1.0 introduction and background - NSCAF

mexicanmorningData Management

Dec 16, 2012 (4 years and 7 months ago)

303 views








Evaluation of Routing Options for the

Nova Scotia Road Network (N
SRN
)

PROJECT
FINAL
REPORT

FOR

SERVICE NOVA SCOTIA & MUNICIPAL RELATIONS
,

NOVA SCOTIA GEOMATICS CENTRE (NSGC)








Geoplan Opus Consultants Inc.




919 Prospect Street




Fredericto
n, NB

E3B 2T7









Telephone:

506
-
451
-
0055




Facsimile:

506
-
450
-
4838









Date:

1
4

March

2006




Reference:

324
-
018




Status:

Final

Report




Version:

1.0

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







i

14 March

2006


Document
Revision History

Revision

Date

Author

Description of change

0.1

1 March

2
006

Dave Loukes

Initial Draft

for internal
review

0.2

4 March 2006

Dave Loukes

Revised Draft for distribution to stakeholders

1.0

1
4

March 2006

Dave Loukes

Final
Report

incorporating feedback from

stakeholder workshop










Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







ii

14 March

2006


TABLE OF CONTENTS


1.0

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

................................
................................
........

1

1.1

Introduction

................................
................................
................................
.........

1

1.2

Background

................................
................................
................................
.........

1

1.3

Document Contents

................................
................................
............................

1

2.0

METHODOLOGY

................................
................................
................................
...........

3

2.1

Project Activities

................................
................................
................................
.

3

3.0

BEST PRACTICE RESEARCH

................................
................................
......................

5

3.1

Approach

................................
................................
................................
............

5

3.2

Summary of Interv
iews

................................
................................
.......................

5

3.3

Synthesis of Results

................................
................................
...........................

7

4.0

BUSINESS REQUIREMENTS AND DATA ASSESSMENT

................................
..........

9

4.1

Approach

................................
................................
................................
............

9

4.2

Summary of Interviews

................................
................................
.......................

9

4.3

Other Routing Applications

................................
................................
...............

16

4.4

Synthesis of Results

................................
................................
.........................

18

5.0

EVALUATION OF ROUTING PACKAGES

................................
................................
..

20

5.1

Approach

................................
................................
................................
..........

20

5.2

Findings

................................
................................
................................
............

20

5.3

Commercial Data Products
................................
................................
...............

27

5.4

Summary

................................
................................
................................
...........

27

6.0

DATA MODEL RECOMMENDATIONS

................................
................................
........

29

6.1

Overview of Relevant Databases

................................
................................
.....

29

6.2

Gene
ral Data Model Considerations

................................
................................

32

6.3

Recommended NSRN Routing Attributes

................................
........................

34

6.4

Other Data Considerations

................................
................................
...............

45

7.0

DATA MIGRATION AND MAINTENANCE STRATEGY

................................
..............

47

7.1

Data Content

................................
................................
................................
.....

47

7.2

Data Migrati
on Strategy

................................
................................
....................

49

7.3

Data Maintenance Strategy

................................
................................
..............

51

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







iii

14 March

2006


8.0

RECOMMENDED IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH

................................
..................

52

8.1

Critical Success Factors

................................
................................
...................

52

8.2

Proposed Activities

................................
................................
...........................

52

8.3

Further Stakeholder Consultation

................................
................................
.....

52

8.4

Negotiation of Partnership Agreements

................................
...........................

54

8.5

Pilot Project

................................
................................
................................
.......

54

8.6

Follow On Activities within FY 2006/07

................................
............................

57

APPENDIX A:

STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

................................
.......................

58

APPENDIX B:

STAKEHOLDER DATA AN
ALYSIS

................................
................................
..............

65

APPENDIX C:

BEST PRACTICE INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

................................
.....................

73

APPENDIX D:

BEST PRACTICE INTERVIEW RESULTS

................................
................................
..

80

APPENDIX E:

STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP SUMMARY

................................
................................
.

85








Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







1

14 March

2006


1.0

INTRODUCTION AND BAC
KGROUND

1.1

Introduction

Geoplan Opus Consultants Inc. has been retained by

Service Nova Scotia and Municipal
Relations (SNS&MR), as represented by
the Nova Scotia Geomatics Centre (NSGC)
,

to
investigate options for enhancing the Nova Scotia Road Network (NSRN) database to permit
shortest path vehicle routing. The following activities were undertaken:



Requirements

definition and current data assessment through stakeholder
consultation;



Review of current practice in other jurisdictions;



Evaluation of commercial shortest path routing packages;



Development of NSRN data model enhancement recommendations;

and



Developmen
t of a recommended NSRN data maintenance strategy.

The results of the above activities have been documented in this
draft
report

and will be
presented
to stakeholders
at a project workshop in Halifax on March 10.

Feedback from this
workshop will be incorpo
rated into a final

project that will be delivered to SNS&MR prior to
March 31, 2006.

1.2

Background

A comprehensive and current NSRN has recently been completed
.

This version of the road
network database is compliant with the specifications for the National Ro
ad Network Version
1 (NRN V1) as published by Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), in that it includes all
mandatory attributes included in this dataset.

The NSRN also includes additional attributes such as civic addressing to meet identified Nova
Scotia busi
ness needs. Consideration is now being given to further enhancing this product,
and one priority identified by users is to use the network
for

shortest path vehicle routing
applications
.

1.3

Document

Contents

This document
is organized as follows:



Section 1.0:

Introduction and Background,
contains introductory and background
materials;



Section 2.0: Methodology,

describes the approach taken to completion of project
activities;



Section 3.0: Best Practice Research,

describes the findings from research conducted
in
to routing best practice within other jurisdictions;



Section 4.0: Business Requirements and Data Assessment,

summarizes the results of
interviews conducted with a number of Nova Scotia stakeholders;

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







2

14 March

2006




Section 5.0, Evaluation of Routing Packages
, documents th
e functionality and data
requirements of a number of commercially available network routing packages;



Section 6.0, Data Model Recommendations,

contains a recommended specification
for an enhanced NSRN database that contains basic network routing capabiliti
es;



Section 7.0, Data Migration and Maintenance Strategy,
proposes a strategy for the
initial build and ongoing maintenance of NSRN routing attributes;



Section 8.0, Recommended Implementation Approach,
presents a short term action
plan for validating the d
ata model / data maintenance recommendations contained
within this report;



Appendix A, Stakeholder Interview Questionnaire
, contains a copy of the
questionnaire used to conduct interviews with selected Nova Scotia

stakeholders;



Appendix B,

Stakeholder Data

Analysis
; contains a summary of results obtained by
summarizing the data needs and data sharing questions from the structured interviews
conducted with Nova Scotia stakeholders;



Appendix C, Best Practice Interview Questionnaire
, contains a copy of the
que
stionnaire used to conduct external interviews with selected external agencies;



Appendix D,
Best Practice Interview Results
,

contains the tabulated results of the
interviews conducted with the external jurisdictions
;

and



Appendix E,
Stakeholder Workshop S
ummar
y
,
contains the summary notes from the
stakeholder workshop held in Dartmouth on March 10, 2006
.




Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







3

14 March

2006


2.0

METHODOLOGY

This section describes the approach taken to completion of project activities.

2.1

Project Activities

The project workplan included seven acti
vities. In summary, a brief user needs assessment
was completed, a review of other jurisdictions was
done

and a high level analysis of a few
comm
ercial ro
uting packages was undertaken. Based upon these activities, data model / data
maintenance and implemen
tation recommendations were prepared.

The results were summarized in a
draft

report
that was circulated to stakeholder agencies that
had been consulted during the study. A

stakeholder workshop

was
then
held in
Dartmouth

on
March 10, 2006

to confirm the fin
dings
.

Feedback from
the

workshop was then incorporated
into this final report.

T
hese activities
are

summarized

below
, and further described within the following sections of
this report
.

2.1.1

Requirements Definition and Current Assessment


Geoplan Opus determin
ed user requirements for shortest path routing through stakeholder
consultation. This was done through
a combination of
on
-
site
and telephone
interviews
using
a structured interview questionnaire, with follow up as needed to clarify feedback.

2.1.2

Review of Oth
er Jurisdictions

The project team conduct
ed

structured interviews with a
number

of external agencies to
examine current routing practice within other jurisdictions. A modified version of the interview
questionnaire developed as part of the preceding activi
ty
was

circulated in advance to
facilitate this process.

2.1.3

Evaluation of Commercial Packages

Geoplan Opus conduct
ed

a brief analysis of commercially available shortest path routing
packages in order to assess: a) functionality provided; and b) data requireme
nts.

2.1.4

Recommended
NSRN Data Model Enhancements

Based upon the results from the above activities, the project team develop
ed

recommendations for the enhancement of the NSRN data model to support shortest path
routing. These recommendations include definitio
n of the required additional data fields, how
the content of each field should be structured, and the suggested source(s) of the data.

2.1.5

Recommended NSRN Data Maintenance Strategy

The team develop
ed

a recommended approach for the maintenance of the addition
al NSRN
routing attributes on an ongoing basis. It is anticipated that this strategy will result in an
incremental improvement in the quantity and quality of these attributes over time.

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







4

14 March

2006


2.1.6

Stakeholder Workshop

The findings from the above activities were docum
ented in a draft report that served as the
basis for
the

stakeholder workshop. The agencies represented at this workshop included
CBRM, HRM, EHS, EMO, the Department of Education (DOE), NSTPW and SNS. Appendix
E

contains the workshop summary and lists the
participants.

2.1.7

Final Report

The

results of the above activities
have been

documented in a project final report

(this report)
.



Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







5

14 March

2006


3.0

BEST PRACTICE RESEARCH

This section describes the findings from research conducted into routing best practice within
other juris
dictions.

3.1

Approach

The project team conducted structured interviews with four external agencies to examine
current routing practice within other jurisdictions.
The four agencies that participated in the
intervi
ews were the

British Columbia
Bureau of Integr
ated Land Management
, the Ontario
Ministry of Natural Resources, Statistics Canada and New York
State
Department of
Transportation.

The project team also contacted
both
Natural Resources Canada (NRCAN)
and US Bureau of Transportation Statistics (responsibl
e for the Transportation profile of the
GeoSpatial One
-
Stop program)
but did not conduct
a structured interview with these two
agencies
.

Neither agency is currently involved
in

any routing practices
,

n
or

do they have any
plans to do so
in the foreseeable
future.

A modified version of the interview questionnaire developed as part of the business
requirements activity was developed and circulated in advance to facilitate this process.

3.2

Summary
of Interviews

3.2.1

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources

The
Ontario Mi
nistry of Natural Resources (MNR)
have
developed a

data model
,
the
Ontario
Road Network (ORN), related to roads and their descriptive attributes
for

the Province of
Ontario. The ORN is based primarily on the National Road Network

(NRN) specification that
has been

developed by Natural Resources Canada.

The ORN model has been further developed beyond the current NRN standards and includes
some routing attribute information to properly support routing applications. The
current model
is not considered

to be

a
fully functional
routing model.
MNR

collect and maintain specific
attribute requirements to perform route analysis but their main focus
currently

is collecting
address information for the entire province. At the present time they are
both providing
ro
uting analysis services internally and

also providing

their data to
provincial

agency

to
conduct
vehicle dispatch and

s
chool bus routing
services. They

have
also
started on a limited
basis some service area analysis

using routing package software
. MNR are

currently using
ArcGIS with Network Analyst along with
a third party

sof
tware product, Mapeze
, to provide
routing

analysis.

MNR relies on government agencies such as
the
Ministry of Transportation
Ontario (MTO)
and

m
unicipalities
, closest to the source,

to collect or provide u
pdate information for the ORN.
They are
currently

also
investigating

third

p
arty data
products and

contracting out data
collection for areas or municipalities that have minimum data or GIS capabilities.

3.2.2

British Columbia
Bureau of In
tegrated Land Management

The
British Columbia
Bureau of Integrated Land Management

(
BILM
)
within the Ministry of
Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







6

14 March

2006


Agriculture and Lands
has created the
Digital Road Atlas Version 2 (
DRA2
)

Road Network
model

and database
.
The DRA2

is intended to be a centra
l, up to date collection of road data
for BC. The
maintenance process

allows for multiple data providers to provide updated road
data to be integrated into the DRA2 Road Network, which can then be redistributed in various
formats to the users of the data.

The data model was developed after reviewing network
database standards such as GDF, Canada Post
,
and

the
NRN along with reviewing
business
requirements of
emergency response agencies such as Ambulance Services and
the
RCMP.

The model was developed prio
r to the NRN but is similar to
V
ersion
1 (NRN V1)

of this
model.

Many business requirements have been identified for vehicle routing on the road network
database. At the moment vehicle dispatch is only used for
the
planning function. They are
not curre
ntly using speed

restrictions or

turn impedances
in support of

dispatch

routing
applications. The

DRA2 contains

this information
and an attempt has been made to collect
this data on a province
-
wide basis. However,
the quality and accuracy is not guaranteed

at
p
re
sent

as it has not been subject to strict quality assurance checks
.
The t
ypes of current
v
ehicle routing applications

have been identified

in Table 3.1.
The

following is a list of other
future routing applications
BILM

is looking to implement:



Inte
rface fire protection
;



Evacuation Analysis
;



Disaster Analysis
; and



Timber Harvest


Wood Flow Analysis
.

BC has invested heavily into Open Source software to maintain the
DRA2

database. The
data is currently stored in PostGreSQL. They are starting to look

at maintain
ing

the data in
Oracle Spatial, more for corporate
compatibility rather

then
increased

software functionality
.
They are
also
using
some
ArcGIS and Network Analyst

to

conduct routing

analysis
on behalf
of

some clients
.
They are
also currently c
onsidering the

develop
ment of

their own routing
application.

BC does not provide their data free
of charge to any agency
. They have a large
number

of
partnerships with both government and private companies who pay for the data.
BILM

tailors
their
output
datasets to
meet the specific requirements of
each individual partner.

3.2.3

Statistics Canada

Statistics Canada (StatsCan) is not currently collecting or planning to collect routing specific
data to properly support any routing applications. Their main focus

at present
is to collect
street and address information for the country. StatsCan is not overly concerned about
the
quality of
network
geometry with respect to topology or
spatial
accuracy.
Their primary focus

is to maintain an up
-
to
-
date street network

containing all current roads and streets with the
correct address range to help facilitate the Address Registry.

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







7

14 March

2006


3.2.4

New York
State
Department of Transportation

The
New York
State
Department of Transportation

(NY
S
DOT)

has invested

considerable

time
and effort

to create a road network data model,
the
New York State Data Product, to enable
routing capabilities.
NYSDOT

presently has a
manual

oversize / overweight vehicle routing
web application. This application has weight, height and construction restrictions
for all
bridges in New York State. T
he t
ransportation industry and the general public can access this
website and view all restrictions along a proposed route to identify the appropriate route to
travel.

The URL

for this site

is
:

www.travelinfony.com/osowscreen

.

It is NY
S
DOT’s intention to make this an automated routing approach along with many other
future route analysis business
applications
.
The department

is currently collecting
navigational d
ata attributes

to conduct route analysis on their network.

NY
S
DOT is currently in a partnership with TeleAtlas to purchase new up
-
to
-
date State road
network

data.
TeleAtlas provide all required road network data attributes along with the
navigational att
ributes. The dataset that TeleAtlas provides
NYSDOT

is different
from

the
ir

commercial dataset
product
that
marketed to other customers.
NYSDOT

has a map
maintenance program
online application

that Government Agencies (DOT, Police, etc) can
access throug
h a web
portal (
Internet MapServer)
to provide updates to the database. At the
present time the edits are updated by either
NYSDOT

or TeleAtlas.
NYSDOT

is considering
contracting out

all actual
network
edits
for the State

Transportation

network
.

NYSDOT

s initial approach for collecting complicated turn restrictions for each intersection
has been

modified over the past few years. They felt that simple turn tables worked much
better and were obviously easier to maintain over time. Since they already coll
ect and code
the road network with grade values (x, y, z) and o
ne
-
way streets (including ramps and

divided
highways), then only coding special turn restrictions were required.

3.2.5

Natural Resources Canada

NRCan is not currently considering the addition of rout
ing attributes to the NRN database.
Their current focus is to gain
more widespread acceptance and use

of the Version 2 (NRN
V2) specification
. It is noted that the NRN V2 w
as formally
endorsed

by all provinces

through
the Canadian Council of Geomatics (CCO
G) at
their

Fall 2005 meeting. The NRN V
2 does
actually contain a number of basic attributes that support routing activities. These include
Direction

of Traffic Flow

(identifies one
-
way streets) and Speed Restriction (identifies speed
zones). Note, however
, that these attributes are not considered mandatory at present.

3.3

Synthesis of Results

This section summarizes results of the interview process across all agencies that were
formally surveyed. The detailed tabulation of individual interview question respons
es is
contained within Appendix
D
.

3.3.1

Agency Role

All agencies contacted are directly responsible for road network standards, data collection /
Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







8

14 March

2006


maintenance, and data distribution within their jurisdictions.

3.3.2

Data Model Standards

All three Canadian jurisdiction
s indicated that their road network data model was based at
least in part upon the NRN

with provincial extensions to meet additional business needs
. BC
stated that their model was also influenced by GDF, and it is noted that the NRN specification
is also (
partially) based upon the international GDF
Version 4
standard

that has been
endorsed through ISO Technical Committee 204 (TC 204)
.

The
NYSDOT

road network data model is based upon the UNETRANS data model, which is
an object oriented data model developed b
y ESRI.

3.3.3

Business Requirements

Table
3
-
1

summarizes current (C) and
planned future

(
F
) business requirements for network
routing across the jurisdictions surveyed.


Table
3
-
1
: Summary
of Routing Business Requirements

Business Requirement

MNR

BC

StatsCan

NYSDOT

None identified



C


Vehicle dispatch

C

C


F

Shortest path origin


destination routing

F

C


F

Oversize / overweight vehicle routing


C


C

Road maintenance route optimization


C


F

Transit / school bus routing




F

Collection / pickup service routing


F



School bus routing

C

F



Transit route planning


C



Service area analysis / service facility location planning

C

F



Navigation


Smart Roads (control traffic lights,
intelligent
traffic flow)


F






Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







9

14 March

2006


4.0

BUSINESS REQUIREMENTS AND DATA ASSESSMENT

This section

summarizes the results of interviews conducted with a number of Nova Scotia
stakeholders
.

4.1

Approach

Geoplan Opus determined user requirements for shortest path routi
ng through stakeholder
consultation. This was done through on
-
site interviews with five (5) Nova Scotia agencies:
SNS&MR (
NSGC
)
, EMO, CBRM, HRM, and NSTPW. An interview questionnaire
was

developed and circulated in advance to facilitate this process.

A tel
ephone interview was also conducted with the RCMP, and Emergency
Medical Care

(EM
C
) completed and returned a copy of the interview questionnaire

as a representative of
Nova Scotia Emergency Health Services (EHS)
. The interviews also served to document
curr
ent routing practice (if any) and data available within each agency.

Finally, a telephone
interview

was held with the GeoNova Secretariat regarding the desire to
host a routing application service within the GeoNova web portal.

4.2

Summary of Interviews

This
section summarizes the results of the individual interviews conducted with the Nova
Scotia stakeholders. It is organized by interview questionnaire category.

4.2.1

Current Assessment

Basic GIS Software

ESRI ArcGIS products are used within all of the agencies int
erviewed

with the exception of
the RCMP
. As well, MapInfo is being used in HRM and EHS. EHS also use the TriTech
VisiCAD software for Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) purposes, and it is noted that this
software in its latest release actually incorporates imb
edded
ArcGIS functionality

for mapping
purposes.

Routing Software

CBRM, HRM and the NSGC currently have ESRI’s Network Analyst extension for routing
application functionality. However, this software is not used extensively within any of these
agencies, and

when used the primary business application is service area analysis as
opposed to shortest path vehicle routing. This is understandable in light of the limited network
routing attribution available within the GIS databases of these agencies.

EHS have had
discussions with TriTech regarding the provision of routing capability within
their product, but at present this functionality is not available.

Road Network Databases

The road network database

available from
SNS&MR through
the Nova Scotia Geomatics
Centre

is the Nova Scotia Road Network (
NSRN
). There are at present three distinct attribute
Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







10

14 March

2006


databases that are linked to the NSRN spatial geometry:



The Nova Scotia Civic Address File (NSCAF)
, which includes

street / road

names and
address ranges

along each road

segment
;



The NSTPW Road List database
, which contains road names and Authority Numbers

for NSTPW roads
; and



NSRN basic attributes, which are compliant with the National Road Network Version 1
(NRN V1) specification published by Natural Resources Canada.

T
here appears to be some confusion with respect to the packaging and availability of the
above road network products. Several agencies indicated during the interview process that
the NSCAF road network was currently being used and that they would move to th
e NSRN
when it became available. We suspect that this is due to the manner in which attribute data is
packaged at present. It is important to note that the
same

underlying spatial database


the
NSRN geometry


is used for all of the above data products.

A
gency specific road network databases are presently being used in CBRM, HRM and
NSTPW. EMO is currently using the
NSRN /
NSCAF data for viewing purposes,
NSTPW has
a road listing
database
application that is based upon the
NSRN

geometry and accessible via
the Internet and also through ArcSDE direct connect
,
and
EHS

is using a customized product
(AVLCAD) within their VisiCAD system that is based upon the
NSRN /
NSCAF with additional
attribution provided by municipalities and others. The RCMP
is

currently
inc
orporating

NSRN
road network data
into the Streetfile database used by their CCIDS application (developed
and hosted by Xwave)
in support of internal applications.

The Streetfile database
also
contains additional attributes that are provided by Xwave.

A
gen
cies
that are currently using internal road network databases
indicated
a desire to

migrate to the NSRN once this data became
readily

available.
Although NSTPW are currently
using the NSRN in support of their road listing application, they also have
an

Aut
oCAD road
network database that is used to produce hardcopy map products and is also accessible
through their web site via AutoDesk MapGuide. This database contains information on
Schedule C, B
-
Train and weight restricted routes, and it is unclear how or w
hen this data will
be migrated to the NSRN.

It is
also
unclear whether EHS could directly use the NSRN due to the proprietary structure of
the VisiCAD database, but additional NSRN routing attributes (when available) could certainly
be of use in populating

this database.

Although interviews were not conducted with either the Department of Education or the
Department of Tourism, we have learned through the interview process that
the Department
of Tourism, Culture and Heritage

is

currently using
a shortest p
ath
network routing application

that is made available through their web site, and that several school boards within the
Department of Education have done some work in optimizing school bus routes using routing
software
. This is further discussed within Se
ction
4.3 below
.

Table
4
-
1

summarizes road network database current (C) and
Future

(
F
) use

for agencies
interviewed during this project
.

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







11

14 March

2006


Table
4
-
1
: Roa
d Network Database Current and Planned Use

Road Network
Database

Agency Use


SNS&MR

CBRM

EHS

EMO

HRM

RCMP

TPW

NSRN

(note 1)

C

F

*C

C

F

*C

C

Agency Specific


C



C


C
,F?

Vendor Specific



C
,F



C,F


Notes:

1.

Includes use of NSCAF attributes.

2.

The
EHS

roa
d network database is a vendor specific database that is based upon the
NSRN geometry and NSCAF attributes.

3.

The RCMP CCIDS database also includes NSRN data.


4.2.2

Business Requirements

Current (C) and Future (F) business requirements for vehicle routing are s
ummarized within

Table
4
-
2
.
Note that NSGC has no internal business requirement for vehicle routing directly,
but there is a stated desire from the GeoNova Secretariat to provide
future
vehicle routing
capability through a web por
tal application.

The most requested routing functional requirement is in support of emergency dispatch. In
addition to the
four

agencies that have specifically identified this need, it is likely that the
RCMP could benefit from this service if the function
ality were present in the Public Service
Answering Point (PSAP) locations.

There was considerable discussion at the stakeholder workshop held on March 10 regarding
the need to expand the scope of this initiative beyond merely supporting shortest path
netwo
rk routing capability. A number of stakeholders pointed out that additional applications
including waste disposal route optimization and maintenance route planning were needed in
support of current and emerging business requirements. Furthermore, it has be
en identified
that there are additional stakeholder agencies that should be consulted.

Based upon these discussions, additional consultation is planned at the outset of the
implementation plan (see Section
8.0
).


Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







12

14 March

2006


Table
4
-
2
: Business Requirements for Vehicle Routing Functionality

Routing Functional
Requirement

Agency Need


SNS
&MR

CBRM

EHS

EMO

HRM

RCMP

TPW

Transit route planning





C



Staff
/ personal
route planning

F



C




Em
ergency vehicle dispatch


F

C

C

F

C


Service area / response zone
analysis


C



C



Maintenance vehicle route
planning


F



F


C

AVL interface / real time routing




F

C



Search & rescue vehicle routing




F




Emergency / construction route
planning







F

Oversize / overweight vehicle
routing







F


Table
4
-
3

summarizes the routing data requested either currently or in the future in support of
the above applications. These data requirements are presented in order of pr
iority, with the
most requested data attributes presented first.

Indication of one
-
way streets is clearly the top
priority for routing attributes, with restricted routes (hazardous materials, truck / no truck
routes, etc.) and dead end streets are next in
priority

.

Table
4
-
3
: Requested Routing Attributes

Requests

Data Item

5

One
-
way streets

4

Restricted access routes (for example: no trucks, hazardous materials)

4

Dead end streets

3

Speed limits

3

Weight
restrictions (seasonal and permanent)

3

Rail / Trail access points

3

Signage: other (school zones, etc)

3

Slope / elevation data

3

Service depots (varies by agency)

3

Service area boundaries (varies by agency)

2

Time of Day restrictions

2

Intersecti
on turn restrictions

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







13

14 March

2006


Requests

Data Item

2

Stop sign locations

2

Bridge capacity restrictions

2

Traffic Volumes

2

Barriers / gates

2

Number of lanes

2

Jurisdiction (ownership)

2

Maintenance responsibility

2

Construction zones

2

Road closures

2

Seasonal roads

2

Leve
l of maintenance (winter / summer)

1

Traffic signal locations

1

Horizontal / vertical clearance restrictions

1

School zones

1

Real Time Incident Locations

1

Intersection turn radius restrictions

1

Cul de sac restrictions

1

Traffic calming restrictio
ns

1

Access control

1

Road functional classification

1

Transit routes

1

Winter maintenance routes

1

Fire priority routes

1

Evacuation routes

1

Background layers (NSTDB, NSCAF, etc)

1

Background Orthophotos


Individual agency requirements for routi
ng attributes are summarized within Appendix
B
.

4.2.3

Data Availability

Stakeholders were asked which of the above routing attributes were currently being collected,
and in what form.
Table
4
-
4

summarizes current availab
ility of these a
ttributes

by agency
regardless of form. T
he
tables within Appendix B indicate

for each agency the specific
format(s) in which data is available
.

Table
4
-
4
: Routing Data Availability

by Stakeholder Agency

Total

Data Item

Agency

CBRM

EMO

HRM

NSGC

NSTPW

RCMP

EHS

3

School zones

Y


Y


Y



3

Construction zones

Y


Y


Y



3

Jurisdiction (ownership)

Y


Y


Y



Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







14

14 March

2006


Total

Data Item

Agency

CBRM

EMO

HRM

NSGC

NSTPW

RCMP

EHS

2

Barriers / gates



Y

Y




2

One
-
way streets



Y



Y


2

Restricted access routes (for
example: no truc
ks, hazardous
materials)



Y


Y



2

Intersection turn restrictions

Y




Y



2

Traffic signal locations



Y


Y



2

Stop sign locations



Y


Y



2

Traffic Volumes

Y


Y





2

Dead end streets



Y

Y




2

Number of lanes



Y


Y



2

Maintenance responsibi
lity



Y


Y



2

Weight restrictions



Y


Y



2

Road closures



Y


Y



2

Seasonal roads

Y


Y





2

Slope / elevation data



Y

Y




2

Traffic calming restrictions

Y


Y





2

Service depots

Y


Y





2

Road functional classification



Y

Y




2

Fire / p
olice station locations

Y


Y





2

Service area boundaries (varies by
agency)

Y


Y





2

Transit routes

Y


Y





2

Winter maintenance routes

Y


Y





1

Speed limits



Y





1

Time of Day restrictions



Y





1

Horizontal / vertical clearance
restrict
ions





Y



1

Bridge capacity restrictions





Y



1

Real Time Incident Locations



Y





1

Rail / Trail access points



Y





Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







15

14 March

2006


Total

Data Item

Agency

CBRM

EMO

HRM

NSGC

NSTPW

RCMP

EHS

1

Evacuation routes



Y





1

Level of winter maintenance



Y





1

Cul de sac restrictions



Y






Where routing attrib
utes are being collected in digital / GIS form, there are no industry
standards being followed except in support of basic NSRN attributes (such as number of
lanes) that are currently part of the NSRN specification
.

In general, there is a clear lack of read
ily available digital data to support NSRN routing
requirements at even the most basic level. For example, only one agency
(HRM)
currently
captures one
-
way streets within their road network database. While some additional data is
available in hardcopy form
, there are few if any consistent standards for how this data is
collected and maintained. Initial population of NSRN routing data will therefore represent a
significant effort, and it is therefore likely that this may have to be accomplished in a phased
m
anner with clearly defined priorities.

4.2.4

Data Sharing and Maintenance

Sharing of Currently Available Data

All agencies surveyed indicated
willingness

to freely share routing data that they currently
collect with
SNS&MR
. There were no restrictions imposed on
this, but there is also a general
expectation that there will be a mutual exchange of road network in both directions as the
NSRN is updated and distributed through
SNS&MR via
the NSGC. This willingness to share
currently available data was stated for both

an initial one
-
time data transfer to initially populate
NSRN routing attributes and also for incremental further updates on a schedule to be
determined.

HRM indicated that a procedure for bi
-
directional transfer of NSRN data needs to be
established. In t
heir specific case, there is a desire to receive bi
-
weekly updates in order to
meet their stated currency requirements. It is probable that other agencies may have similar
requirements in the future, and some thought should be given as to how this might be

accomplished through automated or semi
-
automated procedures. It is noted that NRCan have

done some preliminary research into delta file transfer in support of future NRN updates, and
it may be useful to follow up with them to gain some insight into possib
le tools / procedures
that could support this.

Willingness to Provide and Maintain Additional NSRN Routing Attributes

Most agencies indicated a willingness to collect and maintain additional NSRN routing
attributes that may be specified,
provided that it c
learly supports their business needs
. In
some instances, it was indicated that additional resources may be required for the initial lift of
this data. The assumption was again made that reciprocal data sharing would occur under the
Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







16

14 March

2006


terms of this agreement.

NSTPW is unwilling to commit to the collection and maintenance of additional routing
attributes at this time due to existing staff workload constraints in support of business
priorities. They will, however, continue to provide routing attributes for curre
ntly available data
and will contribute additional attributes as business processes are put in place to support this.

It is significant to note that while neither EHS nor the RCMP is a collector of NSRN routing
attributes at present, both agencies indicate
d a willingness to assume a limited quality
assurance role by verifying NSRN routing data. Since staff from both organizations continually
travel the Nova Scotia road network, they would therefore be able to report on data
inconsistencies provided that the
y have copies of the road network maps within their
respective jurisdictions. It is likely that these agencies could play an active role in change
detection as well.

Additional considerations in support of future data sharing included:



A stated desire for
SNS&MR

to provide clear written guidelines for routing attribute
data collection;



Limitations on liability with respect to data provided; and



The need to strongly endorse and support data partnerships through clearly stated
agreements regarding scope, cont
ent

and definition of both financial and in
-
kind
contributions.

4.2.5

Other Comments

It was noted by HRM that they have in the past supplied Navteq with hardcopy information
regarding their road network, and it is assumed that this would have included routing
at
tributes that they currently collect. Discussions are ongoing with respect to possible future
exchange of this data in electronic form. We envision that road network data vendors such as
Navteq and DMTI will increasingly be seeking reciprocal agreements wi
th municipalities to
provide such data, and some are currently putting business processes in place to facilitate
change detection and data transfer that are web based and similar to those used in support of
NSCAF data maintenance.

CBRM indicated that they
would like to have the capability to use NSRN routing attributes /
applications in combination with other data such as land use, in support of analyses and
policy decisions in areas such as waste disposal strategies. We expect that other agencies
will also

wish to leverage this data in a similar manner.

4.3

Other Routing Applications

4.3.1

Nova Scotia
Regional School Boards

It is understood from discussions with
the Nova Scotia Department of Education and others

during this project that
several individual
Nova Scotia

Regional School Boards

are

either
currently using applications software in support of school bus routing analyses
or are
Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







17

14 March

2006


interested in doing so within the near term
.
In particular:



The Halifax Regional School Board is using Trapeze software to conduct sch
ool bus
routing analyses;



The Straight Regional School Board is investigating GIS software for routing purposes
and is interested in this project; and



The Tri
-
County Regional School Board is currently using GIS software for boundary
review and is intereste
d in routing analysis when the data becomes available to
support this.

In addition to the above, it is noted that CBRM staff have provided some staff GIS support for
a local school board that is interested in school bus routing.

4.3.2

Nova Scotia Department of T
ourism, Culture & Heritage

The
Department of Tourism, Culture & Heritage

website has a Mapping Resources page
(
http://ns.mapeze.com/map/map.asp
) that includes route planning as one of its functions
(
http://ns.mapeze.com/map/routing.asp
).
Figure
4
-
1

shows the input dialogue for this
application, and
Figure
4
-
2

illustrates a routing result obtained for two

Nova Scotia locations.
It is
understood that data from DMTI Spatial

is being used to support th
is application.

T
he
application appears to work only with Nova Scotia origins and destinations

at present
.



Figure
4
-
1
: Tourism Routing Application Input


Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







18

14 March

2006


.

Figure
4
-
2
:
Tourism Routing Application

Results

4.3.3

GeoNova Web Portal Applications

The GeoNova Secretariat has
developed

shortest path routing
services

within the

GeoNova
web portal. It is understood that the intent is to provide basic functionality: shortest route
calculation and driving directions. The following

services are being implemented at present
:



A

routing
application service that can be used against the
NSRN
data
and served
directly through the web portal on demand; and



A routing application
program interface (API)
that can be
called

from
a
client
workstat
ion

application as a distributed service offering
.

Both of the above services are free to GeoNova
por
tal users
.

It is noted that these services
will require that network topology be present within the NSRN.

4.4

Synthesis of Results

There are a number of common themes that have emerged from our review and assessment
of the interview results:



There is a willing
ness
within most agencies interviewed
to support this initiative, and in
fact a demonstrated eagerness to proceed within some agencies;



There is some confusion regarding what is included within the NSRN and when it will
be widely available;



Little data is
currently available in digital form, and even hardcopy data is limited in
Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







19

14 March

2006


many cases


it will require a substantial effort to complete the initial lift of this data;



Clear standards and data collection specifications are needed to support this initiative;



Both the RCMP and EHS are willing to participate in a quality assurance and change
detection role;



Routing data to be collected and provided to the NSRN must suppo
rt agency business
requirements


these include other routing functions in addition to shor
test path
routing; and



Broader consultation should be done to identify other potential stakeholders prior to
the finalization of specifications and the commencement of a pilot project.

It will be important to conduct a pilot project prior to proceeding wit
h a provincial
implementation of NSRN routing in order to confirm both the initial data specifications
provided in this report and the anticipated scope of the provincial roll
-
out.





Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







20

14 March

2006


5.0

EVALUATION OF ROUTIN
G PACKAGES

This section documents the functionalit
y and data requirements of a number of commercially
available network routing packages.

5.1

Approach

Geoplan Opus conducted a brief analysis of commercially available shortest path routing
packages in order to assess: a) functionality provided; and b) data req
uirements.
The focus
of this review was in the following areas:



I
mpedances
that
the software could handle
;



T
he data requirements to implement these impedances
;



R
outing functions available such as shortest path, travelling salesman,
and
service
area analys
is
;

and



W
hether the packages could be web enabled and any limitations

of this type of use
.

T
he following
GIS vendor
packages

were reviewed
:



Intergraph



MapInfo


Routing J Server



ESRI


Network Analyst



CARIS

In addition to general GIS vendor offerings,
a few specific routing vendor products were also
examined. These included:



GeoMicro


AltaMap
;



RouteWare


RouteFinder and NetServer
; and



MapQuest
.

The approach taken was to first conduct some basic background research into commercially
available products,

and then follow up with specific vendors to request additional product
information where needed. The results were then tabulated and summarized.

5.2

Findings

Table
5
-
1

summarizes
the routing packages that Geoplan Opus investigated al
ong with the
platform, data formats, and route attribute data supported for each product.


Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







21

14 March

2006


Table
5
-
1
: Summary of Routing Packages Investigated

Vendor

Product

Platform

Data Formats

Routing Data Supported

Note
s

DT

Web

0/U

1W

TR

HI

TP

RS

Intergraph


X

X

AutoDesk

Shapefiles

TAB







None of the
functionality is out of
the box. An
application would
have to be developed
using GeoMedia
Objects.

MapInfo

Routing J
Server


X

TAB

X

X

X

X


X

Some web
development

is
required.

ESRI

Network
Analyst

X


Shapefiles

Geodatabase

SDC

X

X

X

X

X

X

Only Desktop
application that has all
the functionality out of
the box.
A

web
enabled application
could be built using
NetEngine and
ArcIMS.

CARIS


X


CARIS

X

X

X



X

CARIS is
currently
working to upgrade
their routing
functionality.

GeoMicro

AltaMap

X

X

GeoMicro

X

X

X




Uses commercial
vendor data mainly.
Can use client data
but would have to
adhere to Navteq data
structure.

RouteWare

RouteFinder

X


Shapefiles

TAB







A
new version is
coming out in 2006
that will have some of
this functionality.

RouteWare

NetServer


X

Shapefiles

TAB


X

X



X

Hierarchy and
Over/Underpasses
might be available in
their new release this
year.

MapQuest

Advantage
Enterprise


X

AutoDesk

Shapef
iles

TAB

X

X

X

X

X


Will only operate on
commercial vendor
data

Summary of
Abbreviations
:

DT


-

Desktop



O/U


-

Over / Underpasses

1W

-

One
-
way Streets


TR

-

Turn Restrictions

HI


Hierarchy


TP

-

Turn Penalty

RS
-

Restrictions



Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







22

14 March

2006


5.2.1

Intergraph

Data Require
ments/Format

Intergraph does not have a specific routing module / extension. They have therefore not
defined a specific

set
of routing data requirements.

All objects (GeoMedia Objects) required
for this type of functionality are available with Intergraph
but it does not come out of the box.
T
he functionality has to be developed into an Application.

Routing Functions

None at present
. As noted earlier, the objects to create this functionality
are

available but an
a
pplication would need to be developed.

5.2.2

MA
PINFO



Routing J Server

Data Requirements/Format

MapInfo has imbedded routing functionality in a web based application.
The

functions

can
incorporate

following Impedances: Turn tables (over/underpas
ses) and One
-
way Streets.
They

were not aware of any one

format that the data has to be in, but the road network data
would have to be converted to MapInfo (Tab files) and during this process the format would
be created.

Routing Functions

The following routing algorithms are supported:



Shortest path



Service are
a analysis



Travelling Salesman (optimized routing)



Drive Time Matrices


Returns Table of Travel Cost.

Web Enabled

This is a web enabled solution only. The Routing J Server is best for applications demanding
greater customization, control and security


i
deal for customers with appropriate web or
client/server expertise.

Limitations

This is only a web solution; they do not have a desktop solution. You can only use MapInfo
files with this system. Client side customization would be required to get this web

enable
application up and running.

As well, a specific internal routing network data model is
established and maintained by the software that is optimized for network path tracing.

5.2.3

ESRI



Network Analyst

Data Requirements/Format

Network Analyst allows for

the following Impedances:

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







23

14 March

2006




Turn Tables



One
-
Way Streets



Over/Underpasses (Elevation changes)

Network Analyst also support the following additional
path finding

parameters:



Hierarchies



favour higher order streets



Default turns


left turns take more time (
penalty)



Restrictions


Based on Network Attributes, Barriers, No U
-
Turn


Table
5
-
2

describes
the schema of a Turn Table Feature Class

as coded within Network
Analyst.

Table
5
-
2
: Netw
ork Analyst Turn Table Feature Class Coding

Field

Description

OBJECTID

The internal feature number of the turn.

Shape

The feature geometry of the turn feature.

Edge1End

Indicates if the turn passes through the end of the first edge (Y means the turn pas
ses
through the end of the first edge, while N means the turn passes through the beginning
of the first edge).

Edge1FCID

The feature class ID of the line feature representing the first edge of the turn.

Edge1FID

The feature ID of the line feature represe
nting the first edge of the turn.

Edge1Pos

The position along the line feature that represents the first edge of the turn. For a line
feature that represents multiple edges, which can be created by lines with any vertex
connectivity or points with overrid
e policy, the position indicates which of the feature's
edge elements is the first edge in the turn.


The OBJECTID, Shape, and Edge1End fields are present in all turn feature classes. The
other fields vary based on the maximum number of edges supported. A

turn feature class that
supports a maximum of six edges will have Edge6FCID, Edge6FID, and Edge6Pos fields in
addition to the ones listed above.

Routing Functions

The following routing algorithms are supported within Network Analyst:



Shortest path



Service

area analysis



Travelling Salesman (optimized routing)



Origin Destination Cost Matrix

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







24

14 March

2006


Web Enabled

The functions
described
above are for a desktop solution. In order to
provide web enabling
routing
, a client would have to use NetEngine with ArcIMS. There
would programming

/
customization involved in this option.

Limitations

Network Analyst currently s
upports only ESRI formats (Shapefiles, Personnel & Enterprise
Geodatabases
and Smart Data Compression
-

SDC
).

As well, a specific internal routing
network dat
a model is established and maintained by the software that is optimized for
network path tracing.

5.2.4

CARIS

Data Requirements/Format

CARIS allows for the following Impedances:



Turn Tables



One
-
Way Streets



Over/Underpasses (Elevation changes)

There is no specifi
c data format for the above impedances. Routing functionality will only
work on CARIS file format.

Routing Functions

The following routing algorithms are supported within CARIS:



Shortest path



Service

Zone (
Does not actually create polygons
)



Travelling Sal
esman

Web Enabled

There is no web based routing functionality available in CARIS at this
but they are looking to
embed this functionality into Spatial Fusion which is their current web based application.

Limitations

Routing functionality only works on CARI
S file format.

5.2.5

GeoMicro
-

AltaMap

Data Requirements/Format

The data can be provided in any format. GeoMicro converts existing data into their own
proprietary format. They have tools that handle this and these tools are passed on to the
client after the f
irst conversion has been done.

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







25

14 March

2006


The

software can deal with turn tables, one
-
way streets and over/underpasses. The format of
these fields does not matter prior to the conversion.

Routing Functions

The following routing algorithms are supported:



Shortest p
ath



Service area analysis

Web Enabled

Both Desktop and Web enabled applications are built using the same objects. It is quite easy
to deploy this application over the web.

Limitations

GeoMicro uses mainly
commercial
vendor road network data

products such
as DMTI and
Navteq
.

If a client wants to use their own data, then
this data

would have to
be
convert
ed

into
GeoMicro’s proprietary format.
A GeoMicro representative has

estimate
d

that this initial
conversion

would
cost a

minimum of $100,000.

5.2.6

RouteWare
Ro
uteFinder

/ NetServer

RouteFinder is a desktop extension for either MapInfo or ArcGIS. NetServer is a web
-
based
application. Both products were created using RW Net, which is
a

program tool kit for
developers to create their own desktop or web
-
enabled pr
oduct. Both software applications
are set

up to use Vendor Data (
i.e.

DMTI) but client data can be used.

D
ata Requirements/Format

The o
nly impedance that can be used
within
RouteFinder
is one
-
way streets and this is
associated with the Speed Code/Attribut
e. This is a simple field calculation to populate this
field.

The RouteWare NetServer is web enabled. It also has more functionality then RouteFinder.
It can use impedances such as turn tables, elevation changes and use limitation fields. In
addition,
they are putting out a new release within the next 4 months that can deal with
hierarchical routing.

Turn restrictions are coded as 2 fields with FromLink and ToLink to describe the turn
restriction. These contain logical ID (Record ID) of the 2 links m
aking up the banned turn.
The problem with this is if you make changes to the street network and the link ID’s change,
you’d have to update one or more turn restrictions.

RW Net has the object functionality to build an application that has one
-
way, turn
restrictions,
z levels, limitation fields and hierarchical routing in both a desktop and web enabled
application.

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







26

14 March

2006


Routing Functions

The following routing algorithms are supported:



Shortest path



Service area analysis



Travelling Salesman (optimized routing)

Web Enabled

The
RouteWare
NetServer is

web enabled. It
also
has more functionality then RouteFinder.
It can use impedances such as turn tables, elevation changes and use limitation fields. In
addition, they are putting out a new release within the next
4 months that can deal with
hierarchical routing.

Limitations

Depending on the
GIS package used (
MapInfo or ArcGIS
)
, you can only use Tab files or
Shapefiles respectively. RouteFinder does not allow for turn or elevation restrictions in the
current vers
ion along with limitation/cost fields. The new release of RouteFinder in the
spring

of 2006 is
supposed

to have some of these capabilities (Impedances) but they won’t
guarantee anything at the moment.

The cost for the Pro version of RouteFinder is approxi
mately $2100 (1500 Euro). The cost for
the Pro version of NetServer is approximately $5500 (4000 Euro).

5.2.7

MapQuest

MapQuest h
as two products, Advantage API and Advantage Enterprise. Advantage API uses
MapQuest over the
I
nternet whereas the Enterprise
appli
cation
is installed behind the client

s
Firewall.
Advantage API I has

some limitations on the amount of Analysis (
i.e.

optimized
routing


limit on the number of stops) that can be calculated but Enterprise has no
limitations.

In order to use MapQuest, al
l routing functionality is done using Vendor Data (
i.e.

DMTI).
They can convert client data that is in shapefiles into MapQuest but it would not be smart
spatial data. It would only be used as background data.

MapQuest uses its own proprietary Routing En
gine.
It is licensed on a transaction basis

(
per
Route Map Creation
)

rather then by seats. There are a number of packages that can be
purchased depending on how often it would be required.


Routing Functions

The following routing algorithms are supporte
d:



Shortest path



Service area analysis

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







27

14 March

2006




Travelling Salesman (optimized routing)

(Note: Hierarchical routing is available


for longer routes, routing calculations try

to remain on
the major routes).

5.3

Commercial Data Products

5.3.1

DMTI
CanMap RouteLogistics

DMTI
S
patial is a commercial data vendor that provides a number of products covering
Canada. DMTI
has a product called CanMap RouteLogistics which supplies up
-
to
-
date
nationwide street map and routing data for Canada.
The
RouteLogistics product provides
additio
nal attributes for
routing

analysis. The
se attributes include
:



Physical and legislated turn restrictions



Truck route restrictions



Routing hierarchy



Calculated gradient, distance and travel times based on the slope of each segment



Relative elevation nodes
(Over/Underpasses)



One
-
way streets

It is understood that DMTI data is updated on a quarterly basis as a general policy. It is not
clear at this time the extent to which routing attributes are available for Nova Scotia.

5.3.2

Navteq Canada

5.3.2

Navteq Canada

is
a vendor that currently collects and maintains road network routing
data for all major municipalities in Canada and elsewhere. They also have data for major
freeway and arterial routes that connect municipalities, but their data on secondary routes
may be
limited in many provinces. Navteq normally do not sell their data directly to end users


their primary market is the automobile industry and the suppliers of in
-
vehicle navigation
systems.

5.4

Summary

5.4.1

Software Options

Most
commercially available desktop routi
ng
packages

are
capable of directly importing and
using road network data from the major
data
vendor
s
.
The functionality to easily incorporate
agency specific road network data is limited in some of these pages. Of the commercial
software investigated, ESR
I’s Network Analyst appears to offer the most flexibility in the
import and use of client specific data formats such as the NSRN
.

There are several options for web enabled packages using client specific data.
The first
option is to develop a customized ap
plication based upon existing components. The following

products

would requi
re some custom application development:

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







28

14 March

2006




ESRI’s ArcIMS with NetEngine can be used to build a routing application with the
same functionality

contained in Network
Analyst;



MapInfo’s
Routing J Server has most of the required functionality but all the data
would need to be converted t
o MapInfo (TAB) format; and



RouteWare’s NetServer is missing some of the functionality but a new version is set to
be released in the
spring

of 2006 that w
ill have more functionality. All the functionality
could be built within NetServer by using the available S
oftware Development Kit, RW
Net.

A second option would be to use
Intergraph
GeoMedia WebMap. It
has all

of the routing
functionality

within the GeoM
edia Objects model but none of this is out of the box. An
application would have to be developed basically from scratch.

Finally,
MapQuest could be a good option if a client wanted to use Vendor data such as
DMTI. It has most of the routing functionality

and street network data is updated quarterly.

In conclusion,
it would appear that
ESRI’s Network Analyst
may provide

the best
desktop
routing package option for the stakeholders interviewed, as all agencies are currently using
ArcGIS software.

5.4.2

Data Requir
ements

The most robust of the packages investigated support the following routing attributes:



Overpass / underpasses


three dimensional topology;



One
-
way streets;



Turn restrictions;



Network hierarchies based on functional class; and



Travel restrictions su
ch as barriers / gates.

In addition to these, two packages support the assignment of turn penalties.

It is therefore important to develop priorities for NSRN routing attributes based upon those
data elements that can actually be processed by the various so
ftware routing engines. While
secondary attributes (such as speed restrictions and restricted routes) can be used indirectly
to establish cost impedances (such as link travel time) or travel restrictions (links that can be
navigated), the initial focus sho
uld be in support of the primary routing attributes itemized
above.


Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







29

14 March

2006


6.0

DATA MODEL RECOMMEND
ATIONS

This section contains a recommended specification for
enhancements to the

NSRN database
to support

basic network routing capabilities.

Priorities for collectio
n of these attributes in
support of the NSRN are described within Section
7.0

of this report.

6.1

Overview of Relevant Databases

This section presents a brief overview of road network databases that are discussed within
the context

of routing attribute standards for the NSRN.

6.1.1

Nova Scotia Road Network (NSRN)

It was noted previously that there appears to be some confusion with respect to the actual
content of the NSRN database. The NSRN consists at present of one integrated set of
geo
metric features with three distinct set of attribute tables.
Figure
6
-
1

illustrates the
components of the NSRN.


Figure
6
-
1
: NSRN Database Components

NSRN Geometry

The NSRN is based

upon an extension of the National Road Network Version 1 (NRN V1)
specification. It contains three basic spatial features:



Road Segment
s



individual segments of the road network that begin and end at
intersections (Junctions) with other road segments or
Ferry Connections, or terminate
at dead ends;



Ferry Connections


network segments that cross a body of water and connect to
Road Segments at either end; and

Evaluation

of NSRN
Routing

Options

Version 1.0







30

14 March

2006




Junctions


the nodes that are created where Road Segments and / or Ferry
Connections intersect.

E
ach Road Segment feature in the NSRN has a unique identifier (SEGID) that is used to link
feature attributes. These features also have a secondary identifier, the National Identifier or
NID, that references Road Segments to the associated NRN attributes fo
r this section of road.
The two separate identifiers are needed since the NSRN contains additional network
segmentation at Junctions (with resource and other roads not present in the NRN) and at
municipal boundaries (for civic addressing purposes).

NSRN Ba
sic Attributes

NSRN basic attributes are those defined for the NRN V1 with some extensions for Nova
Scotia purposes (for example: Feature Code). They also include standard metadata fields
such as start date and end date. At present, this data exists within

a Road Attribute table that
is associated with individual Road NSRN Segments as a Linear Referencing System (LRS)
linear event that has a
START_DIST and STOP_DIST

along the segment.

The basic attributes include the following:



National Road Class



Number o
f Lanes



Pavement Status



Paved / Unpaved Surface Type



Road Name



Route Number



Exit Number

Nova Scotia Civic Address File (NSCAF) Attributes

The development of the NSCAF database preceded the development of the NSRN, so at one
time this database did in fact h
ave its own road network geometry. However, road network
based civic address data (street names and address ranges) is now linked to the NSRN