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.
N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E F R E I G H T R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCFRP REPORT 24 Subscriber Categories Highways â¢ Freight Transportation â¢ Planning and Forecasting Smart Growth and Urban Goods Movement Alon Bassok Chris Johnson Matthew Kitchen Rebeccah Maskin Kris Overby Puget Sound Regional CounCil Seattle, WA Daniel Carlson Anne Goodchild Edward McCormack Erica Wygonik univeRSity of WaShington Seattle, WA TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2013 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the Research and Innovative Technology Administration
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE FREIGHT RESEARCH PROGRAM Americaâs freight transportation system makes critical contributions to the nationâs economy, security, and quality of life. The freight transportation system in the United States is a complex, decentralized, and dynamic network of private and public entities, involving all modes of transportationâtrucking, rail, waterways, air, and pipelines. In recent years, the demand for freight transportation service has been increasing fueled by growth in international trade; however, bottlenecks or congestion points in the system are exposing the inadequacies of current infrastructure and operations to meet the growing demand for freight. Strategic operational and investment decisions by governments at all levels will be necessary to maintain freight system performance, and will in turn require sound technical guidance based on research. The National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) is a cooperative research program sponsored by the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) under Grant No. DTOS59-06-G-00039 and administered by the Transportation Research Board (TRB). The program was authorized in 2005 with the passage of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). On September 6, 2006, a contract to begin work was executed between RITA and The National Academies. The NCFRP will carry out applied research on problems facing the freight industry that are not being adequately addressed by existing research programs. Program guidance is provided by an Oversight Committee comprised of a representative cross section of freight stakeholders appointed by the National Research Council of The National Academies. The NCFRP Oversight Committee meets annually to formulate the research program by identifying the highest priority projects and defining funding levels and expected products. Research problem statements recommending research needs for consideration by the Oversight Committee are solicited annually, but may be submitted to TRB at any time. Each selected project is assigned to a panel, appointed by TRB, which provides technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. Heavy emphasis is placed on including members representing the intended users of the research products. The NCFRP will produce a series of research reports and other products such as guidebooks for practitioners. Primary emphasis will be placed on disseminating NCFRP results to the intended end-users of the research: freight shippers and carriers, service providers, suppliers, and public officials. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE FREIGHT RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCFRP REPORT 24 Project NCFRP 32 ISSN 1947-5659 ISBN 978-0-309-28343-4 Library of Congress Control Number 2013944212 Â© 2013 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, RITA, or PHMSA endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not- for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Freight Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Freight Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academyâs purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org
C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR NCFRP REPORT 24 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs William C. Rogers, Senior Program Officer Charlotte Thomas, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Kami Cabral, Editor NCFRP PROJECT 32 PANEL Qiang âWesleyâ Hong, Center for Automotive Research, Ann Arbor, MI (Chair) Rebekah Karasko, North Central Texas Council of Governments Nicole Jennifer Katsikides, Maryland DOT Janice Susie Lahsene, Port of Portland, OR Douglas MacIvor, California DOT Matthew B. Malchow, California Air Resources Board Vidyadhara N. Mysore, Florida DOT James P. Schultz, Michigan DOT Eric Pihl, FHWA Liaison M. J. Fiocco, RITA Liaison Tom Palmerlee, TRB Liaison
F O R E W O R D By William C. Rogers Staff Officer Transportation Research Board NCFRP Report 24: Smart Growth and Urban Goods Movement identifies the interrelation- ships between goods movement and smart growth applications, in particular, the relation- ship between the transportation of goods in the urban environment and land-use patterns. The results of the research can be used by decisionmakers to more accurately understand urban goods movement demand, relevant performance metrics, and the limitations of cur- rent modeling frameworks for addressing smart growth and urban goods movement. Smart growth and its compact, transit-oriented, and walkable land use has been proposed as an alternative to urban sprawl. There has been substantial research on the application of smart growth to passenger transport, but little has been done to examine its impact on goods movement. Transportation planning organizations are looking to influence future land-use patterns to create livable, sustainable communities by reducing such factors as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and congestion, and therefore reducing greenhouse gas emissions. How- ever, along certain road segments, smart growth policies could increase congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. An increase in the share of travel completed in a congested envi- ronment would decrease average speed, increase the frequency of hard vehicle accelerations, decrease vehicle fuel economy, and increase air pollutant emissions. Improved modeling that fully accounts for impacts of future land use on personal and goods transportation, in terms of VMT and potentially other metrics, could be used to help design smart growth strategies that result in the greatest emissions benefit. In addition, land-use activities (zon- ing, urban growth limits, etc.) are often disconnected from decisions regarding investments in the goods movement system. Understanding how land-use decisions can impact goods movement demand will become increasingly important. Under NCFRP Project 32, the Puget Sound Regional Council and the University of Washington were asked to (1) describe current smart growth principles and practices, both domestic and international, and identify overarching themes to develop a definition of smart growth; (2) identify metrics and performance measures, especially for goods move- ment (if available), that have been proposed and/or applied; (3) identify a wide variety of stakeholders that would be affected by smart growth plans, policies, and regulations; (4) interview the stakeholders to identify and define the attributes of smart growth that might impact goods movement; (5) develop smart-growth scenarios that impact goods move- ment; (6) input the scenarios into a demand-forecasting model and compare the smart- growth scenarios with different baseline and transportation network alternatives; and (7) describe the implications of the smart-growth and goods movement interaction on trans- portation modeling and freight planning.
C O N T E N T S 1 Chapter 1 Introduction 3 Chapter 2 Defining Smart Growth 5 2.1 Benefits of Smart Growth 10 2.2 Other Components of Smart Growth 12 Chapter 3 Urban Goods Movement Definition 12 3.1 Research into Urban Goods Movement 14 Chapter 4 Intersection of Smart Growth and Urban Goods Movement 15 4.1 Access, Parking, and Loading Zones 15 4.2 Road Channelization, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities 16 4.3 Land-Use Mix 17 4.4 Logistics Studies 17 4.5 Network System Management 18 4.6 Summary 19 Chapter 5 Learning from Goods-Movement Stakeholders 20 5.1 Intent of Focus Groups 21 5.2 Findings from the Focus Groups 31 Chapter 6 Considerations for Smart Growth and Goods Movement 31 6.1 Policy and Planning Considerations 33 6.2 Research Gaps 34 Chapter 7 Urban Truck Freight Models 34 7.1 Introduction 38 7.2 Alternative and Future Modeling Approaches 40 Chapter 8 Modeling 40 8.1 Description of the Land-Use Scenarios 50 8.2 Travel Network Scenarios 51 8.3 Modeling Results 61 8.4 Implications of the Modeling Results 62 Chapter 9 Conclusions 62 9.1 Implications for Freight Planning 64 9.2 Implications for Truck Modeling 66 Bibliography
71 Appendix A Focus-Group Participants 73 Appendix B Focus-Group Guides 78 Appendix C Modeling Tools at PSRC Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the Web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.