Strategic Issues Facing Transportation, Volume 3: Expediting Future Technologies for Enhancing Transportation System Performance (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 33-44
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 33... ...
33 This appendix provides a more detailed overview of the case studies performed under the direction of Dr. Elizabeth Deakin and Karen Trapenberg Frick of the University of California Transportation Research Center.50 The four technology applications treated in case studies included • ITS, • Pavement technology and infrastructure, • Context-sensitive design, and • Integrated transportation-land use modeling.
|
From page 34... ...
34 officials commented that there was not much evidence of a constituency for the changes [in practice towards implementing ITS] , and while they were willing to help create one if there were clear benefits to the public or important user groups, the technology advocates often do not make it clear how an individual, or an industry such as trucking [for technologies like, roadway sensors and on-board information systems]
|
From page 35... ...
35 The need for staff with new skills was identified as a barrier, if agencies chose to proceed independently rather than contracting for services. In particular, many ITS technologies require extensive knowledge of computer science and electrical engineering sensor technology -- disciplinary expertise not currently common in transportation agencies.
|
From page 36... ...
36 Responding to the urgings of the critics, Congress added provisions to ISTEA, signed into law in 1991, that gave states the option to adopt alternative design, safety and construction standards for roads not on the designated National Highway System. The National Highway System Act of 1995 extended the option of alternative design standards to NHS highways other than Interstate highways.
|
From page 37... ...
37 major bus route and shopping street to be more multimodal and community-oriented. The state DOT was reluctant to issue the design exception because it feared that the level of service on the street would significantly worsen.
|
From page 38... ...
38 adopt advances from research. Rodier quoted experts who "used words such as ‘dismal,' ‘primitive,' ‘disappointing,' and ‘deficient' to describe the state of [modeling]
|
From page 39... ...
39 Others argued for entirely different approaches to the development and use of models. One proposal was that researchers should be funded to develop and use models to better understand travel behavior, accumulating research results to allow generalizations, and then the results rather than the models would be used as input in formulating policies and plans based on collaborative planning.
|
From page 40... ...
40 Innovations in pavement design and materials, include • Superpave, a system for designing pavements, • Warm-mix asphalt, • Pavements made of recycled materials, • Permeable pavements, • Cool pavements, and • Self-healing pavement. The Superpave system was developed in the 1980s to address two major concerns in asphalt pavement: rutting and low-temperature surface cracking.
|
From page 41... ...
41 Finally, although innovations may yield benefits to agency staff, the public, or both, agency staff may resist incorporating new practices to their jobs. Interviewees spoke of the difficulty of transferring knowledge of innovations that may be more technically preferable but more complex than original practices.
|
From page 42... ...
42 Barrier ITS CSS Transportation/ Land Use Models Pavements Technology Uncertainty • Validity of models and assumpons Other Technical Barriers • Data availability and reliability • Climates limit implementaon of materials Performance Assessment • Lack of objecve assessments • Lack of or methodological shortcomings in assessments in broader social, economic, and legal context • Controversy and over forecasng of impacts of CSS project • • Uncertainty about need and value added Lack of observability of model performance Standards, Rules, and Regulations • Rapid change makes standards restricve • Unclear relaonship between exisng and new standards • Low-bid pracces prevent adopon of technologies with lower lifecycle costs Internal Organization and Culture • • Conflicng mission goals Separate ITS units may hinder implementaon Slow contracng processes Reluctance to take risks with public funds • • • Conflicng mission goals Inera towards using CSS and conflicng internal culture Insufficient leadership • Cultural resistance to new methods and processes Inadequate Skill-Mix • • • Need for new skills • • • • Need for new skills Heavy exisng work loads Technical Information • Use of jargon Investments, Legal Requirements, and Markets • • • Insufficient aenon to legal issues Cutbacks on funds earmarked for ITS Implementaon paced by technology and system replacement cycles Fear of legal challenges in conformity analyses Budget limitaons • • • Low-bid pracces prevent adopon of technologies with lower lifecycle costs Restricons on use of funds for proprietary materials and processes Limited sources of funding and rising capital costs Table A-2. Barriers identified in case studies.
|
From page 43... ...
43 Barrier ITS CSS Transportation/ Land Use Models Pavements Multi-Party Coordination • Partnerships across agencies and with private sector necessary but difficult • Need for crossagency partnership • Conflict between policy goals of elected officials and agency mission goals • • Differences in atude about CSS between staff across agencies Perceived "footdragging" in cross-agency approvals for projects • Conflict between policy goals of elected officials and agency mission goals • • Fragmentaon between DOT headquarters and field offices Headquarters staff need to "convince" districts to implement new technique or material External Acceptance • • Difficulty assessing market value and acceptance Difficulty convincing users of value • Conflict with local stakeholder interests Table A-2. (Continued)
|
From page 44... ...
44 for partners who can – or finding other ways to provide support (e.g., helping to fund research and development carried out by others) with more flexibility.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.