Skip to Content Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration
FHWA Home  |  FTA Home  |  Feedback   
 

Peer Exchanges, Planning for a Better Tomorrow, Transportation Planning Capacity Building

Transportation Planning Capacity Building Program

— Peer Exchange Report —

The Role of State Department of Transportations in Guiding Transportation Investments

Location: Nashville, Tennessee
 
Date:
 
September 27-28, 2004
 
Exchange Host Agency:    
 
Tennessee Department of Transportation
Exchange Participants: Minnesota Department of Transportation
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Ohio Department of Transportation
Virginia Department of Transportation
Washington State Department of Transportation
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration, Tennessee Division
Volpe National Transportation Center

I. Summary

The following report summarizes the results of a Peer Exchange held through the Transportation Planning Capacity Building (TPCB) Program, which is jointly sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration. The Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) hosted this two-day Peer Exchange in Nashville, TN on September 27 and 28, 2004. The TDOT Peer Exchange was facilitated by Mr. Erick Roecks of MTG Management

The peer exchange focused on six transportation investment topics:

  1. Multimodal Transportation Systems Planning
  2. Transportation Data Collection and Analysis
  3. Environmental Planning and Stewardship
  4. Program Development
  5. Project Development and Management and Rural Consultation for Projects
  6. Leading and Managing Change

The purpose of this peer review was to assist TDOT as it restructures its process for planning and programming future transportation investments. This effort is being reshaped due to the strategic direction defined by the department. TDOT‘s strategic focus is on developing and implementing a transportation system vision, involving and communicating with stakeholders, protecting and preserving the environment, cultivating partnerships, and improving transportation system safety.

The two-day session consisted of a series of presentations by individual state department of transportation (DOT) representatives. Each session concluded with a question and answer period from audience members, composed of TDOT and FHWA staff. This report summarizes each of the presentations as well as the question and answer periods. At the end of the two-day session, each member from the panel and audience was asked to state the most important point discussed during the session. These responses are included in the summary section.

II. Background

TDOT is a centralized transportation agency headquartered in Nashville and having four major regional offices. The fiscal year 2005 budget is approximately $1.6 billion with half of transportation funds from Federal sources and half from the state gas tax. There are no state laws or regulations regarding allocation of funds within geographic regions.

TDOT has begun working more closely with state and Federal environmental agencies earlier in the planning process to better integrate environmental concerns into the transportation planning process. This includes the establishment of a five member environmental council and a commitment by TDOT to context sensitive designs for future projects.

TDOT is currently undertaking the establishment of a new long-range multimodal transportation planning process that will provide Tennessee with a 25-Year Long Range Multimodal Transportation Plan. The long-range plan will provide a new framework to guide the state‘s investments in transportation facilities and services. In addition to the development of a 25-year transportation system vision, a 10-year program and a 3-year list of priority projects will also be products of the new long range planning process. In order to better involve the public, a quarter of the $4.5 million budget for the long-range plan will be devoted to public involvement.

III. State DOT Overviews

Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT): Mn/DOT is a decentralized transportation agency with eight district offices and expert offices in its headquarters. The Lieutenant Governor serves as the Commissioner of Mn/DOT. State gas tax receipts are constitutionally mandated to go toward transportation-related efforts. In addition, the legislature can authorize additional capital funds- it recently approved $400 million in bonds for a specific set of transportation investments. Generally, there is no legislative directive on how funds are to be spent (geographically or for specific projects) but there was a legislative mandate that 50 percent of the recent bond appropriations be allocated towards the Twin Cities 8-county district‘s needs and 50 percent to the rest of the state. This can be a constraint because a large percentage of the transportation needs are in the Twin Cities region. All projects involving capacity improvements require municipal approval. This has a dramatic affect on the consultation process between the state and local governments. In addition to roads, Mn/DOT also has programs and grants for aeronautics, rail, ports and waterways, and freight and commercial vehicles.

North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT): NCDOT has a centralized system for planning, project development, and design. The 14 field offices are in charge of maintenance, right-of-way, and inspections. NCDOT has a 19 member appointed Board of Transportation. NCDOT is responsible for 80 percent of the roadway system in the state. The 2005 annual budget for NCDOT is approximately $3.3 billion. In 1989, the general assembly created the Highway Trust Fund, which established an equity formula that allocates funds based on population, the interstate system, and equal share to ensure an equal geographic distribution of funds. This can result in the funding of different projects than those that might be chosen using a performance-based analysis.

Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT): ODOT reorganized in 1994 and modeled its structure after the Florida DOT. Historically, the department was centralized for finance and budgeting, but was decentralized for design and construction. In 1994, the budgeting process was also decentralized. Now, each district has a budget that allows district managers to move money from operations to capital, which gives the districts a greater ownership of their dollars. The role of the central office is to provide policy and perform statewide planning. Since 1994, ODOT staff has been reduced from 7,800 workers to 6,000. Each Ohio County has an elected county engineer. Ohio is approximately one-third urban, one-third metropolitan, and one-third rural. ODOT has a 2005 budget of $2.3 billion, with approximately 50 percent from state gas tax revenues and 50 percent from Federal gas tax revenues. The Ohio constitution requires that gas tax revenues only be used for transportation purposes, however, there are no legislative mandates on how the transportation funds must be spent or allocated.

Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT): VDOT is led by a commissioner and board of directors. VDOT has nine districts and recently underwent a major restructuring of its personnel and structure. VDOT has decreased its staff size from 15,000 employees in 2000 to 9,600 in 2004. The 2005 budget is approximately $2.9 billion. Revenues come from Federal funds, state gas tax, and a portion of the state sales tax. In addition, Virginia issues bonds for capital projects.

Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT): WSDOT is decentralized for project delivery and centralized for policy setting. WSDOT has created a detailed performance measurement system to better gauge the policy outcomes and agency performance. Program delivery and accountability is central to the operations of WSDOT. The department produces a quarterly report (the Grey Notebook) that tracks a variety of performance measures and accountability measures. The 2005 budget is approximately 3.7 billion with most of the funding coming from gas tax revenue. In 2003, the state increased the gas tax by 5 cents to fund a specific list of transportation projects. The tax increase will sunset when the projects are paid for and completed. The 18th Amendment to the state constitution dedicated fuel tax revenue to highway purposes only. Washington enacted a Growth Management Act in 1990 to help promote statewide consistency in planning.

Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT): WisDOT is composed of seven divisions and has its headquarters located in Madison. The Division of Transportation Districts oversees the eight districts across the state. The state patrol and motor vehicles office are also under the WisDOT structure. Wisconsin has a Transportation Projects Commission composed of the governor, legislators, and public citizens that must approve all major projects before they can be funded. Policy and planning functions are centralized and responsibility for project delivery is located within the districts. By state law, all Wisconsin local governments must have a comprehensive plan adopted by January 2010. Wisconsin uses no general funds to support transportation. Revenue is primarily from federal funds, the state gas tax and vehicle registration fees. The budget for 2003-2005 is approximately $4.8 billion, with a large portion dedicated to local aid for local streets and highways.

IV. Multimodal Transportation System Planning

ODOT Perspective: Mr. Cash Misel, ODOT Assistant Director of Planning and Programs, gave a presentation on ODOT‘s multimodal transportation planning. ODOT produced its first multimodal transportation plan in 1997. The update to that plan was begun in 2001 and is in draft form. Currently, the plan is out for public comment and review. ODOT managers felt it was important for all ODOT divisions to contribute to the statewide ODOT long-range plan. The goal was to develop a living document that is a summation of the 2-year transportation improvement program (TIP), their 15-year state transportation plan, and general guidelines for 30 years. ODOT intends to update the state plan every five years.

Concurrent to the development of the long-range plan, ODOT developed a biennial Business Plan, which linked performance measures for each part of the agency to the agency‘s core objectives, and a new project development process (PDP), which integrates the planning, environmental, design, and construction processes into one integrated system. ODOT has also created a transportation review council that reviews all projects that add capacity.

ODOT has 65 performance measures that cut across the entire enterprise and have resulted in improved data gathering. ODOT has found that citizens do not care which agency owns and operates the various parts of the system, but they do care how it is managed and maintained. In response, ODOT developed a set of uniform system conditions that can be applied throughout the state. ODOT has focused around five policy goals:

  1. Transportation safety
  2. Economic development and quality of life
  3. Efficient, reliable traffic flow
  4. System preservation
  5. Resource management

Lessons learned include:

  • It is important to clearly identify needs early on and set goals for the department and its programs. There needs to be a clear link between planning and the identification of projects.
  • Performance measures are a good tool for linking transportation data to transportation results. It is important to have feedback metrics and the sharing of accountability for the measures to be effective.
  • Proper public involvement requires spending time and resources educating the public on existing conditions, financial resources, and legal constraints.

WisDOT Perspective: Mr. Douglas Dalton, WisDOT Urban Planning Chief, gave a presentation on WisDOT‘s multimodal planning. In 1994, WisDOT adopted its 25-year transportation plan, TransLinks 21, with a large public involvement process. This effort involved over 200 meetings and over 10,000 people. WisDOT also conducted a statewide telephone poll to verify public support for what is included in the plan. The plan identified funding impacts and what the impacts would be if they could raise the base for funding. Wisconsin‘s gas tax is already one of the five highest in the country.

Wisconsin has a requirement to perform a systems level environmental evaluation (SEE) for the transportation plan. This includes identifying potential impacts of capacity expansion on water and land resources and environmentally sensitive corridors, as well as overall energy and air quality impacts of the plan recommendations. The plan recommended specific implementation actions and the preparation of detailed modal system plans for highway, bicycle, airports, pedestrians, freight rail, transit, and local roads. All of the modal plans except for transit and local roads have been completed. A previous highway plan, finished in 1988, Corridors 2020, set specific completion goals of 2005 for the Backbone components, which have been fully implemented.

In 1999, the state legislature mandated comprehensive planning at the local and regional level. All local units of government must have a comprehensive plan in place by January 1, 2010 and all subsequent development-related actions must conform to the adopted plans.

The next long-range plan to be adopted, Connections 2030, will extend the planning horizon out another 10 years and will build on TransLinks 21. The new plan will focus on policy issues, include performance measures, and identify key statewide multimodal corridors. Lessons learned from these previous planning efforts include:

  • It is important to be more fiscally constrained in the plans. The public needs to understand the linkage between expectations and funding. In the future, WisDOT will include a series of recommendations tied more directly to achievable funding levels.
  • WisDOT wants to maximize the use of technology for public outreach.
  • WisDOT wants to have buy-in from the internal stakeholders, especially the implementers.
  • WisDOT wants to make sure that their planning is flexible. It is important to be able to respond to a new administration or other directives.

Group Questions and Answers

How does a DOT plan across modes?
VDOT VDOT had never done a multi-modal plan before. As a first start, they took all of their modal plans and worked through a process to determine which projects gave the best synergistic benefits. Virginia‘s plan will be finalized at the end of this year. A challenge will be to see how the legislature reacts to the priorities. If you looked at the top 10 priorities, 8 are in the northern part of the state.
WisDOT WSDOT has had difficulty incorporating modes that they do not own or operate into their multimodal planning efforts. WisDOT is trying to determine what is the best role for a state DOT to support these modes. They are trying to integrate all of the modes through an issues approach. Transit is one of the areas that needs work because the regional systems that do not interconnect.
Should a DOT shift its focus to be on mobility and choice and less on cars and trips?
WSDOT WSDOT‘s last plan looked at the issue of choice but has now moved away from that because of the difficulties of calculating benefits of choice with performance based planning. WSDOT is also beginning to avoid using the letter grades of levels of service because it can mislead what is really happening over time. They have actual live travel times on their web site and are looking more at reliability (a budgeted travel time using 95 percent reliability). WSDOT has been trying through policy initiatives to get transit systems engaged in congestion mitigation but transit is locally funded and it is difficult to get them to look at a regional perspective.
WisDOT WisDOT looks at corridors and those that have multimodal possibilities such as high-speed rail in the Milwaukee-Chicago corridor.
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT has moved to a data based and performance measurement system that includes all modes. While Mn/DOT has done a performance based plan that looks at new initiatives, some districts only have enough funds to maintain the current system. Mn/DOT is funding the first few years of Minneapolis‘s light rail system with congestion management air quality (CMAQ) funds, but it is not known how the system will be funded after the three-year period.
NCDOT NCDOT has moved away from a thoroughfare plan and now are going to a comprehensive transportation plan, but it is a difficult transition.
ODOT With ODOT, Cleveland is the only city to have a rail transit system. Cincinnati and Columbus are trying to add this mode. All of the dedicated funding in Ohio goes to highway projects and they have not been able to convince the public to support rail.
VDOT VDOT is trying to get people to focus on the concepts of relieving congestions and improving safety overall rather than on specific projects. They have also found mode versus mode analysis to be very difficult.

V. Transportation Data Collection and Analysis and Transportation Modeling

WisDOT Perspective: Mr. Douglas Dalton presented information on Wisconsin‘s statewide model. The 3rd generation of the statewide forecasting model is currently under development. This model will be integrated with the 14 metropolitan planning organization (MPO) models and 2 urban models that are currently in use across the state. To better integrate the various models with the statewide model, there will be compatible zone boundaries and networks. In addition, the number of external trips at the edges of MPO model boundaries will come from the statewide model. The statewide model will:

  • Identify potential shifts among modes
  • Identify travel shifts between corridors
  • Identify shifts among routes within the corridor
  • Allow for air quality analysis for rural non-attainment areas
  • Allow for performance of bypass analysis

WisDOT is facing several hurdles in the model development process, including:

  • Model development can be expensive. The state has spent $850,000 on this model development process to date. Yet, the state is now looking at cutting back on the basic traffic counting program in order to save money.
  • There is a lack of intercity bus ridership information to help validate the base year intercity bus model component.
  • There is a concern among some MPOs that there will be a duplication of effort between the state and the MPOs in modeling, producing two differing forecasts for the same facility.

ODOT Perspective: Mr. Cash Misel presented information on ODOT‘s data collection and analysis work. Their efforts focus on both the development of a statewide model and the ongoing process of collecting data to support its focus on making investment decisions based on performance measures. ODOT is developing a statewide model that will be completed in 2005. One example of how ODOT hopes to use the model in the future is by working with the Ohio Turnpike on establishing a package of possible incentives to switch trucks to the Turnpike from other roads.

As of today, ODOT has 65 performance measures for each part of the organization and produces an executive management report to show the status of performance. This use of performance measures and data has allowed ODOT to use data to drive the decision making process for where and how to invest its transportation funds. In the early 1990‘s ODOT did not have much credibility with the state legislature. In 1994, ODOT reorganized and developed a series of performance indexes. Due to a refocusing of efforts ODOT was able to reduce their operating costs and leveraged those dollars into infrastructure projects.

The ODOT Funds Management committee works to assign the money to balance between competing needs (safety, system preservation, capacity needs, and operating needs). They also use the data to help with staffing decisions. ODOT uses its geographical information system (GIS) information for its legislative briefing to help better display projects and programs visually. ODOT has learned several lessons on the use of data and decision-making, including:

  • What you measure will make an impact.
  • It is important for everyone within the organization to understand and know what the performance measures are.
  • You need to make sure what you measure is important to you. ODOT is revisiting some performance measures to make sure they are measuring what they want. With the current ODOT business plan, they are now focused on 5 strategic initiatives.
  • Performance measures are a good tool for linking transportation data to transportation results. Identification of feedback metrics and the sharing of accountability for those measures across the organization can lead to effective actions.
  • It is important to recognize that not all data collection is perfect. It is necessary to have quality assurance measures in place.
  • Data analysis works best when all systems can talk to one another.

Group Questions and Answers

Do the models make provisions for future use of congestion pricing or tolls?
ODOT & WisDOT Both the Ohio and Wisconsin models allow for looking at congestion pricing or tolling, if so desired.
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT does not have a statewide model because the vast majority of the congestion is in the Twin Cities and the regional MPO has its own model for this purpose.
How useful has your intelligent transportation systems (ITS) system been to help collect data?
WSDOT For WSDOT, ITS has been invaluable for their evaluations such as looking at congestion measurements and high occupancy vehicle (HOV) systems. One challenge is that they have a large amount of data for the urban areas but lack significant data for the rest of the state.
VDOT Several years ago, VDOT discontinued collecting data in order to save money. VDOT strongly encourages other states to not fall into that trap because it takes a long time to recover from the lack of data. Two years ago, VDOT developed a data warehouse so that any part of the agency can access the data.
NCDOT NCDOT has been having problems with making sure the data is used properly by its various users.
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT uses ITS data for planning and performance but they feel as if they are not utilizing it to its full potential.
TDOT TDOT only uses data for peak periods; the agency is beginning to look at using the data in different ways.
How does the DOT work with local governments in forecasting future land use scenarios?
WisDOT WisDOT works with each MPO on land use scenarios but a problem they have found is that one needs to take a longer time horizon to see the real change. With the Madison region, they are looking out 50 years.
NCDOT In North Carolina legislative changes have required the preparation of land development plans before the transportation plans. North Carolina has seen land use determined by environmental restrictions, such as the protected species act.
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT assigns speed targets along its corridors to give the local communities a performance framework to work within. The locals can then use this framework in determining the proper amount of land use activity along the corridor.
WSDOT In Washington State, transportation is treated as one form of land use. The state has a growth management plan with growth boundaries. They built their transportation projects to support the state management plan. The regional transportation plans have to have a land use strategy.
TDOT In Tennessee, there is a dawning realization that they cannot keep developing as they have been in the past. The relationship between land use and transportation is an evolving one.
To what extent are GIS systems used as a data tool?
ODOT ODOT sees GIS as a multipurpose tool. They use it for public education as well as internal data, for example vehicle crash data.
WisDOT WisDOT uses GIS for displaying information to the public as well as for analysis.
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT uses GIS to map some of their performance measures; for multi-county corridor analysis they have the data linked with aerial photos.
VDOT VDOT uses GIS for its asset management system.
NCDOT NCDOT has found that the GIS mapping component can help them better identify bad data that is not readily apparent otherwise.
TDOT TDOT uses GIS for its public outreach efforts to better inform the public.

VI. Environmental Planning and Stewardship

WSDOT Perspective: Charles Howard, Director of Strategic Planning and Programming, spoke on environmental stewardship at WSDOT. In 2001, WSDOT incorporated an environmental policy statement that guides all aspects of WSDOT activities. It commits the department not only to actions, but also to reporting on its performance. As with other activities, WSDOT uses its data to ensure that it is addressing the correct problems.

WSDOT is currently updating it state transportation plan for 2005 and health and environment is one of ten key issues identified in the plan. The plan specifically examines air quality issues. One action the state is considering is the adoption of the California emission standards, like the seven New England states have already adopted. WSDOT is also focusing on the need to better integrate habitat planning with transportation planning and to look at secondary cumulative impacts of transportation investments.

WSDOT produces the "Grey Notebook, Measures, Markers, and Mileposts," a quarterly performance report. Environmental issues, such as water quality, stormwater runoff, erosion, and snow and ice removal are included in the report. A WSDOT priority is improving the "readability" of its environmental documents. The agency is trying to make documents more concise, more visual, and more engaging. In order to achieve this, WSDOT is working with the necessary resource agencies to explain the proposed changes and coordinate a better solution.

WSDOT maintains an environmental GIS data library that contains over 300 data layers. The database can be shared with other resource agencies. WSDOT is looking at implementing off-site environmental mitigation measures in some cases when the benefits are greater than at the project site. Lessons learned in environmental stewardship include:

  • It is the citizen‘s goals for environmental protection that WSDOT is trying to meet.
  • It is important to be proactive- it allows the agency to help set the agenda for many difficult issues such as sprawl, air quality, etc.
  • Environmental stewardship needs to be integrated into the overall DOT activities.
  • It is important to help educate the environmental resource agencies about transportation projects and coordinate the review process with the agencies.
  • It is important to invest in data and research.

Group Questions and Answers

How do you improve the working relationship with the environmental resource agencies?
VDOT VDOT looks at trying to take creative measures to mitigate negative impacts but it is difficult because sometimes the resource agencies have a hard time responding to the changing solutions. These agencies are used to following regulatory guidelines and need to better understand how DOTs can help with the final product.
WSDOT WSDOT believes that its main job is to avoid negative impacts. But they have gone beyond their traditional steps to try to retrofit past actions.
How do you deal with some of the issues that are outside the scope of traditional transportation planning?
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT‘s long-range plan is policy based, not project based. The plan can look at non-traditional means of travel. Mn/DOT has adopted context sensitive design and has a policy to respect local planning desires and issues.
VDOT VDOT includes criteria such as quality of life into the decision-making process to determine which projects get funded. They have adopted the policy of adding sidewalks to secondary roads and have begun building trails to address this set of criteria.
WisDOT In Wisconsin there is a presumption that a project will accommodate bicycles and include sidewalks if the community wants it. In some cases a community does not want either of these enhancements. Most importantly, WisDOT tries to obtain community involvement early in the process. It saves them time and money in the end. WisDOT is trying to better understand the linkages between planning and environmental issues, such as those that come up in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process earlier in the process.
Do you have a process for removing contractors if they have environmental problems?
VDOT VDOT has a policy of suspending contractors from the bidding list for environmental concerns.
TDOT When issues occur, TDOT has the same rule making but goes beyond just environmental rules; it includes other kinds of contract issues.
What methods have other states used to incorporate an environmental ethic into the culture of the DOT?
NCDOT At NCDOT it is all about leadership. It is important for the staff to see that it is a priority to senior management. The office of environmental quality tracks all environmental process improvements.
TDOT At TDOT, management believes that it is important to help each employee understand how his own work touches the environment.
Text Because Mn/DOT has a decentralized approach, the workers also act as members of the community and have a greater sense of ownership of the environment.
ODOT All design staff at ODOT are required to take a design sensitive course.

VII. Program Development and Measuring Results

Mn/DOT Perspective: Peggy Reichert, Mn/DOT Director of the Statewide Planning Unit, and Mark Larson, Mn/DOT Director of Measurement, presented work on Mn/DOT‘s program development and measurement program. Mn/DOT has a strategic plan that provides a framework for all of its planning. The three major strategic areas of focus are:

  1. Safeguard what exists
  2. Make the network operate better
  3. Make Mn/DOT work better

These three focus areas feed into the statewide transportation plan, which is a policy document and does not include any specific projects. Projects are developed at the district level which each prepare 20-year plans. This work feeds into a 10-year work program and a 3-year state transportation improvement program (STIP).

The Minnesota state plan has 10 policy areas, each with performance measures and targets. Each district prepares a long-range plan that is performance based. The main categories of focus are preservation of the system, interregional mobility, and the duration and extent of congestion on the freeways, and safety. They are evaluating the cost effectiveness of fixing, where justified, the 350 top crash-cost locations in the state, as well as developing preventative strategies to reduce fatalities.

Each district has a target allocation of state and Federal funds and each district refers back to its performance based plan to decide how to allocate funds. The fiscally constrained plan is a subset of the performance-based identified needs. System preservation is the number one priority and they allocate their first dollars towards that priority. The district plans show that 70 percent of their funds are needed to cover preservation needs. This is something that Mn/DOT would like the state legislature to better understand.

Because Mn/DOT‘s approach is policy oriented and decentralized, the department needs strong performance information and a feedback loop. There are three central questions to evaluating investment options and monitoring results:

  1. What is the current system performance?
  2. Is the program moving Mn/DOT toward its policy goals and performance targets?
  3. Is the program "on time" and "on budget"?

To track and document progress, Mn/DOT produces a series of regularly scheduled reports for Mn/DOT management and staff. The central office sends out recommended projects to each of the districts. One area which Mn/DOT will focus on is to ensure that the district TIPs are achieving the statewide priorities. One of Mn/DOT‘s annual reports focuses on reasons for delay during the project design and construction phases. Mn/DOT uses a database to track reasons for delay; the majority of delays are the result of a lack of resources, poor estimating, and project coordination problems.

Mn/DOT monitors its high priority projects and has set up a system oversight among the district and headquarters staff. This oversight includes a monthly videoconference to review the projects, which are judged against seven project milestones. Currently, they have about 20 high priority projects the department is tracking. The letting of a project and the designation of construction limits (including right-of-way) are seen as the two key milestones in project development to manage.

Lessons learned include:

  • There is a need to foster ownership and obtain buy-in from the districts about the use of performance-based programming. Staff from Mn/DOT headquarters met with staff from each district to talk about the policy.
  • There is a realization that budgets for certain categories of projects at the district level may fluctuate over the years as they program projects for certain needs. There is also a concern that mobility projects requested by the state legislature may take funds away from preservation projects.
  • While each district is semi-autonomous, it is important to have a system of uniform measurement performed. Mn/DOT does certain measurements, such as bridge and pavement management, at the headquarters level, while project management is done at the district level.
  • It is important to begin the process of setting targets for performance measures. It is always possible to refine the targets as time goes on and more data is available.
  • The department has always had preservation as their top target.

Group Questions and Answers

How do you track and measure the costs of projects?
WisDOT WisDOT has seen a huge increase of costs for some of their major projects. Because of this, the department is looking at introducing performance measures to better identify the reasons.
NCDOT NCDOT has established a system to monitor and track costs. NCDOT has found that scope changes during the NEPA phase of project development often result in higher project costs than originally programmed. Cost estimating procedures in NCDOT‘s STIP have tried to account for some of this by including adjustments (similar to inflation). NCDOT‘s is considering revising its STIP process to a two-phase STIP. If this is implemented, the cost variations encountered during the NEPA phase will be handled in a developmental TIP, and then the second phase TIP will have a 3-4 year constrained schedule and budget.
ODOT ODOT has a template for tracking costs of its "Top 50" projects. They have had problems in the past with cost estimating and are now considering having cost ranges. The templates track scope, budget, and schedule. For any changes in the scope, budget or schedule, ODOT will assemble a team to decide if the change is reasonable or not. The districts have now found the templates useful to track all of their projects regardless of size.
WSDOT WSDOT has realized that building large projects is risky and has set up a cost estimation validation process that uses an outside expert review group to review their larger projects. The review group expresses the portions of a project as a range based on risks. The group identifies what can change and the range of probability of what will happen. It basically says that building big projects are risky.
VDOT VDOT developed a cost estimation system two years ago. Every project goes through this system and the results are posted on the VDOT website. Each project is re-estimated every quarter. The cost estimate system is based on historical data and includes what part of the state the project is being constructed in and what the project is. As the system incorporates actual data on projects, VDOT is expanding its database on costs for future projects.
What type of training do you give to staff for a better understanding of performance measures?
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT began with a thorough set of training. Performance measures should start with those aspects of an agency that are most compelling. From there an agency can expand.
Text TDOT is beginning the process of incorporating performance measures. There is the recognition that the performance measures need to address the strategic goals of the department and there needs to be clear understanding of who within the department is responsible for each measure.
WSDOT WSDOT believes that it is extremely important to just begin the process of adopting performance measures and to not wait until everything is perfect. The department has continually updated and tweaked the measures as they learn more about the process. Additionally, it is crucial to get the operations people involved in performance measures.
What measures does the customer most care about?
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT performed market research of what the customers want. Snow and ice performance measures were developed using this input. They did not do as much public outreach with the most current plan because of the public outreach already done on defining performance measures. Mn/DOT has asked the public to rank the importance of the transportation services they are receiving and their satisfaction with each. From that, Mn/DOT can identify gaps in services and the relative priority of closing the gaps.
NCDOT NCDOT has not done any customer surveys; their main form of determining customer satisfaction is from input from their board and the legislators.
VDOT VDOT has conducted customer surveys. They are used to help the department on setting priorities.
WSDOT WSDOT is about to conduct a statewide survey. They have done some focus groups before.
ODOT ODOT contracts with a university to conduct customer surveys and they also do polling. ODOT also conducts focus groups.

VIII. Project Development and Management and Rural Consultation for Projects

NCDOT Perspective on Project Development: Robert Hanson, NCDOT, presented information on project development and management at NCDOT. For the past several years, NCDOT has increased its focus on integrating the coordination between project management and the environmental process (NEPA). Now the department uses a co-project manager approach to ensure that environmental concerns are recognized throughout a project‘s life.

Current initiatives include:

  1. Merger process (NEPA consultation)
  2. PMII- project management improvement initiative
  3. Regional approach
  4. Legislative review
  5. Indirect and cumulative impacts

NCDOT has now decided to focus on the effects of indirect and cumulative impacts after having several judicial decisions against the department. To better address the environmental review process NCDOT initiated a 404/NEPA consultation process that has FHWA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and NCDOT as co-chairs of the review process. Other members of the team include state and Federal environmental resource agencies. Over time the relationships among the key players has improved due to the interactions and better understanding of each other‘s goals and objectives. The most contentious point in the process can be during the defining of purpose and need. It can now take up to two years for complicated projects to get approval of purpose and need. But once agreement has been reached during this phase it can make the following process go more smoothly because many of the issues have already been worked through. If the consultation process is not working, there is a mechanism for the issue to be decided by senior managers at the agencies.

NCDOT uses project management software to track environmental issues. The software is also linked to the financial management system. In an effort to better respond to local concerns, NCDOT is adopting an approach to project development lead by regionally focused teams. NCDOT is also incorporating context sensitive design into the planning process. It is working with several of the local universities to achieve this. There is a belief that the department needs to be more aware of fitting infrastructure into the environment. NCDOT is also incorporating performance measures to help track the projects that have been delivered and the amount spent on projects. Some lessons learned include:

  • Establishing environmental commitments are important
  • Concurrence in the merger process can take time but helps bring agreement early in the process, which may save time later.

NCDOT Perspective on the Rural Consultation Process: Transportation planning in North Carolina has traditionally been a top-down process, with no formal way to address local needs. The formation of Rural Planning Organizations (RPOs) and the development of the rural consultation process helped with the identification and programming of rural needs. Every portion of North Carolina is covered by either one of the 17 MPOs or 20 RPOs. NCDOT wants to have non-metropolitan officials involved in the process. For many years NCDOT‘s focus was on thoroughfares but they realized they needed to look at the more rural areas also. There are four primary roles and functions of the RPOs:

  1. Develop long range local and regional multi-modal transportation plans.
  2. Provide a forum for public participation in the transportation planning process.
  3. Develop and prioritize projects the RPO believes should be in the state TIP.
  4. Provide transportation related information to local governments and other interested parties.

From its outreach, NCDOT has identified safety on rural roads, maintenance and preservation, and modernization of facilities as the rural constituencies‘ greatest concerns. NCDOT has identified a total of $44 billion in rural needs over the next 25 years, but there is a lack of funding to meet all of these needs.

NCDOT conducted a survey of rural officials to gauge the effectiveness of its consultation process and ideas for improving future consultations. NCDOT has seen several benefits from this consultation process. This includes an increased level of trust and support for their programs by the locals, and better plans and programs responding to the rural needs.

Because North Carolina has 19 non-attainment areas, numerous rural areas are affected. One area of contention is that because rural areas use the STIP as its fiscally constrained long-range planning document, they are faced with a shorter time frame to reach conformity than the larger MPOs.

Because of limited funding, NCDOT is working to ensure that the most important rural projects receive funding. In the future, RPOs will have STIP review and prioritization sessions with NCDOT, similar to the process that currently occurs with MPOs.

While consultation in project development is a good tool to get people involved, it is time consuming and can be contentious. Lessons learned include:

  • Information sharing leads to big success. NCDOT did not have an effective way to reach out to their rural constituents before and the agency is now sharing more information through coordination, especially between MPOs and RPOs.
  • Funding is a critical issue- there is friction between urban (MPOs) and rural (RPOs) over funding. There is also a dynamic tension about the use of Federal versus state funds, and the prioritization of short-term needs versus long-term projects.
  • The creation and starting of 20 new organizations was time consuming and difficult. It is important for NCDOT to remain flexible to respond to changing needs.

Group Questions and Answers

How do the boundaries of the planning organizations compare with the other forms of government (counties, Councils of Government (COG), etc.)?
NCDOT NCDOT created the boundaries for its DOT division offices a long time ago and they are different from the RPO or MPO boundaries. There are some COGs that function as the RPOs. In one case a COG operates two RPOs.
WSDOT WSDOT has Regional Transportation Planning Organizations (RTPO) that cross boundaries. A number of the Washington COGs are one county in size so the RTPOs are larger than the COGs. State law allows WSDOT to be the staff for the RTPO. That has been successful, but not widely applied.
Mn/DOT Within Minnesota, a Mn/DOT district may have an MPO, counties and a regional Area Transportation Partnership. Mn/DOT allocates funds to rural districts for planning needs.
ODOT The state of Ohio does not have RPOs.
WisDOT Wisconsin has 1,900 local units of government and a strong county form of government. With a few exceptions, the state‘s counties are in a regional planning district. Many of the larger counties are in MPO planning areas, where they do long-range transportation planning.
For public involvement, how do you use the staff and consultants?
All Each of the states prefers to have its own staff lead the public involvement process and may at times use consultants to supplement the efforts.
ODOT ODOT prefers to have their own staff responsible for the lead role in public involvement and use consultants to supplement their efforts. ODOT has a published public involvement booklet.
WisDOT WisDOT does most of its public outreach and training in-house and uses some consultants for the process.
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT has a document on public participation and prefers to use its own personnel with consultants used to supplement the outreach efforts. One thing Mn/DOT has found is that for some of its larger projects that span a long time, the public for the projects has changed, so they need to keep reevaluating if they are reaching the right groups of people.
NCDOT In North Carolina, the lead for outreach is dependent upon the project.
WSDOT WSDOT wants to have a strong DOT presence, but consultants are also used. They have no restrictions on the use of consultants. They have various ongoing training for project level staff.
VDOT While VDOT contracts out 40 percent to 60 percent of its work, all the public involvement is done by the VDOT project manager with in-house staff.
How do you develop your list of contacts for public outreach?
NCDOT NCDOT has tried to contact people early in the process and has used flyers and phone calls to reach beyond just placing an advertisement in the newspaper.
TDOT TDOT has created the division of community relations to improve its outreach efforts and has spent the past year developing a comprehensive outreach plan that is posted on its web site. It includes a checklist throughout the agency so that they know the steps that have to be followed, including the incorporation of NEPA needs.
VDOT VDOT found that previously they had no comprehensive approach across the agency for public outreach. Now they try to identify a specific staff member responsible for each of their projects or programs.
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT has worked hard to ensure that its district personnel are able to communicate with the public and lead local involvement.
What types of public education programs are state DOTs doing?
WSDOT At WSDOT, they want everything they do to be transparent to the public. Most of their initiatives are on the website. They are starting a campaign about responsible driving techniques-an area where they have not traditionally been involved. If they want to achieve some of their goals (such as safety), they recognize that they have to educate the public better.
ODOT ODOT has paid advertisements to help get out the message on safer driving and they fund law enforcement speed checks at high crash locations.
WisDOT At WisDOT, a lot of what they do in planning is to get their message out to the public. They do public service announcements and sponsor educational courses. They used CMAQ funds for a transit campaign in the Milwaukee area.
NCDOT North Carolina has an ozone awareness campaign by the state air agency using NCDOT CMAQ funds. They also have targeted educational efforts for specific regions.
Mn/DOT When designing a public outreach program, Mn/DOT wants to make sure that the effort makes a difference. It is important to determine who is the target market and how effective will the campaign be.

IX. Leading and Managing Change

VDOT Perspective: Jeffrey Southard, Chief of Planning and Environment for VDOT, gave a presentation on "Leading and Managing Change". Prior to 2001, VDOT had not changed its organizational structure in 50 years. It was an organization that needed to change to respond to its evolving business needs. The policy makers identified the following agency priorities, which are described in further detail below:

  1. Reorganization and goal setting
  2. Alternative project delivery
  3. Needs assessment and project prioritization
  4. Multimodal planning
  5. Performance measurement and management system

A. Reorganization: VDOT wanted to implement a structure that would be sustainable regardless of the personnel in charge. They wanted to both centralize some functions and decentralize others. It was felt that VDOT headquarters should set policy and the field should be responsible for delivering projects. A major goal was to increase financial accountability within the department, including field offices. Ultimately, VDOT ended up with an organization that was dramatically changed from before. Other goals included:

  • Concentrated the organization on operations
  • Focused on a true project management program
  • Increased transparency of the department to the public
  • Increased power of the districts to plan and deliver projects
  • Consolidated functions, such as design, that had been spread across several departments in the past

VDOT had nine major construction districts but the districts did not have the authority to deliver projects. VODT performed customer surveys and found that residents wanted the VDOT planners to be out in the field. Before the reorganization, 80 percent of the staff was at headquarters and 20 percent in the field. After the reorganization, the ratio is 50 percent/50 percent between headquarters and the field.

B. Alternative project delivery: In order to deliver better projects and ongoing operations, VDOT implemented several changes:

  • Entering into partnerships with private companies to deliver construction projects. This provides them with alternative ways to build large projects.
  • Creation of special tax districts. A tax district in Northern Virginia has paid for improvements within the designated corridor.
  • Contracting specific asset management services to help shift risk, control costs, and set standards.
  • Entering into agreements with local governments for the delivery of local roadway projects. Three jurisdictions to date have enrolled in this program.
  • Develop a statewide planning process and the development of criteria for rating projects to better identify the highest needs.

C. Needs assessment and project prioritization: VDOT began the process of undertaking an objective statewide analysis of deficiencies and the identification of possible solutions using the Statewide Planning System (SPS). These needs form the basis for the State Highway Plan. The recommended proposals from State Highway Plan are judged by specific criteria and are prioritized for funding.

D. Multimodal planning: VDOT decided to develop a multi-modal approach when examining corridors.

E. Performance measurement: VDOT managers believed that the use of performance measures in identifying needs was critical in developing its multimodal investment network. The first performance measure was to deliver projects on time and on budget. For fiscal year 2001, only 20 percent of projects were completed on time and only 51 percent were completed on budget. In fiscal year 2004, 40 percent of projects are on time and 73 percent are on budget. The institution of performance measures gives management the tools necessary to do their job and allows the public to better understand and follow the process. There is transparency to the public- everything is on the website. VDOT developed its own on-line management system. These include:

  • Dashboard 1 tracks the progress of projects for time and cost.
  • Dashboard 2 is phase two of the program and will include a cost estimating system. The system gathers every part of the bid process and will allow VDOT to build a base of costs for future cost estimating.
  • CEDAR (Comprehensive Environmental Data and Reporting System) tracks environmental compliance, regulatory commitments, and contracts. Everyone involved in the project can look at the status of the permitting process and be able to identify problems.
  • RUMS (Right of Way and Utilities Management System) tracks right-of-way and utilities issues related to projects.

Lessons learned

  • It is important to have a management vision. VDOT had a top down organization before but by creating a new vision they wanted to involve everyone into the success of the department. They wanted change to be part of the VDOT culture.
  • It is important to set specific goals and measure performance.
  • Institutional change- there needs to be constant examination to find better ways to do things.
  • Technology, data, and business systems are critical to the success of the organization. As an agency it is important to track commitments and costs.
  • Transparency is important, both within the organization and to the public. The name of the person responsible for each function is on the website so that anyone from the public can contact them.
  • Accountability is crucial. Performance measures allow people to better understand the department goals and objectives.
  • It is important to remain open to new opportunities and ways to deliver the projects better.

Group Questions and Answers

How does management communicate change within an organization, especially when it involves reductions in personnel?
VDOT VDOT decided to be direct with people and allow the staff to see the changes as they occurred. The leaders of the organization reached out to the staff to keep them informed. The VDOT leadership team felt that if they did not find different ways of doing business, then the legislature might step in and force their changes on the organization. Approximately 5 percent of the work force either retired or moved on during the reorganization.
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT cut staff to save approximately $36 million in costs. They tried to assure that any shifting of personnel aligned with the department‘s strategic priorities.
WisDOT WisDOT is in the process of a reorganization and downsizing because of statewide budget concerns. These changes have yet to be implemented.
ODOT When ODOT restructured in 1994, it felt that if they did not change themselves, then someone else, the legislature for example, would mandate change. ODOT gave each district and division a budget and they were allowed to allocate those funds anyway they wanted. They focused so much effort on the district and it took time for central office people to understand the power of setting policy.
TDOT TDOT is somewhat constrained because the number of personnel is fixed within certain departments.
How are project managers staffed and how do you determine their workloads?
VDOT VDOT has a project management for all of their larger projects. At the district level, a project manager may have between two to four projects at one time depending on the size of the project.
ODOT ODOT tries to have one project manager for the life of a project, but that does not always work.
NCDOT NCDOT operates under a co-project manager role, combining project development (NEPA phase) and design.
Mn/DOT Mn/DOT assigns project management and staff for projects from a pool of staff. A project manager will also be doing other things as well.
WSDOT WSDOT assigns a project engineer several projects at the same time depending upon the complexity of the projects.
TDOT A TDOT project manager is responsible for both the external role of dealing with the public and internally to coordinate the resources as needed for a project.
How does a state handle contracting out of maintenance?
VDOT VDOT began the process of contracting out approximately five years ago. The major reasons were to cap costs and to shift risk to an outside source. VDOT is very aware that the cost to provide maintenance or other services may vary across the state.
Mn/DOT Generally, Mn/DOT does not outsource its maintenance work. One thing to consider when reducing staff is how do the bumping procedures work.
ODOT ODOT does not contract out its maintenance work but they do compare their in-house costs with what those costs would be in the private sector.
WSDOT WSDOT does not contract out their services; all of their staff is unionized.
WisDOT WisDOT contracts with the counties for most of its maintenance needs.
What are the advantages or disadvantages to being centralized or decentralized?
WisDOT Over the years, WisDOT has become more centralized so they are more consistent in their investments.
NCDOT NCDOT is a centralized agency but is now moving to have more expertise at the regional level.
VDOT VDOT tries to have the authority where each level of activity occurs. That means some authority is centralized and some is decentralized. Their contracting and modeling effort, for example, is centralized and most of the environmental work is decentralized.
ODOT In Ohio, their initial decentralization was followed by some centralization to ensure uniformity where needed.

X. Lessons Learned/Recommendations

This section contains a summary of the lessons learned and recommendations discussed in each of the five topic areas of the two-day peer exchange. More complete descriptions of the lessons learned and recommendations are contained within the body of the report.

Multimodal Transportation Systems Planning

  • It is important to clearly identify needs and set goals for the department and its programs.
  • There needs to be a clear link between planning and the identification of projects.
  • Performance measures are a good tool for linking transportation data to transportation results. It is important to have feedback metrics and the sharing of accountability for the measures to be effective.
  • Proper public involvement requires spending time and resources educating the public on existing conditions, financial resources, and legal constraints.
  • A state DOT must work to keep the public informed and involved. Market research can be a very important part of doing business with the public.
  • It is important to be more fiscally constrained in the plans. The public needs to understand the linkage between expectations and funding.
  • An agency should maximize the use of technology for data needs and public outreach
  • Planning needs to be flexible. It is important to be able to respond to a new administration or other directives.

Transportation Data Collection and Analysis and Model Development

  • Performance measures are a good tool for linking transportation data to transportation results. Identification of feedback metrics and the sharing of accountability for those measures across the organization can lead to effective actions.
  • ITS technologies and GIS can be powerful tools in collecting data and presenting information to elected officials and the public. This data can drive the use of performance measures within the agency.
  • An agency should make sure that what they are measuring is important to their agency‘s goals.
  • It is important to recognize that not all data collection is perfect. It is necessary to have quality assurance measures in place.
  • Data analysis works best when all systems can talk to one another.
  • Data collection and model development can be expensive but is necessary part of planning.
  • Cutting back on data collection to save money can hurt an agency in the long run.
  • There needs to be coordination among the state and regional agencies (MPOs and RPOs) to prevent a duplication of efforts.

Environmental Planning and Stewardship

  • Every action a state DOT takes can have an impact on the environment.
  • Environmental stewardship needs to be integrated into the overall DOT activities. Senior management must take the leadership in emphasizing the importance of integrating transportation and environment.
  • It is important to be proactive- it allows the agency to help set the agenda for many difficult issues such as sprawl, air quality, and congestion.
  • A state DOT can provide useful support to resources agencies (data, mitigation, etc.) within the state. Working cooperatively with these agencies can help strengthen the working relationship and result in better environmental stewardship.

Program Development

  • It is important for a DOT to begin using performance measures to guide investments. An agency can begin by picking those measures that are most important to the most vital projects. After implementation, it is possible to later adjust your measures.
  • It is important to begin the process of setting targets for performance measures. It is always possible to refine the targets as time goes on and more data is available.
  • There is a need to foster ownership of an agency‘s performance measures and obtain buy-in off from all portions of the agency.
  • A DOT should have a structure in place to identify and track the cost of a project from concept to construction.
  • Budgets for certain categories of projects may fluctuate over the years as they program projects for certain needs.
  • While districts or regions may be semi-autonomous, it is important to have a system of uniform measurements that are consistent on a statewide basis.
  • Identification of the public‘s priorities is important in determining what performance measures to focus on.

Project Development and Management

  • Establishing environmental commitments are important
  • Concurrence with resource agencies early in the life of a project can take time but helps bring agreement early in the process, which may save time later.
  • Information sharing with other agencies, the public, and internally is crucial.
  • Funding is a critical issue- there will be friction among areas of a state, modes, and project categories about where to invest state and Federal transportation funds.
  • The creation and operation of new regional planning agencies requires a tremendous amount of a DOT‘s resources. A DOT needs to remain flexible to respond to changing needs.

Leading and Managing Change

  • It is important to have a management vision that is well communicated within the agency and to the public.
  • It is important to set specific goals and measure performance.
  • There should be constant examination of the agency to find ways to do things better. It is important to remain open to new opportunities and ways to deliver the projects better.
  • Technology, data, and business systems are critical to the success of the organization. As an agency it is important to track commitments and costs.
  • Transparency is important, both within the organization and to the public.
  • Accountability is crucial. Performance measures allow people to better understand the department goals and objectives.
  • All DOTs are struggling with the same types of problems. The peer exchange showed that there are multiple ways at getting to the right answer. Each state has different approaches but there is real commonality and that can help define good practices.
  • It is important to share information and best practices among agencies. Establishing contacts with other state DOTs can foster a better sharing of information, ideas, and best practices.

XI. For More Information:

Key Contact(s): for host agency(s): Ed Cole, TDOT Chief of Environment and Planning
 
Address: Suite 700
James K. Polk Building
Nashville, TN 37243
 
Phone: (615) 741-2848
 
Fax: (615) 741-2508
 
E-mail: ed.cole@state.tn.us

Key Contact(s): for host agency(s): Julie Lamb, Assistant to the Chief of Environment and Planning
 
Address: Suite 700
James K. Polk Building
Nashville, TN 37243
 
Phone: (615) 741-8899
 
Fax: (615) 741-2508
 
E-mail: Julie.lamb@state.tn.us

XII. List of Participants

State DOT Name Title/Division or Office Mailing Address E-Mail Address & Phone No./ Fax No.
Minnesota Peggy Reichert Director, Statewide Planning Unit
Office of Investment Management
MS 440395 John Ireland Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55155-1801
peggy.reichert@dot.state.mn.us
(651) 284-0501
Fax: (651) 296-3019
Minnesota Mark Larson Director of Measurement,
Office of Investment Management
MS 440395 John Ireland Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55155-1801
markc.larson@dot.state.mn.us
(651) 282-2689
Fax: (651)296-3019
North Carolina Lori Cove Assistant Manager of Systems Planning 1554 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1554
lcove@dot.state.nc.us
919-715-5482 x389
North Carolina Rob Hanson Assistant Manager of Project Development 1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
rhanson@dot.state.nc.us
919-733-7844 x226
Ohio Cash Misel Assistant Director of Planning and Programs Ohio DOT
1980 W. Broad Street
Columbus, OH 43223
cash.misel@dot.state.oh.us
614-466-2448
Virginia Jeffrey Southard Chief of Planning and Environment 1401 E. Broad Street
Richmond, VA 23219
jeffrey.southard@virginiadot.org
804-786-2703
Washington Charlie Howard Director, Strategic Planning and Programming Division Box 47370
Olympia, WA 98504-7370
howardc@wsdot.wa.gov
360-705-7958
Wisconsin Doug Dalton Chief of Urban Planning 4802 Sheboygan Ave.
P.O. Box 933
Madison, WI 53702
douglas.dalton@dot.state.wi.us
608-266-3662

XIII. Attachments/Links

AGENDA

Monday, September 27, 2004

9:00-9:15 Welcome TDOT Commissioner Gerald Nicely
FHWA Division Administrator Bobby Blackmon
Ed Cole, Chief of Environment and Planning
9:15-9:30 Introductions, Exchange Objectives and Format Eric Roecks, MTG
9:30-10:15 Setting the Context Brief overview of each participant state and how their state is organized
TDOT Overview by Ed Cole
  • Organization and brief history
  • Key transportation investment issues / initiatives
  • Status on each peer exchange topic area to be discussed
10:15-10:30 Break
10:30-12:00 Topic 1: Multimodal Transportation Systems Planning State experience and lessons learned
from Ohio – Cash Misel and
Wisconsin – Doug DaltonPanel discussionAudience questions
12:00-1:00 Lunch
1:00-2:30 Topic 2: Transportation Data Collection and Analysis, Transportation Modeling State experience and lessons learned
from Wisconsin – Doug Daltonand
Ohio – Cash Misel

Panel discussion
Audience questions
2:30-2:45 Break
2:45-4:15 Topic 3: Environmental Planning and Stewardship State experience and lessons learned
from Washington – Charlie Howard

Panel discussion
Audience questions
4:15-4:30 Wrap Up Process check
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
9:00-9:15 Welcome TDOT Commissioner Gerald Nicely
FHWA Division Administrator Bobby Blackmon
Ed Cole, Chief of Environment and Planning
9:15-9:30 Introductions, Exchange Objectives and Format Eric Roecks, MTG
9:30-10:15 Setting the Context Brief overview of each participant state and how their state is organized

TDOT Overview by Ed Cole
  • Organization and brief history
  • Key transportation investment issues / initiatives
  • Status on each peer exchange topic area to be discussed
10:15-10:30 Break
10:30-12:00 Topic 1: Multimodal Transportation Systems Planning State experience and lessons learned
from Ohio – Cash Misel and
Wisconsin – Doug Dalton

Panel discussion
Audience questions
12:00-1:00 Lunch
1:00-2:30 Topic 2: Transportation Data Collection and Analysis, Transportation Modeling State experience and lessons learned
from Wisconsin – Doug Daltonand
Ohio – Cash Misel

Panel discussion
Audience questions
2:30-2:45 Break
2:45-4:15 Topic 3: Environmental Planning and Stewardship State experience and lessons learned
from Washington – Charlie Howard

Panel discussion
Audience questions
4:15-4:30 Wrap Up Process check
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
8:15-9:45 Topic 4: Program Development and Measuring Results State experience and lessons learned
from Minnesota – Peggy Reichert and Mark Larson

Panel discussion
Audience questions
9:45-10:00 Break
10:00-12:00 Topic 5: Project Development and Management and Rural Consultation for Projects State experience and lessons learned
from North Carolina – Rob Hanson and Lori Cove

Panel discussion
Audience questions
12:00-12:45 Lunch
12:45-2:00 Topic 6: Leading and Managing Change Presentation by Virginia – Jeffrey Southard

Panel discussion
Audience questions
2:00-2:45 Open Question Session
2:45-3:00 Break
3:00-4:00 Open Question Session
4:00-4:30 Closing Remarks/Adjourn Audience take-aways
Panel take-aways
Process check

back to top


FHWA Home   |  FTA Home   |  Privacy Statement   |  Website Feedback   |  Site Map
  United States Department of Transportation