied training or degree, etc.)– Responsibility to convey skills to users – software/tools, methodology– On-the-job training including internal and client-side– Developing regulatory (FGDC mapping) + industry standards (ISO)– Sensor data standards re: modeling– Legal issues: use & creation of data products (professional certification +

production of valid data)– GIS, remote sensing, photogrammetry certification– Participation at different Universities, agencies, companies including site visits,

exchange programs


University System – Different models– Non-traditional approach; – Req. multidisciplinary training incl. physics, math/statistics– Technical writing– Promotion of GIS topics in varied fields (e.g. geography, civil

engineering)– Cross-reference in different departments– Understanding of map transformations & also creation of presentable

results– Need for real-world experience (internships, co-ops)

Technology Outreach Directions

GICAP 2002

August 7-9, 2002

Technology Outreach Issues

Comparison metrics of time, cost and quality Identification of economic and land use data

gaps Development of indicators to measure

appropriateness of using remote sensing Long-term vs. short-term benefits of using

remote sensing


Quantification of upfront planning info for design development, management, and operation.

Reuse of data during several stages of process Complimentary opportunities for use with

remote sensing data Packaging of data and delivery of results


Outsourcing of data collection and analysis Integration of contractor data standards Development of guidelines to potential users to

indicate potential usefulness of RS as related to projects of different sizes and types for example AASHTO, ASCE, TRB

Leveraging and exposure to stakeholders


Document success stories and disseminate and advocate to potential users

Distributed hubs for data archiving, possibly needed in each state

Formal approval from appropriate federal and state agencies

Formulate regional environmental screening frameworks

Progress from buy in to best practices


Target geologist, and other internal champions, at DOT and other agencies as best users for RS and convince upper management to adopt RS practices as official department policies

Getting congressional funding for multi-agency partners

Set up pilot projects under T23 authorization to demonstrate RS at different scales


Use GIST and other forums Pool funding sources to support demonstration

projects Student internship programs for agencies

REMOTE SENSINGLearning From Workshop

A PUBLIC SECTOR VIEW

August 9, 2002

NCRST-E GICAP 2002 WORKSHOP

Memphis, Tennessee

David S. Ekern, P.E. – Assistant Commissioner – Mn/DOT

-Associate Director - AASHTO

TRENDS/OBSERVATIONS• Enabling tool/technologytool/technology NOT need/program/activityneed/program/activity• Most Promising Themes:

• Doing current activities faster, better, cheaper (at least 2 out of 3).

• Reliable, Meaningful, Credible• Expanding Abilities to do New Activities.

• Most Effective when Approached as One of Family of Information Source Tools.

• Application to Modal Issues Just Beginning.

• Need to Understand and Deal with INSTITUTIONAL Barriers (awareness, senior management leadership, agency capacity, education).

• Most Successful When Directly Related to Agency Decision Support Systems.

• Need to Learn From Other Technology Deployment Efforts (CADD & ITS).

• Agencies may Need to Evaluate Expectations About Data Quality and Volume.

CHALLENGES - NEXT STEPS

• ENHANCE TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER• Move Research to Deployment Faster.• Focusing Research Results at Users.• Focus at a Few Key Products or Services.• Develop Synthesis on Remote Sensing.• Hold Focused Conferences/Workshops.

• PROMOTE INNOVATIVE THINKING• Public/Private Sectors Need to be Innovative and Nontraditional in

approaches to deploying Applications.• Enhance and Revise Procurement Systems.• Funding for Systems Conversion to National Standards.• Shape Thinking based on Planning System Level, Engineering, Operations

Need.

• ENGAGE STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS• Fund Association Leadership of the Efforts.• Engage Transportation Community in Geospatial/E-Gov.• Engaging Related Federal Agencies (FTA, FHWA).• Establish long-term MOUs to coordinate Efforts.

CHALLENGES – NEXT STEPS

• EXPAND WORKFORCE AND TRAINING• Focus on Agency Capacity Renewal and Development.• Focus on Private Sector as Source of Skills and Staff.• Programs Targeted Toward New Professionals.• Focus on the Educational Community.

• DEVELOP STANDARDS• Basic Information on Availability, Accuracy, Cost.• Specific Accuracy Requirements for Individual Applications.• Specific Standards Needed to Assure Customer of Product/Service Reliability.

• SPECIFIC RESEARCH NEEDS• Cost/Benefit of Data Collection for PLANNING, ENGINEERING,

OPERATIONS uses.• Metrics and Measuring Tools.• Synthesis on Use in Modes.• Regional Study Application.• Database Development and Maintenance.• Measuring and Monitoring Transportation and the Environment.

Documents

Tuesday, 26 August 2003