GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) FOR TRANSPORTATION SYMPOSIUM FINAL REPORT MYRON L. BACON D. DAVID MOYER DELTA COURT OF FLAGS HOTEL

Transcription

1

2 GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) FOR TRANSPORTATION SYMPOSIUM FINAL REPORT MYRON L. BACON D. DAVID MOYER DELTA COURT OF FLAGS HOTEL ORLANDO, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 15-17, 1989

3 I INTRODUCTION A symposium on Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for Transportation was held in Orlando, Florida in February of This report provides a summary of the background, approach used, subjects discussed, major issues identified, and action items needing further attention. In addition to this summary report, a proceedings, containing material for most of the presentations made at the symposium has also been prepared. The proceedings will be available after July 1, 1989 from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Attention: Jack Stanton, Project Director, 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 225, Washington, D. C The remainder of this summary report is organized as follows: Section II contains a brief summary of the background for the Orlando GIS Symposium and why it was held. Section III provides an overview of the goals for the Symposium and how it was organized to reach these goals. Section IV contains a summary of the plenary sessions and outline of material contained in the concurrent sessions. Section V provides a listing and brief discussion of the major transportation GIS issues identified by conference participants. Section VI outlines an Action Plan to guide further work needed by a variety of organizations and agencies with interests and responsibilities in the transportation GIS area. II BACKGROUND The 1989 GIS for Transportation Symposium was an outgrowth of past activities of the sponsoring organizations (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Highway Engineering Exchange Program (HEEP), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). For example, AASHTO and HEEP had sponsored a similar s~nposium in Tempe, Arizona in FHWA had sponsored conferences on automated cartography in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and Olympia, Washington in Based on their earlier efforts, the sponsoring groups had concluded that a more formally structured meeting was needed. Further, there was a need for sessions on major themes such as management needs and expectations for GIS, applications, data needs and acquisition, and hardware and software technology available. It was around these four themes that the Orlando symposium was organized. III APPROACH The overall purpose of the symposium was to bring together officials from state and provincial transportation agencies to exchange information and hear about 1

4

5 to be successful requires three things: vision, skills, and an authorizing environment. - due to resources they control and skills they have, State DOTs are often called on to be the lead state agency for GIS. In the second plenary session, three industry leaders provided insights as to where GIS is headed and what the implications of this direction are for transportation agencies. Jack Dangermond of ESRI outlined some fundamental GIS concepts and provided suggestions on how to integrate these technologies to serve our needs. For example, Dangermond noted that the major cost and major concern must be on the data base, not hardware and software. GIS uses geography as a tool to integrate various data, drawing on a wide range of "tools in the GIS toolbox", to facilitate such integration. He stressed the importance of linkages and noted the importance of indexing to facilitate integration as the key, and that it is not necessary to convert all data to one system. Trends identified included movement from multi-user systems to single user workstations and from generi c tools to task specific tools. Dangermond concluded that the challenge is not the technology, but rather each one of us as users of GIS technology. John Lange of IBM also noted the high cost of data conversion, indicating that 80 percent of GIS project costs are generally devoted to this aspect of the project. Lange noted there are three ways to facilitate access of data to user: Integration, interface, and reference. The key to success in a GIS is to get information to user in acceptable form. Charles Miller of CLM Systems provided GIS insights from an engineering perspective. He noted there are a number of engineering applications for GIS and stressed the importance of users keeping in touch with people who are responsible for and working on the data base. Miller suggested that given the capability of the next generation of work stations, it is best to regenerate information, not store it in processed form. He also stressed the best approach is to be bold, in order not to underestimate both needs of and capabilities for GIS. The remainder of day one was devoted to a roundtable for managers to determine needs and uses they see for GIS and to a series of presentations by six states and provinces on their experiences in implementing a transportation GIS. Management Issues The Management Issues session identified a number of problems facing high level managers in State DOTs as they consider GIS implementation strategies. Among major issues identified were: Technology transfer - Still a need for it Need to define what GIS is Need guidance in how to best get GIS implemented in agency 3

6 State and Province GIS Experiences Representatives of the States of Alaska, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, along with the Province of New Brunswick were included in these sessions. Later in the week additional state and province GIS sessions were presented by New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Saskatchewan. The GIS system presentations made by Ohio, Alaska, and Pennsylvania described varying degrees of implementation. Each state outlined how it had approached the task of implementing a GIS, as well as noting the difficulties encountered. Ohio The Ohio DOT approach has been 10 years of GIS process and application. Initial funding was provided by a grant from the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration. Consequently, the primary application has been accident data. Public domain software was created by Intergraph Corporation, based on Ohio DOT's specification, to complement the data base management system on the agencies Intergraph hardware. This approach has allowed Ohio to produce products that have many characteristics of what is now commonly referred to as GIS information. The graphical base covering Ohio's 41,000 square miles was networked by manually digitizing the 112,000 miles of roads that make up the State, county, township, and municipal road network. Although Ohio has made considerable use of GIS in planning and operations, its greatest potential appears to be in support of the on-going decision-making process. Alaska Alaska DOT is relatively new in the GIS field, but has made major advances in the last two years. Alaska's large land area, wide range of terrain features, and severity and rapid changes in weather all help create a unique set of challenges for the Alaska transportation industry. Funding for the creation of a GIS has come from Alaska's vast natural resource base. It is expected that the GIS will in turn assist in the use and conservation of these resources. Recent advances in geo-positioning technology are expected to hasten the use of GIS as a decision-making tool as America's "last frontier" continues to develop. Pennsylvania Pennsylvania is developing a major GIS capability, having spent $1.7 million thus far on implementation and operation of the GIS in DOT. The system was built using the 7.5 minute-based Computer Assisted Mapping Program. High on the list of priorities has been the restructuring of position related data. Currently 42,000 miles of state highways have been digitized, with another 3 to 5 years needed to complete the off road digitizing effort. With over 800 production data bases, Penn DOT relies heavily on a fully functional network-structured data base with multiple paths of entity/attribute owner/member relationships. Using GIS to combine graphic and tabular data for analysis, planning, and decision-making should push this technology rapidly forward in the near future. A second session on State and Provincial GIS efforts included presentations by North Carolina, Saskatchewan, and New Hampshire. 4

7 North Carolina In response to a grass roots interest in GIS, a GIS Task Force was formed in The Task Force has widespread support including the Governor and FHWA. An extensive study was made by the Task Force and the following recommendations produced. 1. Initial GIS development should be around pavement management, traffic engineering, planning, budgeting, maintenance, map publishing, and field office support. 2. GIS should utilize a relational data base. 3. GIS should be integrated with statewide telecommunications system. 4. GIS should be functional under a wide rang~ of work stations. 5. GIS should have a permanent development team staff. Saskatchewan Saskatchewan reported on a highway GIS pilot project. The GIS will continue the present policy of making digital data available through the Central Surveys and Mapping Agency (CSMA). The just completed pilot project used MunMap, a PC based GIS that runs on PC/AT and Intel workstations. The project involved linking CSMA's 1:1,000,000 digital map with data on highway traffic, pavement condition, and accidents. Project goals were to: 1. Give users the ability to interface graphic information with accident statistics, traffic data and pavement management information residing on the Saskatchewan Highways and Transportation mainframe computer data base. 2. Provide users with a map building tool for highway transportation system applications. 3. Provide users with information retrieval capabilities for textual and graphic information. Based on the successful completion of the pilot project, it is expected that the transportation GIS will be extended to the entire province in the near future. New Hampshire f New Hampshire appointed a steering committee in 1985 to plan and implement an extension of their computer capabilities into the area of graphics. Progress in the development of CAD/D operations has proceeded steadily since that time. This presentation reported on the automation of graphic straight line diagrams. These diagrams, used to provide quick reference to roadway location, had traditionally been created by the thousands by hand. The GIS application automates the straight line diagram creation process, using a link between the straight line diagram and the state's Roadway Inventory Systems to place current inventory data on the diagram. This CAD/D application not only solved the diagram problem, it also set the stage for continued development of the New Hampshire Graphic Roadway Inventory System. 5

8

9 composed of hardware, software, data, and personnel used to capture, edit, display, and most importantly, analyze geographic information". Wisconsin approach stresses that GIS is a tool with which to build applications that deal with geographic data (i.e. is a method, not data). The WisDOT GIS allows the combining of point and data layers in accordance with analysis request. very flexible method of storing data. continuous data, by combining Overlay function provides a Expected long-range benefits include: 1. Reduction of redundancy 2. Integration of new data acquisition technology 3. Improved, more timely analysis 4. Faster applications development. At WisDOT, GIS is a data base integrator, not an integrated data base. The system supports multiple location method. The WisDOT GIS is based on work station technology. GIS Application Technical Concurrent Sessions The second day of the Symposium was devoted to concurrent sessions on a range of technical matters. These sessions covered the following topic areas. 1. Location Referencing Systems for Transportation Data This session included discussions of NAD 27 and NAD 83, coordinate reference systems, interagency involvement in geodetic network densification, basic GPS applications, converting milepost data to XY coordinates, and an administrator's view of referencing systems. The session organizers strongly recommended that NAD 83 be the datum used in GIS. A GIS users group is needed as a resource for information on recommendations, advice, etc., to help in implementing and building a GIS. One way to help build the information sharing network is through a research project (e.g. NCHRP), to generate a document describing the GIS technology applications by DOTs that are most advanced in the field. There is also a need to separate GIS efforts into two levels of resolution: high accuracy, high resolution information (e.g. surveyed information, 1:6-00 mapping) versus low accuracy, low resolution (digitized from 1:24,000 or 1:100,000 USGS maps). For high resolution, high accuracy GIS, NAD 83 datum should be used as the location reference system. Low resolution data can be built as needed on any location referencing system and then later transformed into NAD 83 reference system. However, it is not possible to go the other way around. 7

10 2. GIS Basics This workshop was organized to provide an introduction to GIS, with the range of topics including basic GIS concepts, organizational strategies, strategic planning needs, and GIS functionality. The latter topic touched on a number of areas that were covered in more detail in later sessions, such as data base design, spatial reference framework, and modeling. It was stressed that agencies need to consider the broader uses of GIS in DOTs, not just the traditional ones such as accidents, pavement management, etc. Potential users were also cautioned not to overlook the importance of institutional considerations as to GIS development and operation. 3. Sources of Geocoded Data This session identified two major problem areas facing DOTs: a. Where to get digitized cartographic data and how to maintain it b. How to attach locational reference to road features. The discussion in this session produced four conclusions: a. GIS requires digitized cartographic data and large tabular attribute files that are extremely time-consuming and expensive to build and maintain. b. As GIS evolves, many agencies have seen benefit of and want to share in a commonly funded data base. c. To shorten response time and lessen financial burden on agencies, work sharing is desirable. However, sharing requires standards for positional accuracy, attribute coding, and completeness of the highway system. d. Cooperative agreements among agencies should be pursued. This workshop also produced the following proposal as to leadership strategy and the research agenda that is necessary. Proposal It is clear that the information base required for GIS.will be used by many agencies, but the responsibility for it will largely fall to a single agency (quite often DOT). Therefore, it will be advantageous to seek ways to share the effort of creation and maintenance of the GIS. To this end standards for items such as attribute coding and positional accuracy must be established. Further, the lead agency should assume leadership in establishing a mechanism by which state DOTs can maintain cartographic and tabular data, for their own needs and the needs of other agencies, in such a way that data can be passed freely back and forth without problems of compatibility. 8

11 The research agenda should include a demonstration project that is designed to define working arrangements among DOTs, FHWA, USGS, and Census that will at least establish: - a sharing of the digitizing effort, - standardization of attributes and attribute codes, and - maintenance and update procedures. 4. Standardization Issues This session examined both technical and administrative standardization issues. Conclusions emphasized the need for data sharing, which in turn requires a data dictionary, and also standard data exchange formats. As to administrative standards, information is needed on what standards are used to monitor and exchange data by DOTs, both within agency and with other agencies. 5. Data Base Design Presenters emphasized the need to the complete design before starting to build GIS. Further, data base design is a decision-making process, therefore there is no single way to approach the design of a data base. Traditional MIS analysis techniques must be modified for spatial data. Finally, the concept developed by Wisconsin, of a location entity, should be carefully considered as a way to control the universe of GIS. 6. Data Products for Transportation Planning This session focused on a cooperative project, by the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of the Census, to produce a nationwide digital data base. The presentation drew on the digital line graph (DLG3) and TIGER files produced in this cooperative effort and raised a number of issues for consideration. a. In what format should these data be released, (Census has one format, USGS has another}. b. Costs of products vary from free to quite costly. c. Content of specific products were discussed, both in terms of what items are included as well as the accuracy of each item. 7. Designing and Implementing a GIS Data Base The presentations in this session raised a number of questions and reached several conclusions. For instance, the question of multiple platforms and the portability of data was addressed. It was concluded that data bases need to be relational, e.g. ARC/INFO and Intergraph. Given such relationships, what appears to be separate data bases can really be related, using DMRS for Intergraph and INFO for ARC. There is also a need to be discerning in what data are moved. 9

12 The difficulty DOTs face in standardization of data, when 80 percent of the data collected for GIS will be used by users outside of DOTs, was noted. The importance of CEOs understanding the relative flows of benefits and costs for GIS was discussed. This is particularly important in ensuri ng that CEOs do not lose interest before the system gets into full operation. The importance of accurate and timely information was noted, if GIS is to improve decision-making. Current maps and related tabular information are often not sufficiently accurate and GIS alone will not solve these accuracy problems. 8. Interagency Coordination Representatives from Iowa, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, and Wisconsin, as well as FHWA and USGS shared their experiences as to interagency cooperation and coordination. Among conclusions reached were: - Currently, there are not many programs in place for interagency cooperation. There is a need for more interagency cooperation to support GIS efforts. There is a need for "Information Engineer/Specialist" to provide accuracy statements for map data and data bases when GIS applications merge data from several sources to create a thematic map. There is need for cooperation among Federal mapping agencies and State DOTs that would allow data for transportation networks to be used to update the transportation layer of the DLGs. 9. Applications of GIS in Transportation During the symposium, three sessions were devoted to presentations concerning applications of GIS technology in transportation agencies. Presentations in the first of these sessions included an automated mapping system used by Minneapolis to display attributes ranging from road conditions to crime statistics, a nationwide rail and truck information system that uses models to route goods and vehicles, and applications at three levels of geography, local, regional, and national. a. Local - accident analysis and demand modeling b. Regional - alternatives analysis c. National - pavement management and HPMS Three themes emerged during the above session. The first is that GIS technology can be applied to many of the problems confconted by the transportation professional during the course of performing his job. Activities such as managing the infrastructure, planning for changes in the infrastructure, scheduling projects and constructing new facilities, improving the safety of the system, assessing environmental impacts of 10

13 existing and new facilities, travel demand modeling, routing hazardous materials and oversized trucks, can a l l benefit form GIS technology. These and other applications should guide the way in which the transportation profession uses GIS to become more efficient and effective. By contrast, existing GIS technology, which may have been developed for other disciplines, should not force the transportation professional to approach problems in ways that are neither natural nor appropriate. Rather, the transportation professional should work to refine GIS technology so that it better meets the needs of the transportation community. The second theme is that a GIS provides a common frame of reference upon which all agency base maps, data bases, and therefore applications can be built. The office in charge of pavement management requires a subset of the agency's database. The person in charge of accidents requires another, but overlapping, part of the data base. The commonality of data structures forced upon the agency by a GIS makes it possible to share easily any subset of the agency's data. The final theme is that, for the first time, there are good sources of low-cost digital map data with sufficient accuracy and detail for most transportation tasks. The U.S. Geological Survey Digital Line Graphs (DLGs) are available at 1:100,000 scale for the entire United States. While the cartographic quality of the DLGs are excellent, they contain little attribute information. For example, only the interstate and primary routes have names assigned to them. Attributes such as names, number of lanes, and width of the right-of-way will have to be added. The Bureau of the Census TIGER files contain all road names. However, in the central cities they are lacking cartographic detail. TIGER contains more attributes than the DLGs as well as all Census geography such as block and tract boundaries. This additional information makes TIGER an excellent resource for local and regional agencies. State DOTs will have a use for both TIGER and DLG files and should become familiar with them. The second application session included four presentations on: a state DOT integrated data base, a prototype GIS in a State highway department, an overview of FHWA GIS demonstration project activity, and a series of transportation applications including HPMS, pavement management, accident analysis, and travel demand modeling. The discussion in this session led to the conclusion that transportation GIS can be implemented now. Technology exists for: - CAD- based systems - Micro-based systems - Mini-based systems - Video imagery linked with GIS The question most often asked is what is the best way to implement a GIS in my organization. In this regard, a number of specific questions related to application issues, management issues, data issues, and technology issues were identified. 11

14 Application Issues - How do I start? - What scale maps should be used? - How do I coordi nate with others? - What area do I implement first (pavement management, bridge management, safety, road inventory)? - How do I interface with my existing data bases? Management Issues - How do I get top level support for the resources needed? - Who should have the lead for GIS within my organization? - What will it cost? - What is the best way to get started with GIS? - How do I prepare a GIS plan? - How do I educate my organization about GIS? Data Needs and Acquisition Issues - What digitized data is already available? What scale map should I use? - How do I put together digital data with attribute data? - How do I obtain latitude/longitude for existing data? - How do I keep the data up-to-date? Technology Issues - What GIS system should I use? - Should it be main frame, mini or micro? - How do I interface with our existing data bases and CADD systems? The conclusion in this session was that it is not IF to implement a GIS but rather HOW to implement a GIS. The technology already exists to do the job. The key is obtaining answers to the issues raised above, which in turn depends on getting educated on all facets of GIS in order to effectively implement a GIS in the organization. The third application session included presentations on GPS networks for control or GIS systems, networking for a State GIS, design guidelines for a State GIS, and use of a GIS to handle the information base for multi-billion dol lar public works projects. These presentations raised four issues and provided some suggests for resolving them, based on the experiences in these four applications. 1. What densi ty of geodetic control is necessary to support a GIS/LIS? Opini ons vary but Florida is using second order class 1 at 3 mile spaci ng between monuments. 2. What is the most effective way to install geodetic control for a GIS using GPS technology? Cooperative programs, in which local, state, and federal agencies all participate seem to be the most efficient. 3. What is the best way to develop GIS guidelines (e.g. for a State DOT GIS)? While consultants can probably provide such guidelines more quickly, in-house development has the added advantage of educating the staff within the DOT, while the guidelines are being developed. This approach provides important payoffs in the long run. 12

15 4. Is a GIS an effective tool to handle the information base for large public works projects? The example discussed was the Boston Harbor Tunnel/ Central Artery Project. This project will likely take 20 years and cost in excess of $20 billion to complete. A GIS is being developed to handle the massive amounts of spatial data needed for the project. Since start of construction is still two years away, the results of this major GIS effort remain to be seen. V SUMMARY OF GIS ISSUES RAISED At the beginning of the Symposium, all participants were asked to help identify relevant GIS issues in four categories: applications, management, data needs and acquisition, and technology. Each participant was asked to complete an Issue Identification form (see example in Appendix A), and turn it in late on the second day of the symposium. They were further instructed to watch for such issues in each session they attended. The purpose was to use the issues identified as a basis for the Action Plan to be developed on the last day of the symposium. The following is a summary of the issues identified using this process. APPLICATION ISSUES: Basic Premise: Trying to determine how GIS can help us do applications required in our jobs. 1. Selling GIS to upper management - One good way is develop a GIS application that meets a real need (i.e. do a current application in GIS environment, and do it significantly better). 2. Need to clearly articulate to vendors that transportation application needs are unique (e.g. different from Natural Resources, AM/FM, etc.), so that vendors can better address transportation needs. 3. State DOT's need to prioritize their application needs, and then apply GIS to those applications first, that are most likely to show success. 4. While applications may be different, they have many common data needs and tools, which GIS can provide, if requirements and specifications for a GIS are properly specified. 5. Balance pre-planning and applications development - develop database for at least one needed application, before attempting application. 6. To develop GIS application most quickly and efficiently, GIS should integrate information from currently available databases (e.g. CADD, accident file, etc.) 7. Currently operating applications (e.g. Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania} should be documented and made available to other DOT's. 13

16 MANAGEMENT ISSUES: 1. Education - How to get top management to understand the magnitude of GIS without getting them turned off before the system is completed: a. Training for executives and managers b. Training for Legislators c. Good definition of GIS d. Define benefits of GIS e. Define needs f. How will quality be maintained 2. Organization - What changes should be made to organizational structure related to GIS: a. GIS I DBA? b. Where/Who should control 3. External Coordination: a. FHWA role b. Standards c. Reporting d. Goals - FHWA/State/Local DATA NEEDS and DATA ACQUISITION ISSUES: 40 issues received were reviewed and analysis reduced issues to the following 5 major categories: 1. Data Standardization 2. Data Accuracy 3. Data Sharing - Federal, State, Local governments 4. Create interface among separate data bases (created at different scales, resolutions, etc.) 5. Optimize data collection and maintenance techniques TECHNOLOGY ISSUES: 1. Technology Transfer: a. General information of what's going on in GIS b. Dialogue between DOT's and Vendor Community 2. Integration Issues: a. Multiple hardware platforms b. Integrating - CADD, Image, Spatial Data, Workstations, Mainframe, Non-Spatial Data 14

17 3. Data Modeling: a. How do I design GIS data bases? b. Data base design and planning is a crucial issue in designing GIS. c. Standard data modeling methodology. 4. Data Exchange Standards a. What non-proprietary standards should be used? b. Should States, Census, FHWA use common definitions and typologies? DAY 3 VI ACTION PLAN The final day of the symposium was devoted to the development of an action plan. The purpose of this plan is to help guide further development of GIS for transportation, based on the ideas and issues from the symposium. The format for this process was as follows. The first plenary session provided an opportunity for the 16 session leaders to provide a 3-5 minute summary of the discussions in their respective sessions. This session provided an opportunity to get a flavor for concurrent sessions one was unable to attend, as well as provided an opportunity for session leaders to highlight what they felt were the most important aspects of their respective sessions. Following the first plenary session, Susan Crampton, Secretary of the Vermont DOT and chair of the AASHTO Subcommittee on Information Systems, addressed the symposium to share Vermont's experience in developing GIS capability to implement their Growth Management Act of 1988 (Act 200). Since Act 200 requires the establishment of a statewide GIS, her insights provided a good summary of many of the issues on which the symposium was focusing. Crampton stressed the complexity of a statewide GIS, the absolute necessity of standards to assure compatibility of all data from all levels of government, and the major expense that such a project involves. (Vermont has committed $4.75 million over the next five years for GIS development.) Crampton also discussed the use of consultants to help guide the process and the importance of conducting a pilot project before moving to a fully operational system. Finally, Crampton emphasized the importance of planning before starting on a statewide GIS, and urged symposium attendees to take very seriously the task of developing an Action Plan to guide further work of AASHTO, HEEP, and FHWA on GIS. The second plenary session built on the earlier plenary and the Issue Identification exercise to develop an Action Plan. An open forum format allowed all attendees to voice their opinions and stress the issues and ideas that they believed were most important. Major points were recorded on flip charts and additional notes were compiled by several individuals. Following this session, a smaller group (of 30-40) met for another two hours to help flesh out the Action Plan items identified by the larger group. 15

18 The results of this process was a plan made up of five major items: education, standards, institutional impacts of GIS on the organization, networking, and user requirements (to guide vendors). The Action Plan based on these five major items is presented below. 1. Education A range of groups on which education efforts should focus was identified. These included managers, providers, users, and elected officials. Concern was also expressed about the need to train adequate numbers of technicians and others who will be responsible for developing and operating these systems. A strong case was made for education and training of top management within agencies and a number of specific needs were identified. These included: a. Need for a basic introduction to GIS (similar to the workshop presented by Ken Dueker) b. Need to stress the complexity of GIS technology, which means: - need commitment of management up front - need to recruit people we do not have currently - need plan up front, before development begins - need patience by management c. Need education of information managers on the need to justify GIS, vis-a-vis other resource demands that are facing the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO). d. Need training for top managers on how to assure successful GIS, including proper timing of implementation and how to keep GIS effort from becoming divisive within the organization. e. Need education that stresses the evolutionary nature of GIS, that full system will be developed over a period of years and that maintenance of data base must be an on-going concern of all participants (users, providers, etc.) Lead Responsibility AASHTO and FHWA Because of their respective positions in the transportation arena, it was felt that AASHTO and FHWA were the logical groups to take the lead in GIS education. Specific tasks should include: - Defining what a GIS is - Describing how to use GIS as a tool in the transportation field Help determine the benefits a GIS offers, compared to current tools in use - Help articulate how CAO can have a positive effect on the development and use of GIS in specific states 16

19 2. Standards The need for standards in a number of areas in order to facilitate data sharing were identified. These included standards for data base, data dictionary, etc. Lead Responsibility USGS, Census, FHWA, and AASHTO All of these agencies need to be involved if standards are to be developed most effectively. The following steps were suggested as a way to operationalize the standards development process. a. Preparation of a draft paper on the scope of the standards problem. (Jerry Dildine of the NCDOT agreed to take on this task.) b. Prepare a solicitation for funding to support the work outlined in the scope paper. (Mike Bacon of WISDOT agreed to prepare this document.) A logical approach is through a Joint Development Task Force appointed by AASHTO, and to solicit funding from the AASHTO Joint Development Council. 3. Institutional Impacts of GIS on Organization Due to the complexity of GIS, there are widespread, often unknown or unexpected impacts on a agency when a GIS is implemented. These institutional impacts and issues need to be defined. To do so requires that the architecture of GIS, in it's broadest terms, needs to be outlined. For instance, what are the institutional and economic impacts of GIS in State DOTs? What are the components, and relationships among these components, in a GIS? (e.g. data base, data base management, analysis tools, data base management system, GIS, MIS, etc.) Lead Responsibility TRB Because this will involve research and data collection, TRB seems ideally suited to provide the leadership in this area. 4. Networking This symposium demonstrated that there is much on-going activity that is relevant and of interest to anyone developing a GIS, particularly at the State or Province level. What is needed is a functioning network to help assure that such information is available on an on-going basis. To carry out this task, two kinds of resources are needed: funds to operate the network and a mechanism to facilitate networking. Lead Responsibility FHWA 17

20 J:i'HWA is ideally positioned to take the lead in development of the on-going mechanism to facilitate networking. Such a network would also provide a most effective means of distributing the results of FHWA-funded demonstration projects. FHWA is also the logical agency to fund such a network, since it would benefit all State and Province DOTs. Other agencies that could logically assume an active role in this networking activity are USGS, Census, and the National Governor's Association. 5. User Requirements Both users and vendors expressed the critical need for DOTs to clearly articulate and prioritize their needs. These needs should include as detailed specifications as possible and be provided to vendors on a timely basis. To carry this out, a survey of states is needed, with each State and Province DOT asked to provide: - Sample RFPs that have been used to solicit GIS hardware and software in the past, and - Additional requirements that States and Provinces have identified, but not included in RFPs because of their belief that technology to meet them was not available, or were beyond the scope of the resources they had available to acquire the technology. It was suggested that the requirements be stated on as generic a basis as possible, e.g.: Lead Responsibility AASHTO - consulting - data conversion - hardware/software VII Conclusion Various groups and organizations are already at work to see that this Action Plan is carried out. There is clearly momentum for development of GIS capability in State and Province DOTs that is continuing to grow. The actions suggested by the participants at the Orlando symposium are one guide to help assure that these GIS efforts produce the most effective results as possible. With continued support from the sponsoring organizations and the vending community, the future looks bright. Hopefully the next GIS Symposium for Transportation will document significant progress in the development and use of this exciting technology. 1.8

21 ISSUE IDENTIFICATION GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS SYMPOSIUM ORLANDO, FLORIDA APPENDIX "A" APPLICATION ISSUES: MANAGEMENT ISSUES: DATA NEEDS AND DATA ACQUISITION ISSUES: GIS TECHNOLOGY ISSUES: I NAME I ORGANIZATION