The document summarizes a workshop on strategic planning for a Transportation for the Nation (TFTN) initiative. TFTN aims to create a nationwide geospatial dataset of all roads. Presenters discussed findings from stakeholder outreach, including support for TFTN and safety benefits. Challenges include different stakeholder needs and data quality issues. A potential model involves expanding the Highway Performance Monitoring System to include all roads. Obstacles like funding and quality standards would need addressed. Benefits were identified for safety, planning and various users. The discussion focused on identifying best practices and moving the initiative forward.

1. Strategic Planning for Transportation for the Nation (TFTN) Steve Lewis Geospatial Information Officer, USDOT Director, Office of Geospatial Information Systems, USDOT/RITA/BTS Todd Barr Geospatial Program Manager, Koniag Technology Solutions (KTS) September 29, 2010

2. Agenda for Workshop Overview of TFTN Strategic Planning Project– Steve Lewis, US-DOT Overview of TFTN Strategic Plan Findings– Todd Barr, Koniag TFTN Perspectives Panel & Lightning Talks NSGIC/State Perspective – Danielle Ayan, Georgia Tech Private Sector Perspective – Skip Parker, NAVTEQ Private Sector/Regional Perspective – Dr. Bruce Spear, Cambridge Systematics Academic/Local Government Perpective – Al Butler Questions & Answers, Discussion, Brainstorming

3. TFTN Background Influenced by several different efforts: In 2008, an “issues brief” by NSGIC called for the creation of TFTN OMB Circular A-16 identifies the USDOT as the “lead agency” for the “transportation theme” of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI). Emerging USDOT data requirements for geospatial data for all roads, such as accident reporting for enhanced safety and bridge inventory. Aligned with several initiatives such the emerging federal Geospatial Platform concept. - one element of the “geospatial portfolio”

4. 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 naming Persistent segment ID numbering Advanced functionality is built on top of baseline Data is in the public domain and readily shareable

5. Strategic Planning Effort – The Process 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

6. What Has Been Done? - Pre-Award Outreach Meeting of Federal Stakeholders, October 2009 NSGIC Annual Conference, October 2009 National Geospatial Advisory Council, December 2009 Transportation Research Board Annual Meetings, January 2010 ESRI Federal User Conference, February 2010

7. Stakeholder OutreachPresentations & Workshops

9. Highway Performance Management System

10. Intelligent Transportation Systems

11. Asset Management

13. Trends from the Workshops and Interviews

14. Near Unanimous Support

15. Learned about similar efforts ? ?

16. Safety could be a key to success… A Geospatial representation of ALL ROADS is needed to Meet many of the USDOTs Safety Initiatives Emergency response Funded Efforts

17. “Think Regionally, Act Locally” States and counties Are looking beyond their borders Are the authoritative data source for their transportation data

18. “Can you live with that?” The Stakeholders have different needs Need to find a baseline that works with everyone Once the baseline is established, the consumers can add their own “special sauce”

19. Baseline Geometry with “Special Sauce”

20. Initial, Minimal Components Road naming Basic attributes (e.g. functional classification) Persistent segment ID numbering

21. Additional Stakeholder Ideas

22. Variety of stakeholders adds their own “special sauce” on top Private Sector: full routability and immersive imagery US Census: Polygon topology for census geographic units USGS: Enhanced cartographic display and labeling State DOTs: advanced attributes State DOTs: Linear Referencing System (LRS) State E911: Addresses TFTN: Common baseline foundation of geometry, basic attributes

23. A Potential Model for TFTN - HPMS 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 Current reporting requirements for the HPMS could be expanded to require all roads Detailed HPMS attributes would continue to be provided for only Federal-aid roads Annual nature of HPMS reporting provides a data update mechanism USDOT works with states to develop basic standards Reporting requirement would enable states to utilize FHWA funding for creation and maintenance of inventory

24. Obstacles Associated With This Model FHWA has to change the HPMS Reporting Requirements to include all roads in the geospatial submission States are not required to work with neighbors for connectivity No USDOT resources currently available for aggregation, assembly and publication of a nationwide data set The level of quality/accuracy varies from State to State

25. How Can These Obstacles Be Overcome? Through State-level Best Practices Some States work with their local government partners Provide funding and technical support State collects and aggregates the data into a Statewide dataset Involve the e-911 community Examples include Arkansas and Ohio Some states are using public-private partnerships Contracting for creation and maintenance of Statewide inventory Includes a mechanism for posting update requests In some case, the State is allowed to distribute a version of the data Examples include Massachusetts and New York Through possible additional USDOT funding sources

26. Potential Benefits of TFTNDifferent benefits to different groups of stakeholders

27. Examples of what have we heard so far…

28. At the ESRI User Conference Short-term and long-term considerations Short term: don’t forget several nationwide datasets currently exist TIGER Commercial OpenStreetMap Longer term: design and build something new HPMS is not resourced to make a seamless nationwide data set Look at other “process models” too! Public/private partnership Build on TIGER Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI) Something “outside-the-box” that we have yet to imagine

29. Census Bureau Interview Takeaways TIGER is a mature product Many users depend on it for a variety of applications National broadband mapping (for Census geometry) Significant improvements in latest TIGER files Positional accuracy improved (7.6 meter) Substantial input from local sources incorporated Research into potential for OpenStreetMap Planning for more frequent updates (depending on funding)

30. USGS Interview Takeaways Requirement for nationwide roads in The National Map (TNM) TIGER did not meet TNM requirements Positional accuracy Depictions of interchanges and dual-carriageways Attributes Costs to retrofit TIGER were prohibitive Have currently replaced TIGER with TeleAtlas data Competitive price, but restricted use Looking at OpenStreetMap and other alternatives, long-term The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) provides a positive example of Federal-State collaboration

32. Develop an inventory of what each state has for street centerlines

34. The Road Ahead More interviews, meetings, surveys, case studies, etc. Through these, we will: Identify what’s working, what’s needed – current practices, requirements, strategies, standards, documentation Identify institutional constraints, capacity, operational authority, motivation, benefits, etc. Formulate strategies for implementation Identify potential sources of funding

35. Thank You Check out our Web-site http://www.transportationresearch.gov/TFTN/default.aspx

36. Questions & Discussion Any questions for presenters and/or panelists? We have some questions for you We'd like this to be an open, interactive forum All have a chance to speak Please raise your hand State your name and affiliation

37. Discussion Questions First and foremost: what's on your mind? Does this make sense? Are we nuts? New ideas? Obvious concerns? Additional perceived benefits of TFTN GIS Pro draws a diverse audience How does VGI fit into the picture? Opportunities and/or concerns Perspective on roles of federal agencies Who are producers? Who are consumers? Who works well with states?