T3 Webinar:

Developing a Regional Concept for Transportation Operations

Text version of Webinar presentation:

"Portland, Oregon Pilot Project"

Description of image or images on a slide contained in brackets.

Back to Webinar Files

Portland, Oregon Pilot Project

Jon Makler
City of Portland & Metro (MPO)

Talking Technology & Transportation
July 25, 2007

Slide 1: Who sought the program?

• Metro (Metropolitan Planning Organization)
• TriMet (Regional Transit Operator)
• Oregon DOT
• Portland Office of Transportation

Slide 2: Why?

• Engage MPO as a means to increased institutional support in the region
• Formalization of relationships that have enabled unique culture of collaboration

Slide 3: Preliminary Decisions (Fall '05)

• Use grant to create full-time (temporary) staff position - a catalyst
• Focus in three areas:
  • Traveler Information
  • Network Management
  • Integrating TSMO into RTP

Slide 4: Project Management

• Committee of liaisons from each of the four partner agencies
• Good source of advice for new staffer
• Lesson: missed opportunity to engage leadership of four partner agencies at the outset

Slide 5: Results: Traveler Information

• Great stakeholder interest and participation
• Lack of champion = lack of momentum
• Focused on the means rather than the end

Slide 6: A Second Wind (Fall' 06)

• Elected official gets ambitious regarding:
  • Incident management
  • Snow/ice event management
  • Downtown construction information
• RCTO Process is welcomed as a tool

Slide 7: Results: Incident Management

• Strong champion
• Clear, outcome-based objective
• Effective delegation from committed managers to relevant staff
• Straightforward identification, narrowing, and selection of actions

Slide 8, 9, 10: Findings

• RCTO fits a situation that has
  • Focus on a specific outcome
  • Consensus regarding the need
  • A champion
• All parties comparably invested in the process and the outcome (including both policy makers and implementing staff)
• RCTO does NOT fit a situation...
  • That identifies a program area but not a specific outcome (i.e., traveler information)
  • In which implementers don't agree something needs to be done
• Relation to ITS Plans and Architectures
  • The cart got in front of the horse
  • RCTO fits in the family of strategic decision-making tools that also includes systems engineering
  • Weak architectures need RCTOs most of all:
    • Objects outweigh outcomes
    • Punted on planning
    • Cloudy on coordination

Slide 11: MPO Engagement: Challenges

• Low status for ITS in the policy arena
• Difficulty competing for funding
• Absence of staff relationships between MPO and operating agencies
• Lack of connection between regional ITS coordinating committee and other MPO committees

Slide 12: MPO Engagement: Solutions

• Staff Activity (UPWP)
  • Short-term: provide education/outreach
    • "Metropolitan Mobility the Smart Way"
  • MPO as analytical resource
  • Facilitate training/capacity building
  • Provide technical assistance to regional efforts
• Refine TSMO policy in the RTP
• Create sub-allocation of funding for ITS
• Establish new intermediary committee for system management policy

Slide 13: Conclusion: Personal View

• Use the RCTO tool where success depends upon the existence of a deliberate, rational process. Such as:
  • A leader and an implementer agree something needs to be done but need help communicating about how to proceed
  • The need to act has been established but success depends on the coordination of multiple agencies.

Slide 14: Thank you

For more information:

Jon Makler
City of Portland / Metro
maklerj@metro.dst.or.us
503-797-1873

Access T3 Archives at: http://www.pcb.its.dot.gov/res_t3_archive.asp

Next >>  RCTO: Pima Association of Governments

back to top