DETERMINATION OF FREIGHT CORRIDORS FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Texas A&M University Civil Engineering Department CVEN April 28, 2003 ADHARA CASTELBLANCO

Outline Introduction Objective Background Methodology Results Sensitivity Analysis Conclusion and Recommendations

Intro: Problem Description U.S. urban highways (congestion) Traffic growth > road capacity Cost: delays, contamination and fuel consumption ITS Vs. new construction

Importance Identify 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

Background Ohio DOT: Economic and non-economic criteria Major production and distribution centers Ohio (nodes) Link-node Approach (highway network) Shieh: Min highway network for LCV High 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: 8-10 Rank 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 - 15 I - 10 I - 40 US 101 I – 80 I - 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