<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>New Digital Imaging Systems for Small and Mid-Sized Metropolitan Areas</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804226</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Merrimack Valley Planning Commission (MVPC) of Massachusetts, composed of 15 small communities ranging in population from 4,000 to 70,000 persons, is the first regional entity in the country to acquire a patented new aerial imaging data system and software. This is a unique and economical system by which color digital aerial photography is provided, including patented supporting software from which measurements and calculations can be made and images easily retrieved from thumbnail scrolling on a desktop computer. Geographic information system (GIS) data can be layered on the images and one can view all points by coordinates.  The most unique aspect of the system is the close-up and oblique (side-view) imagery that constitutes more than 90% of the photo library. This allows for much more understandable viewing and analyses of locations, roads and buildings compared with the traditional straight-down orthogonal perspective. Also highly unique is that measurements can be made from the screen even in the oblique mode. All municipal departments can readily and more comprehensively view locations in the field from their desktops, but the public safety and transportation applications may be the most dramatic. The images and software may be installed on as many municipal desktops as desired.  The MVPC and its metropolitan planning organization (MPO) carried out a successful “regional purchasing” of the system and enrolled all of its jurisdiction in the sublicensing of the image library and software. At an average community cost of $5,000 all receive images, software and support; the entire MPO is covered with many overlapping images from different compass directions.  Specific transportation applications of the system are extensive:  Updating road inventory files and identifying road centerlines; Measuring roadways and intersections for lane configuration improvements and restriping; Viewing infrastructure along roadways, including poles and signs; Viewing the condition of roadways; Viewing high accident locations; Planning for development along roadways; Measuring paved areas such as parking lots and roads. This paper describes the unique Pictometry product, its success in the regional purchasing of it by small communities, and the successful use of the system in the transportation planning process.  MVPC is an Alpha and Beta tester of new system applications in GIS connectivity and change detection. MVPC is also now working on integrating its economic, traffic and land use models and is exploring how it will connect the unified models to its new imaging system.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:39:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804226</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Return of the Streetcar — An Experience from Middle America</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804500</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Many medium-sized cities are busy revitalizing their riverfronts after years of industrial and manufacturing uses. However, it has been realized that redevelopment projects will not only help with economic development but will increase the amount of traffic along a fragile environmental area. The City of Dubuque, Iowa located on the Mississippi River has built a conference and educational center, a museum, and a hotel and is in the process of planning and designing new retail and housing developments. Formerly an industrial area, “America’s River Project” at the Port of Dubuque will attract a half million visitors each year.  While the new development will make Dubuque a better place to live and add to the community’s economic vitality, it will also bring more traffic and parking problems. By studying the transportation alternatives in the downtown and the port areas, the City of Dubuque hopes to determine why transit might be the best solution.  Dubuque believes that a streetcar transit system holds the promise of reducing parking and automobile congestion by providing a solution to meet growing transportation needs. Vintage streetcars, light rail, and rubber-tired trolley buses are among the options that were analyzed in Dubuque.  Using transit to link the port with downtown will make it easier for both tourists and residents to enjoy the attractions of both areas. Additionally, the new transit system will also likely spur more new development by drawing restaurants, shops, and entertainment downtown and into the riverfront areas.  Preliminary study results show that an investment in transit would be a cost-effective option. Officials from Dubuque realize that instead of having to spend a lot of money building new roads and parking garages, each city could maximize the use of its existing facilities. Overall, citizens in Dubuque believe that an alternative transit system will make life easier, and do it in a way that will avoid major capital expenses later on.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:39:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804500</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Economic Development Highways Initiative: Lessons Learned, and a Framework in the Sky</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804568</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In FY 2000, Congress directed the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to conduct the Economic Development Highways Initiative (known hereinafter as the Initiative). FHWA has substantially completed this assignment. Over 200 state, local, and regional officials, including many elected officials, provided advice to FHWA and the prime contractor (AECOM Consult) during studies conducted under the Initiative. A number of subcontractors— including universities—also participated. The Initiative was also informed by contemporaneous research sponsored by FHWA and others working outside of the formal structure of the Initiative itself. Lessons learned were many:  respecting the state/local process can result in more realistic expectations; a meaningful assessment of economic development potential requires a realistic look at the highway improvement process and a hard look at the existing local economy; studies done during an improvement project should be considered, in addition to the textbook cases of before (ex-ante) studies and before/after studies (ex-post); and a number of methods can be used to estimate the impact of improvements.  The overall results support the general linkage between highway improvements and economic development. The results also support the contention that the highway improvements are frequently a necessary but not sufficient condition for capturing economic growth potential. Based on these lessons, a framework for an evaluative procedure is presented.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:39:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804568</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Safe Routes to School Through Safe Communities: Results of a Community Planning Grant Program in California</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804498</link>
      <description><![CDATA[California’s Safe Routes to School (SR2S) initiatives are based on an international movement aimed at increasing safe walking and bicycling to school. Since the 1970s, there has been a dramatic reduction in children walking or bicycling to school. Instead, school children are being driven, primarily in private automobiles, which contribute to increases in local traffic-related injuries and death, traffic congestion and air pollution. In addition, these children are also losing an opportunity to be physically active, which contributes to increases in obesity, diabetes and asthma—chronic diseases that are currently seen at higher rates and younger ages than ever before. And, unfortunately, those children who still do walk and ride their bikes often face a very inhospitable environment. This lack of environmental support for physical activity thereby increases the children’s risk of pedestrian and bicyclist injury, among the leading causes of death for youth in California.  The Safe Routes to School through Safe Communities planning grant project was implemented in 2000- 2002. Eight communities of varying size across California were awarded $25,000 over a 17-month grant period. The local projects were responsible for: 1) developing a broad-based, community coalition in order to foster community ownership; and 2) developing a strategic plan for the implementation of interventions. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Safe Communities model, which uses an informed community-based planning approach, guided project staff in their coalition and plan development. A qualitative program evaluation was conducted to measure the grantee’s success in meeting these objectives.  Each of the eight grantees was successful to varying degrees at meeting the two broad objectives. Grantees felt that acquisition and appropriate use of data; diverse and flexible coalitions; and the  attainment of resources and political will were key elements in a project’s success. Awareness of each coalition member’s constraints and offerings was important, as was sensitivity to the needs and  capabilities of schools and community members. Community visibility and patience were essential.  Some components of the planning grant projects continued in nearly all the eight communities after the grant period ended. Several sites successfully acquired operating funds from another source and/or found another entity to host the coalition. Project staff felt that successful relationships had been built with city staff, leading to funding for pedestrian and bicyclist safety projects as well as opportunities for SR2S to thrive in the future. It was concluded that SR2S can promote physical activity, safety, sustainable transportation practices, and a sense of community. The Safe Routes to School through Safe Communities grant program was an experiment in providing people the financial support to develop strategic plans to improve the neighborhoods around schools for children to walk and bicycle more, and safely. This grant program successfully demonstrated that even a small amount of financial support goes a long way in allowing communities the time to stop, think, and work together toward the best solutions for a safe and active community in the future.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804498</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Congestion Mitigation Resources &amp; Strategies for Arizona's State Highway System</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804492</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Growing traffic congestion is one of the most significant problems for the transportation system in Arizona, and the nation. Our propensity for single-occupant vehicles has produced not only the well documented metropolitan congestion but has become a universal problem, spreading to smaller urban and rural locations. A challenge for the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) will be to use a variety of practical, relevant congestion mitigation options in appropriate, collaborative and innovative ways to address current and future congestion problems. To meet this challenge, ADOT has undertaken the development of a comprehensive Congestion Mitigation Methodology for the implementation of a consistent and sustained approach to assess and manage the growing congestion problem on all elements of the state highway system. This effort has resulted in the development of practical strategies to help mitigate Arizona’s mobility and congestion problems. A significant step in the development of the Congestion Mitigation Methodology was building a consensus among traffic management stakeholders on effective congestion definitions and overcoming the major obstacles to successful mitigation. Input on the definitions of congestion and congestion management and on the state of the practice in congestion mitigation came from a national survey of MPOs and state DOTs, and from a statewide conference on congestion mitigation. The project has produced recommendations for how to systematically quantify congestion on Arizona’s highways using a state-specific congestion index, and it also has produced an interactive database of available congestion mitigation strategies.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804492</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>"What Do 3rd Graders and Volunteer Fire Chiefs Have in Common?": Public Outreach Experience on Planning Studies in Bowling Green, KY</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804198</link>
      <description><![CDATA[What do a class of third graders and a group of volunteer fire department chiefs have in common?  They are some of the groups that have been reached out to in the innovative public involvement approach that was utilized for the I-66 Corridor and Bowling Green Outer Beltline Planning Studies in Bowling Green, Kentucky.  Bernardin, Lochmueller and Associates (BLA) initiated a planning study in June 2001 for the 40-mile section of the I-66 Corridor in the vicinity of Bowling Green, and by January 2002, a planning study of the Bowling Green Outer Beltline was added.  While each project serves a different purpose, the study areas for both projects are coincident, and thus the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) recommended that both projects be studied at the same time to ensure that the compatibility of the two projects is addressed.  This led to an interesting dilemma within the public involvement program - How do you explain two distinct, but compatible, projects in one setting - whether that's a meeting, a newsletter, or a newspaper article?  The answer - you don't!  You take your message to the people and you make it fit your audience.  This is where the third grade class and the volunteer fire chiefs come in.  Following the round of public information meetings midway through the studies, it was determined that an effort was needed to reach out to groups within the Bowling Green community that either weren't represented by those attending the previous public meetings or have historically been left out of the planning process.  Within Bowling Green, these groups included low income and minority communities, emergency service providers, and rural and small town residents.  BLA worked very closely with the KYTC staff to come up with unique and innovative ways of taking the message to the people.  This paper examines in more detail the tools utilized to reach these "unreachable" groups.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804198</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Transportation Planning - Changes in North Carolina</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804561</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Highway Planning has been a requirement in North Carolina since the passage of NC General Statute 136-66.2 in 1959. This Statute required the development of "a street system that will serve present and anticipated volumes of vehicular traffic" and has been the guiding force in roadway planning and implementation in North Carolina. Over the past decade, there has been a desire by the public, local decision-makers, and transportation professionals to expand transportation planning beyond highways. Federal legislation (Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act — ISTEA and Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century — TEA-21) expanded transportation planning requirements for areas over 50,000, or Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to consider non-highway modes in their transportation planning process. In 2001, the North Carolina law was revised to require the development of a “transportation plan” that considers options other than roadway improvements.  The primary challenge was defining the product that would be mutually adopted by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and the MPO, municipality, or county. Historically, NCDOT adopts a “thoroughfare plan,” which is a map designating existing and proposed roadway facilities. It has been an important planning tool for areas across North Carolina and has been a mechanism for municipalities and MPOs to implement roadway projects. For North Carolina’s 17 MPOs, the revised State Statute provides consistency with Federal law, but it is not as prescriptive. For non-MPO areas, the revised law expanded the scope of transportation planning. However, it is essential for the transportation planning process and product to be useful, easily understood, and not overly burdensome to develop. The transportation plans that are developed and adopted must compliment other transportation laws in North Carolina while providing a tool to facilitate the transportation vision of local communities.  The Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) is the transportation planning document that will be mutually adopted. It is a series of maps, which includes: a cover sheet, highway map, public transportation and rail map, bicycle map, and in the future will include a pedestrian map.  The highway map is significantly different from the current thoroughfare plan. It classifies the primary roadway system into five categories based on the proposed level of access to the facility. Each category includes existing facilities, proposed facilities, and “needs improvement” facilities. The “needs improvement” category not only includes proposed widening projects, but also includes operational strategies and access management strategies that will facilitate increased mobility along a corridor. The public transportation and rail map includes existing and proposed public transportation infrastructure and services; it also designates active and inactive rail corridors. The bicycle map includes on-road and off-road facilities. The pedestrian map is still under development.  The series of sheets that make up the CTP will be developed in a GIS format. This will allow electronic versions of the transportation plans to be distributed. Using the electronic form of the plan allows the user to visualize how the different modes interact. It also provides an opportunity to present more information than a hard copy of the plan. Interactive links would allow the user to view existing and proposed attributes associated with the various elements of the plan.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804561</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Linking Land Use and Transportation Planning in Aquidneck Island, RI: A Regional Perspective</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804221</link>
      <description><![CDATA[It is argued that the public policy on land use and transportation planning must be reoriented and linked to promote a balanced pattern of development. This paper uses Aquidneck Island as a case study to describe how land use and transportation planning can be linked at the regional level. Aquidneck Island is located in the State of Rhode Island and is home to the communities of Newport, Middletown and Portsmouth. The island is about 45 square miles. The population of the island was 60,958 in 2000. Past development patterns and population growth have contributed to a congested road network, costly road maintenance projects and inconsistent land use decisions based on limited knowledge of the regional transportation network. In order to promote effective regional planning for the island, the Aquidneck Island Planning Commission was created by resolutions of the three communities in 1985. The paper is organized into three sections. First, the paper presents a profile of the island and its three communities. This is followed by an analysis of the initiative to promote regional land use and transportation planning on the island. Specifically, the paper discusses the development and application of a travel demand forecasting model for the island using TransCAD software package. The paper ends with a summary of findings and recommendations for the refinement and the future application of the model for Aquidneck Island.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804221</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A Spatial Economic Model to Forecast External Trips in Small Communities</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804195</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A primary concern in forecasting traffic volumes to support highway bypass infrastructure improvements, when proposed for a small community, is the quantification of external traffic on approach roadways.  Essentially, the question transportation professionals are trying to answer is how many vehicles are destined for town versus vehicles solely passing through the town.  The current methods for calculating the external traffic include conducting an origin-destination study or applying existing regression equations.  This paper's objective is to examine the possibility of using spatial economic models to predict the external traffic values.  This paper applies two spatial economic models to predict the external traffic for three small communities in Alabama, and compares the model results against a cordon-line origin-destination study.  The paper identifies the  model providing external traffic volumes that best replicate the observed external traffic in the case study cities and makes recommendations regarding the various models and their ability to forecast external traffic.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804195</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Accomplishing Alternative Access on Major Transportation Corridors</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804569</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Many communities have developed access management plans and programs aimed at reducing the number of driveways on major arterial routes. These plans often involve the provision of service roads, shared driveways, and interparcel connections that reduce the need for individual sites to have direct, driveway access. Yet accomplishing alternative access can be challenging in today’s development environment. This paper examines strategies for accomplishing alternative access on major transportation corridors, based on actual case examples. It addresses policy, regulatory, and funding strategies for alternative access that can be directly applied by communities alone, or in coordination with state transportation agencies and metropolitan planning organizations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804569</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Should Larger Time Penalties Be Applied for Modeling Internal-External Trips?</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804499</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper reports some findings in the study of use of travel time penalties for distributing internal-external (I-E) and external-internal (E-I) trips. The study was based on a travel demand model that was developed by the authors for Parkersburg-Marietta Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), an interstate metropolitan area including a county in Ohio and a county in West Virginia.  In the development of the travel demand model, specifically in the estimation of the exponential function parameters of the gravity models for trip distribution, the authors investigated the use of relatively large extra travel times, which averaged 15 minutes, on the trips traveling between internal traffic analysis zones (TAZs) and external stations. The purpose of applying those large penalties was to more accurately reflect the actual travel times of those trips. The penalties were derived from the household travel survey in the same area. As a result, the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) of system-wide traffic assignments revealed that the application of large penalties improved the model, compared with the situations where no penalties or small penalties (2-5 minutes) were used. Inspired by this interesting finding, the authors further investigated the trip matrices generated by the gravity models and found noticeable differences between the scenario with large penalties and the one with no penalties.  Based on the findings, the authors discussed in a broader range the I-E and E-I trip distribution issue for mid- or small-sized communities where decent proportions of I-E and E-I trips exist, which may be otherwise distorted in a travel demand model without careful handling. The authors finally suggested larger travel time penalties should be applied and an approach to estimating appropriate travel time penalties was also proposed when no survey data is available.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804499</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Four Decades of Travel Modeling and Forecasting in North Carolina--Lessons Learned</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804501</link>
      <description><![CDATA[North Carolina Department of Transportation planning staff first had experience with travel modeling and forecasting in the early 1960s. The experience included both oversight of work by consultants and in-house travel modeling. In the 1960s consultants were primarily employed for work in the larger urban areas. The State staff primarily handled the transportation planning work in smaller areas. North Carolina General Statutes enacted in 1959 required all municipalities to have a major street plan adequate to serve both existing and future travel needs.  As studies continued into the 1970s, more and more of the work was accomplished by the State staff both in large and smaller areas. Some modeling work was also accomplished for a multi-county area.  A large variety of travel modeling techniques and procedures were used and researched by the staff in the last four decades of the 20th Century. This paper provides a summary of the various procedures and techniques used in the four decades and the lessons learned.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804501</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The 2002 Parkersburg West Virginia Household Travel Survey - What Went Right and What Went Wrong</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804494</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report contains a methodological discussion of the Wood-Washington-Wirt Interstate Planning Commission (WWW-IPC) 2002 Household Travel Survey. This survey was conducted during the spring of 2002 and covered two counties in the greater Parkersburg, West Virginia area. The counties were Washington County, Ohio and Wood County, West Virginia. This report was prepared to assist those who are working with the Household Travel Survey database with a focus on survey development procedures and results.  A household travel survey provides the means of examining an average day of travel by households within the two-county study area. Fundamentally the household travel survey sought to determine why people made trips (their trip purpose), how they traveled (mode), how far they traveled (trip lengths), how often they traveled during the day, and at what times during the day they traveled. There were three primary purposes of the survey: 1) to provide a check and additional detail on the U.S Census 2000 journey-to-work travel data, 2) to develop parameters that could be applied for the WWW travel demand model, and 3) to provide information on trips that are not work-related (non-work trips). There are many secondary uses for the survey database. Information was collected on persons who work at home, number of retired persons per household, adult bicycle ownership, and a number of other household and person facts that may be consulted in the future.  The survey featured a self-administered mail-back questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed in a manner to allow the results to be adjusted and factored with the 2000 U.S. Census. Specifically, the questionnaire collected two types of data: 1) census variables such as the number of persons per household, age, vehicle availability, sex, employment status, occupation and income; and 2) transportation related variables including trip origin and destination, trip purpose, travel time, mode of travel used, and vehicle occupancy. The survey design can be described as:  Random Digit Dial (RDD) telephone recruitment; Self administered mail-out mail-back surveys; Targeted individuals at their homes; Collected both demographic and travel data; 24-Hour trip diary format; A focus on non-work trip making; Utilized reminder calls, letters, and gift incentives for late respondents; and Scheduled to interface with the 2002 Wood-Washington 20-Year Multimodal Transportation Plan.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804494</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Roadway Project Prioritization for Ada County Highway District's Five-Year Work Program</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804493</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper outlines the Ada County Highway District’s (ACHD's) project prioritization process for its annual Five-Year Work Program.  ACHD is a unique transportation agency with full jurisdiction over all city and county roadways within Ada County, Idaho. With this role, ACHD is tasked with planning, constructing and managing the  transportation needs of one medium-sized community (Boise, pop. 200,000), five small communities (Meridian, pop. 48,000; Garden City, pop. 12,000; Eagle, pop. 16,000; Kuna, pop. 10,000; and Star, pop. 3,000) and the unincorporated areas of Ada County (pop. 58,000). Total population served by ACHD is 347,000.  This unique responsibility requires daily coordination with the six city governments, county government, the development community, Metropolitan Planning Organization, three city urban renewal development corporations and regional public transportation authority. It also requires that each entity’s elected officials, their staff, citizens and private interests easily understand how ACHD prioritizes capital projects.  The Boise metropolitan area ranked as one of the fastest growing urbanized areas from 1990 to 2000 according to the U.S. Census and is the largest metropolitan area in Idaho. That growth created increased strain on ACHD’s highway system and its limited revenue sources. These factors helped ACHD develop a prioritization method that takes into account numerous factors that impact how and why ACHD programs a specific project for funding.  Prior to 2002, ACHD’s system of prioritizing Major Roadway Projects was primarily a “technical” system, using data such as traffic volumes, accident rates, and pavement condition, with some consideration given to growth and other community programming factors. Programming these projects into a Five-Year Work Program was initially based on these technical rankings but not strictly adhered to since other factors impacted final project selection.  In 2002, ACHD extended these technical factors by introducing prioritization categories that quantified the community planning and political factors that impact roadway projects and reflected how and why projects were selected and programmed. These “programming” factors include categories such as geographic equity, public and outside agency support, leveraging of non-ACHD funds and prior ACHD commitments.  This method was presented to the six cities, the county and other civic and professional groups. It was well received. The input provided valuable information that ACHD has used to evaluate how prioritization processes reflect the changing goals and values of the citizens of Ada County. Currently, ACHD is expanding this process into other types of capital programs including community projects, intersections and roadway drainage projects. In addition, ACHD has been contacted by other agencies in the region regarding implementation of a similar prioritization process for their capital projects.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804493</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Small and Medium-Sized Communities and the University Transportation Centers Program — Public/Academic Partnerships That Work!</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/804562</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Decreasing resources combined with increasing reporting and planning requirements are the reality for many small and medium-sized communities and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). The University Transportation Centers (UTC) Program includes 26 centers nationwide, sponsored by the United States Department of Transportation. Four of these centers focus on aspects of rural transportation exclusively, while several others have program themes that are complimentary to the needs of smaller and medium-sized communities and rural areas. Successful partnerships between the UTCs and these areas are explored in this paper, and a framework laid for participants to investigate partnerships with UTCs and their community and/or MPO.  For example, the Mack-Blackwell Rural Transportation Center (MBTC), located at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville partnered with the local MPO to evaluate the state of the transit system in Northwest Arkansas, a project that enabled the MPO to obtain funding to hire a consultant for a Phase II study and then address the problems identified. Due to limited funds and resources, this pilot study would have been difficult for the MPO to do any other way. The benefits to MBTC included an education opportunity for students, an opportunity to perform a service to the community, and an opportunity for technology transfer. There are many examples of partnerships between UTCs and MPOs and rural agencies and the preparation of this paper included an informal survey of UTCs with a rural and/or small community focus to obtain examples that could be replicated by others. UTCs could be helpful as a technical resource, for assistance with planning issues (such as with air quality or ITS), and can serve as a local resource on a project team when a consultant is hired. These public/private partnerships can be an effective way to stretch the increasingly scarce resources available to small and medium-sized communities and MPOs.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:38:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/804562</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>