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