TR NEWS - Transportation Research Boardonlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trnews/trnews229.pdfNew Guide...

3 Graduated Driver Licensing:Safety Program Proves Effective in Reducing CrashesDaniel R. Mayhew and Herb M. SimpsonGraduated driver licensing programs, which enable new drivers to gain experienceprogressively under conditions that minimize exposure to risk, have demonstratedsuccess in reducing collision rates. The authors, key researchers in the subjectarea, trace the development of the concept, its implementation and acceptance inthe United States and abroad, and the studies corroborating the program’s safetybenefits.

8 Transportation Asset Management:New Guide Advances State of the PracticeLance A. Neumann, Michael J. Markow, and Louis H. LambertAsset management is a strategic approach to allocating and using availableresources cost-effectively. A National Cooperative Highway Research Programproject has assembled a comprehensive guide to asset management, definingprinciples and detailing the applications to transportation agency investments ininfrastructure preservation, operations, and capacity expansion.

16 TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM REPORTCosts of Sprawl—2000:What Are the Impacts? What Are the Alternatives?Robert W. Burchell and Sahan MukherjiSprawl has been the predominant form of growth in the United States for the past50 years. A milestone study for the Transit Cooperative Research Programdeveloped measures to assess the costs and benefits of low-density sprawlcompared with more compact, centrally oriented development in terms of landuse, infrastructure, housing, and public services. The findings favor a managedgrowth approach.

22 POINT OF VIEWLivable Cities:Will Transportation ProfessionalsAnswer the Challenge?Vukan R.VuchicDo the transportation profession, its policy leaders, and its publications harbor abias against transit—particularly against rail—and against balancedintermodalism, all of which are vital to livable cities? A distinguished researchermakes his diagnosis and offers a prescriptive remedy to ensure the profession’spositive contribution to livable cities in the 21st century.

27 NEW TRB SPECIAL REPORTThe Workforce Challenge: Recruiting, Training, and Retaining Qualified Workers for Transportation and Transit AgenciesWalter DiewaldSurface transportation agencies face unprecedented challenges in recruiting andretaining the workforce necessary to provide transportation infrastructure andservices effectively. A TRB study committee points to the need for federalleadership, as well as for partnerships among the range of stakeholders, andrecommends commitment to training and openness to innovations in humanresources management.

TR NEWSNUMBER 229 NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2003

Cover: Teenagers gain valuableexperience behind the wheel in low-risk situations undersupervision in graduated driverlicensing programs. (Photo courtesyof Traffic Injury ResearchFoundation.)

8

22

3

features articles on innovative and timely researchand development activities in all modes of trans-portation. Brief news items of interest to thetransportation community are also included,alongwith profiles of transportation professionals,meeting announcements,summaries of new pub-lications, and news of Transportation ResearchBoard activities.

TR News is produced by theTransportation Research Board Publications OfficeNancy A. Ackerman, DirectorJavy Awan, Assistant Director and

Managing EditorJuanita Green, Production Manager

TR News Editorial BoardNeil F. Hawks, ChairmanNancy A. AckermanJoseph A. BreenWalter J. DiewaldFrederick D. HejlTimothy HessDavid JonesStephan A. ParkerBarbara L. PostA. Robert Raab

Transportation Research BoardRobert E. Skinner, Jr., Executive DirectorSuzanne B. Schneider, Associate Executive

DirectorMark R. Norman, Director,

Technical ActivitiesStephen R. Godwin, Director,

Studies and Information ServicesMichael P. LaPlante, Director,

Administration and Finance Robert J. Reilly, Director,

Cooperative Research ProgramsNeil F. Hawks, Director, Special Programs

TR News (ISSN 0738-6826) is issued bimonthly by the Transportation Research Board, NationalResearch Council, 500 Fifth Street,NW,Washington,DC 20001. Internet address: www.TRB.org.

Editorial Correspondence: By mail to thePublications Office, Transportation Research Board,500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001, bytelephone 202-334-2972, by fax 202-334-3495, orby e-mail [email protected].

Subscriptions: North America: 1 year $55.00;single issue $9.50. Overseas: 1 year $75.00; singleissue $13.50. Inquiries or communications concern-ing new subscriptions, subscription problems, orsingle-copy sales should be addressed to theBusiness Office at the address below, or telephone202-334-3216, fax 202-334-2519. Periodicalspostage paid at Washington, D.C.

Postmaster:Send changes of address to TR News,Transportation Research Board, 500 Fifth Street,NW, Washington, DC 20001.

Notice:The opinions expressed in articles appearingin TR News are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the TransportationResearch Board. The Transportation Research Boardand TR News do not endorse products of manufac-turers. Trade and manufacturers’ names appear in anarticle only because they are considered essential toits object.

Printed in the United States of America.

Copyright © 2003 Transportation Research Board.All rights reserved.

TR NEWS31 Calendar

32 News BriefsRoads and population growth, cleaning tunnels safely, commuting in theBay Area, Los Angeles launches the Gold Line, household travel trends,railroad museum rebuilds, and more.

36 TRB HighlightsCRP News, 36

39 Bookshelf

The January–February 2004 TR Newspresents feature articles on the use ofmarket research by state departments oftransportation, transit agencies, and othertransportation organizations; anti-icingstrategies that reduce the amount of saltneeded to keep roadways safe; and reportsfrom the field by TRB program officers onthe latest developments affectingtransportation agencies and research.

C O M I N G N E X T I S S U E

A L S O I N T H I S I S S U E

Road Weather Information Systems andother technologies help workers apply theminimal amount of salt necessary to keeproads safe and passable after snowfalls.

Backtracking into Rail Research History

In delayed response to the letter to the editor in the January–February 2003 TRNews, “Getting on Track with High-Speed Dynamic Forces” (page 2), I would liketo point out that the first dynamic instrumented rail wheels were developed in Swe-den in the late 1950s. When I was appointed Director of Research and Develop-ment for the Swedish State Railway (SJ) in 1955, our primary charge was to preventderailments. A special task force of SJ and Swedish rail industry researchers—work-ing closely with the American Association of Railroads and the Denver and RioGrande Western Railroad—demonstrated a dynamic instrumented wheel set in1958. The wheel set allowed continuous measuring, recording, and processing oflateral and vertical forces between the rolling wheels and the rails. The findingswere presented at the Technical University of Graz, Austria, and published in 1959in Glasers Annalen in Germany and in Österreichische Ingenieur-Zeitschrift. In 1960we presented a paper on the topic at the American Society of Mechanical Engi-neers–Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Joint Rail Conference inPittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

—Per-Erik Olson, President, Train-Rail ConsultingStockholm, Sweden

PHO

TO:I

OW

AD

OT

L E T T E R S

TR NEWS 229 NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2003

3

GraduatedDriverLicensing

GraduatedDriverLicensing

Graduated driver licensing has gained pop-ularity in North America to address theheightened risk of crashes involving novicedrivers. Starting in the 1970s with efforts to

introduce elements of the system in Maryland and Cal-ifornia, programs recently have gained widespreadimplementation in Canada and the United States.Graduated driver licensing has won public acceptanceby effectively reducing the number of crashes.

Apprenticeship ApproachYoung drivers have a higher risk of collision than older,more experienced drivers (1,2). Age- and experience-related factors contribute to this overrepresentationbecause risk declines with increased age, as young driv-ers mature out of risk-taking lifestyles and improve indriving skills (3). Recent research also suggests thatincreased driving experience is somewhat more impor-tant than increased age in reducing collisions amongyoung novices (4).

Recognition of the influence of experience-relatedand age-related factors on the crash risk of beginningdrivers has prompted many states and Canadianprovinces and territories to implement graduated driv-er licensing. A fundamental purpose of graduatedlicensing is to encourage new drivers to gain drivingexperience under conditions that minimize exposureto risk.

Warren and Simpson presented this premise morethan 25 years ago in a paper, “The Young Driver Para-dox,” arguing that experience was critical to the devel-opment of driving skills (5). Increased experiencedecreases the risk of collision (6). Beginners thereforeneed to drive as much as possible; paradoxically, thisexposes them to the risk of a collision. What is neededis a means to gain experience with minimized risk.This is a basic tenet of graduated licensing.

Somewhat like an apprenticeship, graduated licens-ing eases the novice into the full range of traffic con-ditions. The program provides a protected way for new

drivers to gain experience. Exposure to more demand-ing situations is phased in as the driver gains experi-ence and competence.

Graduated licensing also addresses age-related orlifestyle factors by minimizing the opportunities foryoung drivers to engage in risky behavior or toencounter risky situations. For example, provisionsfor zero blood alcohol content are designed to reducethe incidence of drinking and driving; limits on thenumber and ages of passengers are intended to reduceopportunities for peer pressure and distraction.

Program FeaturesAlthough the features of the systems implemented inNorth America vary, each typically has a learner’s phasethat entails a period of supervised driving, followed byan intermediate phase that imposes certain restrictionson driving.

The learner’s period is critical and cannot bebypassed. Most graduated licensing systems stipulatethat the learner’s license must be held for a minimumperiod of time—usually several months. During thatperiod, the novice can drive only when supervised bya licensed adult.

In the intermediate stage, graduated licensing

Mayhew, who chairsTRB’s OperatorEducation andRegulation Committee, isSenior Vice President,and Simpson is Presidentand Chief ExecutiveOfficer, Traffic InjuryResearch Foundation,Ottawa, Ontario,Canada.

Safety ProgramProves Effective inReducing CrashesD A N I E L R . M A Y H E W A N D

H E R B M . S I M P S O N

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

4

imposes restrictions on when, where, with whom, andhow the novice can drive. Restrictions apply, for exam-ple, to operating a vehicle on high-speed highways andto driving unsupervised during nighttime hours, aswell as to driving with teenage passengers and to drink-ing alcohol and driving.

The restrictions are removed gradually and sys-tematically—except, of course, for the prohibition ondrinking and driving—so that the novice enters thedriving task progressively, step-by-step, earning theprivilege of full, unrestricted driving.

Graduated licensing programs usually alsoinclude a penalty structure, with sanctions imposedat lower thresholds than those that apply to fullylicensed drivers. One of the more popular sanctionsis to extend the graduated licensing period or todemote the driver within the system, withholdingfull driving privileges for a longer period. The threator application of this punishment is intended to deterunsafe driving or other violations of the terms andconditions of the graduated license.

To provide direction on the best practices in grad-uated driver licensing for the varied programs intro-duced in the past decade, the Insurance Institute forHighway Safety, together with the Traffic InjuryResearch Foundation, has issued a report, “GraduatedLicensing: A Blueprint for North America” (7). Thedocument presents recommendations for the structureand contents of graduated driver licensing programs.

Program EvolutionGraduated licensing was first described in the early1970s in the United States, and the National HighwayTraffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) developed amodel system in 1977. None of the states, however,adopted the NHTSA model, although Maryland andCalifornia introduced elements from it (8,9).

During the next two decades, into the late 1990s, noprogress was made on the legislative front in the UnitedStates, although many agencies promoted the conceptvigorously. New Zealand introduced the first graduatedlicensing system in August 1987.

New Zealand BreakthroughNew Zealand’s three-stage program applied to all driv-ers from 15 to 25 years old, inclusively, and to motor-cycle operators of all ages. The program was modifiedin 1999 to apply to drivers of all ages, with severalrequirements tailored to age. For example, therestricted period for 15- to 24-year olds lasts for 18months but extends only 6 months for novice driversover the age of 24 (10).

New Zealand’s graduated licensing program wasmuch heralded in North America and was cited exten-sively as a model legislative initiative. At the same time,

a keen interest in graduated licensing emerged in Aus-tralia at the federal level.

Australian ParallelsIn a development similar to what occurred in theUnited States two decades earlier, the Australian Fed-eral Office of Road Safety designed a model programfor discussion, based on the pioneering work of Waller(11) and others (12, 13). Again, like the NHTSA plan,the comprehensive four-stage Australian model wasnot immediately implemented.

Although several Australian states adopted someof the model components, none—including the mostcomprehensive system, in the state of Victoria—con-formed adequately to the concept of graduated licens-ing (14). Again, parallel to the slow evolution ofgraduated licensing in North America, Australian ini-tiatives recently have demonstrated progress. Forexample, New South Wales introduced a three-stagegraduated licensing system in July 2000.

North American WatershedIn the early 1990s, diverse agencies and individualsactively and aggressively promoted graduated licensingin North America. Some worked from within the gov-ernment, laying an empirical foundation for the con-cept and making the case to politicians, while othersworked outside the government, creating a receptivepublic climate. As a result, graduated licensing finallyemerged, first in Canada and then in the United States.

In April 1994, the Ministry of Transportation for theprovince of Ontario introduced the first graduatedlicensing system in Canada. In October of the sameyear, the province of Nova Scotia introduced its pro-gram. The two programs constituted a watershed in thehistory of graduated licensing in North America.

During the next 5 years, four more provinces intro-duced programs, along with 23 states, starting withFlorida on July 1, 1996. To date, 47 states and 10 Cana-dian provinces and territories have enacted one ormore elements of graduated licensing.

Public SupportThe level of support for graduated driver licensing iskey to the effectiveness of the program. Parents who donot support the program will not enforce the restric-tions or will not ensure that their sons and daughtersare gaining the necessary driving practice. Teenagerswho do not support the program may forgo therequired practice time under supervision or simplymay proceed to drive unsupervised.

Research in Canada and the United States has shownthat the level of support for graduated licensing pro-grams is high. For example, a survey found that 83 per-cent of 520 parents with teenagers (16 to 18 years old)

Michigan has designed a verticaldriver’s license for minors as partof the graduated driver licensingprogram and to stop underagealcohol and tobacco purchases.


5

in the Ontario graduated licensing program approvedof the program (15). Among parents of teenagers in thelearner stage, 89 percent agreed with the requirementfor supervision. Almost 8 out of 10 parents (78 percent)of both learner and intermediate-stage teenage driverssaid that the program was preparing their teenagersadequately for full driving privileges.

A similar level of support was found in Nova Sco-tia. A survey of 450 teenagers 16 to 18 years old and500 parents of 16- to 18-year-olds found that parentsand many teenagers endorsed the graduated licens-ing program (16). Among parents of teenagers in thelearner stage, 87 percent voiced approval, as did 61percent of teenagers in the learner stage. Sixty-sixpercent of learners agreed with the requirement forsupervision, as did 97 percent of parents of teenagersin the learner stage.

U.S. studies also have shown that parents stronglysupport graduated licensing (17,18). For example, insurveys of juniors and seniors from eight Floridahigh schools before (1996) and after (1998) imple-mentation of graduated driver licensing, the per-centage of teenagers who strongly or somewhatsupported the program increased from before to afterthe program (19).

California adopted a relatively strong graduatedlicensing program in 1998, and a 2002 survey ofteenagers and their parents found that 79 percent ofparents with children subject to the requirementsstrongly favored the system (20). Among the teenagersin the system, 84 percent favored the 6-month holdingperiod, and 89 percent favored the requirement thatparents certify at least 50 hours of supervised driving.

Safety EvaluationsResearch has demonstrated that graduated licensing isan effective safety measure (21)—all program evalua-tions published to date have reported safety benefits.Studies of the safety effectiveness of graduated driverlicensing in New Zealand, Canada, and the UnitedStates have shown overall reductions in crashes of 4 to60 percent. With the many variations among the pro-grams, this variation in the magnitude of the reportedcrash reductions is not surprising.

The variability, however, may be attributable in partto different evaluation designs and statistical analyses,ranging from simple before-and-after comparisons,without the control groups necessary to account forother factors or events that may influence collisions, tothe use of powerful, interrupted time-series analysis,

TABLE 1 Evaluations of Graduated Driver Licensing Programs in Canada

Province GDL Target Group(s) ResultsDate Examined Measures % Reduction

Nova Scotia 1994 Drivers age 16 a Number of crashes -37%Number of injury crashes -31%Per capita crash rate -24%Per capita casualty crash rate -34%

All novice drivers a Per driver crash rate -19%Age 16 Per driver crash rate -22%

Age 17-24 Per driver crash rate -21%Age 25+ Per driver crash rate -43%

Ontario 1994 All novice drivers b Per driver crash rate -31%Age 16-19 Per driver crash rate -31%Age 20-24 Per driver crash rate -42%Age 25-34 Per driver crash rate -38%Age 35-44 Per driver crash rate -37%Age 45-54 Per driver crash rate -24%Age 55+ Per driver crash rate -19%

All novice drivers b Per driver casualty crash rate -24%Quebec 1997 All novice drivers c Number of fatalities -5%

Number of injuries -14%Per driver fatality rate -7%Per driver injury rate -17%

a Mayhew, D. R., H. M. Simpson, M. Groseillers, and A. F. Williams. Impact of the Graduated Driver Licensing Program in NovaScotia. Journal of Crash Prevention and Injury Control, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 179-192 (2001).b Boase, P. and L. Tasca. Graduated Licensing System Evaluation: Interim Report. Safety Policy Branch, Ontario Ministry ofTransportation, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1998.c Bouchard, J., C. Dussault, R. Simard, M. Gendreau, and A. M. Lemire. The Quebec Graduated Licensing System for NoviceDrivers: Two-Year Evaluation of the 1997 Reform. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs, and TrafficSafety, T-2000, Stockholm, Sweden, 2000.

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

6

which seeks to understand the underlying forces andstructure that produced the observed changes in thedata. In addition, the basic groups under study havediffered—for example, the New Zealand programapplies to drivers under the age of 25; the Canadianprograms apply to all novice drivers, not just youngones; and the U.S. programs primarily apply to driversunder the age of 18.

Initial evaluations of the New Zealand graduatedlicensing program implemented in 1987 reported sub-stantial reductions of approximately 25 percent in casu-alty collisions. Longer-term studies, however, have foundsustained and significant reductions of 7 percent (22).

In Canada, studies of the effectiveness of the grad-uated driver licensing programs implemented inOntario and Nova Scotia in 1994 and in Quebec in1997 have reported reductions in collisions amongnovice drivers in all age groups. Table 1 displays asummary of the findings.

In the United States, evaluations have foundsafety benefits from the programs implemented inFlorida in 1996; in North Carolina, Michigan, andOhio in 1997; and in California in 1998. Table 2shows the key findings.

Each of these programs includes an intermediate-stage restriction on driving at night—the restrictions

TABLE 2 Evaluations of Graduated Driver Licensing Programs in the United States

Province GDL Target Group(s) ResultsDate Examined Measures % Reduction

California 1998 Drivers age 16 d Number of casualty at-fault crashes -23%Number of noninjury at-fault crashes -17%Number of teen pass. deaths or injuries -40%

Connecticut 1997 Drivers age 16 e Per capita casualty crash rate -22%Florida 1996 Drivers age 15-17 f Per capita casualty crash rate -9%

Drivers age 15 Per capita casualty crash rate -19%Drivers age 16 Per capita casualty crash rate -11%Drivers age 17 Per capita casualty crash rate -7%

Kentucky 1996 Drivers age 16 g Number of crashes -33%Number of fatal crashes -34%Number of injury crashes -28%Per driver crash rate -32%

Michigan 1997 Drivers age 16 h Per capita crash rate -25%Per capita injury crash rate -24%

North Carolina 1997 Drivers age 16 i Per capita crash rate -23%Per capita fatal crash rate -57%Per capita injury crash rate -28%Per capita noninjury crash rate -23%Per driver crash rate -19%

Ohio 1999 Drivers age 16-17 j Per capita crash rate -60%Per capita fatal crash rate -69%Per capita injury crash rate -59%Per capita noninjury crash rate -60%Per driver crash rate -23%Per driver fatal crash rate -24%Per driver injury crash rate -21%Per driver noninjury crash rate -23%

d California Passenger Deaths and Injuries Drop as Graduated Driver License Law Marks Second Anniversary. News release,Automobile Club of Southern California, 2000e Ulmer, R. G., S. A. Ferguson, A. F. Williams, and D. F. Preusser. Teenage Crash Reduction Associated with Delayed Licensure inConnecticut. Journal of Safety Research, Vol.32, pp. 31-41 (2001).f Ulmer, R. G., D. F. Preusser, A. F. Williams, S. A. Ferguson, and C. M. Farmer. Effect of Florida’s Graduated Licensing Program onthe Crash Rate of Teenage Drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 527-532 (2000).g Agent, K. R., J. G. Pigman, L. C. Steenbergen, S. H. Pollak, P. S. Kidd, and C. McCoy. Evaluation of the Kentucky Graduated DriverLicensing System. Chronicle of the American Driver and Traffic Safety Education Association, Vol. 50, No. 1, Winter 2002, pp. 6-7(2002).h Shope, J. T., L. J. Molnar, M. R. Elliott, and P. F. Waller. Graduated Driver Licensing in Michigan: Early Impact on Motor VehicleCrashes Among 16-Year-Old Drivers. Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 286, No. 13, pp. 1599-1598 (2001).i Foss, R., J. R. Feaganes, and E. A. Rodgman. Initial Effects of Graduated Driver Licensing on 16-Year-Old Driver Crashes inNorth Carolina. Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 286, No. 13, pp. 1588-1592 (2001).j An Evaluation of Ohio’s Graduated Driver License Law. Ohio Department of Public Safety, Columbus, 2001.


7

range from 9:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. in North Carolina,to 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. in Ohio. California’s program alsoincludes a restriction on teenage passengers—duringthe first 6 months of the intermediate stage, a driverwith a graduated license cannot transport passengersyounger than 20 years of age, unless supervised by adriver at least 25 years old.

The partial graduated licensing programs intro-duced in Kentucky in 1996 and Connecticut in1997 also have proved effective in reducing thecrash involvement of teenage drivers. Neither pro-gram has an intermediate stage, but both have anextended learner stage with a mandatory 6-monthholding period.

Improving ProgramsThe elevated crash risk for beginning drivers—partic-ularly young drivers—has led to the implementationof some version of graduated driver licensing inCanada and the United States. Most parents, as well asmany teenagers, support the programs. In addition,scientific evidence continues to confirm the safety ben-efits of graduated driver licensing. These positive find-ings are not surprising, because graduated licensingaddresses the two critical factors that give rise to theoverrepresentation of young drivers in crashes: expe-rience and age or lifestyle.

The crash reductions reported in evaluations, how-ever, are not uniform. The variation in results couldreflect differences in the methodologies, in the studysites, or in the program requirements. Research isneeded to improve understanding of the mechanismsthat reduce crashes; a recent symposium has generatedrecommendations for research (23).

Jurisdictions should make adjustments to their pro-grams as more is learned about what contributes mostto reducing crashes among beginning drivers.Nonetheless, despite the protective features of gradu-ated driver licensing, some novice drivers still will beinvolved in crashes.

References1. Mayhew, D. R. and H. M. Simpson. New to the Road: Young

Drivers and Novice Drivers: Similar Problems and Solutions?Traffic Injury Research Foundation, Ottawa, Ontario,Canada, 1990.

2. Williams, A. F. Teenage Drivers: Patterns of Risk. Journalof Safety Research, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 5–16 (2003).

3. Simpson, H. M. (ed.). New to the Road: Reducing the Risksfor Young Motorists. University of California, Los Angeles,1996.

4. Mayhew, D. R., H. M. Simpson, and A. Pak. Age and Expe-rience in Young Driver Crashes. Insurance Institute forHighway Safety, Arlington, Virginia (in review).

5. Warren, R. A., and H. M. Simpson. The Young Driver Para-dox. Traffic Injury Research Foundation, Ottawa, Ontario,Canada, 1976.

6. Mayhew, D. R., and H. M. Simpson. The Role of DrivingExperience: Implications for the Training and Licensing ofNew Drivers. Insurance Bureau of Canada, Toronto,Ontario, 1995.

7. Graduated Licensing: A Blueprint for North America. Insur-ance Institute for Highway Safety, Arlington, Virginia,2003.

8. McKnight, A. J., A. S. Tippetts, and P. R. Marques. Provi-sional Driver License System for Follow-Up Evaluation ofMaryland Youth License Control Demonstration Project.National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Wash-ington, D.C., 1990.

9. Hagge, R. A., and W. C. Marsh. An Evaluation of the Traf-fic Safety Impact of Provisional Licensing. Research ReportNo. CAL-DMV-RSS-88-116, Department of Motor Vehi-cles, Sacramento, California, 1988.

10. Begg, D. J., and S. Stephanson. Graduated Driver Licens-ing: The New Zealand Experience. Journal of SafetyResearch, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 99–100 (2003).

11. Waller, P. F. The Changing Task of Driver Licensing. InFuture Role of Driver Licensing in Highway Safety. TRB,National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1974.

12. Coppin, R. S. Driver License and Driver Improvement Pro-gram: A National Review. Department of Transport, Aus-tralia, 1977.

13. Croke, A., and W. B. Wilson. Model for Provisional (Grad-uated) Licensing of Young Novice Drivers. DOT-HS-6-01384, Technical Information Services, Springfield,Virginia, 1977.

14. Haworth, N. Young Driver Research Program: Evaluation ofAustralian Graduated Licensing Scheme. Federal Office ofRoad Safety, Canberra, Australia, 1994.

15. Mayhew, D. R., H. M. Simpson, S. A. Ferguson, and A. F.Williams. Graduated Licensing in Ontario: A Survey ofParents. Journal of Traffic Medicine, Vol. 27, No. 3-4, pp.71–80 (1999).

16. Mayhew, D. R., H. M. Simpson, S. A. Ferguson, and A. F.Williams. Graduated Driver Licensing in Nova Scotia:Survey of Teenagers and Parents. Journal of Traffic Medi-cine, Vol. 26, No. 1-2, pp. 37–44 (1998).

17. Waller, P. F., M. L. Olk, and J. T. Shope. Parental Views andExperience with Michigan’s Graduated Licensing Pro-gram. Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 21, pp. 9–15 (2000).

18. Williams, A. F., S. A. Ferguson, W. A., Leaf, and D. F.Preusser. Views of Parents of Teenagers About GraduatedLicensing. Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp.1–7 (1998).

19. McCartt, A. T., W. A. Leaf, C. M. Farmer, S. A. Ferguson,and A. F. Williams. Effects of Florida’s Graduated Licens-ing Program on the Behaviors and Attitudes of Teenagers.Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 32, pp. 119–131 (2001).

20. Williams, A. F., L. A. Nelson, and W. A. Leaf. Responsesto Teenagers and Their Parents to California’s GraduatedLicensing System. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol.34, pp. 835–842 (2002).

21. Simpson, H. M. The Evolution and Effectiveness of GDL.Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 25–34(2003).

22. Langley, J. D., A. C. Wagenaar, and D. J. Begg. An Evalu-ation of the New Zealand Graduated Driver LicensingSystem. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 28, pp.139–146 (1996).

23. Hedlund, J., R. A. Shults, and R. Compton. What WeKnow, What We Don’t Know, and What We Need ToKnow About Graduated Driver Licensing. Journal of SafetyResearch, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 107–116 (2003).

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

8

Neumann is President,and Markow isPrincipal, CambridgeSystematics, Inc.,Cambridge,Massachusetts. Lambertretired last year asDeputy Director,Transportation PlanningBureau, MichiganDepartment ofTransportation, and isnow Senior Associate,Cambridge Systematics.

The recent completion of a NationalCooperative Highway Research Program(NCHRP) Project, Asset ManagementGuidance for Transportation Agencies,1

marks a milestone in transportation asset management.The Transportation Asset Management Guide will helpagencies gain new insights into asset management andimprove their practices.

The NCHRP project also produced a synthesis ofU.S., international, and private-sector practice in assetmanagement, the management framework for theguide, and a prioritized list of research to fill gaps in theknowledge and practice of asset management for trans-portation infrastructure. These products resulted fromtasks outlined in the American Association of StateHighway and Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO)Strategic Plan for Transportation Asset Management,issued in December 2000.

AASHTO has adopted and will distribute the Trans-portation Asset Management Guide. The final draft isavailable on NCHRP’s website.2 In addition, the Fed-eral Highway Administration, through the NationalHighway Institute, has developed a one-day course ontransportation asset management for agency execu-tives and senior managers.3

Following is a preview of the concepts, principles,and techniques described in the guide, with examples

of the improvements that asset management can intro-duce in the ways an agency allocates resources andemploys different types of investments.

Defining the PrinciplesAsset management has many interpretations—forexample,

◆ A next-generation infrastructure managementsystem,

◆ A way to bring private-sector thinking intopublic-sector decisions,

◆ An economics-based approach to investmentplanning and decision-making,

◆ A comprehensive program of facility mainte-nance or maintenance contracting,

◆ A management philosophy to secure the futurelife of transportation infrastructure, and

◆ A way of combining pavement, bridge, safety,and other maintenance management systems to yieldmore effective information.

All of these descriptions reflect elements of soundasset management, but none captures the conceptfully. Asset management is a strategic approach tomanaging transportation infrastructure. It builds onseveral principles:

◆ Asset management is policy-driven. Decisionsabout managing infrastructure reflect the policy goalsand objectives that define the condition of assets, the

1 NCHRP Project 20-24(11).2 http://www4.trb.org/trb/crp.nsf/All+Projects/NCHRP+20-24(11)3 www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/coursedesc.asp?coursenum=1130

Transportation Asset

ManagementNew Guide AdvancesState of the Practice

L A N C E A . N E U M A N N ,

M I C H A E L J . M A R K O W ,

A N D L O U I S H . L A M B E R T


9

levels of performance, and the quality of services tomeet customer needs and achieve economic, com-munity, and environmental goals.

◆ Asset management is performance-based.Goals and objectives must have clear measures of per-formance. Targets established for performance mea-sures will guide decisions in analyzing options, settingpriorities, establishing budgets, and implementingprograms, and must be technically and financiallyrealistic.

◆ Asset management examines options andtradeoffs at each level of decision making. Resourcesare limited. Investment decisions in other areas andabout other assets are interrelated and have an effecton transportation assets. Therefore decision makersshould consider all options and evaluate the tradeoffsamong alternatives.

◆ Asset management takes the long-term view.Analyses of program options should incorporate along-term view of facility condition, performance, andcost. Analysis procedures rooted in engineering andeconomics are most effective in assessing the tradeoffsamong different actions at different times in an asset’slife cycle.

◆ Asset management bases decisions on merit.Choices among options during program development,project selection, and program and service deliveryshould be based on comparisons of costs and of theconsequences of meeting performance targets. Objec-tive, high-quality information must be applied at eachstep, using analytic methods and decision criteria con-sistent with policy goals and objectives and with theagency’s business processes.

◆ Asset management maintains clear account-ability. Performance measures are monitored andreported. This provides feedback on the effective-ness of transportation investments and services, aswell as accountability to management for workaccomplished and for the effectiveness of programand service delivery.

Applying the PrinciplesApplying these principles defines an agency’s way ofdoing business, its procedures for decision making,and its applications of information technology. Assetmanagement is not a separate function or system buta way of improving an agency’s procedures for allo-cating and using available resources to achieve resultscost-effectively.

Most agencies already employ aspects of good assetmanagement practice; the principles in the guidetherefore suggest ways for agencies to leveragestrengths and improve the integration of data, infor-mation, and decision making. To be most effective, theasset management principles must be applied com-

prehensively to all of the agency’s infrastructureexpenditures, including preservation, operations, andsystem expansion—in capital construction as well asin maintenance and operations programs.

Asset management should be implemented in asmany resource allocation and utilization processes aspossible—for example, in policy development; long-range planning; project development; program devel-opment and priority setting; delivery of projects,programs, and services; and system monitoring andreporting. Agencies, however, may decide to focus atfirst on high-priority functions, to gain initial resultsquickly and affordably.

The Transportation Asset Management Guide coversasset management in these investment areas and inresource allocation and utilization. Nonetheless, anagency does not need to mount an all-encompassingeffort to make headway in asset management. Anagency can apply the concepts and principles quicklywith current personnel and information technology—taking advantage of good asset management practicesalready in place.

Because state departments of transportation(DOTs) and other transportation agencies differ sub-stantially in priorities, business practices, and availableresources, the guide presents a broad treatment. Byenabling agencies to understand the context of assetmanagement, the guide helps agency managers tofocus on the specific areas in which asset manage-ment improvements can have the strongest early pay-off. A self-assessment exercise in the guide helpsagencies determine strengths, identify areas forimprovement, and develop an implementation strat-egy for priority areas.

Investment CategoriesSome practical examples can show what asset man-agement involves and how the principles can improvean agency’s practices. Because agencies differ in pro-gram structure and in management culture, the exam-ples relate to the types of investments common to allagencies. The descriptions are limited to three invest-ment areas: preservation, operations, and systemexpansion. These investment areas encompass capitalas well as maintenance and operations expenditures.

◆ Preservation extends the life of an asset or cor-rects a distress that impedes mobility, safety, service-ability, or engineering integrity. Preservation counterswear-and-tear, providing a cost-effective way to keepa facility functioning at its intended level. Correctiveand preventive maintenance, repair, and rehabilita-tion are examples of preservation.

◆ Operations focus on real-time service and oper-ating efficiency. Operations enable facilities to provide

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

10

the maximum level of service before expansionbecomes necessary. Examples include real-time trafficsurveillance, intelligent transportation systems (ITS),real-time signal controllers, various strategies formerlygrouped under transportation system management,safety improvements, ramp metering, incidentresponse, road weather information systems, and trav-eler information systems.

◆ Capacity expansion affects a facility’s level ofservice by adding physical capacity, by creating newcapacity through a new facility, or by implementinglong-term operating strategies. New construction, forexample, may include new mainline facilities, inter-changes, or intermodal facilities. Expansion also canbe achieved through general-purpose or HOV lanes,climbing and passing lanes, bridge widening or con-struction of a parallel structure, and improvementson interchanges, intersections, and intermodal facili-ties. Long-term operating strategies could introducereversible peak-hour lanes, adjustments to speed lim-its, and new signals and lane controls.

These investment categories provide a frameworkfor the practical implications of transportation assetmanagement. All agencies invest in these areas, but indifferent measures. Agencies with mature infrastruc-ture in settled urban areas may emphasize preservationand operations improvements, while agencies inregions experiencing population and economicgrowth may have a relatively higher percentage ofexpenditures for capacity expansion.

Projects may comprise more than one investmenttype, creating interactions among preservation, oper-

ations, and capacity expansion. For example, preser-vation work in construction or maintenance workzones can cause traffic disruptions that require oper-ations remedies. Capacity expansion may includeinstallation of ITS or traffic monitoring hardware toserve operations needs. Operations equipmentrequires maintenance.

Breaking down an agency’s infrastructure man-agement into preservation, operations, and capacityexpansion provides a straightforward way of organiz-ing asset management techniques and of consideringstrategic tradeoffs among the categories of investment.

PreservationAsset management has historical roots in preserva-tion. During the significant capacity expansion underthe Interstate program in the second half of the 20thcentury, the need to manage the maintenance, repair,and rehabilitation of the highway inventory increased,as pavements, bridge elements, and other key featuresof the earliest Interstate-era highways began toapproach the end of their design lives.

As more and more portions of the network aged,competition increased for preservation resources.The need for knowledge and tools to preserve thesystem as cost-effectively as possible stimulatedresearch programs and the development of comput-erized decision-support systems for pavement,bridge, and maintenance management.

In this way, preservation had a head start in thefield of highway management, propelled by its impor-tance and visibility for transportation agencies andmotorists, as well as the early recognition by practi-

Transportation managementcenters regulate travel onstreets and freeways andmaximize levels of service.


11

tioners that system preservation required ongoingmanagement. Nonetheless, the Transportation AssetManagement Guide emphasizes that the other areas ofinvestment—that is, operations and capacity expan-sion—also must be considered within a comprehen-sive, balanced approach.

The guide encourages continuing improvements inpreservation in areas such as the following:

◆ Application of management systems and otheranalytic tools. Pavement and bridge management sys-tems are applied routinely to assess condition, identifyprojects, and track performance. However, use inhigher-level management tasks—such as testing sce-narios, developing programs and budgets, analyzingprogram tradeoffs, and supporting executive deci-sions—should be expanded.

◆ Preventive maintenance strategies. Capital androutine preventive maintenance offer economic ben-efits but are politically difficult to sell. Analytical meth-ods and research documenting the benefits, moreover,are not as advanced as those for design and rehabili-tation. Better information is needed on the long-termbenefits of preventive maintenance strategies.

◆ Continued development of new materials andpractices. Preservation benefits from better materialsand remedial practices. New technology should pro-vide cost-effective options for extending the servicelives of assets.

◆ More comprehensive analysis of strategies forroad occupancy. Work zone management is a majorissue, involving the safety of workers and motorists,and is key in planning major rehabilitation projects.Economic analyses of the effects of work zone con-figurations and scheduling will become common prac-tice as preservation activities increase, traffic volumesgrow, and urbanized areas spread.

◆ Continued enhancement of analytic and deci-sion support tools. Development and enhancement ofdecision-support tools for preservation have beenongoing. The focus will be on information for execu-tives, integration with other applications, incorpora-

tion of customer-oriented performance measures andcriteria, and analyses of program-level tradeoffs.

◆ Maintenance quality assurance programs.Maintenance quality assurance takes a performance-based approach, applying customer-oriented defini-tions of levels of service to budgeting decisions.Maintenance quality assurance embodies the princi-ples of good asset management.

OperationsOperations always have been a component of highwaymanagement and are a logical extension of the assetmanagement concept. Responsibility for operations,however, has been fragmented within and acrossagency jurisdictions. As a result, operations have notbeen integrated effectively into an overall system man-agement strategy.

But just as preservation was recognized as criticalto sustaining the service life of infrastructure cost-effectively, operations have been gaining recognitionfor a strategic role in maximizing the system’s abilityto move passenger and freight traffic. Operations havebecome a key element of good system management.

An effective operations strategy relies on a range ofequipment and software that must perform reliablythroughout the network. The physical assets sup-porting operations must be integrated into agencypreservation programs for inspection, periodic main-tenance, and repair.

The general principles of asset management applyto operations as much as to preservation, but with adifferent focus:

◆ The goals and objectives must reflect systemservice and reliability in real time;

Crack sealing preserves pavement.

Ground-penetrating radar instrument locates andinspects utilities, part of maintenance quality assurance.

PHO

TO:G

EOPH

YSIC

AL

SU

RVEY

SY

STEM

S,INC.,N

ORT

HS

ALEM

,NEW

HA

MPSH

IRE

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

12

◆ The focus is on immediate response to situa-tions and real-time results, not on a program of proj-ects; and

◆ Performance measures and monitoring musttrack real-time service delivery.

The principles of asset management thereforeimply the following for operations:

◆ More integrated decision making. Decisionmaking in operations must coordinate with decisionmaking in other areas of asset management, to supporta unified set of system performance measures. Coor-dination is necessary, for example, in allocatingresources to balance investments in physical assetswith those in operating programs; in maintaining andpreserving operations assets, as well as other physicalinfrastructure; in long-range planning, project devel-opment, and design; in analyses of program tradeoffs;and in dealing with other agencies and jurisdictionsthat influence operations policies and practices.

◆ Interjurisdictional considerations. The so-called trip perspective looks at the entire transporta-tion system without regard to jurisdictionalboundaries and operating responsibilities. Many traf-fic management centers and incident response pro-grams follow this principle.

◆ Comprehensive asset inventories, conditiondatabases, and analytic techniques. An agency’s over-all preservation strategy should include the operationshardware. This requires database and analytic capabil-ities for the operations equipment on a par with thosefor other infrastructure assets. Moreover, other capa-bilities can be applied to operations—for example,maintenance management and bridge management sys-tems that include such assets as traffic managementdevices, ITS systems, sign bridges, and tunnel facilities.

◆ Methods to analyze operations strategies.Analytic tools comparable to those used in preser-vation, for example, are needed to integrate opera-tions fully into an agency’s decision making aboutresource allocation and utilization. Developing suchsystems will require thinking “outside of the box,”to analyze performance over time and in real time.Research is needed to understand performance fromthe perspective of reliability, response time, and thecritical threshold values of motorists, as well asfrom the traditional viewpoints of physical condi-tion and frequency of repairs.

◆ Greater outreach and education. Transportationagencies and operators may not recognize the rela-tionship between operations and asset management.Clearly defining this relationship and communicatingit through training, outreach, research, and deploy-ment will help in advancing the state of the practice insystem management and agency coordination.

◆ Communication of the benefits of operationsinvestments. New analytic tools can improve anagency’s ability to demonstrate the benefits ofinvesting in operations, but demonstrating theactual benefits of systems that are already deployedalso is valuable. Field tests and rigorous evalua-tions are critical in addressing agency skepticismabout ITS, and particularly in communicating theadvantages of strategies that improve system relia-bility and that benefit freight transportation.

Capacity ExpansionIn contrast with operations, capacity expansionfocuses on project development and program com-position through a process that can extend for sev-eral years. In contrast with preservation, capacityexpansion works through discrete—sometimeslarge and expensive—capital projects, instead of

Bridge widening (above, on VA-199) is an aspect of capacity expansion.


13

addressing continuing, systemwide needs. In addition, the substantial federal matching for-

mula for Interstate construction through the High-way Trust Fund has provided a direct and dependablefunding mechanism for capacity expansion projects.The major expansion in U.S. highway capacitythrough the end of the 20th century, therefore, may beregarded as a massive, successful public works effort—but the expansion usually is not thought of in thecontext of asset management practice.

That has now changed—capacity expansion is partof resource-allocation decision making. Needs forfunding have shifted toward preservation and, increas-ingly, toward operations.

Asset management for allocating and utilizingresources applies as much to capacity expansion proj-ects as to preservation and operations. Translatingasset management for more effective decision makingin capacity expansion entails improvements in severalfunctions and capabilities:

◆ Performance-based planning. A performance-based approach to long-range planning focuses on theoutcomes of possible investments and the degree towhich the outcomes support stated policies. Capacityexpansion projects can affect a diverse customer base.

◆ Updated performance measures. Performancemeasures for new capacity projects must reflect morethan level of service in evaluating operational or multi-modal alternatives for expanding transportationcapacity. Measures should enable analyses of the trade-offs among capacity expansion and other types ofinvestments and should reflect the interests of pas-senger and freight customers.

◆ Procedures to analyze multimodal and inter-modal investments and tradeoffs. Different analyticmethods and data requirements apply when assessingprojects in different modes or evaluating the effects onpassenger versus freight transportation. Methods forcomparing cost and performance impacts acrossmodes are under development but must be deployedand tested in agency settings. Data and analytic issuesin freight transportation must be addressed.

◆ Accelerated scheduling. Capacity expansionprojects often require several years from conception tocompletion, increasing costs and delaying benefits.Ways to accelerate this schedule while maintaining thenecessary steps in planning, design, right-of-way, andconstruction include different ways of conceiving proj-ects—for example, as corridor-based or multimodal—as well as streamlining or fast-tracking preconstructionactivities and establishing contract incentives for rapidcompletion of construction.

◆ Bidding and contracting mechanisms. Agen-cies are applying contracting mechanisms such as

design-build on projects with demanding schedules orto supplement agency expertise, as well as alternatebidding to base awards on lowest life-cycle cost. Inawarding a paving contract for a new freeway, forexample, Michigan DOT examined bids for concreteversus asphalt pavement and saved several milliondollars in construction costs.

Agency Self-AssessmentAsset management takes a comprehensive view ofresource allocation and utilization. Most agencies,however, will want to focus on particular priorities. Tohelp identify the most promising areas for focus, theTransportation Asset Management Guide includes a self-assessment exercise.

Through the self-assessment, executives and seniormanagers can characterize agency practices, highlightthe gains accomplished or under way, and identifyopportunities for improvement. The exercise requiresresponses to a series of statements, organized underthe four functional areas of asset management: policydevelopment, planning and programming, programdelivery, and information and analysis. Completingthe form takes approximately 30 minutes.

The value of the exercise is in comparing theresponses from the agency’s executive office withthose of managers for such units as planning, engi-neering, programming, maintenance, finance, opera-tions, and information systems. Bringing together thedifferent perspectives can help identify an agency’sstrengths and the areas that need improvement in assetmanagement practice. Through this discussion, theagency can develop priorities for immediate andlonger-term actions.

The self-assessment is a quick diagnostic tool thatyields an overall snapshot of an agency’s asset man-agement practices. The information can be used indeveloping a more comprehensive asset managementimplementation plan, as described in the Transporta-tion Asset Management Guide.

Implementing ProgramsSeveral agencies have addressed asset managementproactively, launching implementation programs andgaining organizational acceptance. The diversity ofapproaches, however, illustrates not only that assetmanagement draws on a core set of principles, but thatapplication should be customized to an agency’sneeds, priorities, and situations.

Some state agencies—such as the Colorado, Ari-zona, Pennsylvania, and Vermont DOTs—have devel-oped plans to identify strengths and priorities forimprovements in asset management and informationtechnology. Other agencies have focused on innova-tions for asset management.

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

14

Michigan’s LegislationAt the direction of the state legislature and adminis-tration, Michigan DOT, working with local agenciesand other stakeholders, recently played a pivotal rolein drafting and securing passage of legislation to insti-tutionalize asset management practice across trans-portation agencies and jurisdictions. The statuteestablishes an Asset Management Council chargedwith developing a statewide asset management processand requires agencies to

◆ Collect common data elements for all roads andbridges;

◆ Report the true condition of transportationinfrastructure, regardless of ownership;

◆ Develop multiyear programs from long-rangeplans; and

◆ Report to the Council annually their roadwayand bridge inventories, asset conditions, work activities,expenditures, and activities proposed for the next year.

This process will require local and state agencies todevelop a strategic plan within 3 to 5 years to reach anagreed-to level for asset conditions and a recom-mended level of service. These agencies must cooper-ate to identify the funding levels and sources toachieve these targets.

Colorado’s FrameworkColorado DOT has developed investment categories toorganize performance and program expenditure infor-mation within a framework useful in asset manage-ment. The framework includes

◆ Both the capital and the maintenance and oper-ations program dollars, so that Colorado DOT andthe Colorado Transportation Commission can see howthe programs affect system performance;

◆ Performance measures, which provide a basisfor analyzing results and, eventually, tradeoffs; and

◆ An organizational structure for program infor-mation.

The framework does not supplant individual cap-ital and maintenance programs—financial mecha-nisms and program controls remain in place.

Other States’ InitiativesSeveral states have adopted programming proceduresthat focus on a policy-driven, performance-basedapproach to resource allocation and to analysis of trade-offs. New York State DOT has had a process in place for

High-occupancy vehicle lanes are tools to manage highway congestion.

Demonstration of systemto inspect and evaluateconcrete.

GEO

PHY

SICA

LS

URV

EYS

YST

EMS,IN

C.,NO

RTH

SA

LEM,N

EWH

AM

PSHIR

E


15

several years. Montana DOT recently instituted a Pro-gramming Prioritization Process (or P3). PennsylvaniaDOT summarizes performance information on amonthly report card, and Washington State DOT issuesthe quarterly Gray Notebook of performance measuresand a monthly report card on construction projects.4

Asset management principles and techniques alsoare reflected in maintenance quality assurance pro-grams and the associated levels of service. Severalstates have undertaken maintenance quality assuranceprograms, including Arizona, California, Colorado,Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, NorthCarolina, Ohio, Texas, Utah, Vermont, and Washing-ton State. A set of the performance measures com-monly recognized for maintenance is in development,drawing from workshops, projects, and committeeefforts sponsored by AASHTO, FHWA, and NCHRP.

National-Level ActionsIndustry has supported asset management initiativesby individual agencies. At the national level, TRB,AASHTO, and FHWA have been active in supportingconferences, workshops, and TRB Annual Meetingsessions on asset management. The TRB and AASHTOtask forces on asset management met jointly in sum-mer 2002 to chart the implementation of asset man-agement from a national perspective.

FHWA has sponsored development of a one-daytraining course on the Transportation Asset Manage-ment Guide, and AASHTO and FHWA collaborate insupporting “Transportation Asset Management Today,”a community-of-practice website.5 Other organizations,such as the American Public Works Association,6 alsohave developed materials on asset management. TheMidwestern Regional University Transportation Cen-ter provides several resources, including a website,research activities, and newsletters.7

Research is exploring advances in asset manage-ment practice that cut across the investment areas.The NCHRP project produced a prioritized list ofresearch topics in the management, policy, analytic,technological, and academic aspects of asset manage-ment. AASHTO selected several of these topics, andstudies already are under way through NCHRP.

The projects deal with analytic tools to supportasset management, state DOT experience in imple-menting the Governmental Accounting StandardsBoard requirements in Statement 34, and identifyingand setting targets for performance measures to sup-port asset management. A project nominated for FY2004 would investigate the effectiveness of asset man-

agement implementation. Other research efforts, suchas the proposed Future Strategic Highway ResearchProgram, complement the asset management research.

Questions To ConsiderAsset management provides the framework for agen-cies to assess business practices for infrastructure man-agement, to highlight accomplishments, and toidentify opportunities for improvement. When explor-ing what this framework might do, agency decisionmakers should consider the following questions:

◆ How far has the agency progressed in definingand communicating its strategic direction to all stake-holders?

◆ Does the agency comprehensively consider alloptions in solving problems?

◆ Does the agency evaluate tradeoffs in cost andperformance?

◆ Is the agency concerned about achieving long-term results cost-effectively?

◆ Does the agency place value on setting perfor-mance goals and on measuring results?

◆ What should the agency do to be in thestrongest position to justify requests for resources?

◆ Even if significant advances in managementpractices have been implemented, are there betterways to do things?

Asset management addresses these questions byproviding an improved way of doing business. Thehow-tos are presented in the first edition of the Trans-portation Asset Management Guide.

4 www.wsdot.wa.gov/accountability/GrayNotebook.pdf 5 http://assetmanagement.transportation.org6 www.apwa.net/7 www.mrutc.org/assetmgmt/index.htm

Where the Guide GoesThe Transportation Asset Management Guide can assist agencies in improvingprocedures and decisions about allocating and utilizing resources.The book is struc-tured as follows:

◆ Chapter 1: Introduction defines transportation asset management andoutlines past work by AASHTO,FHWA,NCHRP, and international agencies.

◆ Chapter 2: Framework and Principles explains concepts and tenetsof asset management,defines a framework of benchmark practices, and indicateshow to customize the management framework to an agency’s particular needs.

◆ Chapter 3: Self-Assessment explains how to use the agency self-assess-ment test to identify strengths and areas for improvement, provides forms for theexercise, and illustrates how to evaluate results.

◆ Chapter 4: Developing a Strategy traces how to build a strategy toimprove asset management.

◆ Chapters 5 through 8 describe specific applications of asset managementto key functions in resource allocation and utilization: policy goals and objectives;planning and programming; program delivery; and information and analysis, includ-ing performance monitoring.

◆ Chapter 9: Implementation presents initial steps to improve asset man-agement and provides a long-term perspective for continuing improvements.

T R A N S I T

C O O P E R AT I V E

R E S E A R C H

P R O G R A M

R E P O R T

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

16

Critics of suburban sprawl maintain that thisform of growth—predominant in theUnited States for the past 50 years—hashad significantly harmful effects on society.

Suburban sprawl, the critics maintain, has thwartedmass transit development, separated rich and poor,caused unnecessary travel, consumed fragile land, andgenerated excessive public expenditures.

Countering this argument are those who believethat sprawl is as American as apple pie. To them, citi-zens are getting what they want: single-family homeson large lots, safe communities with good school sys-tems, and metropolitan or nonmetropolitan locationsfar from the pace and problems of cities.

To provide credible measures for policymakers andcitizens to apply in the debate, the Transit CooperativeResearch Program (TCRP) undertook a study,1 spon-sored by the Federal Transit Administration. The goalwas to assemble useful information, with supportingfacts, theory, and analysis, on the positive and negativeeffects of sprawl on the U.S. economy, environment,and society, with an emphasis on transportation.

The study, published in 2002 as TCRP Report 74:Costs of Sprawl—2000, developed measures frommethodical assessments of the relative costs and ben-efits of two forms of metropolitan growth:

◆ Low-density sprawl development at the outerreaches of a metropolitan area, and

◆ More compact, centrally oriented development.

The study analyzed each scenario’s demands forland, infrastructure, housing, and public services.

Defining SprawlThe TCRP study identified sprawl as rapid and signifi-cant population growth in rural and undeveloped coun-ties. A statistical percentage of population growth in theupper quartile indicates significant or at least above-average growth in a particular county. The study definedsignificant growth as the upper quartile of countygrowth rates within an Economic Area (EA).2

Analyses of growth must consider both a relative(or percentage) dimension and an absolute (or numer-ical) dimension. If growth in a rural or undevelopedlocation, therefore, reached a specified level of numer-ical growth—in this case, 160 percent of the nationalaverage numerical growth level—the location wasdefined as sprawling, regardless of its relative rate ofgrowth within the EA.

In this way, either of two separate measures ofgrowth plus a density factor (a classification of rural orundeveloped) indicated whether or not a county wassprawling. Counties likely to experience sprawl growthbetween 2000 and 2025 are indicated in Figure 1.

Costsof Sprawl—

2000

1 TCRP Project H-10, The Costs of Sprawl—Revisited.2 An area about twice the physical size of a metropolitan

area including nonmetropolitan area (rural) counties.

What Are theImpacts? What Are theAlternatives?R O B E R T W . B U R C H E L L

A N D S A H A N M U K H E R J I

Burchell is Codirectorand Professor, andMukherji is ResearchAssociate, Center forUrban Policy Research,Rutgers University, NewBrunswick, New Jersey.Burchell was PrincipalInvestigator for TCRPProject H-10, The Costsof Sprawl—Revisited.


17

Projected SprawlTable 1 shows the number of counties in each devel-opment classification that will experience sprawl as aresult of 25 years of household and employmentgrowth, according to the Woods and Poole projec-tions for 2000 to 2025. Overall, 742 of 3,091 counties,or 24 percent, will experience sprawl during theperiod.

Of the 742 sprawl counties, 598 are rural andundeveloped; 144 are suburban and rural center coun-ties. Sprawl will occur in 22 percent of rural and unde-veloped counties and in 54 percent of suburban andrural center counties.

Controlling SprawlA managed growth scenario redirects household andjob growth in sprawl-growth counties to more devel-oped counties within the EA. A variety of monetaryand nonmonetary development incentives or restric-tions, or both, are required to achieve this redirection.

The objective is to reduce significantly the amountof residential and nonresidential growth in sprawlinglocations, whether rural, undeveloped, developing sub-urban, or developing rural center counties. A reductionin growth of one-quarter or more in these locationsconstitutes a demonstrable change. Controlled sprawlis the classification used for counties in which the pur-poseful redirection of households and jobs has reducedsprawl growth by at least one-quarter.

Table 2 shows the number of counties experienc-ing sprawl under the managed growth scenario. Over-all, the redirection of households and employment tomore-developed counties would reduce sprawl sig-nificantly in 420—or 57 percent—of the 742 countiesexpected to experience sprawl. The projectedimprovement affects more sprawling rural and unde-veloped counties (356) than suburban and rural cen-ter counties (64), even though the percentage undercontrol in both groups is about the same, 55 percentto 60 percent.

TABLE 1 Sprawl by County Type Under Sprawl Growth, 2000–2025

County Rural and Suburban and Urban CenterSprawl Designation Undeveloped Rural Center and Urban Total

Nonsprawl 2,128 121 100 2,349Uncontrolled Sprawl 598 144 0 742Total Counties 2,726 265 100 3,091

Source: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.

FIGURE 1 Projected sprawl in the United States, 2000–2025.

Sprawl Status Significant

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

18

Land ConversionIn the next 25 years, the United States will convert18.8 million acres of land to build 26.5 million newunits for housing plus 26.5 billion square feet of newnonresidential space for 49.4 million new jobs. Landwill be converted at a rate of approximately 0.6 acresper residential unit and 0.2 acres per 1,000 square feetof nonresidential space. This projected level of landconversion per unit is on a par with the rate during1980 to 2000 (1, p. 195).

Almost one-quarter of this land conversion is notnecessary and could be avoided through growth man-agement measures that would neither compromisegrowth nor alter housing markets. Establishing theequivalent of an urban growth boundary in EAs woulddirect growth away from rural and undeveloped coun-ties to the more-developed urban and suburban coun-ties and save about 2.4 million acres. Another strategy,creating an urban service area within a county to directdevelopment away from undeveloped areas to moredeveloped areas, could save an additional 1.6 millionacres (1, p. 197).

Water and Sewer InfrastructureFrom 2000 to 2025, traditional development or sprawlgrowth will require developers and local governmentsto install more than 45 million water and sewer later-als below ground to serve new residential and non-residential structures. To calculate the infrastructureand associated costs, the study used a model thataccounts for increases in water or sewer laterals as thedensity of housing development increases.

With intercounty and intracounty growth-control measures, the housing patterns wouldrequire fewer water and sewer laterals to serve thesame number of residential and nonresidentialoccupants. The cost savings of lower tap-in fees,combined with 4.6 million fewer laterals, wouldgenerate an infrastructure savings of $12.6 billionover the 25-year period (1, p. 222).

This estimate includes adjustments for higherinfrastructure development costs per unit in moreurbanized areas. Portions of these savings wouldaccrue to local governments, developers, and housingpurchasers.

Local Road InfrastructureThe demand for additional lane-mile capacity oflocal roads is related to the distribution and densityof population. For 2000 to 2025, under traditionalor sprawl growth, the United States will spend morethan $927 billion to provide necessary road infra-structure—an additional 2.0 million lane-miles oflocal roads (Table 3). Managed growth wouldrequire 1.9 million lane-miles of local roads,amounting to $817 billion in local road costs.

Overall, compact growth patterns could trim188,300 lane-miles of local roads and $110 billionin expenditures—that is, reductions of 9.2 percentin local lane-miles and 11.8 percent in local roadcosts—from what would be expected with sprawldevelopment. Again, these savings calculationsaccount for considerably more expensive roaddevelopment in urban areas.

TABLE 2 Sprawl by County Type Under Managed Growth, 2000–2025

County Rural and Suburban and Urban CenterSprawl Designation Undeveloped Rural Center and Urban Total

Nonsprawl 2,128 121 100 2,349Remaining Sprawl 242 80 0 322Controlled Sprawl 356 64 0 420Total Counties 2,726 265 100 3,091

Source: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.

TABLE 3 Local Road Infrastructure Under Sprawl and Managed Growth Scenarios, for United States and for U.S. Regions, 2000–2025

Total Lane-Miles Required Total Road CostSprawl Managed Sprawl ManagedGrowth Growth Savings Growth Growth Savings

Region (lane miles) (lane miles) (lane miles) ($B) ($B) ($B)

Northeast 288,059 281,251 6,808 $135.77 $129.57 $6.20Midwest 284,164 266,614 17,550 130.76 122.15 8.61South 885,944 806,955 78,989 376.99 338.07 38.92West* 586,011 501,055 84,956 283.49 227.52 55.97United States 2,044,178 1,855,875 188,303 927.01 817.31 109.70

* Does not include Alaska.Source: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.

Local subdivision roads in asprawled development.


19

Local Public ServicesDuring the period 2000 to 2025, under traditionalor sprawl growth development, the nation wouldexpend $143.2 billion annually for public serviceswhile collecting annual revenues of $99.4 billion.The result is a fiscal deficit of $43.8 billion by 2025.

Under managed growth, the nation would expend$139.2 billion annually for local public services—or$4 billion less. The decrease is possible because man-aged growth places more development in developedareas—the public services may be more expensive butoffer excess capacity that can absorb the increaseddemand more readily.

Excess capacity is available in public service sys-tems within urban and inner suburban jurisdictions.The $4 billion annual decrease in costs must bepaired with an aggregate annual revenue of approx-imately $99.5 billion. This reduces the overall annualfiscal deficit to nearly $40 billion by 2025 under themanaged growth scenario ($99.5 billion - $139.2 bil-lion = -$39.7 billion). In 2025, the managed growthscenario, by reducing negative impacts, would yieldsavings of $4.2 billion annually compared with thesprawl growth scenario (1, p. 274).

Real Estate DevelopmentDuring 2000 to 2025, under traditional or sprawlgrowth, individuals and businesses in the UnitedStates will spend more than $6 trillion to developthe residential and nonresidential structures neces-sary to accommodate household and employmentgrowth. More centralized growth and more com-pact development patterns can achieve a combinedsavings of $420 billion in occupancy costs. This isa savings of more than 6 percent in overall propertydevelopment investment costs (1, p. 288).

Average residential housing costs would decreasefrom $167,038 to $154,035 under the managedgrowth scenario, lowering the average housing costnationwide by $13,003, or 7.8 percent, for new hous-ing occupants (1, p. 290).

Travel MilesThe study developed a regression-based travelmodel to predict person-miles of travel as a functionof urban form. The results from the regressionmodel were paired with a population allocationmodel to estimate miles traveled and costs of travelunder the two development alternatives.

The results show a national decrease of 49.6 mil-lion miles traveled daily and an associated decreaseof $24.1 million in daily travel costs under the man-aged growth scenario (Table 4). These figuresinclude increases in the transit component of over-all travel costs.

Quality of LifeThe TCRP study employed the so-called places-rated method to measure quality of life. The methodinvolves selecting variables to distinguish placesthat are recognizable by survey respondents.

The analysis found that the movement of newresidents to more-central locations under a man-aged growth regimen would not appreciably alterexperienced quality of life at any level—whethercounty, EA, state, or region. New residents in coun-ties, EAs, and states would not experience signifi-cant variations in quality of life as a result of thecloser-in living under a managed growth regimen.Some changes in the quality of life may occur forindividuals; on the whole, however, little changewould occur (1, p. 364).

TABLE 4 Additional Daily Travel Miles in Privately Owned Vehicles and Transit Under Sprawl and ManagedGrowth Scenarios, for United States and for U.S. Regions, 2000–2025 (in Millions of Miles)

Sprawl Growth Scenario Managed Growth Scenario Difference—Savings

Total Total TotalRegion POV Transit Travel POV Transit Travel POV Transit Travel

Northeast 87.2 1.4 88.6 81.0 1.7 82.7 6.2 -0.3 5.9Midwest 178.1 4.6 182.7 171.5 5.2 176.7 6.6 -0.6 6.0South 541.3 15.7 557.0 517.4 18.2 535.6 23.9 -2.5 21.4West 386.9 13.2 400.1 367.5 16.4 383.9 19.4 -3.2 16.2United States 1,193.5 34.9 1,228.4 1,137.4 41.5 1,178.9 56.1 -6.6 49.5

POV = privately owned vehicles.Sources:Woods and Poole, 1998; Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

20

Urban DeclineThe Costs of Sprawl—2000 study also explored therelationships between suburban sprawl and urbandecline and concluded the following:

Three variables embodying aspects of suburbansprawl have a statistically significant relation-ship with greater urban decline and distress, asmeasured by an urban decline-distress indexspecifically constructed for this study: (1)greater local government fragmentation, (2)greater overall metropolitan-area residentialsegregation, and (3) higher ratios of the per-centage of poor in cities to the percentage ofpoor in suburbs. These three variables are allindirectly related to the exclusionary behaviorof suburban housing markets. (1, p. 438)

Benefits of SprawlWorking from a preliminary inventory of 13 possiblebenefits of sprawl (Table 5), the study examined theeffects on society as a whole and on specific groupswithin society. The benefits were divided into fourmain categories: housing, transportation, land plan-ning, and social conditions:

◆ The housing benefits may be summed up aslarger structures and bigger lots for less money—thatis, a larger share of the American dream of owning asingle-family home.

◆ Benefits related to transportation include lesscongestion farther away, shorter commuting timesfrom suburban area to suburban area, and lower over-all transportation costs. Each of these benefits reflectsa requirement for unlimited use of the automobile.

◆ For land use, a benefit is that skipped-over landsare available for development as the areas becomemore urbanized.

◆ Quality-of-life benefits include better schoolsand lower crime rates, as well as greater choice ofcommunity, more similarity of neighbors, and moreopportunities to participate in local government.

An evaluative framework was needed to rate theimportance of the 13 potential benefits. Six credibilitymeasures were used to create a hierarchy—for example,whether the benefit was a direct result of sprawl, theoverall impact and recognition of the benefit, the ben-efit’s side effects, and whether the benefit made a posi-tive contribution to society as a whole (Table 5).

Results showed that 3 of the 13 benefits appearto be net benefits to society as a whole: (a) makingavailable larger average lot sizes at a distance fromthe center of a metropolitan area; (b) satisfying con-sumer preferences for low-density living; and (c)providing households with more choices of tax lev-

els and social services. Two other benefits that mayfit into this category are (a) lower land and hous-ing costs farther from a regional center and (b)increased citizen participation and influence insmall, fragmented local governments. The eightother benefits included aspects that were notacknowledged by the public, not specifically relatedto sprawl, or not free from deleterious side effects.

Developing PoliciesTo assist in formulating specific policies in response tothe negative effects of sprawl, the TCRP study reviewedthe literature and found that antisprawl advocates haveproposed seven basic strategies (1, p. 494):

◆ Encourage spatially compact development.◆ Reduce society’s dependence on private auto-

mobiles.◆ Reduce the dependence of local governments on

revenues based on property values and sales taxes.◆ Provide opportunities for low-income and

minority households to move out of concentrated-poverty neighborhoods.

◆ Introduce new elements of urban design intoland-use planning.

◆ Revitalize concentrated-poverty and otherneighborhoods in inner-core areas.

◆ Create regional agencies to review and coordi-nate land-use plans drawn up by localities.

These strategies are found in state plans, stategrowth management acts, local studies, and compila-tions of best practices.

Managing GrowthThe cost of sprawl in dollars and resources is increas-ing. The development pattern consumes significantamounts of land and infrastructure.

Sprawl creates two sets of infrastructure, bothunderutilized:

◆ Cities and older developed suburbs, whichAmericans are running away from; and

◆ The new spreading development, which Amer-icans never catch up with.

This dual development results in higher costs forlocal governments, developers, and housing con-sumers. Taxes are increasing in older communitiesbecause of unused capacity in the infrastructure,and taxes are increasing in sprawl locations becausegrowth requires new systems—for example, forwater and sewers.

Growth can be accommodated in another way—through development patterns that are more cen-

TCRP Report 74: Costs ofSprawl—2000 is availablefrom TRB (www.TRB.org/bookstore/).


21

trally focused and that consume fewer resources—in other words, through compact development ormanaged growth. Managed growth allows all thesame development that would take place underuncontrolled growth, but managed growth locatesthe development so that public services can be pro-vided more efficiently. The result is appreciable sav-ings in a short period of time.

Under managed growth, resources are not con-sumed aggressively, yet the amount of residential andnonresidential development is not altered. The studyconcludes that more planning or zoning at the regionallevel, instead of the local, may be required, with a cor-responding shift in political power.

Reference1. Burchell, R. W., G. Lowenstein, W. R. Dolphin, C. C.

Galley, A. Downs, S. Seskin, K. Gray Still, and T. Moore.TCRP Report 74: Costs of Sprawl—2000. TRB, NationalResearch Council, Washington, D.C., 2002.

Other ResourcesBohl, C. C. New Urbanism and the City: Potential Applica-

tions and Implications for Distressed Inner-City Neighborhoods.Housing Policy Debate, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 761–795 (2000).

Burchell, R. W., W. R. Dolphin, and C. Galley. The Costs andBenefits of Alternative Growth Patterns: The Impact Assessmentof the New Jersey State Plan. Report prepared by the Center forUrban Policy Research, Rutgers University, for the New JerseyOffice of State Planning, Trenton, New Jersey, 2000.

Burchell, R. W., A. Downs, S. Seskin, T. Moore, N. Shad,D. Listokin, J. S. Davis, D. Helton, M. Gall, and H. Phillips.TCRP Report 39: Costs of Sprawl Revisited: The Evidence ofSprawl’s Negative and Positive Impacts. TRB, National ResearchCouncil, Washington, D.C., 1998.

Burchell, R. W., D. Listokin, and C. C. Galley. SmartGrowth: More Than a Ghost of Urban Policy Past, Less Thana Bold New Horizon. Housing Policy Debate, Vol. 11, No. 4,pp. 821–879 (2000).

Complete Economic and Demographic Data Source 1999,Vol. 1. Woods and Poole, Washington, D.C., 1999.

Landis, J. D. Imagining Land Use Futures: Applying theCalifornia Urban Futures Model. Journal of the American Plan-ning Association, Summer 1995, pp. 336–346.

TABLE 5 Alleged Benefits of Sprawl as True Benefits to Society as a Whole

Benefits of Perceived as a Actually Appears Has Serious Perceived as a UnequivocallySprawl Benefit by Caused by Widespread in Negative Side Disadvantage a Net Benefit

Many People Sprawl or its Regions of the Effects by Many to Society as aTraits U.S. People Whole

Lower land and Yes Yes Probably No Partly Probablyhousing costsLarger average Yes Yes Yes No No Yeslot sizeLarger home Yes Not clear Not clear No No No, occurrenceand room sizes unclearReflects low-density Yes Yes Yes No Unclear YespreferencesShorter Probably Not clear Not clear No Yes Not clearcommuting timeLess-intensivetraffic Only by a few Not clear Not clear No Yes No, occurrencecongestion people unclearLower overall No No No No Yes Notransport costsMore efficient Only by a few Yes Not clear No Yes No, occurrenceuse of infill sites people unclearNeighborhoods Yes, No,with lower Yes Partly Yes exclusionary Yes exclusionarycrime rates zoning zoningBetter-quality Yes, No,public schools Yes Partly Yes exclusionary Yes exclusionary

zoning zoningGreater Yes,consumer Yes Yes Yes exclusionary Yes Yeslifestyle choices zoningMore Yes, No,homogeneous Yes Partly Yes exclusionary Yes exclusionarycommunities zoning zoning

Stronger citizenparticipation and Yes,influence in local Yes Yes Yes exclusionary No Probablygovernments zoning

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

22

The author is UPSFoundation Professor ofTransportationEngineering andProfessor of City andRegional Planning,University ofPennsylvania,Philadelphia.This article derives froma presentation at the2002 TRB AnnualMeeting, “Dialogue withVukan R. Vuchic.”

Livable CitiesWill Transportation Professionals Answer the Challenge?V U K A N R . V U C H I C

P O I N T O F V I E W

The development of livable cities is a trendworldwide. In the United States, severalrequirements in the Intermodal SurfaceTransportation Efficiency Act of 1991

(ISTEA) and the Transportation Equity Act for the21st Century (TEA-21) incorporated the goal of liv-able cities, which offer greater diversity of land useforms and activities, greater equity in travel options,and a more intensive social life.

Despite this trend, professional transportation pub-lications in the United States convey predominantlynegative attitudes toward intermodalism. A strong biasagainst public transportation persists. Instead ofopposing the new directions that U.S. laws have intro-duced, the profession should take a broader view ofthe public interest and assume a more constructiverole in creating more livable cities.

Recent ExperiencesSince the 1930s, the immediate reactions to increasesin car ownership and decreases in walking and in useof transit were to widen streets and provide more park-ing. These responses accelerated the increases in caruse and the decreases in the use of other modes, cre-ating a phenomenon termed the “vicious circle ofurban transportation” (1, 2). Cities that have followedthis pattern—adding facilities to satisfy the demandfor car travel—have grown into highway-dominatedregions with car-dependent populations.

The need to analyze the impacts of transportationon cities came into focus in the 1960s. Studies ofurban transportation were undertaken in Great Britain(3), the United States (4), and Germany (5). The Ger-man study was the most sophisticated and became thebasis for a German federal law that financed creationof some of the world’s highest quality transit and high-way systems, as well as livable cities.

Since the 1960s, many innovations have beenimplemented in urban transportation policies, partic-ularly in industrialized countries. Major points of con-sensus about these international experiences can besummarized as follows:

◆ A high density of activities is not compatiblewith the extensive use of private cars. A car-based citythat accommodates unlimited use of private cars isinefficient and undesirable—and in large cities, unlim-ited car use is physically infeasible (5, 6, 7).

◆ A balanced intermodal transportation system issuperior to a cars-only system for economic, social,and environmental reasons (8, 9).

◆ Diverting trips from cars requires two sets of mea-sures: transit incentives and car disincentives (1, 10).

These developments are not theoretical only, butapply in many economically strong, attractive, andlivable cities, such as Melbourne, Australia; Munich,Germany; Portland, Oregon; San Francisco, Califor-nia; and Singapore. Significantly, all of these citieshave excellent transit services; ample, attractive pedes-trian areas; and limited parking. Cities with coordi-nated intermodal transportation, therefore, arefeasible, achievable, and demonstrably successful.

Livable cities are characterized by intermodaltransportation and pedestrian-oriented central urbanareas (here, in Portland, Oregon).

Note: Point of Viewfeatures opinions ofcontributing authors ontransportation issues.The views expressed arenot necessarily those ofTRB or TR News.Readers are encouragedto comment in a letter tothe editor on the issuesand opinions presented.


23

Modal Biases The United States has gone to extremes in accommo-dating the use of private cars, often sacrificing thequality of urban life. Excessive car dependence hascreated serious national problems:

◆ In most cities, residents and visitors cannot getaround—or even get a job—without owning a car.Non–car owners are second-class citizens (TEA-21,Sec. 3037).

◆ Downtowns and outlying activity centers havelarger areas for parking and for streets than for allother activities.

◆ Less than 10 percent of children walk to schoolbecause many streets have no sidewalks.

◆ Many laws and ordinances favor travel by carinstead of by transit or walking.

On the positive side, many steps have been takentoward comprehensive planning and improvements inthe urban environment, such as

◆ Federally required formation of intermodal,regional metropolitan planning organizations;

◆ Ground-breaking legislation in the 1960s tocontrol the negative environmental impacts of trans-portation;

◆ The Federal Transit Administration’s major rolein modernizing transit systems and promoting livablecities; and

◆ ISTEA, a revolutionary departure from highway-dominated policies to coordinated, intermodal trans-portation policies.

ISTEA and its successor, TEA-21, are generallyin line with the thinking of urban transportationprofessionals and civic leaders in most industrial-ized countries. However, automobile-dominatedthinking remains entrenched and causes animositytoward nonautomobile modes, primarily towardtransit and pedestrians.

Supported by special single-mode interests, thisopposition to intermodalism has hampered imple-mentation of many TEA-21 requirements. This prob-lem—particularly the obstacles to implementingfederal transportation laws—is well documented (11).

A major obstacle to a balanced intermodal distri-bution of urban travel is the structure of automobileuser costs; Figure 1 compares user costs—both fixedand out of pocket—for automobiles and transit. Typ-ically, 85 percent of automobile user costs are fixed,with only 15 percent out-of-pocket. If parking is sub-sidized, car travel has lower out-of-pocket costs thantransit. This cost structure stimulates the overuse ofcars and increases vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT).

Moreover, excessive driving has high social and envi-ronmental costs, which car users do not pay.

Energy consumption is another example of thedichotomy between laws and actual practices. TheCAFE standards and ISTEA set the explicit goal ofincreasing fuel efficiency in transportation. Yet thetransportation system contains many stimuli to boostfuel consumption:

◆ Exempt from CAFE standards, SUVs haveflouted the laws aimed at decreasing fuel consumption.

◆ The pricing of car use defies every rule of the freemarket—the low marginal cost of driving and theabsence of charges for social costs give users the illu-sion that driving is virtually free.

◆ Every cent of a gasoline tax increase receivesintense publicity aimed at mustering public opinionagainst gas taxes.

Increasing the gasoline tax, however, not only gen-erates revenues but also increases the marginal costsof driving. As a result, increasing gasoline taxes is awin-win measure. Tolls for driving into cities—ineffect in Singapore; Oslo, Norway; and London—serve the same purposes as gasoline taxes.

Transportation professionals should discuss theseissues more openly, to counter the lobbies that consis-tently work to maximize VMTs and fuel consumption.

Opposition to Change TRB and professional associations, such as the Insti-tute of Transportation Engineers, have made greatprogress in broadening scopes to include intermodaltransportation systems. However, many documentspublished by these organizations are in denial of thispolicy and oppose the changes. As a result, politicalleaders and legislation have progressed beyond pro-fessional thinking in the subject area of urban trans-portation. Open debate and a reorientation fromnegativism to progress are necessary for the transpor-tation profession to regain reputation and authority.

Light rail transit serves pedestrian and transit mall,then proceeds to high-speed railway lines throughoutthe city and suburbs in Karlsruhe, Germany.

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

24

In few areas are so many academics and othertheoreticians as divorced from reality as in urbantransportation. Some are extreme opponents ofautomobile and highway developments, but a fargreater number have developed a passion againsturban transit, particularly against rail.

Some have been writing since the 1960s that railtransit has no future because “it is not flexible and is a19th century technology.” In the past 40 years, however,the number of metro systems in North America hasmore than doubled. Worldwide, the number of sys-tems grew from 25 to more than 100. Moreover, dozensof cities in North America and around the world havebuilt new light rail transit (LRT) systems.

Why have these rail systems been built? Becausethey are not flexible, but permanent and reliable, andconvey a strong, progressive image. They help shapecities, giving car drivers options that no other mode cangive. Light rail and bus semirapid transit are being devel-oped to meet the need for higher quality transit thanbuses in street traffic can offer. Many new regional railsystems are attracting car drivers in low-density suburbsand serving reverse commuters from central cities.

Misguided ReportsIf dozens of cities select rail transit, and the mayors,business associations, and residents evaluate the raillines as great successes, but a professor theorizes thatrail transit is “19th century technology,” who is right?

Any professional familiar with urban transportationaround the world must be amazed when reviewing thereports published by many transportation-relatedorganizations in the United States. For example,

◆ A 1996 World Bank publication, SustainableTransport: Priorities for Policy Reform, extensively cov-ers planning, financing, equity, and other issues of urbantransportation, including cars, transit, and nonmotor-ized transport, and presents specific recommendationsfor action (12). TRB’s report on the same topic, Towarda Sustainable Future (13), however, discusses transit inlayman’s generalities on 2 of its 261 pages, under theheading, “Investments in Transit and Other Nonmotor-ized Modes of Transportation” (emphasis added).

◆ A recent TRB report, Making Transit Work,finds that U.S. transit systems are less effective andattractive than European systems because of differ-ent urban development conditions (14). The reportoffers few critical remarks about policies on transitin the United States.

◆ In 1993 Elmer Johnson, former vice president ofGeneral Motors, led a team that produced a report,Avoiding the Collision of Cars and Cars (6). The reportoffers an excellent diagnosis of the problems caused bychronic highway congestion in cities. However, the solu-tions that the report advanced were nearly nonexis-tent—transit and other modes were hardly mentioned.

Johnson has explained that this glaring deficiencywas because the project participants did not allowpositive statements on transit. The participants didnot include transit experts.

Reports covering major issues in transportationthat are noncritical, narcissistic, and void of innovativesolutions are a serious problem. The phenomenonreflects the prevailing influence of persons defendingthe status quo.

Conducting StudiesThe problem with the treatment of transit is rooted inthe organization and conduct of the studies. Manypersons who have extremely negative views abouttransit, and who lack experience in—and under-standing of—transit and intermodal systems, areappointed to study committees as transit experts. Inmany cases, the appointees have made their negativeopinions about intermodal transportation explicitthrough published writings.

When such a committee discusses issues, state-ments opposed by some members are eliminated fromthe report. In this way, the report presents the lowestcommon denominator or minimum consensus; it iscleaned of self-critical evaluations, loses the focus onmajor problems, and generally produces ineffective

Large parking garages attract automobiles and damagecenter city environments (above, in St. Louis,Missouri).

Coordinated land use and transportation: high-risedevelopments indicate locations of metro stations(Toronto, Ontario, Canada).


25

findings and few constructive recommendations. Twoother examples illustrate this pattern:

◆ The report, In Pursuit of Speed, was prepared atthe request of the U.S. Department of Transportation,to analyze the economic feasibility of high-speedground transportation plans (15). The sponsor didnot include an examination of the national need forefficient high-speed ground transport, so that thestudy focused on means instead of goals. With thiskind of approach, the nation never would have builtthe Interstate Highway System.

◆ The recent General Accounting Office report onbus rapid transit (BRT) confuses the definition of BRT,classifying bus lines with a few sections of separatelanes as rapid transit (16). Cost data for this kind ofBRT are then used to criticize LRT as a more expen-sive mode. The report treats bus and rail systems as ifboth offered the same quality of service and had sim-ilar impacts—an error commonly made by laymen.

If transportation professionals are to respond tonational needs and produce studies to assist politicalleaders in formulating policies, the studies on topicsin urban transportation should be reexamined thor-oughly. Consistent opponents of transit should not beconsidered transit experts and should not beappointed to studies intended to improve urban trans-portation and to meet national goals. Instead, projectparticipants should demonstrate knowledge, real-world experience, and positive views on the subjectmatter, as well as the ability to analyze conditions crit-ically and propose new solutions.

Many TRB committees cover the individual tech-nical and planning aspects of urban transportation,but related policies are only covered for major cities.TRB should increase attention to the important area ofurban transportation policies.

Lessons from Amtrak Interurban travel strongly affects cities—accessibilityis key to a city’s efficiency and competitiveness. Thesuperiority of ground transportation over air trans-portation for travel up to several hundred miles has ledto intensive modernization of passenger rail servicesin most industrialized countries.

Cities such as Paris, London, and Tokyo offer easyaccessibility via many railway stations and rail links toairports. In contrast, access to New York City via JohnF. Kennedy International Airport or to Los Angeles viaLos Angeles International Airport is not efficient.

U.S. national policies have neglected passenger rail.On a per capita basis, investment in Amtrak has beenmany times lower than investment in national rail byvirtually any other country. Congress, which never

has supported intercity passenger rail in ways compa-rable to those for other modes, diverted attention fromthe national goal to the inefficiencies of Amtrak.

Solid Amtrak ridership despite this adversity indi-cates a great latent demand for rail travel in manyareas, from the Northeast to Florida, the Midwest, andCalifornia, as well as across the country. How have pol-icy makers responded to the need for an efficient railpassenger system?

In 1997, influenced by the British deregulationfad, Congress produced the Amtrak Reform andAccountability Act, which required Amtrak to coverall operating costs by 2002. This self-sufficiencyrequirement was illogical and contrary to policiesfor other passenger transportation modes. No suchrequirement applies to highway, air, or urban trans-portation systems—nor could these systems meetsuch a requirement.

The self-sufficiency requirement forces Amtrak tostructure fares for maximum revenues, not to attractthe maximum number of passengers. Instead ofdiverting passengers from congested highways andairways, Amtrak’s high fares push potential rail trav-elers back to cars and airplanes.

The Amtrak Reform Council was appointed tooversee the needed reorganization. Holding to theunrealistic self-sufficiency goal despite the bank-ruptcy of the deregulated Railtrack in Great Britain,the Council produced a report with controversialrecommendations.

The council’s confusion failed to distinguish twotasks:

1. Defining the goal. What type of modern, effi-cient intercity passenger rail system does our coun-try need, and of what size?

2. Developing the means to achieve the goal.

The council focused on the means but failed todefine the goals.

Systems View This evaluation leads to several suggestions for actionsconcerning livable cities and the role of transit:

Metro Rail greatly contributes to the quality of life inthe Washington, D.C., metropolitan area.

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

26

◆ Focus on goals, then work on means. Definethe type of city desired and then determine therequired intermodal composition of the city.

◆ Define the goals in terms of a city’s livabilityand sustainability.

◆ Consider the characteristics of livability relatedto transportation, such as

– Transportation available to all populationgroups;

– Freedom of mode choice—for example, car,transit, or walking;

– Minimal street congestion to increase economicactivity and reduce environmental deteriora-tion; and

– Reasonable equity in mobility available in allareas.

◆ Provide transportation that allows diversity ofland uses and life styles.

◆ Design center city and other major activity areasto be pedestrian-oriented and well served by transit,instead of dominated by freeways and parking garages.

◆ Adopt a policy to provide integrated networks ofsidewalks and bikeways in urbanized areas.

◆ Invest in high-quality transit systems that cancompete with automobile travel for many kinds oftrips.

In general, the car-dependent city offers greaterpersonal privacy—predominantly single family hous-ing and low densities of settlement. The intermodalcity offers greater diversity of land use forms and activ-ities, greater equity in travel options, and a more inten-sive social life.

The two types of cities may be referred to as the pri-vate city and the open city or livable city. By most cri-teria, the livable city is more efficient and sustainablethan the private city.

The livable city requires high-quality transit, rea-sonable accommodations for cars and bicycles, andgood treatment of pedestrians. This is apparent fromobservations of livable cities in North America (forexample, Boston, Massachusetts; Toronto, Ontario;and Portland) and many in Europe (Oslo; Zurich,Switzerland; Paris; and Munich) compared with suchcar-dependent private cities as Detroit, Michigan;Houston, Texas; and Bangkok, Thailand.

Contributing to Livable CitiesA major problem in cities is that individuals’ choice ofmodes often negatively affects transportation systemefficiency and ultimately the livability of urban areas.Policies and system designs should provide individu-als with incentives to select a socially optimal com-position of transportation modes.

But could it be too late to make substantialchanges? Are disincentives for car-use politically unac-ceptable because Americans love cars?

This defeatist attitude stems from a gross sim-plification of a complex problem. Examples of suc-cessful intermodal planning and the creation oflivable cities clearly show that the measures neces-sary to balance mode use are feasible and acceptableif well planned and politically well prepared. Liv-able cities are needed in which people can drivecars, ride transit, and walk comfortably and safelywhile enjoying an attractive urban environment.

Can professionals and academics make a significantcontribution toward this goal? If we broaden our viewsand assume positive, creative attitudes, we can. We havea moral obligation to make that contribution to society.

TRB, in its venerable tradition as an open profes-sional society encouraging free discussion, shouldencourage efforts to take a stronger, leading role inplanning intermodal transportation systems for thedevelopment of livable cities.

References1. Vuchic, V. R. Transportation for Livable Cities. Center for

Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University, New Brunswick,N.J., 1999.

2. Schiller, P. Taking the High Road. The Trust for Public Land,Washington, D.C., 2002.

3. Buchanan, C. Traffic in Towns. HMSO, London, United King-dom, 1963.

4. Fitch, Lyle, and Associates. Urban Transportation and PublicPolicy. Chandler, San Francisco, California, 1964.

5. Die Kommunalen Verkehrsprobleme in der BundesrepublikDeutschland (Hollatz and Tamms, eds.). Vulkan Verlag, 1965.

6. Johnson, E. Avoiding the Collision of Cities and Cars. Ameri-can Academy of Arts and Sciences, Chicago, Illinois, 1993.

7. Public Transport: The Challenge. 51st UITP Congress, Paris;UITP, Brussels, 1995.

8. Pucher, J. Urban Transport in Germany: How To ProvideFeasible Alternatives to Auto Use, Transport Reviews, Vol. 18,pp. 285–310 (1998).

9. Newman, P. Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming AutomobileDependence. Island Press, Washington, D.C., 1999.

10. Cities on the Move: A World Bank Urban Transport StrategyReview. World Bank, Washington, D.C., 2002.

11. Katz, B., R. Puentes, and S. Bernstein. TEA-21 Reauthoriza-tion: Getting Transportation Right for Metropolitan America.The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C., 2003.

12. Sustainable Transport. World Bank, Washington, D.C., 1996.13. Special Report 251: Toward a Sustainable Future. TRB,

National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997.14. Special Report 257: Making Transit Work: Insight from West-

ern Europe, Canada, and the United States. TRB, NationalResearch Council, Washington, D.C., 2001.

15. Special Report 233: In Pursuit of Speed: New Options for Inter-city Passenger Transport. TRB, National Research Council,Washington, D.C., 1991.

16. Mass Transit: Bus Rapid Transit Shows Promise. GAO-01-984,U.S. General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C., 2001.


27

The nation’s economy and the lifestyles of itscitizens depend on a safe and efficient trans-portation system. In 2001, surface transpor-tation comprised 8 percent of the gross

domestic product and about 18 percent of average U.S.household expenditures, second only to housing.

Yet surface transportation agencies face unprece-dented challenges in recruiting and retaining theworkforce necessary to deliver transportation infra-structure and services effectively. The responsible andefficient operation of the nation’s transportation sys-tem depends on a well-trained transportation systemworkforce. Successfully addressing workforce issuesrequires a collective effort, involving transportationagencies, the federal government, the private sector,and a range of academic institutions, as well as thetransportation workforce.

Workforce IssuesUnder the auspices of the Transportation ResearchBoard, the National Research Council of the NationalAcademies convened the Committee on Future Sur-face Transportation Agency Human Resources Needs(see sidebar, page 30) to determine how public trans-portation agencies can reorient human resourcesefforts to respond to changes in organizational roles

and responsibilities in the next two decades. Theseagencies include state departments of transportation(DOTs) and transit agencies that deliver transportationinfrastructure and services with support from private-sector contractors and consultants.

The study did not measure the shortfalls of laborforce supply. Instead, the committee examined strate-gies and made recommendations for transportationagencies to alter human resources activities—specifi-cally, recruitment, training, retention, and successionmanagement—to meet emerging workforce chal-lenges and to adjust to the labor market. The studyalso addressed the leadership role of the federal gov-ernment in this area.

Complexities and ConstraintsTransportation workforce issues are complex. Morethan 50 state DOTs, nearly 6,000 transit agencies,and many other public agencies share responsibilitiesfor transportation. In addition to unique responsi-bilities, each agency has its own organizational struc-ture, history, and culture. Each must adapt to internaland external social, political, and institutional work-ing environments, often in different ways.

Agencies vary in size and in the capabilities andresources available to address workforce needs. Fewhave addressed these needs comprehensively, compli-cating predictions of how many people will be neededin 5 or 10 years in specific job categories for each typeof agency. Most individual agencies do not have themechanisms to identify the specific skills that will beneeded in the future workforce. Therefore, because thedata were insufficient, the committee did not estimatespecific agency needs—what kinds of workers wouldbe needed for what kinds of jobs.

In recruiting, training, and retaining employees,agencies must adopt and adapt practices from a rangeof alternatives and combinations to suit circumstances.The endeavor is complex, because each agency com-petes for qualified staff not only with other agenciesbut with the private sector.

The Workforce ChallengeRecruiting, Training, and Retaining Qualified Workers for Transportation and Transit Agencies

W A L T E R D I E W A L D

N E W T R B S P E C I A L R E P O R T

Special Report 275:The WorkforceChallenge: Recruiting,Training, and RetainingQualified Workers forTransportation andTransit Agencies isavailable from TRB(www.TRB.org/bookstore/).

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

28

The committee therefore focused on how agenciescan meet workforce needs regardless of specific orcumulative requirements. Transportation agencies—in the public and the private sector—have a history ofworking together to address common problems sys-tematically and successfully. Resolving workforceneeds provides an opportunity for partnering.

Expansion and ExpendituresThe committee’s recommendations aim at avoidingthe severe consequences of inaction that already arehaving an effect. Today’s agencies require a workforcewith a wider range of technical disciplines. State DOTswere established early in the last century to build high-way networks, but some now are responsible also forairports, railroads, public transportation, ports andwaterways, intermodal operations, and other ancil-lary functions, such as motor vehicle registration andenforcement.

The changing mission and expanding responsibil-ities require a workforce capable of addressing manyissues beyond the scope of engineering. Transit agen-cies, for example, offer a variety of services and mustaddress many community, economic, and customerconcerns. All agencies face planning, environmental,and technology issues and are increasing the use oftelecommunications, data management, and otherinformation technologies.

Moreover, transportation programs are expandingat the same time that budget restrictions are limitingagency staff or requiring staff reductions. As a result,

more tasks must be contracted out, calling for person-nel skilled in contract management and administration.

Another problem common to all public agencies isthat senior staff are likely to retire in unprecedentednumbers—more than 50 percent of the state trans-portation agency workforce will be eligible for retire-ment in the next 10 years. This is more than doublethe retirement eligibility rate for the nation.

Agencies are facing difficulties recruiting andretaining professional and technical staff because thehighly competitive job market has created a disparitybetween public- and private-sector pay scales. Transitagencies, with bus and train operators comprisingapproximately 75 percent of the workforce, have addi-tional problems to overcome in recruiting:

◆ Attracting workers to a rule-bound, seniority-based environment;

◆ The inability to offer the work schedule flexi-bility sought by job applicants and common in otherindustries competing for the same employees; and

◆ Lower pay scales and fewer opportunities foradvancement in comparison with DOTs.

Within the context of greater skill needs andexpanding programs, agency expenditures for trainingare insufficient. Benchmark studies of training invest-ment in the private sector and federal agencies indicatethat successful organizations spend an average of 2percent of salaries on training—at least four timesmore than transportation agencies are spending.

Washington (D.C.) Metropolitan Area Transit Authority bus drivers receive training on a simulation device.

[PHO

TOC

RED

IT:LA

RRY

LEV

INE]


29

Federal StakesAny one of these issues would be a concern by itself,but taken together these issues suggest a possible cri-sis. Because it is responsible for strategic national inter-ests, the federal government—Congress, theadministration, and U.S. DOT and its modal admin-istrations—has a large stake in the effectiveness of thenation’s transportation workforce and has a key rolein meeting the challenges.

The federal government relies on the nationaltransportation workforce to deliver the programs andprojects necessary to accomplish the economic,mobility, safety, environmental, and defense mobi-lization goals for transportation. As the primary stew-ard of the nation’s transportation system, the federalgovernment is in the best position—in terms ofresources, scope of interest, and influence—to takea leadership role in addressing transportation work-force issues. Without federal leadership, attempts toresolve these issues will lack strategic direction andnational scope, despite the best efforts and accom-plishments of individual transportation agencies andtheir national associations.

RecommendationsThe committee’s recommendations aim at a range ofskill needs in surface transportation agencies. The fed-eral government, the private sector, educational insti-tutions, unions, and employees, however, also must beinvolved in the solution. Opportunities abound forpartnerships.

Partnering may be difficult at times, however,because of rules and regulations that require distancebetween public- and private-sector activities. Exam-ples from successful partnerships and collaborationsin other industries indicate that these barriers can beovercome.

The consequences of inaction include ineffectiveagency operations, inefficient use of limitedresources, higher future costs to meet needs, anddelays in introducing innovation and improvementsto the transportation system. Each of the committee’srecommendations aims at improving the perfor-mance of transportation agencies and, ultimately, thenation’s transportation system. The recommenda-tions reflect the goals and benchmarks of successfulpublic- and private-sector organizations and reflectthe primary goal of President Bush’s 2002 Manage-ment Agenda—improving human capital.

Training must be a priority. All transportation agencies—in partnership with thefederal government, the private sector, educationalinstitutions, unions, and employees—should estab-lish training as a priority. Training is an investment,

providing necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities.Training supports alternative paths to transportationagency careers, so that college and community collegegraduates from programs in business, planning, envi-ronmental science, public policy, and other areas canenter the transportation workforce.

Commitment to training is measured by invest-ment and effectiveness. An investment goal of 2 per-cent of salaries for training—as suggested inbenchmarking surveys of successful organizations—is appropriate for transportation agencies. This isequivalent to approximately 40 hours of trainingannually for each employee. Although the benchmarkgoal is important, the training must be effective interms of improved performance, lower costs, andother measures.

More federal surface transportation program fundsshould be eligible for use by state and local trans-portation agencies for education and training. Although spending at all levels for the training andeducation of the transportation workforce should beincreased, federal spending serves as a catalyst. Fed-eral reliance on the nation’s transportation workforcepoints to the need for federal leadership in addressingtransportation workforce training.

Federal funding for transportation workforce train-ing has several components. The largest single sourceof federal training funding to agencies is a discre-tionary program that permits states to use up to 0.5percent of a portion of the funds from the SurfaceTransportation Program for education and training—approximately $38 million. Similarly, transit agenciescan use a portion of federal operating and capitalinvestment funds for training—approximately $32million.

The committee supports the administration’s reau-thorization proposal to make more program funds eli-gible for use in education and training. If enacted, theproposal would yield a 200 percent increase in avail-able discretionary funds.

Many federal transportation programs encouragethe use of new methods and advanced technologies,including planning and environmental models, sys-tems analysis, intelligent transportation systems,community involvement, and alternative-fuel transitvehicles. But these programs—which receive a total ofapproximately $36 billion annually—do not supporttraining for the people responsible for implementing,operating, and maintaining the innovations.

This lack of support acts as a barrier to widerimplementation of transportation system innovationsand to achieving the corresponding safety and perfor-mance improvements and cost reductions. The lack ofsupport also hampers federal stewardship in assuring

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

30

that state and local governments are using nationalresources efficiently.

The committee supports reauthorization propos-als to increase funding for federal programs thatdirectly support education and training, includingthe University Transportation Centers (UTC) pro-gram; the Federal Highway Administration’sNational Highway Institute; the Federal TransitAdministration’s National Transit Institute; and theLocal Technical Assistance Program (LTAP). In addi-tion to increasing the funds for agency educationand training, Congress should introduce incentivesto trigger more federal funding if states and agenciesinvest their own funds in education and training forthe transportation workforce.

Incentives should be added to the UTC program toencourage partnering with community colleges oneducation and training in areas for which the com-munity colleges are well suited. A systematic evalua-tion of training outcomes must accompany theincreased investment in training.

U.S. DOT, in partnership with transportation agen-cies, the private sector, educational institutions,unions, and employees, should undertake an initia-tive that focuses on innovation in human resourcespractices, addressing recruitment, training, reten-tion, and succession management for transportationagency personnel. This initiative would provide leadership and a focalpoint for federal, state, and local agency efforts, as

well as a basis for creating partnerships among keyparties. The federal government, with its nationaltransportation responsibilities and the humanresources capabilities in U.S. DOT and its modalagencies, should take the lead in this initiative as afollow-up to the U.S. DOT-sponsored NationalTransportation Workforce Summit of 2002.

U.S. DOT should interact with other federal agen-cies that are pursuing workforce development initia-tives and acquire useful information and data. Thetransportation workforce initiative also can build onefforts such as the Transportation Workforce Devel-opment website that the Federal Highway Adminis-tration is developing in partnership with the AmericanAssociation of State Highway and Transportation Offi-cials, documenting exemplary workforce practices atstate DOTs. The initiative also can incorporate theongoing work of the American Public TransportationAssociation’s Workforce Development Task Force.

Including experiences from all types of transpor-tation agencies and private-sector organizations wouldprovide much-needed information and support. Allstakeholders in the nation’s workforce—agencies,academia, trainers, unions, employees, and the privatesector—should participate in setting priorities anddirections for the initiative. These partners shouldwork together to compile data and information toexamine the national implications of transportationworkforce issues.

Transportation agencies should partner with uni-versities, community colleges, training institutes, andLTAP centers for training and workforce development.These institutions are well organized to provide edu-cation and training and have the technical expertise todeliver the curricula, courses, and training materials tomeet agency needs. Many already are doing this.

Transportation agency leaders must make humanresources management a strategic function. The most successful private- and public-sector orga-nizations have raised human resources managementto the strategic planning level in their organizations,because human capital is a key to successful andimproved performance. Several transportation agen-cies have made the human resources function a strate-gic and equal partner with other key agency functions.

Without this organizational change, agencies willcontinue to fill positions in a piecemeal fashion insteadof identifying future workforce needs and addressinggaps in the ability to meet those needs through astrategic human resources program.

The author, a Senior Program Officer in the TRBDivision of Studies and Information Services, servedas study director for this project.

Committee on Future Surface TransportationAgency Human Resource Needs: Strategies forRecruiting, Training, and Retaining PersonnelDavid L.Winstead, Holland & Knight, LLP, ChairAnthony L. Alarid, New Mexico State Highway and Transportation

Department (retired)David S. Ferguson, Florida Department of TransportationMargaret L. Forde, Northeast Houston Community CollegeCameron Gordon, American Council on Intergovernmental RelationsDamian J. Kulash, Eno Foundation for Transportation (retired)Paul J. Larrousse, Rutgers UniversityJohn M. Mason, Jr., Pennsylvania State UniversityMyra Howze Shiplett, National Academy of Public AdministrationThomas R. Smith, Wilbur Smith AssociatesDarwin G. Stuart, Chicago Transit Authority (retired)Paul E. Torgersen (NAE), Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Liaison RepresentativesJoseph Toole, Federal Highway AdministrationTimothy Klein, Research and Special Programs AdministrationK. Thirumalai, Research and Special Programs Administration

TRB Meetings2004

Additional information on TRB conferences and workshops, including calls for abstracts, registration and hotel information, lists ofcosponsors, and links to conference websites, is available online (www.TRB.org/trb/calendar). Registration and hotel information usually is available 2 to 3 months in advance. For information, contact the individual listed at 202-334-2934, fax 202-334-2003, or e-mail [email protected]/.

*TRB is cosponsor of the meeting.

C A L E N D A RTR NEW

S 229 NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2003

31

January10 Pavement Performance Data

Analysis ForumWashington, D.C.A. Robert Raab

11–15 TRB 83rd Annual MeetingWashington, D.C.Mark Norman, Linda Karson

April13–17 5th International Conference on

Case Histories in GeotechnicalEngineering*New York, New YorkG. P. Jayaprakash

14–16 8th International LevelHighway–Rail CrossingSymposium*Sheffield, United Kingdom

21–23 Workshop on AbandonedUnderground Mines*Tucson, Arizona

May5–8 5th International Conference on

Cracking in Pavements: RiskAssessment and Prevention*Limoges, FranceFrank Lisle

23–26 10th International Conference onMobility and Transport for Elderlyand Disabled People Hamamatsu, JapanClaire Felbinger

26–28 8th International Conference onApplications of AdvancedTechnologies in Transportation*Beijing, China

June 7–9 6th International Symposium on

Snow Removal and Ice ControlTechnologySpokane, Washington

27–30 North American TravelMonitoring Exposition andConference 2004San Diego, California

July21–24 Highway Capacity and Quality of

Service Committee MidyearMeeting and ConferenceState College, PennsylvaniaRichard Cunard

August29– 6th National Meeting on Access Sept. 1 Management

Kansas City, MissouriKimberly Fisher

September13–17 Structural Materials Technology:

Nondestructive Evaluation–Nondestructive Tests forHighways and Bridges*Niagara Falls, New YorkStephen Maher

22–24 9th National Conference onTransportation Planning for Smalland Medium-Sized Communities:Tools of the TradeColorado Springs, ColoradoKimberly Fisher

25–29 2nd International Conference onAccelerated Pavement Testing*Minneapolis, MinnesotaStephen Maher

October14th Equipment ManagementWorkshopMinneapolis, Minnesota

19–22 2nd International Conference onBridge Maintenance, Safety, andManagement*Kyoto, Japan

19–24 6th International Conference onManaging Pavements*Brisbane, Queensland, AustraliaStephen Maher

2005

January9–13 TRB 84th Annual Meeting

Washington, D.C.Mark Norman, Linda Karson

June 3rd International Symposium onHighway Geometric DesignChicago, Illinois

20–24 Seventh International Symposiumon Utilization of High-Strength/High-PerformanceConcrete*Washington, D.C.Frederick Hejl

July17–20 6th International Bridge

Engineering ConferenceBoston, Massachusetts

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

32

Road ImprovementsMay Not Spark Population GrowthMajor road projects completed in North Carolinaduring the 1990s contributed only marginally to thestate’s overall increase in population, according toresearch released September by the John LockeFoundation, a nonpartisan think tank in North Car-olina. The findings suggest that other factors such aspreexisting density, retail development, zoning, geog-raphy, income, demographics, access to schools, andaccess to sewer and water services have a greatereffect on promoting or preventing sprawl in an areathan road construction does.

David Hartgen, a Professor of TransportationStudies at the University of North Carolina at Char-lotte, conducted the study by comparing populationchanges in 12 commuting regions of North Carolinawith the locations of major road improvements dur-ing the 1990s. His research concluded that abouthalf of the state’s population growth in the periodoccurred in areas that had no major road improve-ments during the decade.

The study notes that the “induced capacity” effectof highway expansion—the number of new driversdue to growth—is only a small percentage of thedaily traffic that highway expansion accommodates.According to the research, urban and rural roadwidenings in several regions of the state raised pop-ulation at a lower rate than the construction of a sin-gle small McDonald’s restaurant does—suggestingcommercial development causes more growth thanroad projects.

The study notes that suburban sprawl occurswhen high-density urban areas are filled to capacity

and that population tends to increase near desirablelocations, such as mountains or the coast. The studysuggests that road investments should be made pri-marily to reduce travel time, operating costs, andaccidents in urban areas and to improve transporta-tion access and community mobility in rural areasrather than to spur growth.

“Officials should cautiously consider proposedchanges in road funding policy that offer hope ofslowing or stopping sprawl or growth since suchpolicies are likely to be unsuccessful,” writes Hart-gen, a former planner and policy analyst for the NewYork State Department of Transportation and theFederal Highway Administration. As long as a com-munity is an attractive place to live and generatesemployment opportunities, growth probably will fol-low—so failure to build roads to accommodate theresulting traffic only will result in more congestion,the report concludes.

The full report, an executive summary, and aPowerPoint presentation of the results are posted atwww.johnlocke.org.

Nevada DOT Makes Tunnel Cleanings Safer The Nevada Department of Transportation (DOT)cleaned the twin Carlin Tunnels along I-80 in north-east Nevada this year by shutting down each tunnelfor two days instead of keeping one lane of trafficopen. Under the new process, workers can completethe annual task of scrubbing the walls and replacingoverhead lights without contending with trafficzooming by sometimes just inches away from thecrews and the equipment.

Traffic for the closed tunnel is diverted to a bypassroute, and traffic in the other tunnel is reduced to onelane to ease the crossover to regular lanes. By sepa-rating traffic from maintenance, workers also wereable to install new sensors and lines for the RoadWeather Information System site and to perform theannual inspection of approach bridges. The resultsare improved motorist and worker safety andincreased efficiency and effectiveness of the mainte-nance operation, according to Nevada DOT officials.

Summarized from Nevada DOT’s September 2003issue of Centerline. For further information visitwww.nevadadot.com/.

Economic Downturn AffectsBay Area CommuteFor the second straight year, the daily commute hasimproved for California residents in a nine-countyregion, according to the 11th survey released in Octo-ber by RIDES for Bay Area Commuters. Less conges-tion, faster driving speeds, and shorter commutes to

NEWS BRIEFS

Nevada DOT worker hoses down the tile walls inside the Carlin Tunnels after rotarybrushes scrub off grime.


33

work were reported by the organization, which oper-ates the Regional Rideshare Program under contract tothe Metropolitan Transit Commission.

San Francisco–Oakland area residents who indi-cated their commute is “better now than it was ayear ago” increased slightly to 30 percent, while 18percent reported their commute is “worse than itwas a year ago.” Commuters who indicated worseconditions dropped 7 percent from 2002, continuinga 25-percent decline in the last two years.

Nearly half of residents surveyed said their com-mute had improved because traffic was lighter. Thesurvey notes that better transit operations and road-ways improvements could have contributed to thelighter traffic, but a likelier cause is fewer commuterson the road due to a slower economy and fewer jobs.

The study also suggests that driving speedsincreased and travel times decreased in 2003because of less traffic. Traffic clips along at an aver-age of 33 mph, a 3-mph increase from 2000 whenthe Bay Area was bustling with jobs. The averagecommute now takes 29 minutes, down from the35-minute high of 2000.

Not since 1996 have so few commuters driven towork alone, the study finds. Sixty-four percent ofrespondents said they drove alone on a regular basis—a 5 percent drop from last year—and an increasingnumber of commuters said they take mass transit,walk, or telecommute. The study noted, however, thatoverall mass transit ridership has decreased—againpointing to the slowed economy. Carpooling remainedsteady at 19 percent.

As in last year’s study, commuters who drovealone said they could not find carpool partners, theirwork schedules required the flexibility associatedwith driving alone, and no practical transit optionswere available for their commute. One reason thatmoved up the list substantially, however, was thatdriving is “easiest and fastest,” another indicator ofdecreased congestion as a result of the slow economyand road improvements, the survey maintains.

For more information view the Commute Profile2003 report at www.511.org (click “rideshare,” then“commute research”).

New Light Rail Line Emphasizes Safety and SecurityLast summer’s 13.7-mile expansion to the Los Ange-les County metro rail provides Pasadena, California,with a train system for the first time since the 1950s.To ensure public safety, the Metropolitan Transpor-tation Authority (MTA) conducted a proactive pub-lic campaign to educate new generations of residentsabout the importance of adhering to precautionarymeasures along the new Gold Line light rail.

MTA officials visited 71 area schools to teach stu-dents to be aware of approaching trains and therequired stopping distances, to stay away from tracksand idle trains, and not to breach train crossing gates.MTA relied on high tech presentations to promotethe rail safety message in a more effective, hands-onmanner.

Interactive DVD presentations were created tohelp the community to recognize rail warningdevices and how they function. MTA also unveileda “Metro Experience” mobile theater, a Disneyland-style thrill ride that simulates actual train rides anddemonstrates consequences of unsafe behavior. Themobile theater employs 3–D projection, wind, seatmovement, and strobe lights in the 5-minutepresentation.

MTA utilizes safety and security measures alongthe Gold Line and in transit stations. Four quadrantgates seal off key intersections when trains are cross-ing; vehicle detection loops embedded in the pave-ment automatically lift the nearest gate to allowtrapped vehicles to escape; and pedestrian and swinggates close off foot traffic at most at-grade crossings.

Fiber optic signs installed on traffic signal can-tilevers for the street-running portions of the lineprovide drivers advance warning of approachingtrains. Meanwhile, Sheriff’s Department securityassistants inspect fares at transit stations, providingassistance and resolving issues.

N E W S B R I E F S

The Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authorityis taking a proactive, innovative approach to ensuresafety and security on its new Gold Line light rail.

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

34

National Survey IdentifiesHousehold Travel TrendsFor the first time a typical American householdnow has more vehicles than drivers, U.S. DOTreported in August. An average of 1.9 personal vehi-cles is owned or available to 1.8 drivers per house-hold, according to the department’s NationalHousehold Travel Survey (NHTS).

The survey contacted a national sample of 26,000households in 2001 and 2002 and interviewed60,000 individuals about the amount and purpose oftheir travel, the use of different travel modes, timeand miles spent traveling, and the ownership of vehi-cles. NHTS, which expands and replaces the Nation-wide Personal Transportation Survey and theAmerican Travel Survey released in 1995, examinesboth daily travel and longer-distance trips. Amongthe findings were that

◆ Americans travel an average of 40 miles a day,including 35 of those miles by personal vehicle,

◆ About 90 percent of daily and long-distancetrips are by a personal vehicle,

◆ 9 percent of daily trips are by walking and 2percent by transit or school bus,

◆ 13 percent of long-distance trips of more than 50miles from home are for commuting to and from work,

◆ 97 percent of trips of less than 300 roundtripmiles are by personal vehicle;

◆ Nearly 75 percent of trips of more than 2,000roundtrip miles are by airplane,

◆ 57 percent of long-distance trips are taken bypeople who have a total household income of$50,000 or more,

◆ 8 percent of U.S. households do not have avehicle, and

◆ 17 percent of adults report that they have usedpublic transit in the last two months.

For further information, go to the Bureau of Trans-portation Statistics (BTS) website at www.bts.gov.

B&O Railroad Museum RebuildingRestoration continues at B&O Railroad Museum’sNational Historic Landmark Roundhouse in Balti-more, Maryland, after a February 2003 snowstormcaused the lower roof to collapse. Falling debris dam-aged historic locomotives and railcars on display,and the museum has been closed since.

Architects, engineers, and contractors have replacedhistoric structural components with materials thatreplicate the finishes of the interior and exterior.Museum management recently learned that theremaining portions of the upper roof, including theclerestory, lantern, and cupola, do not meet the Inter-national Building Code standards and must bereplaced, at a cost of an additional $2.2 million. Theprojected reopening date for the museum will beannounced in early 2004, according to Museum Direc-tor Courtney B. Wilson.

Plans, drawings, and permits are being finalizedfor a state-of-the-art facility that will enable museumstaff to begin repairing historic locomotives androlling stock severely damaged by the fallen roof.The total cost of the repairs and expansion is esti-mated at more than $30 million, with approximately$20 million covered by insurance. The board ofdirectors and staff are raising $10 million throughsupport from federal, state, and city governmentgrants; private and corporate foundation funds; anda grass-roots appeal to regional and national busi-nesses and the general public.

For more information visit the B&O RailroadMuseum’s website at www.borail.org.

N E W S B R I E F S

BRIDGE OF ACHIEVEMENT—NewJersey DOT received the 2003 NationalAchievement Award from the NationalPartnership for Highway Quality for workon a 500-ft., fixed-span bridge along US-9over the Nacote Creek in Atlantic County.The bridge replaced a deteriorating draw-bridge built in 1922.For the first time in anyproject, New Jersey DOT employed suchinnovations as load and resistance factordesign; high-performance concrete forbeams and for prestressed cylinder piles tosupport the pier caps;nontoxic,manmade

materials for the fender system; and Vibro concrete columns that support theapproach embankment walls. The construction also resolved environmental issuesinvolving historic property,coastal wetlands,and threatened and endangered species,including the bald eagle and osprey.

After February 2003 snowstorm, rubble from fallenroof surrounds Track 15 and covers historiclocomotives at B&O Railroad Museum’s Roadhouse.By November 2003, much of lower roof was rebuiltand interior scaffolding was put in place in preparationfor clerestory reconstruction.

Researcher Honored forEfforts To Prevent TeenAlcohol UseMothers Against Drunk Diving (MADD) hasnamed a new National President’s Award inhonor of Ralph W. Hingson, Professor ofSocial and Behavioral Sciences and AssociateDean for Research at the Boston UniversitySchool of Public Health. The award recognizesHingson’s work to prevent alcohol-impaired driving. A member ofthe TRB Committee for Alcohol, Other Drugs, and Transportation,Hingson has published more than 100 articles in peer-reviewed

journals. MADD credits his papers with providing scientific evi-dence for legislation that raised the legal drinking age to 21, low-ered the illegal drunk driving limit to .08 percent blood alcoholconcentration, and made it illegal for youth under 21 to drive avehicle after consuming any measurable amount of alcohol.

The Ralph W. Hingson Research in Practice Award will be givenannually to a researcher whose work supports MADD’s mission.Hingson, a past MADD National Board member, received the inau-gural award at the organization’s 2003 national conference. Hing-son provided background for a September 2003 NationalAcademies report about effective strategies for combating under-age drinking in America.


35

N E W S B R I E F S

Ralph W. Hingson

Compost seeding ispneumatically applied on medianareas on Highway 404.(Published and reprinted withpermission of the OntarioMinistry of Transportation.)

Canada Uses Compost To VegetateHighway AreasThe Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) inCanada is evaluating pilot projects that are usingcompost, rather than topsoil, to replenish subsoiland establish vegetation cover after highway con-struction projects. The preliminary results indicatethat compost is a highly effective and environ-mentally friendly alternative to traditional meth-ods of growing vegetation cover and controllingerosion.

The revegetation process normally consists of set-ting down over the exposed earth a new topsoil layerand hydraulically seeding the area with perennialgrasses. A field trial along Highway 404 in December2001 spread a compost and seed mix, and MTOobservations indicate good initial growth of peren-nial grasses, quick germination and cover, moderateerosion control, and reduced weed and competitivegrass growth.

A truck-mounted, computer-controlled and -calibrated pneumatic blower unit propelled themixed compost directly and uniformly onto the soil

surface. The ministry now is mon-itoring approximately 30 applica-tions of the compost technique atvarious road and facility sites.

The compost is formed by ahigh temperature bio-oxidationprocess converting wood, leaves,grass clippings, and other naturalwaste materials into a stable, nutri-ent-rich organic matter. The compost processinginvolves heating the waste up to 60°C for at least 15days, which destroys weed seeds and pathogens thatmay be present in other soil additives, reducing theneed for herbicides and pesticides. The compost alsocontains significantly more organic material thantopsoil. Compost is known to improve the struc-tural, nutrient, and biological properties of soil towhich it is applied, and the density helps preventsediment runoff and erosion. MTO also notes a keybenefit to using compost is it recycles natural waste.

Summarized from MTO’s June 2003 issue of RoadTalk. For further information visit http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/.

INTERNATIONAL NEWS

PEOPLE IN TRANSPORTATION

Traffic Flow Expert ReceivesResearch AwardAdolf May, Jr., Professor Emeritus at the Uni-versity of California–Berkeley, has receivedthe American Road and TransportationBuilders Association’s (ARTBA) 2003 S.S.Steinberg Award for his contributions totransportation research.

In his 45-year career as an educator andresearcher, May has been a recognized leader in the design, oper-ation, and simulation of freeways, rural highways, urban streets,and intersections. He has published more than 300 papers andreports, and is author of the textbook, Traffic Flow Fundamentals.

May has been active in TRB since the early 1950s. He has servedon many committees and panels, as well as the TRB Executive Com-mittee and the Technical Activities Council. He is an emeritus mem-ber of the Highway Capacity and Quality of Service Committee.

May served as the first director of the Chicago Area FreewaySurveillance and Control Project, a forerunner of current activi-ties in intelligent transportation systems. In 1990, he was electedto the National Academy of Engineering in recognition of hiswork in traffic engineering and traffic flow. He received theTheodore M. Matson Memorial Award in 1992 and the TRB Dis-tinguished Lectureship in 1994.

The award was named after S.S. Steinberg, the founding pres-ident of ARTBA’s Research and Education Division.

Adolf May Jr.

PH

OTO

:NIC

KC

LOSE,R

OA

DT

ALK

JUN

E2003

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

36

Annual Meeting Abounds inSessions and ThemesMore than 9,000 transportation professionals from around the world areexpected to converge on Washington, D.C., in January for 5 days of ses-sions, specialty workshops, and committee meetings at the TRB 83rdAnnual Meeting. In addition to the three spotlight themes of transpor-tation infrastructure, security measures, and funding reauthorization,one-third of the 500 sessions, on January 11–15, 2004, will focus on oneof the following major issues:

◆ Transportation safety options for the future (36 sessions);◆ Balancing environmental and transportation goals (24 sessions);◆ Matching transportation systems with communities—including

context sensitivity, land use and sprawl, demographics, and environ-mental and economic impacts (23 sessions);

◆ Freight transportation (20 sessions);◆ Future capacity—or congestion—of the transportation sys-

tem (18 sessions);

◆ Integrating modes and institutions for a more seamless trans-portation system (18 sessions);

◆ Transportation investment decisions: art or science? (15 ses-sions);

◆ Transportation personnel shortage: outlook, implications,experiences, and actions (6 sessions); and

◆ Long-term options for transportation and energy (5 ses-sions).

Sessions are located at three hotels: Marriott Wardman Park,Omni Shoreham, and Washington Hilton. The Hilton will playhost to mega sessions on Monday, January 12, when high-rankingofficials from the U.S. Department of Transportation will give theirperspectives on the upcoming reauthorization and future outlookfor federal transportation programs. The future role of state DOTsalso will be discussed.

For session details and program information, visitwww.TRB. org/meeting. An Interactive Preliminary Program on

TRB HIGHLIGHTS

From the Top Down: Fatigue Cracking inHot-Mix Asphalt Layers Load-associated fatigue cracking had been thought to originate in thebottom layer of hot-mix asphalt (HMA) in concrete-surfaced pave-ments and then spread to the surface. Recent studies have deter-mined, however, that fatigue cracks in the wheel path also canoriginate on the pavement surface and then descend through theHMA layer. Penetration of water and other foreign debris can accel-erate this cracking. Studies have identified some of the factors thatcause top-down cracking, have provided hypotheses for crackingmechanisms, have proposed test methods for evaluating an HMAmixture’s susceptibility to cracking, and have developed preliminarymodels for predicting the initiation and propagation of cracks. Addi-tional research is needed, however, to evaluate and validate thehypotheses, test methods, and models and to guide pavement engi-neers in selecting HMA mixtures and in designing flexible pavements.

Advanced Asphalt Technologies, LLC of Sterling, Virginia, hasreceived a $39,556, 7-month contract [National Cooperative HighwayResearch Program (NCHRP) Project 1-42, FY 2003] to conduct PhaseI and develop a research plan to determine

◆ Mechanisms that govern the initiation and propagation of top-down fatigue cracking in HMA layers,

◆ Methods for laboratory testing of HMA mixtures to identify thesusceptibility of the surface layer to cracking,

◆ Significant factors associated with top-down fatigue cracking,and

◆ Models for predicting the initiation and propagation of top-down cracking.

Investigations will be pursued in a subsequent phase to developguidance for dealing with top-down cracking.

For further information contact Amir N. Hanna, TRB (telephone 202-334-1892, e-mail [email protected]).

Mainstreaming Riprap Design Criteria,Specifications, and Quality ControlThe Federal Highway Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of Engi-neers, and state departments of transportation have developed orused methods for sizing riprap (rock cover) to protect bridge abut-ments, piers, channels, guidebanks, dams, embankments, and otherstructures vulnerable to erosion. Most of the methods are based on,or derive from, procedures originally presented in the 1930s. Othermethods for sizing riprap are the result of empirical studies designedto protect specific structures, such as piers and abutments.

Current techniques and procedures for the design of riprapprotection can be confusing and difficult to apply. A review of theliterature indicates that many different techniques are used todetermine the size and extent of a riprap installation. Dependingon the technique used to measure riprap, the required size of stonecan vary widely, because there is no consistent classification sys-tem or set of specifications. Most states have their own specifica-tions for classifying riprap size and gradation. A consistentspecification that could be used from location to location, there-fore, is needed. Moreover, many of the construction practices forinstalling riprap are not effective, so that projects historically havesuffered from poor quality control. Standard construction practicesand techniques are needed to ensure proper placement and per-formance of riprap countermeasures.

Ayres Consultants, Inc., of Fort Collins, Colorado, has beenawarded a $350,000, 30-month contract (NCHRP Project 24-23, FY2003) to develop recommended design guidelines, material specifi-cations, and construction inspection and quality control guidelines forriprap. Ayres anticipates that the guidelines and specifications will beused for the design and construction of riprap revetment at riverbanks,bridge piers, bridge abutments, guidebanks, and other locationsrequiring scour countermeasures.

For further information contact Tim Hess, TRB (telephone 202-334-2049, e-mail [email protected]).

COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS NEWS


37

the website allows searches of program sessionsand meetings so that participants can plan ameeting itinerary. Preregistrants can viewsession room assignments.

The TRB Annual Meeting offers opportunities for professional interaction and ideaexchange; (above) a poster session at the 2003 meeting.

Audible Signals for Pedestrian Safety Near Light Rail Safety issues associated with motor vehicle–light rail vehicle crossingstraditionally have received more attention than issues involving pedes-trian–light rail vehicle conflicts, such as collisions, near misses, evasiveactions, and illegal pedestrian movements. Although light rail vehiclecollisions with pedestrians are fewer in number, the results are gener-ally more severe because of pedestrian vulnerability. Compounding the problem are new generations of light rail vehicles that are quieter

than previous designs.Conflicts may increasefor pedestrians—par-ticularly for those withdisab i l i t i es—who are unaware of quieteroncoming light railvehicles.

Light rail systemsuse audible signals toalert vehicles and pe-destrians to oncomingtrains, but operatingprocedures for thesesignals differ from sys-tem to system. Forexample, some rail sys-tems require the trainoperator to sound ahorn or bell at eachgrade crossing, whileother systems requirethe sounding of thehorn or bell only if thereis an immediate hazard.

Operating procedures also differ for sounding the bell on auto-matic warning devices at grade crossings. Some agencies sound thebell only when the warning devices are active and the gates arelowering, and then extinguish the bell when the gate reaches thehorizontal position. Other agencies sound the bells at the gradecrossing for the entire time that the warning devices are active,until the train has passed and the gates have fully ascended. Inaddition, some agencies have installed supplemental audibledevices at crossings.

The use of loud and frequent audible signals, however, can lead tocommunity pressure to reduce noise at crossings. In some instances,quiet zones have been established, increasing the concern for vehicleand pedestrian safety at crossings.

Research is needed to improve understanding of the effectivenessof various audible signals and associated operating procedures, andto provide guidance for light rail systems.

Korve Engineering, Inc., of Oakland, California, has been awardeda $400,000, 24-month contract [Transit Cooperative Research Pro-gram (TCRP) Project D-10, FY 2003] to develop a guidebook on theuse of audible signals and related operating procedures for pedestrian-crossing safety in a light rail transit environment. The research willaddress

◆ Integration of audible devices with other crossing measures—such as signage, channelization, warning and control devices—to maximize safety;

◆ Pedestrian crossings in various environments—for example,low-speed street running, at highway–rail grade crossings in semi-exclusive rights-of-way, and at stations;

◆ On-vehicle and wayside audible signals; and ◆ The needs of disabled individuals.

For further information contact Christopher Jenks, TRB (telephone202-334-3089, e-mail [email protected]).

Transportation Giants Celebrate CentennialsFord Motor Company, the American AutomobileAssociation (AAA), motorcycle manufacturerHarley-Davidson, and the first of the state DOTs allare passing the 100-year milestone in 2004. Specialevents at the TRB Annual Meeting will honor the his-toric achievements of these groups. Consult theonline Interactive Preliminary Program for moreinformation,www.TRB.org/meeting.

Korve Engineering, Inc., of Oakland,California, is developing a guidebook fortrain operators on the use of audible signalsnear pedestrian crossways.

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

38

Developing and Sharing Transit BusMaintenance PracticesTransit bus maintenance managers must problem-solve issues notcovered by internal written procedures. Whether addressing an equip-ment problem, an inspection procedure, a campaign replacement, aclimatological adaptation, or a routine cleaning, many managers pro-ceed by gathering information from other transit systems and vendorsto develop a maintenance practice that meets the needs of the localsystem. That practice then becomes the de facto norm until a bettermethod is identified.

The results of their efforts, however, often are not shared withthe rest of the transit industry. Consequently, many transit systemsface the same issues and expend valuable time and resources seek-ing information from other transit systems or “reinventing thewheel.” Improved methods for sharing maintenance practiceswould greatly improve bus maintenance efficiency.

The Internet has made new tools and information sources avail-able for developing and sharing of bus maintenance practices; yet,many transit systems are not aware of these resources. TRB and theAmerican Public Transportation Association publish transit mainte-nance web boards that allow managers to compare notes and shareinformation. Use has been increasing steadily. In addition, productmanufacturers and suppliers maintain websites that provide guidance

on maintenance issues. Potential pitfalls to some of these tools include inconsistency in the

quality of information, the need to adapt the information to local con-ditions, warranty issues, proper citing of references, use of copy-righted materials, and legal and liability implications associated withsharing maintenance practices.

Transit Resource Center of Sacramento, California, has beenawarded a $300,000, 18-month contract (TCRP Project E-5, FY 2003)to create recommended guidelines for transit systems on how todevelop and share bus maintenance practices with the rest of thetransit industry. The research would not develop universal best main-tenance practices, but instead provide methods to assist maintenancemanagers in obtaining relevant information, validating it, filling in thegaps where necessary, developing a practice most applicable to localconditions, and appropriately sharing maintenance practices with therest of the transit industry.

The guidebook will include case studies that use the method-ology to develop practices for at least six specific maintenanceproblem areas. The research also will include recommendations onhow to improve tools for developing and sharing bus maintenancepractices.

For further information contact Christopher Jenks, TRB (telephone202-334-3089, e-mail [email protected]).

TRB HIGHLIGHTS

Transit IDEA Expands Panel for Security ProjectsThe Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has joined thepanel of TRB’s Transit IDEA (Innovations Deserving ExploratoryAnalysis) program to guide projects that focus on measures to enhancetransit security—a high priority since September 11, 2001. Subjectmatter experts, transit agency representatives, and leaders from theAmerican Public Transportation Association and the Federal TransitAdministration also collaborate on the Transit IDEA panel, which hasthe following three investigations under way:

◆ Innovative Bioterrorism Detection for Transit Security,◆ Bandwidth Expansion and Real-Time Surveillance for Security

on Transit Buses, and◆ Counter-Terrorism Chemical Detector for Rail Transit Systems.

For more information about the project or to propose transit securityor bus rapid transit projects go to http://www4.trb.org/trb/dive.nsf/web/transit_idea.

IDEA Project Helps Win AwardA past recipient of a TRB IDEA program research grant, TransTech Sys-tems, Inc., of Schenectady, New York, received the 2003 NOVA Awardfor the Pavement Quality Indicator. The indicator provides qualityreadings during a paving job without the limitations of nuclear devicesor destructive testing. The density gauge employs electrical impedance

technology originally tested through the National Cooperative High-way Research Program IDEA program. The Construction InnovationForum presents the NOVA Award to honor innovations that improvethe quality and reduce the costs of construction.

For further information read the Fall 2003 issue of Ignition,http://gulliver.trb.org/publications/ignition/ignition_4.pdf.

COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS NEWS (continued)

The 16-pound TransTech Systems Pavement Quality Indicatormeasuring density.


39

BOOKSHELF

Practical Guide to RailwayEngineeringCommittee 24, Education andTraining, American RailwayEngineering and Maintenanceof Way Association; Landover,Maryland: 2003; $124.95,including a full-text CD-ROM;572 pp.

In the United States, formal education in railwayengineering is limited to a handful of universities;some of these also offer short courses for practi-tioners. Members of the American Railway Engi-neering and Maintenance of Way Association(AREMA) Committee on Education and Traininghave responded to the need for educational mate-rials about railway operations and practices for indi-viduals who are entering the specialized field ofrailway engineering without the formal education.This comprehensive guide was assembled by 50volunteer railway practitioners, members of thecommittee, each of whom tapped extensive experi-ence and knowledge for the task.

As the introduction states, the guide constitutes acourse, “Railroad 101.” The text provides detailed cov-erage of railroad operations, rolling stock, right-of-way

and roadbed, track design and maintenance, commu-nications and signals, railway structures, electrifica-tion, passenger and high-speed rail, and railwayenvironmental conditions and permitting, amongother topics. The guide is intended to enhance theunderstanding and use of the more detailed and tech-nical AREMA Manual for Railway Engineering, thedefinitive work in the field.

Practice Problems for the Civil Engineering PE Exam: A Companion to the CivilEngineering Reference Man-ual, Ninth EditionMichael R. Lindeburg, Profes-sional Publications, Inc. Bel-mont, California: 2003; $164;1-888577-96-7.

This book presents 439 problems divided amongchapters that cover PE exam topics involving waterresources, environmental, geotechnical, structural, andtransportation. Most problems are in the same multi-ple choice format as the exam. Solutions assist thereader step by step through the process, providing aclear, complete explanation of how to reach the correctanswers most efficiently.

The books in this section are not TRB publications. To order, contact the publisher listed.

Pavement Management, Monitoring, and AcceleratedTesting 2002Transportation Research Record 1816This three-part report contains papers about pavementmanagement, including state highway networkingprojects, infrastructure maintenance, and cost analysis;pavement monitoring, including trucking trends, fiber-optic traffic sensors, and long-term pavement perfor-mance models; and accelerated pavement testing,including compressive stress pulse measurements,adapting for wet base conditions, and failure mecha-nisms in FHWA’s ultrathin whitetopping project.

2002; 155 pp.; TRB affiliates, $36; nonaffiliates, $48.Subscriber category: pavement design, management, andperformance (IIB).

Transportation Planning and Analysis 2002Transportation Research Record 1817This volume presents diverse transportation plan-ning issues, from the development of the highwaysystem in California to transportation planning for

air quality management in Delhi, India; from Inter-net outreach in New Jersey statewide planning andthe viability of online grocers to transportation poli-cies in Bogotá, Colombia, and highway improvementin central Kentucky.

2002; 187 pp.; TRB affiliates, $37.50; nonaffiliates,$50. Subscriber category: planning and administration(IA).

Highway Safety: Work Zones, Law Enforcement,Motorcycles, Trucks, Older Drivers, and Pedestrians Transportation Research Record 1818Under the rubric of highway safety, papers offer find-ings on road use behavior in Estonia, the typology ofmotorcycle crashes, truck crashes, the relationshipbetween injury and fatality in aging road users, pedes-trian collision prediction, and sidewalk design andaccessibility for persons with disabilities.

2002; 142 pp.; TRB affiliates, $31.50; nonaffiliates,$42. Subscriber category: safety and human performance(IVB).

TRB PUBLICATIONS

TR N

EWS 22

9 NO

VEMB

ER–D

ECEM

BER

2003

40

BOOKSHELF

Eighth International Conference on Low-Volume Roads 2003Transportation Research Record 1819, Volume 1 and 2This two-volume set compiles the 94 papers presentedat the 8th International Conference on Low-VolumeRoads in Reno, Nevada, on June 22–25, 2003. Volume1 includes research findings on the following topics:management and planning for rural roadways in thewestern United States, Sweden, Scotland, Nicaragua,Botswana, and Nepal; technology transfer for innova-tive solutions for roads with difficult terrain and forimproved erosion control; environmental effects,including fish passage, biodiversity conservation, andnative vegetation; safety for low-volume rural roadsand detection of unsealed surfaces; traffic and design;and maintenance for distressed pavement and gravelroad management systems. Volume 2 includes paperson soil stabilization, such as testing of cement kilndust asphalt, magnesium chloride, and calcium chlo-ride; and studies of materials, pavements, structures,and drainage.

2002; 328 pp.; TRB affiliates, $71.25; nonaffiliates,$95; CD-ROM only, TRB affiliates, $52.50; nonaffiliates,$70; printed volumes plus CD-ROM, TRB affiliates,$97.50; nonaffiliates, $130. Subscriber categories: plan-ning and administration (IA), energy and environment(IB), design (II), materials, construction, maintenance(III), operations and safety (IV).

Water Transportation, Ports, and International TradeTransportation Research Record 1820These studies present diverse developments in watertransportation and international trade at seaports inLos Angeles, California; Florida; Rotterdam, Nether-lands; South America; and the three Baltic states ofEstonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. Included are an evalu-ation of the design and operational costs of intermodalrail systems; methods to improve cost-and-quality fea-tures of barge transport; an analysis of transportationsystem access to port areas; the feasibility of linkingroutes and services between the Great Lakes,Minnesota, and Ontario, Canada; and the economicimpacts of port capacity investments.

2003; 81 pp.; TRB affiliates, $30; nonaffiliates, $40.Subscriber category: marine transportation (IX).

Additional Investigations on Driver InformationOverloadNCHRP Report 488Driver information overload occurs when too muchinformation—from either devices or conditions—

prevents proper perception and response. Drivers withinformation overload may make erratic maneuvers orengage in other behaviors that compromise safety. Thisreport investigates and develops a model for predictingdriver information overload from freeway signs. CRP-CD-36 incorporates the model into a software tool thatidentifies conditions that create information overloadand that evaluates alternatives for sign locations.

2003; 107 pp.; TRB affiliates, $16.50; nonaffiliates,$22. Subscriber category: safety and human performance(IVB).

Public Transportation Security, Volume 4: IntrusionDetection for Public Transportation FacilitiesHandbookTCRP Report 86, Volume 4Volume 4 addresses the need for evaluating and upgrad-ing intrusion detection systems applicable to a widerange of transit facilities (including tunnels, bridges,and rail yards) and transit vehicles (such as buses,trains, support vehicles, and special-purpose vehicles).The handbook guides in assessing system needs; devel-oping system designs; and estimating system costs, ben-efits, and risks. Systems discussed range from low-techto high-tech and directly support the deterrence anddetection of intrusions into secure areas.

2003; 162 pp.; TRB affiliates: $18; nonaffiliates: $24.Subscriber categories: public transit (VIA); planning andadministration (1A).

Facilitating Partnerships in Transportation ResearchNCHRP Synthesis 312In today’s transportation research community, no sin-gle research unit possesses every required resource insufficient measure to operate independently or meet allof its strategic goals. Partnerships can contribute sig-nificantly by making resources more broadly available,allowing more flexibility in research performance, andproviding greater opportunities for the parent organi-zation to maximize the value of its research.

This synthesis examines current partnershipswithin transportation research to identify the keyfactors that facilitate partnerships and to presentmethods and approaches for producing synergiesthat can benefit the research programs and the par-ticipating organizations. Materials in this synthesisare designed to assist state and provincial researchunits to form, manage, and sustain more effectiveresearch partnerships.

2003; 76 pp.; TRB affiliates, $12; nonaffiliates, $16.Subscriber categories: Planning and Administration (IA);Highway Operations, Capacity, and Traffic Control (IVA).

To order the TRB titlesdescribed in Bookshelf,visit the TRB onlineBookstore,www.TRB.org/bookstore/, or contactthe Business Office at202-334-3213.

TR News welcomes the submission of manuscripts for possiblepublication in the categories listed below. All manuscripts sub-mitted are subject to review by the Editorial Board and otherreviewers to determine suitability for TR News; authors will beadvised of acceptance of articles with or without revision. Allmanuscripts accepted for publication are subject to editing forconciseness and appropriate language and style. Page proofswill be provided for author review and original artworkreturned only on request.

FEATURES are timely articles of interest to transportation pro-fessionals, including administrators, planners, researchers, andpractitioners in government, academia, and industry. Articlesare encouraged on innovations and state-of-the-art practicespertaining to transportation research and development in allmodes (highways and bridges, public transit, aviation, rail, andothers, such as pipelines, bicycles, pedestrians, etc.) and in allsubject areas (planning and administration, design, materialsand construction, facility maintenance, traffic control, safety,geology, law, environmental concerns, energy, etc.). Manuscriptsshould be no longer than 3,000 to 4,000 words (12 to 16double-spaced, typewritten pages), summarized briefly butthoroughly by an abstract of approximately 60 words. Authorsshould also provide appropriate and professionally drawn linedrawings, charts, or tables, and glossy, black-and-white, high-quality photographs with corresponding captions. Prospectiveauthors are encouraged to submit a summary or outline of aproposed article for preliminary review.

RESEARCH PAYS OFF highlights research projects, studies,demonstrations, and improved methods or processes thatprovide innovative, cost-effective solutions to important transportation-related problems in all modes, whether theypertain to improved transport of people and goods or provi-sion of better facilities and equipment that permits such trans-port. Articles should describe cases in which the applicationof project findings has resulted in benefits to transportationagencies or to the public, or in which substantial benefits areexpected. Articles (approximately 750 to 1,000 words) shoulddelineate the problem, research, and benefits, and be accom-panied by one or two illustrations that may help readers bet-ter understand the article.

NEWS BRIEFS are short (100- to 750-word) items of inter-est and usually are not attributed to an author. They may beeither text or photographic or a combination of both. Linedrawings, charts, or tables may be used where appropriate.Articles may be related to construction, administration, plan-ning, design, operations, maintenance, research, legal matters,or applications of special interest. Articles involving brandnames or names of manufacturers may be determined to beinappropriate; however, no endorsement by TRB is impliedwhen such information is used. Foreign news articles shoulddescribe projects or methods that have universal instead oflocal application.

POINT OF VIEW is an occasional series of authored opinionson current transportation issues. Articles (1,000 to 2,000words) may be submitted with appropriate, high-quality illus-trations, and are subject to review and editing. Readers are alsoinvited to submit comments on published points of view.

CALENDAR covers (a) TRB-sponsored conferences, work-shops, and symposia, and (b) functions sponsored by otheragencies of interest to readers. Because of the lead time requiredfor publication and the 2-month interval between issues,notices of meetings should be submitted at least 4 to 6 monthsbefore the event. Due to space limitations, these notices willonly appear once.

BOOKSHELF announces publications in the transportationfield. Abstracts (100 to 200 words) should include title, author,publisher, address at which publication may be obtained, num-ber of pages, and price. Publishers are invited to submit copiesof new publications for announcement, and, on occasion, guestreviews or discussions will be invited.

LETTERS provide readers with the opportunity to comment onthe information and views expressed in published articles, TRBactivities, or transportation matters in general. All letters mustbe signed and contain constructive comments. Letters may beedited for style and space considerations.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Manuscripts submitted forpossible publication in TR News and any correspondence on edi-torial matters should be directed to the Director, PublicationsOffice, Transportation Research Board, 500 Fifth Street, NW,Washington, DC 20001, telephone 202-334-2972 or [email protected]. All manuscripts must be submitted in dupli-cate, typed double-spaced on one side of the page and accom-panied by a word-processed diskette in Microsoft Word 6.0 orWord Perfect 6.1 or higher versions. Original artwork must besubmitted. Glossy, high-quality black-and-white photographs,color photographs, and slides are acceptable. Digitalcontinuous-tone images must be submitted as TIF or JPG filesand must be at least 3 in. by 5 in. with a resolution of 300 dpior greater. Any graphs, tables, and line art submitted on diskmust be created in Adobe Illustrator or Corel Draw. A captionmust be supplied for each graphic element submitted. Requiredstyle for units of measurement: The International System ofUnits (SI), an updated version of the metric system, should beused for the primary units of measurement. In the text, the SIunits should be followed, when appropriate, by the U.S. cus-tomary equivalent units in parentheses. For figures and tables,use only the SI units, providing the base unit conversions in afootnote.

NOTE: Authors are responsible for the authenticity of their arti-cles and for obtaining written permissions from publishers orpersons owning the copyright to any previously published orcopyrighted material used in their articles.

I N F O R M A T I O N F O R C O N T R I B U T O R S T O

TR NEWS

Access management is the systematic control of the location,spacing, design, and operation of driveways, medianopenings, interchanges, and street connections, as well asroadway design treatments—such as medians and auxiliarylanes—and the appropriate spacing of traffic signals.

The Transportation Research Board (TRB) has examinedregulations and techniques associated with accessmanagement, producing a portfolio of practical know-howto help transportation professionals, planners, decisionmakers, and members of the general public examine waysto improve public safety, extend the life of majorroadways, reduce traffic congestion and delays, supportalternative transportation modes, and improve theappearance and quality of the built environment.

Here are some of the access management titles TRB has published:

Access Management ManualISBN 0-309-07747-8, 388 pages, 8.5 x 11, paperback (2003);

also available separately in CD-ROM

Impact Calculator CD-ROM: Impacts of Access Management TechniquesCRP-CD-24, Version 2.0.4 (2003)

Driveway Regulation PracticesSynthesis of Highway Practice 304, ISBN 0-309-06921-1,

77 pages, 8.5 x 11, paperback (2002)

Impacts of Access Management TechniquesNCHRP Report 420, ISBN 0-309-06312-4,

157 pages, 8.5 x 11, paperback (1999)

Land Development Regulations That Promote Access ManagementSynthesis of Highway Practice 233,

ISBN 0-309-06003-6, 45 pages, 8.5 x 11,

paperback (1996)

To order these and other TRB publications, visit the TRB Bookstore, www.TRB.org, or call 202-334-3213.

New

TR NEWS - Transportation Research Boardonlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trnews/trnews229.pdfNew Guide...

Documents

Transcript of TR NEWS - Transportation Research Boardonlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trnews/trnews229.pdfNew Guide...