Incorporating Truck Analysis into the Highway Capacity Manual (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

5 This section reviews how public agencies plan for truck freight movement and establishes a context for how public agencies might use a separate level-of-service measure for trucks. Current federal, state, and local practices are reviewed with examples drawn from several state agencies and MPOs. Freight planning has only recently come to the fore as a significant planning issue, espe- cially for state and local agencies—for example, states and localities now see freight planning as an essential component of economic development. As another example, effects of freight move- ment on air quality are an increasing concern in non-attainment areas such as the Los Angeles region. Freight planning is also a national issue. The recent report of the National Surface Trans- portation Policy and Revenue Study Commission devoted a significant amount of discussion to freight planning issues, including the increasing importance of an efficient goods movement system for the economic health of the United States (National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, n.d.). 2.1 Federal Agency Practice The U.S. DOT recently announced the creation of a Freight Policy Council that will focus on improving the condition and performance of the national freight network to better ensure the ability of the United States to compete in today’s global economy (FHWA, n.d.: Releases and Speeches). The formation of the council follows the passage of MAP-21, which calls for the creation of a National Freight Strategic Plan. 2.1.1 Federal Highway Administration FHWA carries out a number of freight-related functions including the following (FHWA, n.d.: Freight Management and Operations): • Setting truck size and weight standards (FHWA, n.d.: Truck Size and Weight); • Planning, funding, and maintenance for the National Highway System (NHS) (FHWA, n.d.: National Highway System). This includes the interstate system and corridors designated by Congress as “high priority corridors”; • Conducting policy studies in support of efficient freight movement; and • Developing and making accessible information on freight commodity flows. S e c t i o n 2 State of Public Agency Practice

6 incorporating truck Analysis into the Highway capacity Manual 2.1.2 National Transportation Safety Board NTSB has an Office of Highway Safety, which includes the following: • Investigations Division—investigates accidents involving issues with wide ranging safety sig- nificance and • Report Development Division—researches national highway safety issues, develops accident reports, and issues safety recommendations. 2.2 State Agencies State agencies provide several functions related to freight movement, such as the following: • Include freight planning as part of statewide transportation planning, • Establish weigh stations, and • Set size and weight limits for trucks on the state highway system that is not part of the Inter- state Highway System. An example of a state that provides several functions related to freight movement is Cali- fornia. California performs freight planning research, issues bonds to fund infrastructure improvements on trade corridors (i.e., Trade Corridors Improvement Fund), and produces a goods-movement action plan. 2.2.1 Caltrans Freight Planning Research The Freight Planning Branch of the California DOT (Caltrans) conducts analyses of freight transportation system performance and future trends, develops freight mobility plans and modal studies, and recommends improvements to goods movement systems and operations through system planning, regional planning, intergovernmental review, participation on multi-state goods movement advisory committees, and other activities. 2.2.2 Trade Corridors Improvement Fund The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006— approved by the voters as Proposition 1B in 2006—made $2 billion available for infrastructure improvements along federally designated “Trade Corridors of National Significance” in Cali- fornia or along other corridors within California that have a high volume of freight movement. The funds were made available to the California Transportation Commission upon appro- priation in the annual Budget Bill by the Legislature and subject to such conditions and criteria as the Legislature may provide by statute. This $2 billion program within Proposition 1B is known as the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF). The types of projects considered under this program include highway expansions, grade separations, rail capacity, and port access improvements. In selecting projects, the Goods Movement Action Plan was considered, among other factors. 2.2.3 Goods Movement Action Plan Caltrans is currently updating its Goods Movement Action Plan (GMAP) under the work- ing title of the “California Freight Mobility Plan.” The GMAP was issued in 2005 and 2007 and helped guide project selection for the allocation of funds under the TCIF program.

State of Public Agency Practice 7 Like the GMAP, the Freight Mobility Plan will address current conditions, future trends, and major issues in goods movement across all modes and regions of California. Going further than what the GMAP addressed, the Freight Mobility Plan will devote more attention to community impact issues, take a more in-depth look at trucking, and will identify more thoroughly the freight needs of portions of California that did not receive sufficient attention during develop- ment of the GMAP. This update will also benefit from important regional freight mobility plan- ning programs that partner agencies have been engaged in and will utilize recent freight industry plans developed by seaports, railroads, and others. New considerations that have emerged for the Freight Mobility Plan include the following: • Climate change goals and greenhouse gas emissions, • New legislative mandates including sustainable communities, • Adaptation to sea-level rise, • New trends in international and interstate goods movement, • Regional differences throughout the state in goods movement and infrastructure, • How to best obtain substantive input from stakeholders, • Identifying and evaluating projects and developing criteria to set priorities, and • Integration with other state plans and programs. 2.3 Multi-Regional Agencies A number of multi-regional agencies have been created to deal with freight issues that tran- scend individual regions and states. One example is the Mid-America Freight Coalition (MAFC) which was formerly known as the Mississippi Valley Freight Coalition. MAFC is a regional orga- nization that cooperates in the planning, operation, preservation, and improvement of transpor- tation infrastructure in the Midwest. Its coalition members include ten states (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin) that share key interstate corridors, inland waterways, and the Great Lakes. These ten states signed a Memoran- dum of Understanding in October 2006 demonstrating their willingness to meet freight demand through regional cooperative efforts. The MAFC is built upon the work of the Upper Midwest Freight Corridor Study (UMFCS). 2.4 Regional and Local Agencies Local agencies include MPOs and other regional agencies, counties, cities, and special districts such as ports. 2.4.1 Metropolitan Planning Organizations MPOs provide a regional perspective on freight movement, not only identifying conges- tion and reliability issues, but also explicitly recognizing freight movement as contributing to the economic health of a region. MPO studies of freight movements have brought together a wide variety of stakeholders including city and county governments, port authorities, the busi- ness community (including shippers and freight carriers), environmental groups, and the public at large. A recent presentation on Best Practices for MPO Freight Planning in 2009 noted that there is no single best practice for freight planning, and that freight planning issues should match the

8 incorporating truck Analysis into the Highway capacity Manual issues of the MPO (Cambridge Systematics, n.d.). Freight movement issues in the region can be seen in a number of ways, including as an • Economic development issue, • Congestion issue, • Safety issue, and • Quality of life issue. Metropolitan Transportation Commission MTC developed a regional goods movement study for the San Francisco Bay Area in 2004 (Metropolitan Transportation Commission, 2004). Phase 1 of the study focused on understand- ing the movement of goods and the economic effects of this industry on the San Francisco Bay Area. Phase 2 assessed both the economic and employment effects of the industry on the Bay Area and its sub-regions. It provided a “big picture” analysis of the industry for policymakers and focused on the interaction among the trends in the goods-movement industry, local policy decisions that affect the goods-movement industry, and the industry’s effects on the regional economy. The intent of the study was to develop strategies for how MTC should allocate investment resources to goods movement in the regional transportation plan. As part of the study, a working paper was produced on developing land use strategy to support regional goods movement in the Bay Area (Hausrath Economics Group and Cambridge Systematics, 2004). Portland Metro In 2010 Portland Metro adopted a regional freight plan as an element of its regional transpor- tation plan (RTP) update (Metro, 2010). The intent of the plan was to position the region for the economic rebound after the 2008–2010 recession. The task force targeted the following as the main issues for freight movement in the region: • Congestion and hotspots—chronic road and rail network bottlenecks that impede regional freight/goods movement; • Reliability—as distinct from congestion, unpredictable travel time due to crashes, construc- tion, special events and weather (often exacerbated by capacity constraints); • Capacity constraints—caused by physical and operational issues as well as lack of capacity in critical corridors; • Network barriers—safety concerns and out-of-direction travel resulting from weight limited bridges, low bridge clearances, steep grades, at-grade rail crossings and poorly designed turns or intersections; • Land use—system capacity and land for industrial uses that is being lost to other activities; and • Environmental and other impacts—managing adverse impacts including diesel emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, water quality, noise and land use conflicts. Sacramento Area Council of Governments SACOG conducted a regional freight study in 2007 that looked at freight movement in the region in relation to transportation and land use policies (Tioga Group, 2007). The study looked at existing and planned land use policies and also conducted a project analysis of the Metro- politan Transportation Plan (MTP) with specific regard to how projects in the MTP would affect freight movement in the region. Projects were graded specifically on how well they would improve goods movement. Within each grade, the total cost of the projects that received that grade was calculated.

State of Public Agency Practice 9 2.4.2 Cities and Counties Cities and counties regulate freight primarily through their authority to designate loading zones, to restrict truck parking, to prohibit trucks from certain roads, and to designate specific truck routes. Physical characteristics of city roads can also limit truck movements such as height limits imposed by bridges and overpasses (Rhodes et al., 2012). For example, New York City regulates truck traffic in several ways including (NY DOT, Trucks and Commercial Vehicles) • Limiting truck parking to certain areas, • Prohibiting standing by trucks except for loading and unloading, • Limiting trailer parking, • Identifying specific truck routes within the city, • Developing a pilot off-hour truck delivery program that restricts truck deliveries to certain hours with low traffic, and • Setting weight and size limits on trucks within the city. Another example is San Francisco, which has instituted a number of regulatory and advisory measures for trucks including the following (San Francisco MTA): • Requiring special permits for “extralegal” trucks on city streets (i.e., trucks that exceed 8.5 ft. in width, 14.0 ft. in height, or 65.0 ft. in length or are greater than 34,000 lbs. per axle); • Designating streets with specific restrictions on truck weights; • Designating advisory truck routes within the city; and • Providing a special advisory that trucks, like all other motorized traffic in the city, should share the road with bicycles. The City of London’s transportation strategy focuses on a number of strategies to address congestion and reduce CO2 emissions. One of the strategies for freight is out-of-hours deliveries (OHD). The department for transport has published guidance on how local authorities can facilitate OHD. Benefits of OHD include (Rhodes et al., 2012) • Improve driver and fleet productivity, • Improve the environmental footprint of the logistics operation by operating vehicles more efficiently during times when there is less congestion, and • Reduce the wider impacts (e.g., crashes, noise, and parking) of logistics operations on the local area. A trial of OHD performed in the borough of Wandsworth at the Sainsbury supermarket chain found that (Rhodes et al., 2012) • The average delivery vehicle roundtrip journey times were reduced by 60 minutes from the distribution time; • OHD produced a saving in drivers’ time of 2 hours per day, equal to 700 hours or £16,000 per year; and • OHD removed 700 vehicle journeys from the road annually (2 per day during the congested period), which is equivalent to a 68-ton reduction in CO2, and a 700-liter per year savings in fuel. 2.5 Findings from Public Agencies Survey Surveys and interviews of transportation planners at selected state DOTs and MPOs in 12 states found 1. The majority use HCM methods. The second most common is microsimulation, followed by FHWA’s freight analysis framework (which uses the area-wide planning method from HCM 2000).

10 incorporating truck Analysis into the Highway capacity Manual 2. There is a strong preference for truck level-of-service (LOS) methodology for ranking goods- movement investments and evaluating general highway capacity investments. 3. Agencies believe that truck LOS should be sensitive to travel time reliability, traffic congestion, and average speed. 2.6 Conclusions from State of Practice Review Freight planning and regulation is conducted by a number of agencies at different levels with overlapping authorities. Freight planning issues have been given greater and greater policy importance over the past 10 years as public agencies at the national, state, regional, and local levels have increasingly recognized the importance of efficient freight movement for economic health and regional economic competitiveness. Freight movement entails a number of issues including economic development, safety, con- gestion, and environment. Truck LOS is concerned with only some of these issues. This may explain in part why there appears to be no specific examples of use of LOS measures that solely address trucks other than planning studies that address how congestion affects truck movement and shipping reliability. And yet, recognizing the limitations of LOS, there is strong interest from public agency freight planners in having the ability to apply a truck LOS measure in planning and programming goods-movement projects. This is driven by the desire to “mainstream” consideration of high- way freight movement in the process used to identify, prioritize, and program transportation improvement projects by speaking the same language as for automobile projects. Automobile LOS is often used in transportation planning and traffic impact studies to identify deficiencies, determine significant impacts, and develop mitigation measures. The recent development of bicycle, transit, and pedestrian LOS measures for urban streets for the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (TRB, 2010), leaves freight movement on highways as the last major mode of travel without a LOS measure.