University of California Office of the President  
Senior Vice President—Business and Finance

Research Administration Office

Memo Operating Requirement

No. 01-03

March 8, 2001


CONTRACT AND GRANT OFFICERS

Subject: Washington State Department of Transportation Master Basic Agreement GCA2676

Attached is a new master Basic Agreement GCA2676 between the Washington State Department of Transportation and The Regents of the University of California. Under this Basic Agreement, the Department may access research expertise at any University campus via a Research Task Order, Exhibit A. The terms of the Basic Agreement apply to all Research Task Orders. 

The term of this Basic Agreement is February 1, 2001 through June 30, 2005. The campuses’ full applicable federal indirect cost rates apply to these Research Task Orders. The Department Research Administrator for this Basic Agreement is Gary Ray at (360) 705-7975.

 

Refer:

Samuela A. Evans
(510) 987-9849
Samuela.Evans@ucop.edu


Organization: P-230
Subject Index: 22
 

Samuela A. Evans
Coordinator

Enclosure



BASIC AGREEMENT 
GCA2676

THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this First day of February 2001, between the State of Washington, Department of Transportation, acting through the Secretary of Transportation, hereinafter called the "State," and the Regents of the University of California, hereinafter designated as the "Research Agency." 

WHEREAS, the Research Agency has the qualified personnel able to conduct Transportation Research and, 

WHEREAS, the State desires the Research Agency to conduct specified Research Tasks,

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants, and performance contained herein or attached as exhibits and incorporated and made a part hereof, the parties hereto agree as follows:
 

Section I

Coordination of Contract Documents
 

The execution of this Basic Agreement shall not in any manner provide for or imply any agreement on the part of the State to assign any specific number of Research Tasks to the Research Agency. 

A Task Order (Exhibit A) shall be issued separately for each Research Task and assigned to a specific Research Agency campus. The campus shall responsible for fulfillment of the requirements of the task order. A list of Research Agency Campuses is attached as Exhibit D.

The provisions of this Basic Agreement, Task Orders, and Research Agency's Proposals for research are intended to be mutually complementary. In case of any discrepancy between provisions, the Basic Agreement shall prevail over the Task Order and the Task Order shall prevail over the Research Proposal.

Section II

Purpose, Scope, and Methods 

The purpose, scope of work, and the method of study for a Research Task shall be as described in the Task Order. 

Section III

Reports

The Research Agency Campus shall submit to the State copies of a narrative progress report as specified in the Task Order. Report format and reporting period will b as prescribed by the State. The report is to be concise but in sufficient detail to enable an evaluation f the progress of the Research Task. 

A final report of the findings and results of the research, includin interim and task reports which provide documentation of technical data and their analysis, shall be p epared by the Research Agency Campus. As a requirement for fulfillment of the Task Order, the Rese rch Agency Campus shall furnish to the State the number of copies of the draft and approved final report s specified in the Task Order. Interim reports, working papers, manuals, and other items are to be s bmitted as required in the Task Order. The 'WSDOT Research Report Requirements" shall be used y the Research Agency Campus as a guide for writing final and interim reports and working papers (Exhib t B).
 

Section IV

Term

 

The term of this Basic Agreement shall be continuous through J ne 30, 2005, or until a written notice of termination has been issued, whichever occurs first. The ter of this Basic Agreement maybe extended upon the mutual, written consent of the State and the Rese rch Agency.

Research Tasks, final and other reports and items pertaining the eto shall be completed on the date specified in the Task Order.

Section V

Cost

 

The total aggregate amount authorized for payment through the --ask Orders during the term of this Basic Agreement shall not exceed One Million ($1,000,000) Dollars. . 

The estimated cost for each Task Order shall be specified by m *or budget category and the total price in the approved project proposal. The Research Agency Campu shall notify the State of any changes in the cost of major budget categories when such changes m y affect the performance and/or product of a task. The State may request a revised budget at its discr tion. No notice is required for budget adjustments made for close out and final billing of a Task Order.

The State shall insure that the aggregate value of the task orders do no exceed the authorized amount. 

Any claim for a change in the total price of this Basic Agreement or a Task Order shall be in accordance with Section XVI and issued as an amendment.

Section V1

Payment

Payment to the Research Agency Campus shall be as specified in the Task Order and will be for actual direct costs and related indirect costs incurred in the performance of the work and services authorized. The Research Agency shall use their approved accounting practices and procedures for determining salaries and wages that are charged to a Task Order. Labor and associated costs shall be in general conformance with the progress of the work.

Reimbursement for indirect overhead attributable to a study will be made in an amount not to exceed the percent of the direct costs specified in the Task Order. The indirect costs authorized shall be in accordance with the current "Federal Rate Agreement for Colleges and Universities" on file at the Research Agency. Reimbursement shall be limited to the maximum amount authorized by the Task Order. 

The Research Agency shall pay all costs incurred in conducting a Research Task and shall be reimbursed upon approval by the State of the Research Agency's billings. Claims for reimbursement shall be supported by the Research Agency's records. Invoices detailing the charges and expenses by major budget category incurred shall be submitted to the State for payment as specified in the Task Order. Progress billings shall be identified by the word "Progress." The final billing shall be submitted within 90 days of task completion and shall be identified by the word "Final." Audits will be made in accordance with Federal OMB Circular A-1 33.
 

Section VII

Source of Funds
 

Unless otherwise indicated in the Task Order, funds made available under 23 U.S.C. Section 120, with the appropriate proportion of State matching funds, will be used in payment.

Section Vill

Subcontracting

The services of the Research Agency are to be directed by the Principal Investigator identified in the Task Order. The Research Agency shall not assign, sublet, or transfer any of the work other than as specified in the approved Task Order without written approval from the State.

The Research Agency shall comply with all Federal and State laws and regulations, including Title 6, Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Exhibit C), that pertain to the work being perf 3rmed and including affirmative action when retaining a subconsultant.
 

Section IX

Patent and Invention Rights

Should patentable discoveries or inventions from work describec herein, the Research Agency shall maintain effective procedures to adhere to the provisions of Public Law 96-517 and the implementing regulations of 37 CFR Part 401, including but not limited to the following: 

1 .The Research Agency may elect to retain title to any invention conceived or first reduced to practice by Research Agency personnel in the course of work performed under this Agreement. 

2.The State and the U.S. Government reserve a nonexclusive, nontransferable, paid-up license for the practice of any such invention for government purposes in the United States, its territories, and throughout the world and such additional rights as conferred by sections 202204 of Title 35 United States Code.

3.The Research Agency shall include the following statement in the second paragraph of the specification of the application for any patents issued on a subject invention: "The United States Government and the State of Washington have rights in this invention pursuant to the Agreement between the University of California and the Washington State Department of Transportation dated this day of 19__."

4.The Research Agency shall provide the State with a list of all subject inventions or certification that there were no such inventions at the time of filing the f i'lal report as required by this Agreement.

Section X

Inspection of Work 

The State and the Federal Highway Administration shall at all times be accorded proper facilities for review and inspection of the work hereunder and shall at all reasonable times have access to the premises, to all data, notes, records, computer programs, correspondence, instructions, and memoranda of every description pertaining to the work hereunder.

Section XI

Records 

The State will exercise general supervision over each Research'Task. The Research Agency shall maintain accounting records and other evidence pertaining to the cost incurred on each Research Task. These records will be made available for inspection by the State, FedE ral Highway Administration, or any authorized representative of the Federal Government at all reasonablE times at the off ice of the Research Agency. The minimum retention time of these records shall be in accordance with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Common Rule 49 CFR 18 and/or the Research Agencys Federal Auditor approved policy and procedures on record retention. Copies thereof shall be furnished if requested.

Section XII

Rights to Data 

The Research Agency grants to the State a royalty-free, non exclusive, irrevocable license to reproduce, translate, publish, use and dispose of, for state government purposes, and to authorize others to do so, all data collected and incorporated in reports and documents produced.

Section XIII

Equipment and Instrumentation

All apparatus and equipment purchased or manufactured for which reimbursement is sought shall be used exclusively on an assigned Research Task and shall remain the property of the State; however, the Research Agency shall be the custodian and will be responsible for maintaining current inventories of nonexpendable items until disposition has been made by the State.

The Research Agency Campus shall comply with all Federal and State laws and regulations, including Title 6, Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Exhibit C), that pertain to affi'mative action when purchasing materials, supplies, and equipment for a Research Task.

All Major items of equipment and apparatus for which reimburs ment is sought and which are not identified specifically and approved as part of the Task Order require ritten approval by the State prior to purchase. A major equipment or apparatus item is one costing $5,00 or more and has a life expectancy of one year or more. 

The Research Agency Campus shall maintain an inventory of all major equipment or apparatus items. The inventory shall also include "small and attractive" nonexpe clable equipment items with an acquisition cost less than $5,000, as defined in State Administrative & Accounting Manual section 30.40.20.

A complete inventory of all nonexpenclable equipment and appal atus acquired by the Research Agency Campus for research and other assigned tasks shall be submitted to the State on or before July 1 of each year until notice of disposition has been issued. The following shall be furnished for each inventory item: (a) item name, (b) date of acquisition or manufacturer, (c) serial iumber, (d) make/model identification, (e) Research Agencys identification number, if different than "C," (f) physical location, and (g) total cost.

Upon completion of a research task, arrangements for the equip ent's further use on approved research or for its disposal will be made by the State.
 

Section XIV

Travel 

Any out-of-state travel which is not identified specifically, by purp:)se or event, date and location, in the approved Task Order, must have prior written approval (written ap roval shall include receipt of e-mail authorizing travel by appropriate WSDOT authority) of the WSDOT Research Off ice to be eligible for reimbursement. Current Research Agency travel regulations and rate shall apply to all in-state and outof-state travel for which reimbursement is claimed during the term of Task Order.

Section XV

Publication 

The Research Agency shall, after acceptance and publication of ~he final report for a Research Task, or 60 days after submission of the final report, whichever comes first, e free to copyright any material, including computer software, that is a part of a Research Task, with th provision that the State and the Federal Highway Administration reserve a royalty-free, non-exclusive nd irrevocable license to reproduce, publish or otherwise use, and to authorize others to use, the material for government purposes.

The Research Agency shall not release, either orally or in writin information or other material developed during a Research Task prior to publication of the final rep rt, or 60 days after submission of the final report, which ever comes first, except with written or verbal a proval of the WSDOT Research Office. However, there is no intention to limit discussions of the Rese rch with small informal technical groups or lectures to employees or students. Lectures to other groups that describe the plans but disclose neither data nor results are permissible without advance approval by SDOT. 

Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to affect the preparation and filing of theses by students working on a Research Task in accordance with the practice 3 normally followed or required by Research Agency regulations. 

All reports published shall contain the following statement on the Credit Sheet: "The contents of this document reflect the views of the author(s), who is (are) responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the offi ial views or policies of the Washington State Transportation Commission, Department of Transp rtation or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specificatio or regulation."

The final document must include one of the following statements depending on the funding source, on the cover or frontispiece: 

Prepared for 

Washington State Transportation Commission
Department of Transportation 

or

Prepared for

Washington State Transportation Commission
Department of Transportati n and in cooperation with
U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration 

The State will notify the Principal Investigator of which statement to use prior to delivery of the reports.

Section XVI

Amendment

The Task Order may be amended to extend the term, change the cost, or to change the area of topics or phases designated for a Research Task. Amendments will be mutually agreed upon in writing prior to undertaking any work under the changes or incurring additional costs. No implied or actual change to the Basic Agreement or a Task Order shall be made by any individual employed by the Research Agency, a Research Agency Campus or the State without an approved Agreement/Task Order Modification.
 

Section XVII

Termination of Contract

If it is considered to be in the best interests of the State, the State may terminate this Basic Agreement upon giving thirty (30) days' notice in writing to the Research Agency. The Research Agency may also terminate this Basic Agreement by giving thirty (30) days' notice in writing to the State. Upon termination of this Basic Agreement, all Task Orders shall be automatically terminated.

The term of each Research Task issued under this Basic Agreement shall be specified in the Task Order agreement. Should a Task Order be terminated prior to fulfillment of the terms stated therein, the Research Agency shall be reimbursed only for actual expenses and no: ncancelable obligations, both direct and indirect, incurred to the date of termination.

Section XVIII

Legal Relations

The Research Agency shall comply with all Federal, State, and Local Laws and Ordinances applicable to the work to be done under this Basic Agreement and Task Orders issued, as allowed by State of Washington statute. The Research Agency shall also comply with Title 6, Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Exhibit C). 

Each party to this Basic Agreement shall be responsible for damage to persons or property resulting from the negligence on the part of itself, its employees, its agents, or its officers. Neither party assumes any responsibility to the other party for the consequences of any act or omission of any person, firm, or corporation not a party to this Agreement.
 

Section XIX

Exhibits

 

Exhibit A, Task Order 

Exhibit B, WSDOT Research Report Reguirements

Exhibit C, Title 6, Civil Rights Act of 1964 

Exhibit D, Research Agency Campus List 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed thiE Agreement as of the day and year first above written.

REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
 

By

Samuela Evans
Contract Agreement Officer


STATE OF WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON ST TE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION

By L

JAMES P. TOOHEY
Assistant Secretary
Planning and Progra -nming Service Center 

Approved as to form

February 6, 2001

 

By


Assistant Attorney General


 

RESEARCH TASK ORDER
BASIC AGREEMENT NUMBER T2676 TASK ORDER NUMBER 01 DATE February 1, 2001
TITLE Sample for Contract GCA2676 Exhibit A
ESTIMATED COST $2 TERM MONTHS PREVIOUS 0 NEW
EDUCATIONAL AGENCY Berkeley FACULTY CONTACT (name, phone) PARTICIPATING AGENCY Campus John Harvey 510-231_9~13 FHWA PROJECT MANAGER (name, phone) TECHNICAL CONTACT (name, phone) PARTICIPATING AGENCY CONTACT(name, phone) Gary Ray 360-705-7975 Marty Pietz 360-705-7 74 1 Tim Rogers 360-753 9889 CONSIDERATION AND PAYMENT T E EDUCATI NAL AGENCY AGREES TO PERFORM ALL THE SERVICES SEE FORTH IN THE ATTACHED PROPOSAL

H 0 OR THE CONSIDERATION THEREIN, WHICH BY THIS REFERENCE BECOMES A PART OF THIS TASK ORDER - THE OBLIGATIONS AND RIGHTS OF THE PARTIES TO THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE SUBJECT TO AND GOVERNED BY THIS TASK ORDER AGREEMENT AND THE BASIC AGREEMENT.

THE ATTACHED -SPECIAL PROVISIONS' BECOME APART OF THIS TASK ORDER AGREEMENT
COMPLETION DATE: ORIGINAL REVISED THE STATE AGREES TO REIMBURSE THE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY FOR DIRECT COSTS AND RELATED INDIRECT COSTS AS SPECIFIED IN THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE: O TOTAL REIMBURSEMENT FOR DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 0 THIS MODIFICATION 0 INCREASES DECREASES THE TOTAL FUNDS FOR THIS TASK ORDER BY$ $2O REIMBURSEMENT FOR RELATED INDIRECT COSTS SHALL NOT EXCEED PERCENT OF THE ALLOWABLE DIRECT COST CHARGEABLE TO THE PROJECT.171 PROGRESS BILLINGS DETAILING CHARGES AND EXPENSES INCURRED MAY BE E SUBMITTED FOR PAYMENT AT THE DISCRETION OF THE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY OTHE FINAL BILLING MUST BE IDENTIFIED BY THE WORD "FINAL", EITHER FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED IN SPECIAL PROVISION(S) NUMBERED 1

TERMINATION OF TASK ORDER

THIS TASK ORDER AGREEMENT MAY BE TERMINATED BY THE STATE OR THE EDUCATONAL AGENCY BY GIVING 30 DAYS NOTICE IN WRITING.

DELIVERABLES

DELIVERABLES SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE SPECIFIED IN THE PROPOSAL IN TERMS OF SCHEDULE, CONTENT, FORMAT AND QUANTITY.

EDUCATIONAL AGENCY ADDRESS

WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Research 0ffice PO Box 4730 Transportation Building
Olympia WA 98504-7370
BY: (signature) DATE
BY: (signature) DATE
NAME AND TITLE James P. Tooy Assistant Secretary Planning & Prrogamming Service Center
THE WSDOT ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL APPROVED THIS TASK ORDER AGREEMENT AS TO FORM. ON MAY 11,1996


 

Exhibit B

WSDOT Research Report Requirements

 

WSDOT

RESEARCH REPORT GUIDELINES

 

by

 

Amy J. O'Brien

Public Information Specialist

Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC)

University of Washington

1107 NE 45th St., Suite 535

Seattle, Washington 98105

 

Prepared for

 

Washington State Transportation ommission

Department of Transportation

and in cooperation with

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration


 

Contents 

Section A--Guideline Summary-


Section B-One-Page Summary

Guidelines for WSDOT One-Page Summaries

Example: One-Page Summary ---

Section C-Research Report and Interim Report----

Guidelines for WSDOT Research Reports and Interim R 

Example: Research Report and Interim Report. - 

Section D-WSDOT/rransNow Reports - ------

Guidelines for WSDOT/TransNow Reports

Example: WSDOT/TransNow Report Cover 


Section A  

GUIDELINE SUMMARY 

Each research project will require a One-Page Summary and a Research Report. Some projects may require a Technical Report. Consult with the WSDOT search Office Project Manager assigned to your project before beginning your project to de rmine the document required. Separate Technical Report guidelines are available.

ONE-PAGE SUMMARY 

Purpose: To provide information to a wide aud ence.

Distribution: This one-page summary is intended or wide distribution as a flyer

and for use in reports to WSDOT management and the Federal

Highway Administration. The content of this summary can be used

as an abstract for the Research Repprt described below.

Requirements: Section B, pages 3-4

Example: Section B, pages 5-7

RESEARCH REPORT (OR INTERIM REPORT)

Purpose: To provide a 35-50 page document. With minor modifications, this

report should also be suitable for publication in a journal.

Distribution: This report will be sent to WSDOT, FHWA, state DOTs, universities,

libraries, the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), and other interested researchers.

Requirements: Section C, pages 3-8

Examples: Section C, pages 9

 

Section B 

GUIDELINES FOR WSDOT ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES


LENGTH 

The summary should be no longer than 1 typewritten, single- or double-spaced page, with 1-1/4-inch margins. 

STYLE


To achieve uniformity and consistency, use Webster's Third International Dictionaq for spelling, definition and compounding. Published standards of learned societies are accepted in questions of usage of technical terms. Other matters of style and usage are based on widely accepted documents such as the Chicago Manual of Style or Words Into Type.

 

PARTS OF THE ONE-PAGE SUMMARY

 

Heading/title

Introduction

Research Approach

Conclusions and Recommendations

Project Contacts

WA-RD number(s) of related reports

Preparation date

Heading/title


Provide the project title.


Introduction 

State that "This technical summary describes the key lindings of a WSDOT (FHWA) project that is documented more fully in (names official and technical reports)." Also include the purpose of the project. 

Research Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations 

These headings are self-explanatory.


Project Contacts

Give the names, addresses, and phone numbers of pro ect principal investigator(s) or manager(s) and technical monitor(s).

 

GRAPHICS 

Graphics will not be included.

 

REFERENCES

Do not list references.

 

APPENDICES

Do not use appendices.

 

FOOTNOTES

Do not use footnotes to the text. Incorporate such nc tes within the text.

 

ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS, AND SYMBOLS

Abbreviations, acronyms and symbols must be fullY defined the first time they are used in the summary; the definition should be given first, followed by the abbreviated term in parentheses.

 


 

Example: 

One-Page Summary

 


 

TRUCK RESTRICTION EVALUATION:

THE PUGET SOUND EXPERIENCE

Introduction. This technical summary describes the key findings of a WSDOT (FHWA) project that is documented more fully in the summary report titled "Tnick Restriction Evaluation: The Puget Sound Experience." The objective of the study was to deten-nine the impacts of truck lane restrictions on (1) the operation of the facility, (2) the level of safety experienced on the facility, (3) the pavement deterioration rates, and (4) the trucking industry economically.

Research Approach. Three study sites with posted lane restrictions and a control site were considered in this study. Three types of analyses were performed: (1) an in-depth analysis to deten-nine how the implementation of a lane restriction would impact the operation, safety, and life of the facility and the economic impacts for the trucking industry; ~2) a site comparison analysis to determine whether the results from the in-depth analysis could be nfidently applied to other areas in the region; and (3) a survey analysis to determine the opinions of truckers, motorists, industry, and enforcement officials with respect to lane restrictions.

Conclusions and Recommendations. The following conclusions are based on the analysis: (1) Facilfty overation. Any changes noted in facility operation could not be directly linked with the implementation of the truck lane restriction. (2) Level of Safe . The majority of truck-initiated accidents result from changing lanes to the right. Hence, left-most lane restrictions may lead to an increase in truck-initiated accidents. (3) Economics. The economi,- loss incurred by an individual driver who previously traveled in Lane 4 but would be required to travel in Lane 3 would amount to $4.84 per year (19.52 minutes of lost driving time). For the industry as a whole, economic losses would amount to $1,155 annually. (4) Pavement Deterioratic)n Rate. Because of small truck traffic volumes in the left-most lane, a truck lane restriction wou have minimal impacts on the life of the pavement. 

Truck distribution across the facility, truck and non-truck speeds, and restriction violation rates vary somewhat depending on (I)site proximity,(2)size of the faciliiy,(3) volume levels observed at each of the sites, (4) degree and length of grade, and (5) location o entrances and exits.


At this time, truck lane restrictions are not recommended for further implementation in the Puget Sound region. This recommendation is based on (1) a lack of obNious operational, safety-related, economic, or pavement deterioration rate benefits; (2) a lack of consistency among the sites; and (3) some noted resistance to the lane restrictions from the motor ca rier industry.


Proiect Personnel 

Dr. Fred L. Mannering
Principal Investigator
121 More Hall, FX- 10
Dept. of Civil Engineering
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195
(206) 543-0078

Jodi L. Koehne
Research Enginee
TRAC
4507 University Way NE
Seattle, WA 98105
(206) 543-8935

Les Jacobson
Technical Monitor
Traffic Manager
WSDOT, District
PO Box 3303310
Seattle, WA 98133 -9710
(206) 440-4487 


 

Section C 

GUIDELINES FOR WSDOT RESEARCH REPORTS

AND INTERIM REPORTS 

This format is intended to provide concise, abbreviated documentation of a project. Readers should be left with a brief history of the problem and the ways in which others have addressed it, an overview of the research approach and procedures used, and a thorough understanding of the findings and their implications.

If a project requires more detailed, technical documentatio , and thus a larger report, a Technical Report may be necessary. Please consult with the WSDOT Research Office Project Manager assigned to your contract. 

The format pertains to both research and interim reports. Every WSDOT project requires a Research Report. Interim reports are sometimes specified in contracts of phased studies or studies that span several years. They document progress, con(lusions, or recommendations at a given point in the study.

 

LENGTH 

Both research and interim reports should be no longer than 35 to 50 typewritten, double-spaced pages, including figures and tables, with 1-inch margins on top and bottom and 1-1/4" margins left and right.


STYLE 

To achieve uniformity and consistency, use Webster's Third International Dictionary for spelling, definition and compounding. Published standards of learned societies are accepted in questions of usage of technical terms. Other matters or style and usage are based on widely accepted documents such as the Chic4yo Manual of Style or Words Into Type-

 

PARTS OF THE RESEARCH REPORT 

Form 310-022, FHWA Technical Report Standard Title Page (with Abstract)

Disclaimer

Table of Contents (including Figures and Tables)

Body of Report

- Executive Summary

- Introduction or Background

- Review of Previous Work

- Research Approach/ Procedures

- Findings/ Discussion

- Conclusions

- Recommendations /Application/ Implementation

- Acknowledgment

- References

- Appendices

 

Title page 

The title page should include the title of the report, name(s) of the principal investigator(s), their research agency(ies), name and title of technical contact at WSDOT, type of report, title of project, name of sponsoring agency, and date of publication, using the format shown in the Section D example.

Form 310-022. FHWA Technical Report Standard Title Page

You can obtain this form from the FHWA, WSDOT Research Office, or the TRAC office. The form contains an abstract which should be self-con ained and not require reference to the report to be understood. The abstract should not contain unfamiliar terms, acronyms, abbreviations, symbols, or equations. It should review the primary objectives and scope of the study; the techniques or approaches should be described only to the extent necessary for comprehension; and the findings and conclusions should be presented concisely.

Disclaimer

The disclaimer is to read: "The contents of this report re ect the views of the author(s), who is (are) responsible for the facts and the accuracy ol the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or p:)Iicies of the Washington State Department of Transportation [and/or another agency]. This report does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation."


 

Body of Report 

The body of the report should be organized in the following manner:

Executive Summary

Introduction or Background

Review of Previous Work

Research Approach/ Procedures

Findings/ Discussion

Conclusions

Recommendations /Application/ Implementation

Executive Summary. Write the executive summary with the busy transportation professional in mind. It should be no longer than 10 pages and should be comprehensible apart from the larger document. It should contain a readable yet condensed description, explained within the context of the project scope and objectives, of the research findings, conclusions, and recomme ations that evolved from the project. Beyond these elements, it should contain only ftdormation that is essential to an understanding of the findings and how they relate b) the solution of the operation problems. Do not summarize the full report.

Introduction or Background. Discuss the problem that led to the study, current knowledge that can help in its solution, and the objec ves and scope of the assigned

Review of Previous Work. Summarize or highlight the project's literature review, stateof-the-art survey, or the work that others have performed in relation to the problem at hand. 

Research Approach /Procedures. Discuss the approac that was used in attempting to solve the problem. Include in the appendices forms that may have been used in soliciting information or details regarding test procedures or analyses.

Findings /Discussion. Present the research findings that evolved from the project. Include in the appendices summary data, principal mathematical formulas that have been developed, or other technical details. 

Conclusions. Conclusions are concerned with general principles suggested in the findings. They are extensions of the findings beyond conditions specific to the project. 

Recommendations/ Applications /Implementation. Recommendations should address specific actions that WSDOT should consider. Discuss flie implications of the findings in relation to standards, specifications, policies, and procedures; what they add to an understanding of the problems; and what effects they have on economy, safety, amenities, and convenience. Assess their limitations. Items recommended for implementation should be identified and necessary im lementation steps listed. 

References 

1.Arrange the reference fist alphabetically by author (or publication information if no author); list only the references cited in the text.

2.Denote a reference at the appropriate place in the xt (preferably after, rather than interrupting, a sentence) by the author's name and publication date in parentheses. Example: (Reed 1993)

To include a page number, follow the author and date with a comma and the page number. Example: (Reed 1993, 62) 

3.Do not reference any material that would not be available to readers in printed form, such as unpublished material, personz I communications, telephone conversations, etc. Instead, state these references in parentheses in the text with the term unpublished data.

4.Do not repeat a reference in the list and do not u e ibid., op. cit., or loc. cit. If a reference is cited more than one time in the text, repeat the author/date citation. 

5. Be sure that references are complete. If a reference has no date, include the information "undated."

 

APPENDICES

Appendices should contain (1) materials that are needed to support, explain, or substantiate the main body of the report or (2) discussio -is whose technical nature would make them inappropriate for or disruptive to the main body of the report. Each appendix should be designated by letter and title, and references to appendices should be made at appropriate places in the text. 

Appendices may contain the following:

- state of the art survey

- manuals and guidelines

- documentation and further elaboration of research findings

- forms

- mathematical analyses

- project statement and project working plan (including any approved revisions)


METRICATION 

Federal rules require that authors use the International S stem (SI) units. Alternative units in parentheses are prohibited. WSDOT recommends ASTM's Standard Practicefor Use of the International System of Units and AASHTO's Guide to Metric Conversion for guidance in converting units from U.S. Customary to SI.

 

EQUATIONS 

1.Current word processing programs allow the display of stacked fractions.

2.Distinguish carefully among the following:

- all capital and lowercase letters

- capital 0, lowercase o and 0 (zero)

- lowercase I and number 1 (one)

- letter X, Greek X and the multiplication sign x

- prime, apostrophe' and superscript'

- English and Greek letters 

3.Number all displayed equations with arabic numerals in parentheses placed

flush right, e.g.:

(Equation 1) 

FOOTNOTES

Do not use footnotes to the text. Incorporate such notes within the text.


ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS. AND SYMBOLS 

Abbreviations, acronyms, and symbols must be fully def ned the first time they are used in the paper; the definition should be given first, followed by the abbreviated term in parentheses. 

 

TABLES

1.If tables are not presented on separate pages, leav ~ about 1-1/2" of white space

between a table and the text.

2. Number the tables consecutively with arabic numerals and give each table a title.

The title should briefly identify the table; furnish background information,

describe the results given in the table, or include i-dormation provided by

column heads in the text, not in the table title. 

3. Refer to each table at the appropriate place in the xt.

4. Give each column in the table a heading and leave plenty of space around

headings.

5. Denote footnotes in tables by superscript letters.

6. Indicate the meaning of a dash (-) when it is used in a table, i.e., whether it is

used to indicate missing data, incomplete research, data not applicable or

unavailable, or a problem investigated but no results. 

7. Check the accuracy of all totals.

8. The size of the type in tables should be no smallei than 10 point.
 

FIGURES 

1. Use professionally drawn grapl-tics and charts that are clean, sharp and black on

white. Shades of gray are acceptable. Mimeograph or xerox copies, pencil

drawings, blueprints or ozalid prints. and negatives are not acceptable. For

charts, use plain paper instead of graph paper and show only the main

divisions. 

2. Use only unscreened, black-and-white glossy pri ts of photographs that are

sharp with good contrast. Slides, color photograp. is, and negatives are not

acceptable. (WSDOT does not reprint its reports in color.) 

3. If figures are not presented on separate pages, leave about 1-1 / 2" of white space

between a figure and the text.

4. Number figures consecutively with arabic numends.

5. Refer to each figure by number at the appropriate place in the text.

6. Do not use lettering of figures smaller than 10 point.

7. Figure sizes, line weights, and letter sizes should )e uniform throughout the

report.

8. Each figure must have a caption.

 


Example:

Research Report

and Interim Report

 



 

 

Research Report

 

Research Project T9233, Task 9

GIS for Transportation Planning

 

USING GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATIC N SYSTEMS

FOR REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

IN A GROWTH MANAGEMENT CONTEXT

 

by

 

Timothy L. Nyerges and James D. Orrell III

Department of Geography, DP-10

University of Washington

Seattle, WA 98195

 

Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC)

University of Washington, JD- 10

University District Building

1107 NE 45th Street Suite 535

Seattle, Washington 98105

 

Washington State Department of Trans ortation

Technical Monitor

Judith Lorenzo

Assistant Program Manager

Scenic Highways Program

 

Prepared for

 

Washington State Transportation C mmission

Department of Transportation and in cooperation with

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Highway AdministratiOn

 



 

TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE

REPORT NO.: WA-RD 285.1

TITLE: USING GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS FOR REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING IN A GROWTH MANAGEMEMT CONTEXT

REPORT DATE: October 1992

AUTHORS: Timothy L. Nyerges and James D. Orrell III

PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS: Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC) University of Washington. JE-10, The Corbet Building, Suite 204, 4507 University Way N.E. Seattle, Washington 981059

CONTRACT OR GRANT NO.: T9231, Task 9

SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: Washington State Department of Transportation, Transportation Building, KF-01, Olympia, Washington 98504

TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED: Research report

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES: This study was conducted in cooperation wtih the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.

ABSTRACT: Growth management in Washington State provides a new context for regional transportation planning. A major part of this planning involves investigation of the latest information processing techniques and interjurisdictional coordination specifically with regard to transportation and land use linkages. Geographic information system (GIS) applications for transportation can assist transportation planners with data analysis concerned with these linkages. This project has identified information needs in the context of a regional transportation planning process, particularly the needs of Regional Transportation Platming Organizations (RTPOs). Urban and rural contexts are considered. Information processing tasks are elucidated and the software functions that address these tasks am presented, Data sources are identified for urban and rural traffic forecast modeling. Institutional and technical barriers inhibiting access to data for the regional transportation planning process are discussed.

KEY WORDS: Regional transportation planning, growth management, GIS, inforination needs, geographic information systems, TIGER/Line, Census Transportation Planning Package

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT: No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springficld, VA 22616

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION: None


 

DISCLAIMER 

The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Was]-dngton State Transportation Commission, Department of Transportation, or the Feder 11 Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.

 


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

 

Summary -----------------------------------------------------------------------vii 

Introduction

Research Objectives------------------------------------------------------1

The Problem--------------------------------------------------------------1  

Review of Current Practice

Literature Review---------------------------------------------------------3

Telephone Survey---------------------------------------------------------5

Procedures

Workshop 1-Information Needs --------------------------------------------------6

Individual Listing of Issues--------------------------------------------------6

Clustering Issues to Form Cluster Working Groups-------------------------6

Issues and Regional Transportation Planning Components------------------8

Issues and Scales of Analysis ----------------------------------------------9

Issues and Information Processing Applications ----------------------------9

Workshop 2-The Regional Transportation Planning Process-----------------------9 


Findings/Discussion

Synthesis of Workshop 1 Results

Institutional Issues -------------------------------------------------18

Technical Issues---------------------------------------------------19

Synthesis of Workshop 2 Results-----------------------------------------19

A Database Model for Regional Transportation Planning------------------25

 

Recommendations/Application/Implementation-----------------------------------37

Important Aspects of this Research for Individual RTPOs

Important Aspects of this Research for the Overall Problem

Acknowledgments ------------------------------------------------------------- 41

References----------------------------------------------------------------------42


 

LIST OF FIGURES

 

Figure

1. Workshop 1 Process Overview----------------------------------------------7

2. Association of Transportation Planning Scales of Analysis with
Administrative and Geographic Perspectives for Regional
Transportation Plan Development--------------------------------------------12

3. Regional Transportation Plan Making Process--------------------------------15

4. Regional Transportation System Analysis ------------------------------------ 16

5.a Database Model for Travel Directed at Developing Trip Distributions------- 26

5.b Database Model for Travel Directed at Loading Trip Assignments onto

Transport Network and Performing System Evaluation-------------------------- 27

 

LIST OF TABLES

 

Table Page

1. Synthesis of Issues From Information Needs Workshop---------------20

2. Tasks by Plan Component--------------------------------------------21

3. Data Categories and Data Sources------------------------------------29

4.a Data Entry Functions in a GIS, for Transportation---------------------33

4.b Data Output/ Display in a GIS for Transportation---------------------33

4.c Data Management in a GIS for Transortation--------------------------34

4.d Data Manipulation Functions in a GIS, for Transportation------------- 35

4.e Data Analysis Functions in a GIS for Transportation-------------------36

5. Data Issues Impeding Regional Transportation-------------------------39

 


 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

This report documents tasks 1 and 2 of a three-part research project investigating the use of geographic information processing technology to support regional transportation planning. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) recognizes that the emergence of a new mandate for regional transportation planning under the Washington State Growth Management Program provides a new context for the planning process. They also recognize that the use of geographic information processing technology can facilitate regional tr msportation plan development. 

The findings documented in this report, in large part, result from two highly interactive workshops designed and implemented by the research team. orkshop participants included transportation planning professionals from the organizations responsi:)Ie for plan development, as well as from other organizations representing important roles in support of transportation planning, including those offering information sources, e.g., the Census Bureau.The workshops were designed, in part, to encourage intergovernmental coordination and cooperation as mandated in the growth management program. 

The purpose of the first workshop was to identify, and begin the synthesis of, the broad range of information needs for regional transportation plan development. ThE methodology developed for the workshop and documented in this report may be of concern to other information gathering sources interested in geographic information system (GIS) implementation. The second workshop involved a more detailed examination of the information needs, data sources, and software functions necessary for regional transportation plan development. 

This report further synthesizes the results from the workshof s with other issues of concern in the implementation of geographic information processing technc logy in regional transportation planning. Specifically, the regional transportation planning process is discussed in terms of administrative and geographic dimensions as they interconnect with different scales of transportation analysis throughout the state of Washington. Important products in th s report include the following:

- a new synthesis of the technical aspects of the regional transportation planning process

- the development of a database model showing the important data elements and their interrelationships involved in regional transportation Aanning contexts

- a list of information categories and data sources to support the planning process

- identification of problems associated with data sourcE s that impede the planning process

- a detailed list of geographic information processing software functions cross-referenced with the regional transportation planning components

- recognition of the value of coordination and commu ' ation among the planning community in sharing technical solutions to facilitate the transportation planning process throughout the state

- recognition of the need for continued technical support for the planning effort, particularly among the newly formed Regional Transportation Planning Organizations (RTPOs)

- recognition that regional transportation planning invo ves extensive data inventory, analysis, and storage on an iterative basis, and requires sufficient budget resources for staff and other program requirements (e.g., computers, software, and data for which a fee is charged)

 


 

INTRODUCTION

 

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 

The first objective of this part of the research project w is to identify the informational needs of the regional transportation planning process. Informatcon needs were developed from two one-day workshops, a'literature review, a telephone survey, and a synthesis of the requirements outlined in the Growth Management Legislation.

The second objective of this research was to analyze and evaluate how the forthcoming Census Transportation Planning Package (CTPP) and TIGE /line data could support the transportation planning needs identified for the first objective The report actually takes this objective a step further, responding to the broad set of needs identified in the two workshop sessions. The report documents a wide range of the data and sources necessary for regional transportation planning and provides a first step of identifying specific problems associated with their acquisition and implementation.
 

THE PROBLEM

This report documents the regional transportation pl g process as mandated by the Growth Management Program created by the Washington State Legislature in 1990. It begins with a description of the planning problem and the required components for plan development. This description includes different perspectives on the regional planning problem, but ultimately recognizes that the process and information needs are similar for all jurisdictions involved in planning. The issue of scales of analysis is seen as the unifying dimension for the different institutional perspectives on the planning process. 

Following this description, more detailed discussions o information processing tasks, information categories, and data sources are outlined. This effort focuses on the presentation of a single database model, which captures the essence of data requirements and data relationships, to support the planning process regardless of the keographic scale of analysis.

In the implementation section of this report, some specifi-- issues associated with the integration of geographic information processing in regional transportation planning are higl-dighted. Further cooperative research regarding these issues is necessary to meet the challenges and goals presented in the growth management man4 late. 

The Wasl-dngton State Department of Transportation (W SDOT) recognizes that growth management in Washington State provides a new context for trInsportation planning. A major part of planning in fl-iis new context involves investigation of the latest information processing techniques and inter-jurisdictional coordination specifically regarding transportation and landuse linkages. Geographic information system (GIS) applications for transportation can assist transportation planners with data analysis for growth management in various geographic areas of the state and, at the same time, foster inter-jurisdictional coordination among planners.

A GIS is defined as a system of hardware, software, data, people, organizations, and institutional arrangements for collecting, storing, analyzing, and disseminating information about areas of the earth. (Dueker and Kjerne 1989) The main focus of a GIS in transportation is on areas of the earth that involve a transportation network. (Nyerges and Dueker 1988; Nyerges 1990a) A GIS can be used to integrate transportatic n information from disparate sources on the basis of geographic location, for example, an esU nate of travel demand inferred from land use and transportation networks, or a state-wide distribution of travel studies performed by regional planning agencies.

In recent years, interest in GIS has reached such high levels vendors are now providing solutions for several transportation planning problems. At VSDOT within the Planning, Research and Public Transportation Division, the Transportation Planning Office (TPO) is responsible for providing technical assistance to the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and the newly formed Regional Transportation Planning Organizations (RTPOs). This project was designed to assist in documenting the regional transportation planning process, specifically regarding the use of geographic information processing technology.

 


REVIEW OF CURRENT PRACTICE

 

LITERATURE REVIEW

Over the past several years, transportation modeling as been a large part of the planning effort of MPOs in Washington State. The Growth Management Program requires that RTPOs develop regional transportation plans and that these plans be consistent with the transportation elements of local comprehensive plans. This reqt irement will increase the level of effort expended on land use based travel demand modeRig, which is part of the data analysis used in preparing regional transportation plans. In addition, the plan consistency required by the Growth Management Program necessitates an enhanced level of interjurisdictional coordination among MPOs, RTPOs, District Planni.-ig Offices, and local agencies.

During the 1980s part of the transportation planning eff:)rts by MPOs across the U. S. was supported by the Urban Transportation Planning Package (UTPP), published by the Census Bureau. ~The UTPP was a special product of the 1980 Census organized for transportation planning applications. It contained population, employment, and supportive journey-to-work data. In an effort to continue support for such planning applications, the Census Bureau, in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), will soon be releasing another Census Transportation Planning Package (CTPP). This refined set of journey-to-work transportation data is a special product of the 1.990 Census. The CTPP will be compatible with the previously released TIGER/line street neW,ork files since the TIGER/line files provide the geograpl-dc reference elements for the CTPP. CTPP includes the following types of data: place of work, commuter trip (including bo ends of trip), and place of residence. There is a statewide component consisting of place, county, and state level data, and an urban component consisting of transportation analysis zone, wid census tract data. 

In recent years, much of the transportation planning effort in the state of Washington has been undertaken by MPOs using transportation modeling software. Most experts now recognize that land use based transportation modeling is superior to traditional travel demand modeling based on population estimates alone. (de la Berra 1989) Several software packages now allow some form of land use based data input for modeling, (Lewis 1990) In addition, several of the software vendors of transportation modeling packages now recognize that data management can play a key role in analytical routines and graphics display. Much of that influence has come from a GIS approach to data processing. Consequently, many modeling vendors are trying to develop linkages to a GIS or develop suc-i functions into their software, or both. Using the CTPP data requires a method of storage, manipulation, and analysis that can be provided by modeling and/or GIS software packages. 

Integration of transportation modeling and GIS software takes many forms. (Nyerges 1990b; Nyerges 1992a) One extreme approach is off-fine, separate databases (data structures), where data is transferred between a modeling package and a GIS. The other extreme approach is total integration of modeling and GIS databases (data structures). Another system could have separate data structures, but an on-fine transfer of data. This latter approach is the most common one in reaching effective solutions with minimum effort Transportation modeling and GIS software together provide a depth of analysis that only sophisticated transportation modeling software can provide and the breadth of data management, manipulation, and display that GIS can provide. 

A GIS can be used for several transportation planring applications that involve integrating data sets from several sources. Manipulation c f these data to geographical distribution information has not been available before becau e of a lack of both analytical synthesis in software packages and of cartographical displays that effectively depict spatial distributions. (Nyerges and Dueker 1988) The context of growth management transportation planning, in which the goal is to develop an explicit lirkage between land use and transportation systems, begs for the capabilities of a GIS approach.

 


PROCEDURES

This section reviews the approaches and results from tvo 1-day workshops designed and implemented by the project team. The workshop participants represented a broad crosssection of organizations responsible for the development of regional transportation plans. Representatives from federal, state, and regional government Eigencies that are linked to the planning process via their supporting roles as data provilers also participated in the workshop.
 

WORKSHOP 1 INFORMATION NEEDS

The purpose of the first workshop was to begin the process of identifying the issues associated with implementing transportation planning under growth management. A graphic outline of the workshop process displays an overview of the process (see Figure 1). The work sessions identified in the figure are described in this section.

Individual Listing of Issues 

The workshop began with each of the participants reviewing a list of issues compiled from returned questionnaires. The participants were then askcd to consider this fist and any other additional issues, and to identify the three issues of greatest significance to them. These three issues were then fisted on separate 5" x 8" index cards along with the initials of the participant. 

Clustering Issues to Form Working Group Themes 

Related issues were clustered together to form subjects for discussion. Each participant forwarded the card stating their most significant issue firs:. This grouping activity was repeated two more times, thus addressing each of the three issles chosen by each participant. When participants had more than three highly-significant issues, their additional cards were considered one at a time for association with any of the existing working group themes. 

A check was then made to insure that each working group represented at least two different issues, and that no one issue was represented in more than one working group in a given round. This was done because it spurred conversation for sharing information.


Issues and Regional Transportation Planning Components

The third session of the workshop used the issues identiFied in session two to examine the relationships between these issues and the components of the regional transportation planning process as described in the Growth Management Act. -his was accomplished using a matrix worksheet with issues fisted on the left side of the m trix and the components for regional transportation planning listed across the top. (See Appendix A for a sample matrix.)

Participants formed small discussion groups based on their working group affiliations and used individual matrix worksheets to record the associations of the issues and the transportation planning components. Each individual considered the issues independently first and then recorded their observations on separate worksheets. After this independent work period, they discussed their results in small groups and aj rived at a consensus of the relationships between the concerns and planning components. 

At this point, they also reached a consensus regarding the total number of instances where each concern related to a component of the planning - rocess (i.e., they counted the number of entries in each component column). They entered tlds total number in the bottom row of the worksheet. The total number of occurrences determined the ranking of each transportation planning component's overall importance in rel tion to the combined concerns represented by the clustering of issues. (See Appendix B for a sample tally.)

The consensus of issues were copied onto a separate worksheet and given to the facilitator as documentation for the activity. The participants also generated a generic description (title) for the cluster of issues at the bottom of the worksheet. Then, this description was transferred to a title card and placed on a large wall presentation matrix used to present the issues. The summary row totals from the bottom of the consensus worksheet were also recorded on the wall presentation matrix. 

The total number of times an issue appeared reflected ubjective observations. Totals were dependent upon both the number of concerns considered within a cluster of issues and the participants' interpretations of how each concern was related. to the planning components.

 


 

FINDINGS/DISCUSSION 

SYNTHESIS OF WORKSHOP 1 RESULTS

The issues identified in the first workshop were divided into two categories: institutional and technical concerns. As the first step in our synthesis, we combined the issues identified in the first workshop into a single database and resorted them based on their primary concerns' emphasis--institutional or technical.

Institutional Issues

Several institutional concerns were identified: 

Guidelines (roles, data, analysis), Identification of roles, responsibilities, cooperation (of key players and agencies), Criteria (data, planning, analysis), Standardization of LOS/Technical criteria, Consistency of regional transportation plans, Unifyirig multiple agency priorities, Staffing, Elected official involvement, Information dissemination, and Sources of, access to, and timeliness of data. 

The above list indicates that a significant number of the issues identified in the first workshop were associated with institutional concerns. Clearly, two things were requested by workshop participants: 1) further policy-level clarification of the growth management program's transportation provisions, and 2) development of appropriate institutional guidelines. It is not in the scope of this project to develop such guidelines, but it is of interest to the WSDOT Transportation Planning Office in their ongoing efforts to provide transportation planning, a growth management program, and technical assistance to WSDOT districts, locales, and the RTPOs. 

One of the institutional concerns identified in the workshop is the issue of information sources, access, and dissemination. This is a key consideration of this research project. The development of a prototype information processing application to partially support this activity (a GIS application for monitoring transportation planning studies) wi in WSDOT was undertaken as Task 3 of the project. (Nyerges 1992b) This prototype will provide WSDOT with information concerning how a GIS application might help with institutional (oncerns, by organizing the data describing regional transportation system studies and research.

Technical Issues 

Several technical concerns were identified: 

Data collection & analysis, Data inputs for modeling, Standardization of models/formats/ data, Data requirements & transfer, and Environmental issues. 

These five summary-level technical issues, synthesized fr:)m Workshop 1 on information needs, provided a starting point for the development of a more comprehensive list of regional transportation planning issues and, subsequently, specffic tasks related to those issues. Table 1 represents the elaborated synthesis of issues resulting from the in ormation needs workshop. This list of issues was used as a starting point for the development of a comprehensive list of tasks (discussed in the next section) that are directly linked to the process diagrams outlined in Figures 3 and 4.


SYNTHESIS OF WORKSHOP 2 RESULTS
 

This section outlines a detailed list of information processing tasks associated with regional transportation plan development, which was used as the starting point for the second workshop. The refinement of this list of tasks started with the list of issues in'rable I and the process diagrams in Figures 3 and 4. This list should serve as a starting point for developing more detailed work plans in specific planning settings. Its primary purpose, here, is as a foundation for developing a database model for regional transportation planning, which, in turn, is used to develop a comprehensive list of information categories and data sources. The list of tasks provided in Table 2 is subdivided into three major sections (Policy Phase Tasks, Analysis Phase Tasks, and System Phase Tasks) corresponding with the major groups in Figures 3 and 4.

 


CONCLUSIONS 

This report presents a broad framework, which captures the interplay between the regional transportation planning process and information processing technology. The breadth and depth of the material presented should provide valuable insights for those interested in both policy and technical aspects of the regional transportation planning process. This project is the first step in undertaking the information technology transfer problem for transportation analysis in growth management. We believe that further detailed issues regarding information processing can easily follow the basic structure set forth in this report. 

This research has benefited from the contributions of m ny individuals in the regional transportation planning community. Their open interaction in the workshops has added greatly to the clarification of regional transportation planning problems. As the planning process moves forward, there is a need for this type of exchan~ e to continue between RTPOs and individual planners. 

The synthesis of the workshops' results presents sever il important conclusions. The first is that the regional transportation planning effort needs fui ther policy-level guidance if it is going to meet the goals of the growth management program. This is, however, an institutional problem, and not the primary focus of this research. 

The second issue that needs more deliberation concerns data a cess and better coordination of data sharing. This report documents data needs and has begun the data source identification process. It notes specific cases where data exist but are currently inaccessible to the planning community because of institutional barriers. A coordinated and cooperative effort to overcome unnecessary obstructions to data sharing should be further pursued. 

Third, and last, it has become apparent from this research that many of the RTPOs need greater technical support to implement the technical solutions iderttified here. Further investment in helping RTPOs implement appropriate information processing hnology would be beneficial to the regional transportation planning process, and ultimately to the quality of transportation statewide.



RECOMMENDATIONS/APPLICATION/IMFLEMENTATION

From a technological standpoint, the results of this research provide a starting point for considering how the tasks of regional transportation planning under growth management intersect with current geographic information processing concepts and techniques. The issues identified demonstrate concerns regarding data sources and availability, and concerns regarding software capability. Currently, the knowledge base in both areas seems to be lacking or dispersed, based on the cross-section of input received from flie workshop participants. This report's aim is to resolve this problem.

 

IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF THIS RESEARCH FOR INDIVIDUAL RTPO'S

From a management standpoint, the process diagrams (figures 3 and 4) and task list (Table 2) developed in this report are applicable to a broad range of organizations, enabling them to better understand the nature of regional transportatio i planning problems and how geographic information processing technology can be applied. This information provides a starting point for the development of more detailed plans and programs to meet the needs of various organizations in the state of Washington. 

Additionally, the general GIS functions described in tab s 4a-4e can be used to identify the important software functions available in some software to address specific transportation planning problems. However, each MPO and RTPO must assess these functions considering its own technological needs. In general, the value of this research in addressing these types of issues is primarily at the level of individual RTPO/ MPOs.

 

IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF THIS RESEARCH FOR THE OVERALL PROBLEM 

This research can make an important contribution at theintergovernmental level. It is at this level that further application and implementation of the concepts developed in this report could have the greatest effect on the regional transportation pLmning effort and the adoption of geographic information processing technology to support this effort. Specifically, this research identifies concerns that represent significant obstacles to existing efforts to effectively implement regional transportation planning programs. Some of these obstacles include: an overall view of the problem, institutional barriers to data acquisition, understanding of the technologies, and the cost of the technology. 

Many of the issues identified will determine the success f regional transportation planning efforts. Technical coordination of these issues is required for plan development. The need for coordination reflects the broader institutional difficulties associated with regional transportation planning. Table 5 documents the data issues iden ified in this research that lie at the center of regional transportation analysis and, consequently, at the heart of successful regional transportation planning.


September 16, 1994

 


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 

The authors express their appreciation to the persomiel of the many metropolitan transportation planning organizations throughout the U.S. whc provided information for this study. Special thanks go to the personnel of the Regional Transportation Planning Organizations throughout Washington State who contributed th E!ir time during the workshops, making this study a creative undertaking. The authors would like to recognize the contributions of Elaine Murakami, Larry Blain, Garr Clark, Wid Glenn Miles for comments provided during the design and documentation of the workshop results. Last, but not least, the authors wish to thank Judith Lorenzo of the WSDOT Design Office (formerly with the Planning Office), as technical monitor, for allowing us the creative leash to draw these ideas together.

 


REFERENCES 

de la Berra, T., 1989. Integrated Land Use and Transport Mo6ding, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dueker, K. and D. Kjerne, 1989. "Multipurpose Cadastre: Terms and Definitions," in Technical Papers ASPRS/ACSM Annual Convention, American Congress on Surveying and Mapping, Bethesda, MD, April 2-7,1989, pp. 94-103.

Lewis, S., 1990. "Use of Geographical Information Systems in Transportation Modeling," ITE journal, March, 1990: 34-38. 

Nyerges, T., 1990a. "Locational Referencing and Highway Segmentation in a Geographic Information System," ITE journal, March, 1990: 27-3 1.

Nyerges, T., 1990b. "Software Functionality for Geographic Information Systems in Transportation: Development of a State-Route Di ital Highway Network for Washington State," Proceedings of the 1990 Geograpl-dc Information Systems (GIS) for Transportation Symposium, American Society of State Highway and Transportation Officials, U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, San Antonio, TX, March 14-17 (1990): 281-302, 

Nyerges, T., 1990c. "Evaluating Geographic Information Processing Software for Processing TIGER Files," Final Report on Task 1, Joint Statistical Agreement between University of Washington and U.S. Bureau of the Census, March (1990). Contract JSA: 88-28. 

Nyerges, T., 1992a. "Coupling Spatial Analytic Models and GIS,' Proceedings of the 5th Spatial Data Handling Symposium, Charleston, SC, August 2-7. (1992). International Geographical Union. 

Nyerges, T., 1992b. "A GIS Prototype Application for onitoring Washington State Transportation Planning Studies," Olympia, Washington: Washington State Department of Transportation, Draft Technical Report No. WA-RD 285. 1. 

Nyerges, T. and K. Dueker, 1988. "Geographic Information Sys ms in Transportation," invited summary paper included in the Proceedings of the Ea5tern and Western ComputerAssisted Cartography Conferences in Transportation, published by the Federal Highway Administration, Planning Division, HPN-22, V~ ashington, D. C., July (1988).

Rhind, D. W. and P. A. Green, 1988. "Design of a Geographical Information System for a Heterogeneous Scientific Community," Internationel journal of Geographical Information Systems, 2(2):171-189. 

State of Alaska, 1986. Bid Specification for a Digital Mapping stem for the State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. Department of Administration, Bid No. 1145 1, Juneau, Alaska. 

WSDOT, 1991. Workshop Manual.- Land Use and Transportation Linkages.


 

Section D

WSDOT/TransNow Reports

 

GUIDELINES FOR WSDOT/TRANSNOW REPORTS

 

When WSDOT and Transportation Northwest (I'ransNow) jointly fund a project, the resulting reports will have a few differences.

Except for the differences noted below, the reports should follow all other WSDOT report guidelines.


ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES

• No differences.

 

RESEARCH REPORTS AND INTERIM REPORTS

• Use the WSDOT/TransNow cover layout. 

• Use the WSDOT/TransNow disclaimer (see below).


WSDOT/TRANSNOW- DISCLAIMER 

The disclaimer is to read:

"The contents of this report reflect the views of the author(s), who is (are) responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. This document is disseminated through the Transportation Northwest (TransNow) Regional Center under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation UTC Grant Program and through the Washington State Department of Transportation. The U.S. government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. Sponsorship for the local match portion of this research project was provided by the W shington State Department of Transportation. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or pohcies of the U.S. Department of Transportation or Washington State Department of Transportation. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation."


 

Example:

WSDOT TransNow Report Cover

 

Research Report 

Research Project GC8719, Task 9

Motorist Information Real-Time

 

REAL-TIME MOTORIST INFORMATION FOR REDUCING URBAN FREEWAY CONGESTION:

 

COMMUTER BEHAVIOR, DATA CONVERSION

AND DISPLAY, AND TRANSPORTATION POLICY

 

by

Mark Haselkorn	Woodrow Barfield	Jan Spyridakis

Principal Investigator	Co-principal Investigator 	Investigator

 

Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC)

University of Washington, JE- 10

The Corbet Building, Suite 204

4507 University Way N.E.

Seattle, Washington 98105

 

Washington State Department of Transportation

Technical Monitor

Les Jacobson

Urban Systems Manager

 

Prepared for
 

Washington State Transportation Commission Transportation Northwest (TransNow)

Washington State Department of Transportation
135 More Hall, FX- 10

University of Washington

Olympia Washington 98504-7370 Seattle, Washington 98195

 

and in cooperation with

U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration

 

June 1992

 


Exhibit C 

Title 6, Civil Rights Acts of 1964 

During the performance of this agreement, the Regents of the University of California, and its campuses, for itself, its assignees and successors in interest, hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant," agree as follows:

1. Compliance With Regulations: The Consultant will comply with the Regulations of the Department of Transportation relative to nondiscrimination in Federally-assisted programs of the Department of Transportation Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, hereinafter referred to as the Regulations, whic.-i are herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this agreement. 

2. Nondiscrimination: The Consultant, with regard to the work performed by it after award and prior to completion of the contract work, will not discriminate on the ground of race, color, or national origin in the selection and retention of subcontractors, including procurements of materials and leases of equirment. The Consultant will not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section 8.4 of the Regulations, including employment practices when the contract covers a program set forth in Appendix A- I I of the Regulations 

3. Solicitations for Subcontracts, Including Procurements of Materials and Equipment: In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotiation made by the Consultant for work to be performed under a subcontract, including procurements of materials or equipment, each potential subcontractor or supplier sha,l be notified by the Consultant of the Consultant's obligations under this contract and the Regulations relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, color or national origin.

4. Information and Reports: The Consultant will provide all information and reports required by the Regulations, or orders and instructions issued pursuant thereto, and will permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the State Transportal ion Department or the Federal Highway Administration to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such regulations, orders and instructions. Where any information required of the Consultant is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the Consultant shall so certify to the State Transportation Department, or the Federal Highway Administration as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information.

5. Sanctions for Noncompliance: In the event of the Consultant's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this contract, the State Transportation Department shall impose such contract sanctions as it or the Federal Highway Administration may determine to be appropriate, including, but not limited io: 

a. Withholding of payment to the Consultant under t ie contract until the Consultant complies, and/or 

b. Cancellation, termination or suspension of the contract, in whole or in part.

6. Incorporation of Provisions: The Consultant will include the provisions of paragraph (1) through (6) in every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regulations, order, or instructions issued pursuant thereto. The Consultant will take such action with respect to any subcontract or procurement as the State Transportation Department or the Federal Highway Administration may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance. Provided, however, that in the ever t the Consultant becomes involved in, or is threatened with litigation with a subcontractor or supplier as a result of such direction, the Consultant may request the State to enter into such litigation to protect the interest of the United States.



Exhibit D 

UC CONTRACT AND GRANT OFFICES

Joyce Freedman, Director
Sponsored Projects Offic
336 Sproul Ha11
University of California
Berkeley, CA 94720
Phone: (510) 642-8110
FAX: (510) 642-8236
Ahmad Hakim-Elahi
Office of Vice Chancellor - Research
410 Mrak Hall
University of California
Davis, CA 95616
Phone: (916) 752-7630
FAX: (916) 752-8671
Bruce Morgan. Director
Office of Contract & Grants
115 Administration Building
University of California
Irvine, CA 92717
Phone:(714)856-5677
FAX: (714) 725-2094
Ann Pollack, Acting Director
Office of Contract & Grant Administration
Wilshire Center Suite 1200, Mail Code 140648
University of California
Los Angeles,
CA 90024
Phone: (310)825-1431
FAX. (310) 206-4996
Hannah Petzenbaum, Director
Office of Research Affairs
1126 Library South
University of Californi
Riverside, CA 92521
Phone: (909) 787-5535
FAX:
(909)787-4483
Linda Dale, Director
Office of Contract & Grants
UC San Diego
9500 Gilman Drive
LA Jolla, CA 92093-0934
Phone: (619) 534-3333
FAX:
(619)534-0280
Nancy Wilson, Manager
Contracts and Grants
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
UC San Diego, 02 10
La Jolla, CA 92093-0210
Phone: (619) 534-4570
FAX: (619) 5-34-5306
John Klimek, Manager
Office of Research Affairs
3333 California Street, Suite 11
University of California
San Francisco, CA 94143-0962
Phone: (415) 476-2977
FAX: (415) 476-8158
Sherylle Mills Englander, Manager
Sponsored Projects
32V Cheadle Hall
University of California
Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Phone: (805) 893-4036
FAX. (80-15) 893-2611
Bill Clark, Manager
Contracts and Grants Office
399C Applied Sciences Building
University of California
Santa Cruz, CA 95064
Phone: (408) 459-2778
FAX: (408) 459-4989
Carol Berman
Contracts and Grants Coordinator
ANR, Office of the President
300 Lakeside Drive, 6" Floor
Oakland, CA 94612-3550
Phone: (510) 987-0050
FAX: (SIO) 763-6436 
David F. Mears, Director
RAO, Office of the President
University of California
1111 Franklin St., 5th fl.
Oakland, CA 94607-5200
Phone: (510) 987-9838
FAX: (510) 835-3705

(1/01)