DETERMINATION OF FREIGHT CORRIDORS

FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Texas A&M UniversityCivil Engineering Department

CVEN 689-600

April 28, 2003

ADHARA CASTELBLANCO

Outline Introduction Objective Background Methodology Results Sensitivity Analysis Conclusion and Recommendations

Intro: Problem DescriptionU.S. urban highways (congestion)

Traffic growth > road capacity

Cost: delays, contamination and fuel consumption

ITS Vs. new construction

ImportanceIdentify strategic roadways that should be considered in, for ITS deployment.

Allocate resources in high priority routes that interconnect the most economically significant counties in the State of California

Promote economic growth and maximum regional trade opportunities

Objective

Identify the SFC in the state of California

Analyze results through a sensitivity test

BackgroundOhio DOT:

Economic and non-economic criteria Major production and distribution centers Ohio (nodes)Link-node Approach (highway network)

Shieh: Min highway network for LCVHigh Standard highways No circuits

1. Data Processing

Economic Criteria (75%)

Intermodal Facilities (15%)

Border Crossing (10%)

Economic Criteria (1-10)

Based on the Gross State Product

- Income of major industries (REIS)

* Whole Sale

* Retail

* Manufacturing

* Farming

* Construction

Existence of Intermodal facilities

Marine Port: Major marine ports

(U.S. Marine Port Authority)

Airport: Major cargo airports (FAA)

Rail / Truck: Transfers (FHWA)

Border Crossing

Location of international commercial border crossings: U.S. – Mexico

(Customs and Border Protection)

Some Examples of Categories

Aggregation of Results

Add weighted scores of different categories and summarize into 3 classes:

Rank 1: 8-10Rank 2: 6-8 (16%)Not eligible: <6

Assumptions

Access-controlled

High standards of design

Geometry

Bridge clearance

Turning radius

2. Network Analysis

Overlay of road map on aggregated map:

Select Best Route

“Virtual Cost” based on road type

Network Analysis Cont’d

Connect high economic counties first

Perform two more network analyses for the other counties in the north and south respectively

Route Development

Analysis of the Freight Corridor

Exclude stops that were generating circuits or were redundant

Only the County of Contra Costa was excluded from the corridor

Buffer zones

Multiple rings with 10 miles in between were drawn in order to check proximity of principle sites to SFC

Sensitivity Test

Five more Counties were included by lessening the economy activity weight by 30% and increasing the weight of the transportation facilities.

New Freight Corridor

I - 15I - 10I - 40US 101I – 80I - 5

Fresno Co. was left out from the SFC

Buffer Zone: Radii of 10 miles

Conclusion and Recommendation

The assignation of the freight corridor is susceptible to the weights assigned to criteria

Better approach: Number of truck trips to and from each production and distribution center

Better cost: average velocity

Do you have any Questions