Slide 1

Introduction
Oscar E. Jarquin
Chief, Office of Information Technology
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
Los Angeles, California, USA






Civil Engineer
Land Surveyor
GIS Professional
Project Manager
Program Manager


Slide 2

Governance and Structure
National Academy of Sciences
 Transportation Research Board (TRB)
 American Association of State Highway
Transportation Officials
 Technology Implementation Group (TIG)



Slide 3

AASHTO Technology Implementation
Group (TIG)
FY 2007 – 2012 AASHTO TIG Focus
Technologies

Multi Level Linear Reference
System (MLLRS)


Slide 4

Lead States Team


Slide 5

Iowa’s LRS Experience


Slide 6

Agenda


What Iowa’s LRS includes



What do the DOT’s business units gain



What allowed Iowa to succed


Slide 7

Iowa’s LRS
Implementation of NCHRP 20-27
model. Which separates business
data from the location components
of linear features (roads, navigable
rivers, railroads, pipelines, etc.).


Slide 8

NCHRP 20-27 Model
Crash

Coordinate
Route

PMIS

Reference
Post

Base
Record

Coordinate
Route

Inventory

Milepoint

Project
Data

Stationing

LRS Components

Centerline
Representation 1

Centerline
Representation 2

Program

Literal
Description

Address
Range

Centerline
Representation 3


Slide 9

LRS Components
(all public roads 114,000 miles)


Cartography







Datum (Anchor Sections & Points)
Network (Transport Links & Nodes)
Routes






Traveled Way Spatial
Roadway Spatial

Parsed Names
Paths

LRM Components (ie Reference Post)


Slide 10

Transformations between
supported business location
referencing methods (LRM)
A common linear description of the network
that can relate all the methods.
LRM

LRM

Transform

Transform
Datum

LRM

LRM

Transform

LRM

LRM


Slide 11

How does LRS benefit the DOT
Improved Accuracy
Entire road system (all public roads) are
created based upon same standard
 A separate abstraction layer call Roadway
exist that provides a single representation
of divided roadways
 The system is represented over time (from
1/1/2001)



Slide 12

How does LRS benefit the DOT
Central location of data


Route names for all roadway systems



One navigable network



Centerline for all roads



History of road network


Slide 13

How does LRS benefit the DOT
Clearly defined rules and practices


LRM usage and results



Metadata for all LRS components


Slide 14

LRS how did Iowa succeed
Reasons for creation of LRS
 Division Level Sponsors
 Business data kept separate from location



Slide 15

California’s LRS
Experience


Slide 16

California Business Driver…
Corridor Management
Local Jurisdiction 1 – T raffic S ignal S ystem

P
R egional R ail A gency – T rain M anagem ent S ystem

S tate D O T – F ree w a y M anagem ent S ystem

B us C om pany – A V L system

Local Jurisdiction 2 – T raffic S ignal S ystem


Slide 17

Multiple LRM’s
County
ORA

County
ORA

Route

Postmile

405

R 23.000

Route

KiloPost

405

R 33.877


Slide 18

Service Oriented Architecture
(SOA)
Applications
Other
GIS

CTIS

St. Hwy
Inv.

Parcels

PEAR

HPMS

TIMI
Others

Envir.

Asset Mgt

Security

Linear Referencing
Mapping

Doc
Mgt

Other Functions

SHARED FUNCTIONS

Search Functions
CAD
Others

Locals
Google
Earth
Public

SOA
(Service Oriented Architecture)

State
Agencies

Internet

Data Files

SOA output via GIS =
Planning, PID, Design,
Proj. Mgt., Constr.,
Operations, etc. for
system performance,
geometrics, etc.

Java/XML Message Bus

PMS
TASAS

TMCs
(loops, CMS, etc.)

Main Frame

HPMS

Hwy.
Inven.

Web
Pages

Traffic
Volume

Programming

Other

TSM
OE-PSE

CT PASS

External Sources


Slide 19

Identifying Common SOA
Components
Login
Login

Append data, maps
to request

Initiate PEAR
Request

Manage Users
Manage Users

Submit, Review and
Approve

Define activities and
resources

Validate location
Validate location

Create audit log

Track activities

Display attribute
information
window

Help Functions
Help Functions

Upload site data

Develop cost
estimates

Export RSS feed

Publish document

Spatially review
information

ID need for risk
assessment

Import CTIPS
projects

Office of GIS
Service Oriented
Architecture
Diagram
(Confederated
Level)
10/30/06

Edit planned project

CTIS Specific Functions

Read traffic
information
sources

Display associated
media file

Sharable Functions

TIMI Specific Functions

Map Specialty
Scoping Areas

Compile document

PEAR Specific Functions

Search Adjoining
Projects

Map Navigation
Map
Navigation
Functions
Functions

Mao List Functions
Map List Functions

Map Cartographic
Functions
Map
Cartographic
Functions

Map Components
Map Components
(scale
bar, north
(scale
bar,
north
arrow,
etc)
arrow, etc)

Common Mapping Functions

Map Print Functions
Map Print Functions

Legend Functions
Legend Functions

Common table
Common
functions table
functions

Metadata search
Metadata search

Print Report
Print Report

Edit metadata
Edit metadata

Common Metadata Functions

Spatial Search and
Select

Search for project

Search list

Attribute Search
Attribute Search

Clear Project Set

Project Set
Summary Report
(average cost, total
cost, etc)

Common Search Functions

Project Set Export

Project Set Overlap
Report


Slide 20

Geospatial Data Management
Google
Earth

GIS Files

Cadastral
CADD
Post Mile Info

Cloud
Web

Geospatial Data
GIS

MicroStation

Geodatabase / Web Services


Slide 21

Postmile Lookup Tool


Slide 22

ArcGIS Tool Bar


Slide 23

AASHTO’s Technology Implementation Group – or TIG – scans the
horizon for outstanding advancements in transportation technology and
invests time and money to accelerate their adoption by agencies
nationwide.
Each year, TIG selects a highly valuable, but largely unrecognized
procedure, process, software, device, or other innovation that has been
adopted by at least one agency, is market ready and is available for
use by other interested agencies.
Guided by the vision of "a culture where rapid advancement and
implementation of high payoff, innovative technologies is the
expectation of the transportation community," TIG’s objective is to
share information with AASHTO member agencies, local agencies, and
their industry partners to improve the Nation’s transportation system.


Slide 24

TIG LRS Team Members


Iowa Lead State








o

Peggi Knight ( Team Leader)
Eric Abrams (GIS Coordinator)
Karen Carroll (LRS Manager)
Mike Clement (QA LRS)
Steve Kadolph (Technical Exp.)
Ryan Wyllie (QA LRS)

Other States



David Blackstone, Ohio
Jonathan DuChateau ,
Wisconsin





o

John Farley, North Carolina
Oscar Jarquin, California
Thomas Martin, Minnesota

Non State





Tim Bisch, Bentley
Gary Waters, ESRI
Mark Sarmiento, FHWA
Reg Saouleyrette, Iowa Sate
University


Slide 25

Many technical reports have been completed about developing and
integrating a Linear Referencing System (LRS) within a state
transportation agency. The magnitude of costs related to the
development of a LRS and the commitment required by an agency can
be overwhelming, especially if there are no data to support the costs or
expected benefits. The Value Analysis (VA) Report will help the states
by providing credible quantitative and qualitative benefits obtained from
a s state’s investment as well as sample costs and requirements for
implementing and maintaining a Multi-Level Linear Referencing System
(MLLRS). The use of the word “baseline system” throughout the report
represents the minimum requirement for a fully functioning MLLRS.
The use of the term “optional functional elements” refers to
supplemental elements that will improve the baseline MLLRS.


Slide 26


Slide 27


Slide 28

Marketing Plan for
Linear Referencing System









Assess LRS Needs and Contacts in Each State
Develop PowerPoint Presentation, Brochure and
Posters
Develop Value Analysis Document (Contractor)
Develop and Host Webinar(s)
Give Presentation and/or Workshop at TRB, GIS-T
and AASHTO IS Conferences
Visit States Offering Invitation
Assess LRS Level of Knowledge Transfer and
Implementation Success
Final Report