Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide (2015)

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.

17 The main intent of this section is to describe how best to use the wide spectrum of initiatives described throughout this Guide. The initiative identification process is a codified approach that seeks to match immediate needs with what the various strategies offer. Agency staff in charge of finding ways to address a freight issue could greatly benefit from having the preliminary guidance offered by the set of initiatives discussed in this section. This guidance can point practitioners and researchers in the right direction; however, only detailed planning and design exercises can address important aspects of the selection process. An estimation of the costs and benefits produced by a given initiative, and an assessment of the trade-offs inherent in the allocation of scarce resources, are only possible through a formal planning process. The term initiative is used throughout this Guide to refer to the set of public-sector actions that could be considered to address a freight issue. Such initiatives typically come in the form of policies, programs, and projects. An example of a policy could be to give delivery trucks preferential access to curb space in commercial areas; an example of a program might be an ongoing effort to incentivize carriers to purchase electric trucks; and an example of a project could be an intersection redesign effort. Selecting the appropriate combination is of great importance. This section of the Guide provides a comprehensive catalog of such initiatives. The catalog is based on an in-depth analysis of public-sector initiatives used across the world, for which the section introduces a comprehensive classification system and provides a critical examination of the evidence concerning the performance of the initiatives discussed. The review that produced this Guide led to the identification of 54 measures. These measures were classified into eight major groups and organized as a continuum with supply initiatives at one end, demand-related initiatives at the other, and operational and financial strategies in the middle (see Figure 2). The measures also were tied to the active participation of the main stakeholders involved in the freight issue to be addressed. The eight groups of urban freight initiatives are: • Infrastructure management • Parking/loading areas management • Vehicle-related strategies • Traffic management • Pricing, incentives, and taxation • Logistical management • Freight demand/land use management • Stakeholder engagement More often than not, the process of selecting the most appropriate initiative to address a freight issue is far from straightforward. Most cases involve a great deal of nuance, including S E C T I O N 2 Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives

18 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Figure 2. Urban freight initiatives.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 19 conflicts to sort out and multiple factors, trade-offs, and the major constraints to be considered. Therefore, extensive stakeholder engagement and data collection often need to precede the selection of an initiative. The tasks discussed in Section 1 for the “definition of goals and objectives to be achieved,” “definition of performance measures,” and “identification of root cause(s)” provide more detail on this general process. Key inputs required for reducing the set of potential alternatives should, at the least, include: (1) geographic scope of the problem; (2) main goals and objectives to be achieved; (3) key con- straints; and (4) root causes of the problem. (For an expanded discussion of how to integrate the inputs into proposed public-sector initiatives to identify their impacts, see the Appendix.) After selecting the most appropriate initiative to solve a given issue or problem, additional considerations need to be identified to ensure a successful implementation. In this Guide, these considerations are presented as questions that address planning, operations, stakeholder engage- ment, and risk management and integration. Each group of initiatives includes some questions planners should ask themselves to move the implementation process forward. The next subsection lists questions that address key considerations in planning, operations, stakeholder engagement, and risk management and integration, and provides a brief description of the significance of each question. Later in Section 2, the key questions that should be answered for each group of initiatives are presented. Planning Considerations 1. Is there enough right-of-way available to complete the project? Some initiatives require suitable space to be implemented; thus, their feasibility depends on the right-of-way available. 2. Will other projects be required to fully complete the project? Some initiatives cannot be fully functional without involving other, complementary projects. Not considering these other projects can lead to unintended consequences and added costs for the primary initiative. 3. How will this project be funded? A fundamental consideration when designing and planning any policy/project is to identify the funding source(s). 4. What is the anticipated duration of the project/policy? The lifespan or duration of a particular policy or project must be considered during the planning process. For example, if new infrastructure is built, how many years will it be expected to operate without needing major changes? Will a policy be in effect for a short, long, or indefinite time period? If the duration of a project or policy is indefinite, have provisions been planned for its periodic reevaluation to ensure it is still applicable? 5. What is the geographic scope of the project? Describing the geographic scope of a project or policy will define the area that will be impacted by that project or policy. For example, some projects may have an impact several hundred miles away, whereas others are more localized. 6. Where is it located? This question defines the physical location of the project or policy to be implemented. In some cases, alternative locations may be considered. The success of a project or policy can hinge on its location, given that the costs, operational requirements, community impacts, and other factors might differ according to the location chosen. 7. What is the desired size/capacity/connectivity? Consideration of the desired size, capacity, and connectivity is particularly important for infrastructure improvements and facilities construction. Size and capacity are defined by

20 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide the needs and scope of the project. Also important to consider is the connectivity from one system to another. For example, if a ring road is built, it is important to have sufficient access to the ring road from other roads. Operational Considerations 8. Will the policy/project be mandatory or voluntary? Defining whether the policy or project will be mandatory or voluntary is important. Laws support mandatory policies and projects; for voluntary policies and projects, the target groups have the option to participate—or not. 9. Is there any incentive for participation (or penalties for not)? The effectiveness of some policies depends on participation from the target group. This participation can be fostered by providing incentives (e.g., tax incentives, reimbursements of initial expenses, or public recognition), or by enforcing penalties for nonparticipation, such as fines. 10. What is the level of incentives? If an incentive is being provided, the amount or magnitude of the incentive has to be deter- mined. If the incentive is too small, it may not produce the intended effect; if the incentive is too high, it may lead to wasted resources. 11. What is the level of price(s)/fine(s)? The same considerations discussed for incentives apply to prices and fines. It is recom- mended that defining the levels of prices and fines follow basic economic principles. They should be large enough to deter undesirable behavior and aid in reaching the desired out- come, but small enough to be politically feasible. 12. How will the policy/project be enforced? Given that compliance with the policy or project will be enforced by the public sector, those mechanisms are best verified during the planning stage to ensure their consideration in the implementation of the policy or project. 13. What is the target group? The project’s target group must be clearly identified to focus project resources in the right direction and ensure that the proper impact is achieved. The target group could include receivers, carriers, drivers, communities, large or small companies, large traffic generators, and a specific industry sector, among other possibilities. Because different industry sectors are likely to exhibit different behavioral responses to public policy, it is important to be certain which group is being targeted. 14. What are the criteria for participation? Ideally, identification of the target group occurs concurrently with establishment of the criteria for participation. There are cases (e.g., public recognition programs) in which the participants must meet specific eligibility requirements to receive an incentive. Companies that do not meet the requirements cannot participate in the program. Determining the criteria helps ensure the efficiency of the policy and prevents unintended consequences. 15. Which agency will lead? To ensure a successful outcome, the most relevant public-sector agency should be chosen to lead the project. Equally important is for the lead agency to collaborate with other agencies as needed throughout the course of the project or policy, from planning through implementation. 16. What are the resources needed to operate the project? It is necessary to identify the resources that will be required once the project or policy is operational to keep it functioning during its useful lifespan. These resources include operating costs, staff resources, and any physical resources such as equipment that might be required to keep the project or policy operational.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 21 17. What permits are required to initiate/complete the project? It is necessary to include a list of all permits that are required to be processed before the initiation/completion of the project, along with any pertinent deadlines. Stakeholder Engagement 18. Who are the stakeholders? It is important to identify and engage the proper set of stakeholders for each project and policy. The stakeholders can be any combination of public agencies, private companies, communities, trade groups, individuals, academia, and policy makers. 19. Should the private sector be engaged? If so, how? Private-sector businesses often are affected by the implementation of public initiatives. In such cases, engagement strategies should be planned to ensure that relevant private-sector representatives are engaged, and that they understand and support the project. 20. Is there a need to engage and coordinate with public agencies? How? Various public-sector agencies can be affected by, or have the power to implement, policies and projects. It is important to ensure that policies or projects proposed by one agency will not negatively affect a project or policy implemented by another agency. Risk Management and Integration with Other Transportation Policies 21. Is there a risk of the technology/project becoming obsolete? The technologies used for a project should be planned and chosen according to the project’s lifespan and duration. For long projects, it might be necessary to consider technology upgrade plans. In the case of infrastructure, a future obsolescence management plan may also be worth considering. 22. Could benefits be provided to the community or pedestrians? Although the first objective of these projects and policies is to address freight system issues, in some cases it is possible to design the projects or programs to benefit additional stake- holders and local communities. If so, such possibilities should be considered, as they will ease implementation. 23. Are there any safety/security issues that should be resolved? It is important to identify any safety or security concerns before project implementation. Identifying potential problems in the design phase will reduce costs and improve the safety of the overall system. Once a preliminary list of relevant initiatives has been compiled, public-sector decision mak- ers and transportation agencies are ready to conduct detailed assessments of each initiative’s pros and cons, and decide on the most appropriate course of action following the process described in Section 1. The case studies presented in Section 3 of this Guide illustrate how numerous ini- tiatives have been identified, selected, and implemented to address freight-related problems in different cities around the United States. Succinct discussions and descriptions of each initiative included in the catalog are given in the rest of Section 2. These descriptions are organized into groups. The descriptions include discus- sions about advantages and disadvantages associated with implementation of each initiative, examples, related initiatives, and references for further review. Following the descriptions are corresponding tables that summarize essential characteristics of the initiatives (e.g., target mode, geographic scope, primary objective, expected costs, and level of effort for implementation). A group summary table also is included that lists each initiative and uses checkmarks to indicate the applicable planning and design questions (considerations) for each initiative.

22 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Practitioners can use the summary tables as a quick reference for each initiative and consult the group summary table to relate the initiatives to the key design considerations. advantages and disadvantages associated with implementation of the initiative discussed, examples, related initiatives, and references for further review. Infrastructure Management Infrastructure management initiatives use infrastructure improvements to enhance freight mobility. Such enhancements are often necessary because both truck size and traffic have increased over the past few decades, making some roadways and buildings obsolete and unable to support current freight traffic volumes (Wilbur Smith Associates 2012). Major Improvements Initiatives considered for major infrastructure improvements often require large expenditures and fairly elaborate planning efforts. Initiative 1: Ring Roads for Bypass Traffic This initiative seeks to shift through-trucks that would otherwise travel through the city to ring roads in the urban periphery. Ring roads only work if they lead to cost savings to the car- riers; without proper land use planning they can create excess sprawl, and they require large capital investments, elaborate needs assessments, and impact analyses. Studies to evaluate ring roads should analyze truck traffic, temporal patterns and their environmental impacts, and other complementary measures (PIARC 2011). The location of traffic generators also needs to be studied to determine where the proposed ring road and its potential interchanges would most effectively improve mobility. Table 1 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 1. Initiative 2: New and Upgraded Infrastructure Initiatives of this type focus on enhancing the geometric design and physical characteristics of current roadways, railways, and intermodal terminals. Market studies must be performed to ensure that investments in these facilities would generate enough intended effects to justify the costs. New or upgraded roads often are considered to address the wider turning radii of trucks (Ogden 1992); trucks unable to make right turns without interfering with oncoming traffic, or cutting across sidewalks; and trucks unable to travel under overpasses (Wilbur Smith Associates 2012), among other issues. Some U.S. examples of this type of initiative are the Atlanta freight corridors included in the Georgia Freight Logistics Plan 2010–2050 (Georgia Department of Transportation 2011a). Railway enhancements face the same obstacles as road-related improvements. Unlike roads and bridges, however, rail infrastructure is primarily owned by private-sector companies, which only make physical improvements if their return on investment can meet expected thresholds. An additional limiting factor is the lack of public funding available to build new or upgraded railways (though federal investments were used in the Alameda Corridor in Los Angeles and the Chicago CREATE project, among others). Nevertheless, new or upgraded railways often are discussed as part of supply chain and logistics improvement plans. An example of this kind of initiative appears in the freight action strategy for the Everett-Seattle-Tacoma Corridor case study in Section 3. Similarly, upgrades of intermodal terminals could have beneficial effects on urban freight by fostering mode shifts to rail. Given that each mode independently strives to increase its market share in freight activities, cooperation is key to intermodal terminal success, and representatives

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 23 Innovative Design—San Antonio’s US-281 Super Street Today’s transportation decision makers face increasingly complex issues even as transportation funding has steadily declined. Increasingly, decision makers must do more with less. This is particularly true in urban areas, where the major freight bottlenecks are often located in areas with tight rights-of-way and environmental constraints. San Antonio’s Challenge In 2009, the San Antonio region confronted these challenges when the develop- ment of a proposed tollway to alleviate congestion on US-281 stalled because of complications in the environmental review process. As congestion increased, freight stakeholders began reaching out to the Texas Department of Transportation (Texas DOT) and the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority to find a short- to mid-term solution to the increasing congestion on US-281 while environmental concerns were being addressed by a larger, long-term solution. A local engineering firm approached the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority with a proposal to transform one of the most congested portions of the US-281 Corridor into a “Super Street” (see Figure 3). A month later, the $5.2 million project was approved through a combination of funding from the Advanced Transportation District, the city of San Antonio, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, often called the federal Stimulus program). Construction began 1 year later and was completed, despite weather delays, within 10 months (Alamo Regional Mobility Authority n.d.; Purcell 2014). A Super Street is an innovative series of intersection improvements that limit and coordinate signal phases by redirecting left-turn phases. Essentially, minor-road drivers approaching an intersection with a major road physically cannot proceed straight through the intersection. The driver is directed to make a right turn onto the major road, turn around using a crossover, and then turn right onto the minor road (Figure 4). Similarly, left hand turns from the minor road are physically prohibited. All movements of the major road function as a normal intersection (Figure 5). Source: FHWA 2004 Figure 3. Super street illustration. (continued on next page)

24 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Source: FHWA 2004 Figure 4. Minor road movements. Source: FHWA 2004 Figure 5. Major road movements. Each intersection functions as a two-phase signal, versus a traditional multiphase signal that requires significantly more red time; therefore, the Super Street design reduces delay. Additionally, because of the reduced signal complexity, the two signal phases can have different cycle lengths, increasing throughput on the higher-volume major road. Furthermore, the geometric changes to the intersection design also reduce conflict points by 37%, compared to a traditional four-leg signalized intersection (FHWA 2004). Although reducing congestion and emissions and improving safety are clear benefits to innovative designs like the Super Street, other challenges could be compounded if this initiative is applied in urban areas. Design considerations need to ensure that trucks turning left from the minor road onto the major road can negotiate the U-turn with ease. According to local freight stakeholders, this has been accomplished in San Antonio, and trucks have been a primary beneficiary of the changes. Additional considerations are needed to maintain traffic flow during the construction process. This is true of most roadway projects, but Super Streets are frequently used in corridors with a tight right-of-way envelope. In 2011, the US-281 team analyzed the effects of the improved US-281 Super Street Corridor. The team found that delay was reduced during a.m. and p.m. peaks by over 1 million vehicle hours annually (65% and 73% reductions, respectively). This reduction resulted in over $24 million saved annually by users of the corridor. The corridor’s crash rate fell by almost 46%. The $5.2 million investment resulted in a 1-year benefit-cost ratio of 4.7 (Gaston and Gilmer 2011). In 2012, the project was recognized by the American Council of Engineering Companies with an Engi- neering Excellence Award (Pape-Dawson Engineers 2012). Innovative solutions will be increasingly necessary as growth in both population and freight demand impact U.S. metropolitan areas. Low-cost projects that have a low geographical imprint while producing significant benefits—such as San Antonio’s Super Street—will be critical to improving freight system performance in metro- politan areas. Innovative Design—San Antonio’s US-281 Super Street (Continued)

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 25 must commit to the global operation and the overarching benefits that the terminal will return to the system. This is the case of a project the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) is pursuing to upgrade the Greenville Yard at the Jersey City waterfront with the main purpose of improving operations and reducing truck traffic in the region. Examples of coordination and required collaborative work of already-finalized projects are described in case studies from Kansas City and Los Angeles described in Section 3. Table 2 summarizes essential characteristics of several initiatives for new and upgraded infrastructure, intermodal terminals. Initiative 3: Freight Cluster Development (Freight Village) Freight cluster developments foster relocation of large freight users, such as distribution centers, manufacturers, truck terminals, and intermodal facilities to a specific area, typically at the urban fringe. Locating a freight cluster far away from the urban core means that small trucks have to travel longer distances to complete their deliveries, increasing vehicle-miles traveled on the last leg of the supply chain. The concept of freight clustering is a relatively recent development in the United States (Smart Growth Network and ICMA 2002), though it is common in Europe. Freight clusters could lead to small reductions in truck traffic given that a portion of the business- to-business freight traffic that normally takes place in the city would take place inside the facility (Allen and Browne 2010). The impact on overall congestion is very small however, as the business- to-business traffic in the clusters represents a minuscule proportion of the total truck traffic in the city. However, the noise and other negative effects generated inside and around the freight village are great disadvantages for local communities. (For a discussion of success factors in Europe, see European Freight Villages and their Success Factors (Nobel 2011). Freight clusters require large tracks of land, initial investments, and coordination efforts. The main benefits of freight clusters are to preserve space for freight-intensive activities inside the metropolitan area but outside the central business district. Table 3 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 3. Minor Improvements Initiatives associated with minor improvements are relatively less costly, though they still require analysis of the anticipated costs and benefits involved before implementation. Initiative 4: Acceleration/Deceleration Lanes Designed to accommodate the acceleration and deceleration profile of trucks, these improve- ments allow trucks to seamlessly merge into traffic. State and local agencies have made a variety of efforts to deal with issues arising from accelerating levels of truck traffic (Douglas 2003). A comprehensive report covering truck climbing lanes and including real-world experiences, lessons learned from previous implementation, typical issues planners face early in the planning process, and a framework and methods for evaluating the benefits and impacts of truck facilities can be found in the Handbook for Planning Truck Facilities on Urban Highways (Douglas 2004). Table 4 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 4. Initiative 5: Removal of Geometric Constraints at Intersections The geometry of intersections in the old sections of large cities poses tremendous challenges to delivery trucks. Although a wholesale redesign of intersections may not be appropriate, it is advisable to improve geometry at selected problem intersections. Restricting access to large trucks may offer a short-term solution, though it may not be appropriate for zones where heavy large-truck traffic is unavoidable. In those cases, a lack of adequate geometric design will sig- nificantly impact traffic and safety; removing geometric constraints may therefore be necessary. New developments must ensure appropriate street geometry for truck operations. An example

26 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide for the implementation of this initiative is presented in the Maspeth Truck Route Redesignation case study in Section 3. Table 5 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 5. Initiative 6: Ramps for Handcarts and Forklifts This program involves building ramps on sidewalks to accommodate forklifts or handcarts to improve the efficiency of loading and unloading activities (Ogden 1992). These ramps make it easy for drivers to deliver larger quantities of cargo, which significantly reduces the time spent in parking and loading areas, increasing the areas’ capacity to accommodate freight vehicles. The ramps also allow a truck to park once to unload its goods for a general location, then to break up the load and distribute it to multiple nearby sites, such as having a single drop-off/pick-up location for multiple shippers or receivers, with self-pick-ups and drop-offs using handcarts. Table 6 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 6.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 27 Source: OpenStreetMap Contributors 2010 Initiative 1: Ring Roads for Bypass Traffic Description: The construction of bypasses (high speed ring roads, or beltways) to move through-trucks to the periphery of the urban area. Only viable if they lead to cost savings to carriers. Targeted mode: Through traffic Geographic scope: Corridor Type of Initiative: Infrastructure management: major improvements Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The cost and effort to construct a new ring road can be very high, involving construction of a new roadway, roadway crossings, and interchanges. Such a construction project will involve long-term planning and implementation, elaborate needs assessments, and impact analyses. Advantages: Reduce congestion Enhance safety Environmental sustainability Reduce infrastructure damage Disadvantages: High probability for unintended consequences - May lead to new development outside urban core - Environmental impacts on the communities affected by the new road Environmental impacts associated with new construction Require very high capital investments Require private-sector acceptance Typical example: Sydney Orbital Network, Australia “Through” Corridors in Atlanta, Georgia, United States (Transport for NSW 2012) (Georgia Department of Transportation 2011b) Source: Georgia Department of Transportation 2011b Related alternatives: 1. New and Upgraded Infrastructure, Intermodal Terminals; 2. Truck Routes; 3. Exclusive Truck Lanes (Dedicated Truck Lanes) References: Marquez et al. 2004; PIARC 2011 Table 1. Ring roads for bypass traffic.

28 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 2a: New and Upgraded Roads Description: Enhancements to the geometric design and physical characteristics of current roadways Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Corridor Type of initiative: Infrastructure management: major improvements Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure/ enhance safety Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Extensive stakeholder involvement and an assessment of all potential impacts (positive and negative), both inside and outside the study area, should factor into planning. Costs of implementation range from short-term, inexpensive maintenance to very high construction and reconstruction costs of new truck routes or lanes. Advantages: Reduce congestion Enhance livability Enhance safety for bicyclists and pedestrians Facilitate multimodal freight Disadvantages: Moderate probability for unintended consequences Environmental impacts associated with new construction Require very high capital investments May increase traffic on improved roadway May require private-sector investments Examples: Lorry Route Network, Suffolk County, England (Suffolk County Council 2013) Atlanta Freight Corridors, Atlanta, GA, United States (Georgia Department of Transportation 2011a) US-281 and Loop 1604 Super Street (San Antonio, TX, United States) Alum Creek Drive Reverse Crossbow Interchange (Franklin County Engineer, OH, United States) Related alternatives: 1. Ring Roads; 2. Freight Cluster Development (Freight Village); 3. Freight Parking and Loading Zones; 4. Truck Stops/ Parking Outside of Metropolitan Areas References: Ogden 1992; Woudsma 2001; Georgia Department of Transportation 2011a; Suffolk County Council 2011; Wilbur Smith Associates 2012 Source: Georgia Department of Transportation 2011a Table 2. New and upgraded infrastructure.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 29 Source: Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority (ACTA) 2013 Initiative 2b: New and Upgraded Railways Description: The construction of new rail lines, or upgrades to existing rail lines Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Corridor Type of initiative: Infrastructure management: major improvements Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure/ enhance safety Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Costs will vary depending on whether a project modifies existing infrastructure or involves new construction. Generally, the costs associated with this type of initiative are very high. Planning should involve public and private sectors; projects will require availability of both types of funding, given that most rail infrastructure is privately owned and operated. Advantages: Enhance safety Facilitate multimodal freight Reduce vehicle-miles traveled Reduce congestion Reduce infrastructure damage Disadvantages: May require very high capital investments May require private-sector investments Require extensive coordination and integration between stakeholders as the rail network is mainly owned by private-sector entities Moderate probability for unintended consequences - May impact competitiveness of alternate modes Examples: CREATE Project implemented in Chicago, IL, United States (CREATE 2003) Revitalizing rail freight in Wielkopolska, Slovenia (CASTLE 2009) Alameda Corridor in California, United States (Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority 2013) Related alternatives: 1. Ring Roads; 2. Freight Cluster Development (Freight Village); 3. Freight Parking and Loading Zones; 4. Truck Stops/ Parking Outside of Metropolitan Areas References: CREATE 2003; Douglas 2003; Ballis 2006; CASTLE 2009; Department for Transport 2010b Table 2. (Continued). (continued on next page)

30 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Source: The Port of Los Angeles 2013 Initiative 2c: New and Upgraded Intermodal Terminals Description: The use and construction of terminals and other transfer facilities to move freight between trucks and other modes of transportation Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Corridor Type of initiative: Infrastructure management: major improvements Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure/ enhance safety Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Costs and effort depend on the type of project: a new intermodal terminal or improvements to an existing terminal. Creation of master plans to include intermodal conditions is less expensive than the very high cost of constructing a new facility. Extensive stakeholder engagement is necessary, as is an assessment of positive and negative impacts for all economic agents involved. The construction of new facilities may require a lengthy implementation period. Advantages: Reduce congestion Reduce vehicle-miles traveled Environmental sustainability Enhance economic competitiveness Facilitate intermodal freight Disadvantages: May require very high capital investments Require long implementation times Require cooperation between multiple stakeholders Moderate probability of unintended consequences - Increase perceived noise in the surrounding areas - Increase traffic in the vicinity of terminal - Potential land use conflicts Examples: Southern California Intermodal Terminals, California, United States (Southern California EDISON 2007) Ohio’s Intermodal Railroad Terminals, Ohio, United States (Ohio Rail Development Commission 2012) Motorways of the Sea in Europe (MOSES 2001) Related alternatives: 1. Ring Roads; 2. Freight Cluster Development (Freight Village); 3. Freight Parking and Loading Zones; 4. Truck Stops/ Parking Outside of Metropolitan Areas References: MOSES 2001; Southern California EDISON 2007 Table 2. (Continued).

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 31 Source: http://saportareport.com/blog/2012/07/ gdot-cuts-ribbon-on-bridge-as-georgians-vote-on-18-billion-transportation-tax/ Initiative 2d: New and Upgraded Railroad Grade Separations Description: The construction of railroad grade separations Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Corridor Type of initiative: Infrastructure management: major improvements Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure/ enhance safety/reduce delays Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Costs and efforts depend on the scope of the project and the complexity of the grade crossing. Due to the extensive planning and design considerations that should be taken into account, these projects are often expensive. Extensive stakeholder engagement is necessary, as is an assessment of positive and negative impacts for all economic agents involved. The reconstruction of grade crossings may require a lengthy implementation period. Advantages: Reduce congestion Reduce risk and maintenance for the railroads Increase safety Increase corridor reliability Disadvantages: May require very high capital investments Require significant coordination with railroads Require cooperation between multiple stakeholders Examples: Highway 307 Overpass of Norfolk Southern Railroad Outside of Port of Savannah Gate Source: (The Port of Los Angeles 2013) Grade separation of State Route 307 over the rail line outside the Port of Savannah (Pendered 2012) Related alternatives: 1. Ring Roads; 2. Freight Cluster Development (Freight Village); 3. Freight Parking and Loading Zones; 4. Truck Stops/ Parking Outside of Metropolitan Areas References: Pendered 2012; The Port of Los Angeles 2013 Table 2. (Continued).

32 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 3: Freight Cluster Development (Freight Village) Description: The concentration of freight users such as distribution centers, manufacturers, truck terminals, and intermodal facilities into a single location, typically at the urban fringe, to provide efficiency and economies of scale. Cluster development is a common land use approach that consolidates a single type of activity in an area to reduce that activity’s negative impacts on other areas, such as residential developments. Targeted mode: Large traffic generators Geographic scope: City Type of initiative: Infrastructure management: major improvements Primary objective: Reduce congestion/land use planning Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Costs to construct a new freight village are very high, but most costs and effort are taken by the private sector. The cost of purchasing land for a freight village may be very high, and may possibly be assumed by the public sector. Because the intention is to concentrate freight activities in one location, coordinated efforts are required, involving the public sector, private sector, and the communities. The implementation and construction of freight cluster development takes a long time. Advantages (inside the urban area): Reduces congestion Environmental sustainability Enhances safety Enhances operational efficiency Enhances livability Reduces freight activity inside urban areas Disadvantages (area of impact of freight cluster): Requires very high capital investment (land acquisition and construction) Requires extensive cooperation between stakeholders Environmental impacts associated with new construction Moderate to low probability of unintended consequences - Increased perceived noise in surrounding areas - Increased traffic in the vicinity of terminal - Increased vehicle-miles traveled Examples: Portland, Oregon, United States (Holguín-Veras et al. 2012a) Seattle, Washington, United States (Holguín-Veras et al. 2012a) Abertis Logistics Park in Santiago, Chile (Abertis 2010) Frankfurt Freight Village (Oder), Germany (GVZ Frankfurt 2013) Related alternatives: 1. New and Upgraded Infrastructure, Intermodal Terminals; 2. Relocation of Large Traffic Generators (LTGs); 3. Integrate Freight into Land Use Planning Process References: Smart Growth Network and ICMA 2002; CASTLE 2009; Allen and Browne 2010; C-LIEGE 2010; Department for Transport 2010b; Nobel 2011 Source: GVZ Frankfurt 2013 Table 3. Freight cluster development (freight village).

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 33 Initiative 4: Acceleration/Deceleration Lanes Description: Improvements to infrastructure designed to accommodate trucks’ technical acceleration and deceleration specifications, especially when merging into traffic at intersections, interchanges, ramps, highways, and at traffic signals Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Corridor Type of initiative: Infrastructure management: minor improvements Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The planning process should involve multiple stakeholders to account for the impacts and benefits of acceleration and deceleration lanes. Depending on the locations, high investments may be needed to acquire land to construct the lanes. Requires analysis of possible environmental impacts. Advantages: Enhance safety Improve mobility Reduce congestion Low probability for unintended consequences Disadvantages: May require high capital investments Environmental impacts associated with new construction May require moderate implementation times Examples: Minnesota Department of Transportation (Minnesota DOT) (Maze et al. 2005) Acceleration Lane at I-81/I-70 Interchange. Maryland, United States (Keels 2011) Deceleration lanes at the intersection of four-lane and two-lane highway Related alternatives: 1. Truck Routes; 2. Restricted Multi-Use Lanes; 3. Exclusive Truck Lanes (Dedicated Truck Lanes) References: Douglas 2003; Maze et al. 2005; Keels 2011 Source: Maze et al. 2005 Table 4. Acceleration/deceleration lanes.

34 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 5: Removal of Geometric Constraints at Intersections Description: Improvements to the geometric design at intersections to better accommodate trucks in areas with high truck traffic and in truck routes Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Point Type of initiative: Infrastructure management: minor improvements Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure/ enhance safety Expected costs and level of effort to implement: A cautious cost-benefit analysis is required. Cost to update design standards at intersections is minimal. Implementation costs vary, but are often high. Advantages: Enhances safety Reduces congestion Reduces infrastructure damage Low to no probability for unintended consequences Disadvantages: Could require high capital investments May require moderate implementation times May conflict with pedestrian traffic May impact private-sector locations Examples: AASHTO standards (AASHTO 2001) Swept Path: Amount of roadway space that truck needs to make to turn without hitting something (U.S. Department of Transportation 2000). Related alternatives: 1. Freight Parking and Loading Zones; 2. Vehicle Size and Weight Restriction; 3. Truck Routes References: Fambro et al. 1988; Hummer et al. 1988; Ogden 1992; Mason Jr. et al. 1993; Harkey et al. 1996; Harwood et al. 1999; AASHTO 2001; Fitzpatrick and Wooldridge 2001; Garber et al. 2008 Swept Path Source: U.S. Department of Transportation 2000 Table 5. Removal of geometric constraints at intersections.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 35 Initiative 6: Ramps for Handcarts and Forklifts Description: Additions to urban buildings and sidewalk ramps to accommodate forklifts or small handcarts to improve the efficiency of loading and unloading truck activities Targeted mode: Urban deliveries Geographic scope: Point Type of initiative: Infrastructure management: minor improvements Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Effort is required to coordinate multiple stakeholders involved from planning and transportation organizations, real estate developers, and landlords to update and modify current regulations, land use codes, and rezoning strategies. Implementation costs may involve the need to buy or rent additional space, or include costs to retrofit existing buildings, though these costs are generally low, and implementation times are short. Advantages: Reduce congestion Environmental sustainability Enhance safety Improve mobility Low to no probability for unintended consequences Disadvantages: May conflict with pedestrian traffic Examples: For freight, a similar curb ramp improvement type of project, such as the projects conducted after the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Source: U.S. Department of Justice 2010 Related alternatives: 1. Freight Parking and Loading Zones; 2. Enhanced Building Codes; 3. Upgrade Parking Areas and Loading Docks References: Ogden 1992 Table 6. Ramps for handcarts and forklifts. Table 7 summarizes the planning and design considerations for the six initiatives listed under infrastructure management.

Ri n g r o a d s f o r t h r o u g h t r a f f i c N e w a n d u p g r a d e d i n f r a s t r u c t u r e F r e i g h t c l u s t e r s ( f r e i g h t v i l l a g e s ) A c c e l e r a t i o n / d e c e l e r a t i o n l a n e s R e m o v a l o f i n t e r s e c t i o n c o n s t r a i n t s R a m p s f o r h a n d c a r t s a n d f o r k l i f t s 1 2 3 Is there enough right-of-way available to complete the project? How will this project be funded? 4 5 6 7 8 Will other projects be required to fully complete the project? What is the anticipated duration of the project/policy? What is the geographic scope of the project? Where is it located? What is the desired size/capacity/connectivity? Will the use of policy/project be mandatory or voluntary? 9 Is there any incentive for participation (or penalties for not)? 10 What is the level of incentives? 11 What is the level of price(s)/fine(s)? 12 How will the policy/project be enforced? 13 What is the target group? 14 What are the criteria for participation? 15 Which agency will lead? 16 What are the resources needed to operate the project? 17 What permits are required to initiate/complete the project? 18 Who are the stakeholders? 19 Should the private sector be engaged? If so, how? 20 Is there a need to engage and coordinate with public agencies? How? 21 Is there a risk of the technology/project becoming obsolete? 22 Could benefits be provided to community or pedestrians? 23 Are there any safety/security issues that should be resolved? Stakeholder engagement Risk management and integration with other transportation policies Operational considerations INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT Major Improvements Minor Improvements Planning considerations Questions Table 7. Planning and design considerations for infrastructure management initiatives.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 37 Parking/Loading Areas Management In many city centers and business districts, parking spaces are very limited, which translates into trucks double-parking or spending considerable time circling a block waiting for a parking space (Jaller et al. 2012), and trucks extending into sidewalks and roadways while docking in undersized loading areas. This is not only an enforcement issue. Frequently the number of parking spaces available is simply not enough to satisfy the needs of delivery trucks. On Manhattan Island in New York City, for example, there are 10 zip codes where the demand for parking from delivery trucks exceeds the linear capacity of the streets to accommodate them (Jaller et al. 2012). As a result, carriers are forced to double-park and pay large amounts in parking fines. In New York City, carriers typically pay between $500 and $1,000 per truck per month in parking fines (Holguín-Veras et al. 2007; Holguín-Veras et al. 2008b). Furthermore, because the parking spaces are also available to other commercial vehicles, such as limos and service vehicles, the amount of net parking available to freight vehicles reduces further. Although service trips are considered commercial, and refer to those trips in which the main purpose is to carry out a service activity at the premises, they do not share the same parking requirements as their freight counterparts. Service trips involve services such as maintenance, repair, document shredding, cleaning, and installations, among others. Because the amount of cargo or equipment that needs to be carried may be minimal, these trips do not necessarily need to park close to their destinations. In gen- eral, service trips also require longer service times, making for longer use of the curb space, which prevents access for freight vehicles to conduct loading and unloading activities. On-Street Parking and Loading Roadways in dense cities or old inner-city areas are not designed to handle large traffic volumes and the on-street parking generated. Appropriate curb allocation is essential to reduce congestion and improve environmental conditions (Nourinejad et al. 2013). The main challenge is that the demand for curb space exceeds capacity because cars, buses, and freight vehicles all need access to the curb. From a strictly economic point of view, however, freight vehicles and buses should have first priority for curb space. Freight vehicles need to park close to their customers, as the cost of walking freight from truck to customers is very high; parking further away reduces the size of the loads drivers carry, all of which increases delivery and parking times. Moreover, freight vehicles produce more congestion than smaller passenger cars do, so it makes sense to get them off the roads. Similarly, fostering transit use requires that bus stops be strategically placed in high-demand locations, and that single-occupant vehicle use be discouraged by making it less convenient. Obviously, however, political reasons may argue for exactly the opposite. The initiatives presented in this subsection deal with on-street parking and loading in a variety of ways. Initiative 7: Freight Parking and Loading Zones These programs focus on allocating curb space for parking and loading activities. In San Francisco, proposals have been made to widen sidewalks and designate (using textured pavement) shared use of the sidewalk for parking/loading activities. In Washington D.C., a curbside freight study has recommended providing longer parking/loading spaces, multi-space meters, and the pricing of loading zones (Jones et al. 2009). Other recommendations are to increase the size of loading zones to 100 feet where possible, and to move them to the end of the block. Increasing the capacity of parking and loading areas is an obvious and low-cost way to reduce congestion and improve traffic. This was the chief finding of Nourinejad et al. (2013) in a traffic simulation study that assessed the impacts of alternative freight parking strategies. The New York City Department of Transportation (New York City DOT) increased the parking allocation for commercial vehicles and installed parking meters (New York City Department of Transportation 2012b; New York City 2012c). The freight industry has reacted very positively

38 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide to the new policy, as it has made it easier for them to do their job. Implementation of this initia- tive is presented as part of Case Studies 5 and 6, from New York City, described in Section 3. Other interesting alternatives that involve managing parking spaces include Green Loading Zones (New York State Department of Transportation 2014), which are discussed in Initiative 33. Table 8 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 7. Initiative 8: Loading and Parking Restrictions Parking and loading restrictions of various forms have been implemented in metropolitan areas in the United States and Europe. The city of San Francisco has a multi-layer parking policy with “commercial yellow zones,” restrictions at “passenger white zones,” and commercial park- ing restrictions in residential zones. Special truck-only loading zones are restricted to special freight vehicles. Other restrictions include time-of-day restrictions for parking, accommodating delivery trucks in “shared” or “flex” spaces, and creating and managing on-street loading bays (San Francisco County Transportation Authority 2009). New York City added loading bays and implemented a graduated rate structure: $2 for 1 hour, $5 for 2 hours, and $9 for 3 hours of parking (New York City Department of Transportation 2012b). Other initiatives that manage curb space by allocating specific time slots for delivery operations have been successfully implemented, such as the New York City DOT Delivery Windows program (New York City Department of Transporta- tion 2009). The implementation of this initiative is presented as part of Case Studies 5 and 6 from New York City, described in Section 3. Table 9 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 8. Initiative 9: Peak-Hour Clearways Peak-hour clearways are streets with prohibitions for curbside parking or stopping during peak hours. Clearways facilitate the movement of all vehicles by increasing the capacity of the road, though they also affect the ability of carriers to service premises along the clearway, and can be inconvenient to businesses and residents wanting to access those businesses during peak hours (Ogden 1992). In London, England, part of the Red Route network is made up of clearways, where stopping is permitted only at designated locations (SUGAR 2011). Table 10 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 9. Initiative 10: Vehicle Parking Reservation Systems Vehicle parking reservation systems make it possible for drivers to reserve curbside parking space. The program requires stakeholder coordination as well as strict enforcement. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) usually are needed to help with the allocation and use of parking spots. In Toyota City, Japan, a pilot test allowed truckers to reserve parking spaces using cell phones. The parking area was remotely monitored using cameras. The pilot was deemed a success because it led to a 56% reduction of parked vehicles on the street for loading/unloading (PIARC 2012). However, no information is available about any research that investigated the potential for unin- tended consequences of this program, such as increased congestion due to other vehicles without access to the system circling around searching for a parking spot. Table 11 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 10. Off-Street Parking and Loading These initiatives address parking in areas other than on the streets. Initiative 11: Enhanced Building Codes Many city buildings were not designed to handle current truck sizes and freight traffic volumes (Department for Transport 2010b). Building codes and regulations are needed that

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 39 can ensure new buildings have adequate loading docks to meet future demands (Wilbur Smith Associates 2012). However, such codes and regulations will require changes to existing regula- tions, such as those in New York City that limit the number of off-street parking spaces provided by new developments (New York City Department of City Planning 2011). Table 12 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 11. Initiative 12: Timesharing of Parking Spaces By recommending that off-street parking structures schedule shared use of parking spaces among various users, this initiative complements on-street parking policies. Scheduling use of parking spaces during certain times of the day allows the spaces to be shared among trucks and commercial and private vehicles (PIARC 2011). Table 13 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 12. Initiative 13: Upgrade Parking Areas and Loading Docks Shopping malls and large stores in central business districts have limited space for maneuvering, and often have insufficient or outdated loading docks. This initiative recommends redesigning docks to accommodate the geometric needs of current and future trucks. It also recommends adequate setbacks from roadways so that trucks do not extend into roadways when docking (Wilbur Smith Associates 2012). Access to and egress from these areas also is important, as dis- tance away from intersections facilitates traffic maneuvers and minimizes traffic impacts. Truck access should be separate from car and pedestrian access for operational, aesthetic, and security reasons (Ogden 1992). Table 14 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 13. Initiative 14: Improved Staging Areas A lack of parking, curb space, and/or loading facilities at establishments receiving freight may require governmental agencies or planning organizations to mandate the use of staging areas. Such requirements should foster the development or implementation of on-site and off-street areas at businesses or facilities that regularly receive freight. However, there are locations where this may not be a feasible option; thus, the establishment of common loading areas for sites that are large traffic generators or for other multi-tenant facilities may be a viable option (Federal Highway Administration 2012b). Alternatively, municipalities might foster the development of nearby delivery or staging areas that could serve as urban transshipment platforms. These areas could be implemented at public or private parking lots, empty lots, or other spaces that could accommodate a number of freight vehicles to conduct loading and unloading activities. At these staging areas, cargo could be unloaded from the freight vehicles and loaded to trolleys, carts, or other vehicles for last-mile distribution. In Bordeaux, France, nearby delivery areas have been established together with additional services, such as dedicated personnel to assist in the dispatching of shipments. These areas can accommodate between three to five freight vehicles (about 30 meters wide) (BESTUFS 2007). The challenge involved in establishing these areas is securing the necessary space. The staging area design also needs to take into consideration possible conflicts with nearby residents. Table 15 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 14. Initiative 15: Truck Stops/Parking Outside of Metropolitan Areas This initiative is similar to the use of truck stops, rest areas, or parking facilities on highways, or other pieces of infrastructure. These facilities are designed and provided so that drivers can take mandatory or optional breaks to rest. The success of the facilities depends on their location, capacity, and other characteristics, such as availability of food, communication services, and other service facilities (New York Metropolitan Transportation Council 2009). The urban freight system also could benefit if similar facilities were constructed or allocated for freight vehicles

40 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide on the fringes of metropolitan areas. Instead of being used as rest areas, these facilities would be available for vehicles to wait for their delivery times without obstructing the curbside or double-parking inside the metro area. The facilities could also be used as temporary staging or consolidation areas, where transshipments could be made without the need for urban consolida- tion centers (UCCs). In addition, such truck stops could be used by freight vehicles as parking locations to avoid peak hours for vehicles participating in programs such as off-hour deliveries (OHD). Table 16 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 15.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 41 Source: Salt Lake City 2013 Initiative 7: Freight Parking and Loading Zones: Location, Number, and Size Description: Initiatives to adapt existing street design and loading areas to accommodate current and future traffic and truck volumes. Parking places and loading zone-related strategies focus on designating and enforcing curbside parking, reallocating curb space, revising signage, and identifying potential freight traffic parking locations. Targeted mode: Large traffic generators/urban deliveries/all traffic Geographic scope: Corridor Type of initiative: Parking/loading areas management: on-street parking and loading Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure Expected costs and level of effort to implement: This initiative requires effort to coordinate multiple stakeholders from planning and transportation organizations to update and modify current regulations, land use codes, and rezoning strategies. Careful planning is needed when allocating curb space or implementing fees or other parking constraints. Positive and negative impacts to road users should also be considered. Investment costs for updating parking regulations are low, and implementation times short. Constructing new parking facilities, or expanding existing truck parking facilities, may require high capital investments. Advantages: Reduce congestion Reduce miles traveled Enhance safety Reduce traffic/parking violations Improve mobility Improve operational efficiency Environmental sustainability Low probability of unintended consequences Disadvantages: May require retrofitting existing developments May result in lack of curbside space Require public and private-sector acceptance May not be feasible at specific locations Examples: Freight Parking Zone, Orlando, Florida, United States (City of Orlando 2013) Freight Zone Parking Enforcement in Salt Lake City, Utah, United States Related alternatives: 1. New and Upgraded Infrastructure, Intermodal Terminals; 2. Removal of Geometric Constraints at intersections; 3. Ramps for Handcrafts and Forklifts; 4. Peak-Hour Clearways; 5. Upgrade Parking Areas and Loading Docks; 6. Parking Pricing References: Rizzo Associates 2001; BESTUFS 2007; Cambridge Systematics 2007; Jones et al. 2009; New York City Department of City Planning 2011; Jaller et al. 2012; New York City Department of Transportation 2012b; New York City 2012(c) Table 8. Freight parking and loading zones: location, number, and size.

42 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 8: Loading and Parking Restrictions Description: Implementation of parking and loading/unloading restrictions, prohibited parking on residential streets, and other time-related parking restrictions Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Point Type of initiative: Parking/loading areas management: on-street parking and loading Objectives: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Multiple stakeholders may be involved to update current regulations, land use codes, and rezoning strategies. Careful planning and a thorough evaluation of positive and negative impacts to road users, commercial companies, and residents are required. Investment costs are relatively low, and restrictions can be implemented in a short amount of time. Time restrictions may require funds to provide incentives to receiver companies to switch operations to alternate hours. Advantages: Reduce congestion Enhance safety Enhance livability Improve mobility Improve operational efficiency Environmental sustainability Disadvantages: Require enforcement Require public and private-sector acceptance High probability of unintended consequences - May create confusion among drivers - May impact logistics operations May require additional incentives to receiver companies Examples: New York City, New York, United States (New York City 2012c) San Francisco, California, United States (San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency 2013) Related alternatives: 1.Timesharing of Parking Spaces; 2. Upgrade Parking Areas and Loading Docks; 3. Parking Pricing; 4. Time-Slotting of Pick-Ups and Deliveries at Large-Traffic Generators References: BESTUFS 2007; Cambridge Systematics 2007; Jones et al. 2009; New York City Department of Transportation 2009; San Francisco County Transportation Authority 2009; New York City Department of Transportation 2012b; The City of New York 2012c; San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency 2013 Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE Table 9. Loading and parking restrictions.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 43 Initiative 9: Peak-Hour Clearways Description: Peak-hour clearways are roadway corridors defined by clearway signs at each end, where parking and standing of vehicles is prohibited during peak hours Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Corridor Type of initiative: Parking/loading areas management: on-street parking and loading Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Peak-hour clearway restrictions require careful consideration of freight movements and land use in the target area. Implementation and enforcement by local authorities is required. Changing policy and adding appropriate signage will bring minor costs; enforcement of parking during peak hours will be additional costs. This type of initiative could be implemented in a short period of time. Advantages: Reduce congestion Environmental sustainability Enhance safety Improve mobility during peak hours Disadvantages: May face private-sector opposition Moderate probability for unintended consequences Reduce residential parking Reduce access to businesses during peak hours May create confusion among drivers Examples: Perth, Australia (Government of Western Australia 2013) Red Route Network, London, England (SUGAR 2011) New Zealand (New Zealand Transport Agency 2007) Source: Government of Western Australia 2013 Source: New Zealand Transport Agency 2007 Related alternatives: 1. Freight Parking and Loading Zones; 2. Timesharing of Parking Spaces; 3. Staggered Work Hours Program References: Ogden 1992; SUGAR 2011 Table 10. Peak-hour clearways.

44 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 10: Vehicle Parking Reservation Systems Description: An initiative that allows drivers to schedule or reserve curbside parking space Targeted mode: Large traffic generators Geographic scope: Point Type of initiative: Parking/loading areas management: on-street parking and loading Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The planning process requires administrative and management coordination with freight carriers, shippers, and receivers; the implementation requires strict law enforcement. Moderate costs are associated with the intelligent transportation systems (ITS), web-cam monitoring, and enforcement. Changing policy and adding appropriate signage will be minor costs; enforcement of parking during peak hours will add costs. Advantages: Reduces congestion Environmental sustainability Reduces vehicle-miles traveled Enhances safety Low probability of unintended consequences Disadvantages: Requires enforcement Requires private-sector acceptance May require additional parking space due to high demand Examples: I-5 Corridor, California, United States (Shaheen 2013) Toyota City, Japan Bordeaux, France Source: (PIARC 2012). Related alternatives: 1. Timesharing of Parking Spaces; 2. Improved Staging Areas; 3. Parking Pricing; 4. Real-Time Information System References: PIARC 2012; Shaheen 2013 Table 11. Vehicle parking reservation systems.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 45 Initiative 11: Enhanced Building Codes Description: The design of off-street parking and loading facilities in urban center buildings, and of parking lots in and at the fringe of metropolitan areas Targeted mode: Large traffic generators/urban deliveries/all traffic Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Parking/loading areas management: off-street parking and loading Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Enhanced building codes for off-street parking and loading facilities require consideration of the characteristics of the network, building designs, existing regulations, and vehicle characteristics. The planning process should involve the private real estate sector as well as public planning and economic development agencies, as these changes may involve building codes, land use regulations, and the retrofitting of existing buildings and facilities. Changing design standards and building/zoning codes will carry a low cost. Retroactively updating existing developments for off-street loading facilities will carry a high cost. Advantages: Reduce congestion Environmental sustainability Enhance safety Increase operational efficiency Improve inadequate infrastructure Low probability for unintended consequences Disadvantages: Require private-sector acceptance Require high capital investment costs when constructing or retrofitting existing infrastructure May require updating existing development regulations May require political consensus on updating de- sign standards Require available space for off-street loading Examples: Parking requirements examples (Ogden 1992) Related alternatives: 1. Ramps for Handcrafts and Forklifts; 2. Upgrade Parking Areas and Loading Docks; 3. Improved Staging Areas; 4. Integrate Freight into Land Use Planning Process References: Rizzo Associates 2001; Smart Growth Network and ICMA 2002; Department for Transport 2010b; PIARC 2011; SUGAR 2011; Wilbur Smith Associates 2012 Land use Floor area Minimum number of bays Land use Floor area Minimum number of bays Office General 1/5000 m2 Dept Store General 1/1000 m2 Minimum 1 LR Minimum 1 HR e.g., 5000 m2 1 HR e.g., 2000 m2 2 HR or 1A+1HR e.g., 20000 m2 4 HR e.g., 4000 m2 1 A + 3HR Shop General 1/2000 m2 Showrooms General 1/2000 m2 Minimum 1 LR Minimum 1 HR e.g., 2000 m2 1 HR e.g., 5000 m2 3 HR e.g., 10000 m2 2 HR + 3 LR e.g., 10000 m2 4 HR + 1A Supermarket General 1/1000 m2 Warehouse General 1/1000 m2 Minimum 1 HR and Minimum 1A e.g., 1000 m2 1 HR Industry e.g., 5000 m2 1 A + 1 HR e.g., 2000 m2 1 A + 1 HR e.g., 10000 m2 2 A + 1 HR e.g., 4000 m2 2 A + 2 HR Others General 1/2000 m2 Minimum 1HR LR: Light Rigid Truck Bay HR: Heavy Rigid Truck Bay A: Articulated Truck Bay Table 12. Enhanced building codes.

46 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 12: Timesharing of Parking Spaces Description: Scheduling the use of parking spaces among and between specific carriers, this initiative includes coordinating the timing of pick-ups and deliveries with freight carriers, shippers, or receivers, and in some cases freight and passenger vehicles. Timesharing of parking spaces requires the optimization of times for deliveries and other uses. Targeted mode: Large traffic generators/urban deliveries Geographic scope: Point Type of initiative: Parking/loading areas management: off-street parking and loading Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The planning process should involve extensive stakeholder engagement and coordination with local officials, shippers and receivers of goods, the road freight industry, and other users of parking space. Changing policy and adding appropriate signage will be a minor cost; enforcement (including cameras) and reservation measures could be costly. Advantages: Reduces congestion Environmental sustainability Enhances safety Improves mobility Low probability for unintended consequences Disadvantages: Requires private-sector acceptance Requires enforcement Requires coordination with other parties Examples: Sendai, Japan (PIARC 2011) Related alternatives: 1. Loading and Parking Restrictions; 2. Peak-Hour Clearways; 3. Vehicle Parking Reservation Systems; 4. Time-Slotting of Pick-Ups and Deliveries at Large Traffic Generators References: PIARC 2011 Table 13. Timesharing of parking spaces.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 47 Initiative 13: Upgrade Parking Areas and Loading Docks Description: Redesigning docks to accommodate the geometric space needs of current and future trucks and to provide adequate parking. May involve updating or changing design standards to provide better access or egress to buildings to accommodate delivery vehicles. Targeted mode: Large traffic generators/urban deliveries Geographic scope: Point Type of initiative: Parking/loading areas management: off-street parking and loading Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Changing design standards and building/zoning codes will not be costly. Retroactively updating existing loading docks or constructing larger loading docks will be expensive. Advantages: Reduces congestion Environmental sustainability Enhances safety Improves mobility Improves inadequate infrastructure to accommodate geometric needs Low probability of unintended consequences Disadvantages: Requires private-sector acceptance May require high capital investment May require additional space Examples: New York City, New York, United States; Boston, Massachusetts, United States; San Francisco, California, United States (Wilbur Smith Associates 2012) Urban Investment Research Corporation (UIRC), Chicago, Illinois, United States Related alternatives: 1. Ramps for Handcarts and Forklifts; 2. Freight Parking and Loading Zones; 3. Loading and Parking Restrictions; 4. Enhanced Building Codes References: Ogden 1992; START 2009; SUGAR 2011; Wilbur Smith Associates 2012 Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE Table 14. Upgrade parking areas and loading docks.

48 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 14: Improved Staging Areas Description: This initiative fosters the development and/or requirement of on-site off-street areas at businesses or other facilities to conduct loading, unloading, or other freight-related activities Targeted mode: Large traffic generators/urban deliveries Geographic scope: Point/area Type of initiative: Parking/loading areas management: off-street parking and loading Primary objective: Improve inadequate infrastructure Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Changing design standards and building/zoning codes will not be costly. Retroactively updating existing loading areas, however, or constructing larger areas for freight activities at establishments or facilities, will be expensive. Securing the area to establish public staging areas and operating them will be costly. Advantages: Reduce congestion Environmental sustainability Enhance safety Improve mobility Improve inadequate infrastructure Disadvantages: Require private-sector acceptance May require high capital investment Require additional space May generate resistance from nearby residents Examples: Bordeaux, France (Eltis 2003; BESTUFS 2007) Rouen, France (NICHES 2006) Urban Investment Research Corporation (UIRC), Chicago, Illinois, United States Related alternatives: 1. Vehicle Parking Reservation Systems; 2. Enhanced Building Codes; 3. Truck Stops/Parking Outside of Metropolitan Areas; 4. Time-Slotting of Pick-Ups and Deliveries at Large Traffic Generators References: NICHES 2006; BESTUFS 2007; Federal Highway Administration 2012b Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE Table 15. Improved staging areas.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 49 Initiative 15: Truck Stops/Parking Outside of Metropolitan Areas Description: This initiative involves the construction or installation of truck stops/parking facilities outside the metropolitan area. These facilities could be used by freight vehicles as staging areas to conduct transshipment activities, as temporary parking locations during peak times, or as waiting areas until designated delivery times. Targeted mode: Urban deliveries/all traffic Geographic scope: City Type of initiative: Parking/loading areas management: off-street parking and loading Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The planning process requires administrative and management coordination with freight carriers to select the most appropriate locations. Securing the area to establish the stops and parking areas will be costly. Changing policy and adding appropriate signage will carry minor costs; providing security and other services will add costs. Advantages: Reduce congestion Improve mobility Improve inadequate infrastructure Reduce vehicle-miles traveled Environmental sustainability Reduce curbside occupation time Disadvantages: Require high capital investments - Require extremely large physical space - May require public subsidies Increase in traffic at/in the vicinity of the area/facility Examples: New York City, New York, United States (New York Metropolitan Transportation Council 2009) Related alternatives: 1. New and Upgraded Infrastructure and Intermodal Terminals; 2. Improved Staging Areas; 3. Integrate Freight into Land Use Planning Process References: Federal Highway Administration 2002; New York Metropolitan Transportation Council 2009 New York Thruway (I-87) Madena Service Area Source: New York Metropolitan Transportation Council 2009 Table 16. Truck stops/parking outside of metropolitan areas. Table 17 summarizes the planning and design considerations for the nine initiatives listed under parking/loading areas management.

Fr e i g h t p a r k i n g a n d l o a d i n g z o n e s L o a d i n g a n d p a r k i n g r e s t r i c t i o n s P e a k - h o u r c l e a r w a y s P a r k i n g r e s e r v a t i o n s y s t e m s E n h a n c e d b u i l d i n g c o d e s T i m e s h a r e o f p a r k i n g s p a c e U p g r a d e p a r k i n g / l o a d i n g a r e a s I m p r o v e d s t a g i n g a r e a s T r u c k s t o p s / p a r k i n g o u t s i d e o f m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a s 1 2 3 How will this project be funded? 4 5 6 7 8 Will other projects be required to fully complete the project? What is the anticipated duration of the project/policy? What is the geographic scope of the project? Where is it located? What is the desired size/capacity/connectivity? Will the use of policy/project be mandatory or voluntary? 9 Is there enough right-of-way available to complete the project? Is there any incentive for participation (or penalties for not)? 10 What is the level of incentives? 11 What is the level of price(s)/fine(s)? 12 How will the policy/project be enforced? 13 What is the target group? 14 What are the criteria for participation? 15 Which agency will lead? 16 What are the resources needed to operate the project? 17 What permits are required to initiate/complete the project 18 Who are the stakeholders? 19 Should the private sector be engaged? If so, how? 20 Is there a need to engage and coordinate with public agencies? How? 21 Is there a risk of the technology/project becoming obsolete? 22 Could benefits be provided to community or pedestrians? 23 Are there any safety/security issues that should be resolved? PARKING/LOADING AREAS MANAGEMENT Risk management and integration with other transportation policies Off-Street Parking and LoadingOn-Street Parking and Loading Planning considerations Operational considerations Stakeholder engagement Questions Table 17. Planning and design considerations for parking/loading areas management initiatives.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 51 Vehicle-Related Strategies These initiatives seek to improve environmental conditions by fostering the use of technologies and practices that reduce the negative externalities produced by vehicles. The challenge of this type of strategy mainly relates to enforcement. In areas where these strategies are implemented, information regarding the process and level of enforcement is very limited. Technologies and Programs Initiative 16: Emission Standards Emission standards have helped foster the use of vehicles that produce less environmental impacts. Although they improve environmental conditions, emission standards have resulted in the need for changes in vehicle fleets, thereby increasing investment, maintenance, and operating costs. Evidence exists that actual increases in operational costs are often higher than those noted in these analyses (ICF International et al. 2011). Various programs exist to accelerate the use of cleaner vehicles before the introduction of emission standards, or seek to voluntarily increase the uptake of these vehicles. The Hunts Point Clean Trucks Program is a voluntary clean truck program that provides rebate incentives to truck owners based in the South Bronx communities of Hunts Point and Port Morris, New York (New York City Department of Transportation 2012a). Truck owners can take advantage of available funding to assist them in replacing an older truck with a new EPA emission-compliant diesel truck or a new alternative-fuel vehicle. Funding is also available for the installation of exhaust retrofit technologies or vehicle scrap. Similar schemes include the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach Clean Trucks programs (Port of Los Angeles 2007), which have worked closely with the Coalition for Responsible Transportation to develop an initiative for truck replacement with sponsorship of the private sector (CRT and EDF 2010). The PANYNJ, on its side, has implemented the Truck Replacement Program. Table 18 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 16. Initiative 17: Low-Noise Delivery Programs/Regulations These programs and regulations specifically target noise pollution with regulations and low- noise delivery initiatives. In the United States, EPA provides basic guidelines, though noise policy is left to local agencies (e.g., New York City’s Local Law 113 [The City of New York 2005]). Other noise programs intend to facilitate OHD by fostering adoption of low-noise technologies and practices (Holguín Veras et al. 2013a). In the Netherlands, for example, the PIEK Program subsidizes the acquisition of technologies that meet the new Dutch noise standards (Goevaers 2011). Table 19 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 17.

52 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 16: Emission Standards Description: Enforcement of emission standards for freight vehicles, which may involve the use of electric or low emission vehicles for urban deliveries. A number of vehicle renewal programs support this type of initiative. Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Nation Type of initiative: Vehicle-related strategies Primary objective: Environmental sustainability Expected costs and level of effort to implement: This type of initiative involves minor costs to update policies and standards on emissions, but the public-sector cost of enforcement could be high. High private-sector capital investments in fleet renewal could be involved. The implementation of emission standards is expected to take moderate time. Advantages: Environmental sustainability Enhance livability Enhance efficiency Reduce operational costs Low probability for unintended consequences Disadvantages: Require high capital investments for the private sector May require coordination, control and enforcement among municipalities Depend on other public entities’ standards May require investments in additional infrastructure to support new technologies (e.g., charging stations, alternative-fuel supply) Require private-sector cooperation Examples: U.S. EPA Emission Standards California Air Resources Board’s (ARB) Transport Refrigeration Unit Airborne Toxic Control Measure (California Environmental Protection Agency 2012) Euro VI standards (European Commission 2012) Renewal Programs: U.S. EPA SmartWay program Plug In America (Plug In America 2013) The Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department Program and Pilot Green Transport Fund (Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department 2011) PIEK Program, the Netherlands (Goevaers 2011) Related alternatives: 1. Low Noise Delivery Programs/Regulations; 2. Engine-Related Restrictions; 3. Low Emission Zones; 4. Operational Incentives for Electric/Low Emission Vehicles; 5. Taxation References: City Ports 2005; BESTUFS 2007; TURBLOG 2009; C-LIEGE 2010; Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department 2011; ICF International et al. 2011; California Environmental Protection Agency 2012; Environmental Protection Agency 2012; European Commission 2012; Plug In America 2013; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013 Table 18. Emission standards.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 53 Source: Noise Abatement Society 2011 Initiative 17: Low-Noise Delivery Programs/Regulations Description: Regulations and low-noise delivery initiatives to lessen noise pollution Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: City Type of initiative: Vehicle-related strategies Objectives: Environmental sustainability/reduce noise and pollution Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The planning process should involve extensive stakeholder engagement to analyze the private and public-sector impacts. For the private sector, implementation may require high capital investment costs, such as fleet renewal. Costs to update policy and standards to incorporate these regulations will be fairly low. For the public sector, costs of providing the necessary incentives and enforcement programs could be high. The implementation of this type of initiative may require a moderate amount of time. Advantages: Enhance livability Environmental sustainability - Reduce noise pollution - Reduce emissions Facilitate off-hour deliveries Low probability of unintended consequences Disadvantages: May require high investments to support the programs Examples: New York City, New York, United States (The City of New York 2005) London, England (London Noise Abatement Society 2008) PIEK Program, the Netherlands (Goevaers 2011) Related alternatives: 1. Emission Standards; 2. Engine-Related Restrictions; 3. Certification Programs; 4. Driver Training Programs; 5. Voluntary Off-Hour Delivery Program References: The City of New York 2005; World Health Organization 2006; BESTUFS 2007; C-LIEGE 2010; Wieman 2010; Environmental Protection Agency 2011; Goevaers 2011; Holguín Veras et al. 2013a Table 19. Low-noise delivery programs/regulations. Table 20 summarizes the planning and design considerations for the two initiatives listed under Vehicle-Related Strategies.

54 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Em is si on st an da rd s N oi se p ro gr am s/ re gu la tio ns 1 Is there enough right-of-way available to complete the project? 2 3 How will this project be funded? 4 5 6 7 What is the desired size/capacity/connectivity? 8 Will other projects be required to fully complete the project? What is the anticipated duration of the project/policy? What is the geographic scope of the project? Where is it located? Will the use of policy/project be mandatory or voluntary? 9 Is there any incentive for participation (or penalties for not)? 10 What is the level of incentives? 11 What is the level of price(s)/fine(s)? 12 How will the policy/project be enforced? 13 What is the target group? 14 What are the criteria for participation? 15 Which agency will lead? 16 What are the resources needed to operate the project? 17 What permits are required to initiate/complete the project? 18 Who are the stakeholders? 19 Should the private sector be engaged? If so, how? 20 Is there a need to engage and coordinate with public agencies? How? 21 Is there a risk of the technology/project becoming obsolete? 22 Could benefits be provided to community or pedestrians? 23 Are there any safety/security issues that should be resolved? Risk management and integration with other transportation policies VEHICLE- RELATED STRATEGIES Planning considerations Operational considerations Stakeholder engagement Questions Table 20. Planning and design considerations for vehicle-related strategies.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 55 Traffic Management Traffic management strategies aim to improve traffic conditions using techniques from traffic engineering and control, including access restrictions, lane management, and traffic control. Access and Vehicle-Related Restrictions These measures use restriction(s) to limit, grant, or deny access of freight vehicles to the target area. The nature of the restrictions varies in terms of vehicle type (e.g., size, weight, load factor, commodity type, or engine type), and time of travel. These restrictions are not well received by most carriers, as they result in operational changes and higher costs. For example, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach (California) have imple- mented a clean truck program by which trucks that do not meet certain engine configuration requirements pay a $35/TEU fee for accessing their container ports. The program expects to complete the transition to 100% clean vehicles by the end of 2013 (Port of Los Angeles 2013a; Port of Los Angeles 2013b). Initiative 18: Vehicle Size and Weight Restrictions Vehicle size and weight restrictions limit access on the basis of vehicle size, and often are implemented because of concerns about the perceived congestion or traffic accidents produced by large trucks. These restrictions have been recommended as a way to reduce congestion (Vleu- gel and Janic 2004), though noting that carriers could experience increases of about 5% in oper- ating costs (Allen et al. 2003). Given that carriers’ profit margins are typically less than 5%, it is not surprising that most carriers oppose these restrictions. However, a growing body of research suggests that, although the look of the target area is enhanced due to the restrictions, an increase in pollution and a drop in quality of life also can result (Maze et al. 2005; Wilbur Smith Associ- ates 2012). Using transportation models, the research has proved that vehicle size restrictions increase congestion outside the target area, an effect that could be larger than the congestion reduction within the target area (Qureshi et al. 2012; Holguín-Veras et al. 2013b). The chief conclusion about vehicle size choice is that the private goal of carriers is aligned with the social goals of reducing congestion and pollution (Holguín-Veras et al. 2013b). If carriers use large trucks, large trucks are almost certainly the better social choice. No rational carrier would use a large truck if a cheaper small truck would do the job. Thus, if carriers are forced to replace large trucks with multiple small trucks, they are likely to increase vehicle-miles-traveled and congestion. The implication is that, to minimize social costs, policy makers should foster the use of the largest vehicles that could safely use the network without excessive infrastructure damage. Although politically controversial, this assertion is backed by strong scientific evidence (Qureshi et al. 2012; Holguín-Veras et al. 2013b). However, access restrictions motivated by the need to protect pavements and structures not capable of handling large trucks are justi- fied, because these are externalities not accounted for by the carriers. Vehicle size and weight restrictions should be enacted if, and only if, a careful evaluation of their impacts reveals benefits larger than the costs. It is important to draw a clear distinction between the traditional vehicle size and weight dis- cussion concerning state and federal limitations, and how metropolitan areas are impacted by vehicle size and weight regardless of their compliance with state or federal regulations. Simply, many local streets were not designed to handle the freight vehicles that are currently traversing urban areas. This creates negative externalities for both the vehicle drivers and local residents, as these vehicles slow traffic to get around obstacles or damage roadways never built to withstand the weight of freight vehicles. Table 21 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 18.

56 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Failure to Remove Highway Restrictions State departments of transportation (DOTs) typically have the massive task of keeping an inventory of every segment of roadway for which they are responsible. In keeping an up-to-date database, the DOT also must be aware of any restrictions that might prohibit trucks on their routes. Some restrictions might prohibit trucks of various sizes and configurations from using a certain road. These restrictions might be long term, because of problems with existing infrastructure, or they might be short term, as a result of temporary construction. DOT staff strive to maintain an accurate list of restrictions so the highways remain safe for all users. Likewise, when a problem is fixed in the field, it is important that the corresponding restriction be removed. When restrictions are not removed in a timely manner, it can create additional expenses not only to carriers, but also to other motorists and even to the end-users of the goods being transported. An example of a restriction that was not removed in a timely manner is a bridge on New Karner Road (SR-155) over the New York State Thruway (I-90) in the Town of Colonie, New York. The bridge was the responsibility of Albany County. In Figure 6, the star shows the exact location of this bridge. In 1998, a restriction was put in place that limited use of the bridge to trucks of less than 80,000 pounds. The bridge was replaced in 1999, but the restriction was never removed from the system. Over the years, many carriers in the area contacted New York State DOT about why the restriction was still in place. Because the state DOT was not responsible for the bridge, they could not answer the question with certainty. Trucks weighing 80,000 pounds or more going between points A and B would have to bypass SR-5 because of existing restrictions. Trucks had to take SR-155 east to I-87 south. With the restriction removed, however, trucks could take SR-155 west to the Washington Avenue Extension and get to their destinations more quickly. As shown in Figure 6, the alternative route is not a short detour, and the geometry is not as friendly to commercial vehicles. The route to bypass the restricted SR-155 bridge adds approximately 1 hour to the trip. This hour can easily cost a trucking company several hundred dollars in expenses, including wear and tear on the vehicle, fuel, driver’s wages, and reductions in the drivers’ effectiveness in relation to their hours of service. In addition, the extended route produces additional pollution, congestion, and safety impacts. In 2013, nearly 14 years after the new bridge was placed in service, a representa- tive from an Albany area trucking company contacted the engineer in charge of the bridge replacement project. The trucking company representative asked about the restriction, and the engineer said that to the best of his knowledge, the bridge was replaced to standard so no restrictions should be in place. The trucking representative began contacting others at the New York State DOT, and after approximately 4 months the restriction was removed. This example proves that properly documenting highway restrictions is necessary, but making sure outdated restrictions are removed in a timely manner also is important. In this situation, the representatives from the Albany County Department of Public Works were unaware that the restriction was never removed—and the state DOT was unaware that the restriction could be removed.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 57 Initiative 19: Truck Routes Truck routes specify the links of the network that can be used by freight traffic, and could be statutory or advisory (California Department of Transportation 2012). Statutory truck routes mandate that trucks use specific segments of the network. Statutory truck routes are intended to minimize conflicts between truck traffic, pedestrians, bicycles, and local communities, as well as to protect pavements in local streets not ready for large trucks, and to discourage truck traffic in sensitive areas such as schools. Statutory truck routes should connect all major generators, allow for reasonable access to all points in the area, and minimize trucks’ need to use local streets. Valid reasons to use statutory truck routes include: to avoid structural damage to sensitive facilities, to ensure that hazardous materials are transported far from population centers, and to transport over-dimensional cargo with permits that indicate the approved routes. However, improperly designed truck routes can lead to longer delivery tours and costs. Advisory truck routes, generally welcomed by the trucking industry, inform carriers about the geometric and structural conditions of the network, allowing drivers to select the most appropriate routes. An implementation of this initiative is described in Case Study 2 in Atlanta, and Case Study 7 in New York City, presented in Section 3. Table 22 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 19. Failure to Remove Highway Restrictions (Continued) A B Source: http://gis.dot.ny.gov/osowscreen2/ Figure 6. Failure to remove highway restriction.

58 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 20: Engine-Related Restrictions Engine-related restrictions require freight vehicles to meet an environmental standard to access specific facilities. These restrictions have been used in combination with eco-loading zones and low emission zones (LEZs), among other measures. In eco-loading zones in Bremen, Germany, or Green Loading Zones in New York City, city authorities allocated a number of parking spaces for the exclusive use of freight vehicles that meet stringent standards of environmental performance (PARFUM 2009; New York State Department of Transportation 2014). The carriers that purchase the vehicles get access to choice parking places in areas where parking would otherwise be a major challenge. This practice translates into productivity increases, because less time is wasted trying to find parking, and cost reductions due to eliminated fines. Table 23 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 20. Initiative 21: Low Emission Zones LEZs are used in environmentally sensitive areas where vehicle access is restricted to reduce pollution levels. In some cases, all vehicular traffic is banned; in others, vehicles that meet a minimum environmental standard are allowed in. LEZs are relatively popular in Europe and have started to be implemented in other parts of the world, such as Mexico City. European cities with LEZs include Berlin, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, and London. LEZs typically lead to large reductions in trips, emissions, and noise, especially when combined with incentives or other policies that encourage the shift to alternative-fuel vehicles. Most European LEZs operate 7 days a week. Exceptions include Italy, where the LEZs are active during peak traf- fic periods, and Budapest, Hungary, where they are enforced during daytime hours during weekdays (LEEZEN 2010). All LEZs in Europe affect large trucks (over 3.12 tonnes in gross vehicle weight), and most buses and coaches (typically, over 4.45 tonnes). Some LEZs restrict vans, cars, and motorcycles (LEEZEN 2010). Table 24 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 21. Initiative 22: Load Factor Restrictions To reduce the number of freight trips, these restrictions require a minimum load factor (percent of truck capacity being used) (Quak 2008). Regrettably, these strategies have failed to live up to expectations. The low load factors observed in most cities are the result of market conditions, not carrier inefficiencies. Basically, market pressures force carriers to minimize cargo consolidation because doing so leads to delays that could upset customers and result in loss of business. Also, load factors naturally decrease as trucks makes deliveries. If the target area is at the end of the delivery route, it may be impossible for the carrier to meet the minimum load factor required by the city. These restrictions are also very difficult to enforce, as they require physical inspections which in themselves produce significant congestion. For these reasons, the European cities that implemented these restrictions have since phased them out. Table 25 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 22. Time Access Restrictions Time access measures impose restriction(s) on the times when freight activity can take place. The intent is to reduce freight traffic during congested times of day in specific sections of a city. The three main types of time access restrictions are daytime delivery restrictions, daytime delivery bans, and nighttime delivery bans. It is worth noting that building owners and receivers also impose delivery time restrictions that require deliveries to be made only during specific time windows. Relaxation of such delivery windows can reduce congestion by helping spread peak truck traffic.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 59 Initiative 23: Daytime Delivery Restrictions Daytime delivery restriction programs limit freight vehicle access to target areas during specific periods of time. The duration of the restriction, its geographic scope, and the type of freight vehicles affected vary from case to case. These strategies tend to produce unintended network effects because they can lead to longer routes and travel times in the network, which increases congestion and pollution. Disagreement exists about the merits of daytime delivery restrictions. The experience of seven European cities suggests that delivery time restrictions are generally well received by citizens, as they reduce congestion at peak hours and increase the attractiveness of city centers. However, the restrictions are not well received by businesses in the private sector, as they make the delivery and reception of goods difficult. Some researchers suggest using time restrictions to reduce envi- ronmental impacts and accidents (BESTUFS 2007). In contrast, researchers who have quantified the impacts of the restrictions have concluded that delivery time restrictions reduce negative external effects inside the target area while increasing negative external effects in the wider area, given the longer distances driven (van Rooijen et al. 2008; Quak and de Koster 2009). Some researchers also have found an increase in the transportation costs for the participants, and increases in congestion and pollution (Quak and de Koster 2009). A careful assessment of spill- over effects must be conducted before implementing these restrictions. Table 26 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 23. Initiative 24: Daytime Delivery Bans These initiatives ban freight activity during daytime hours. Typically, the ban applies to large trucks, though it could cover other vehicle types. These bans have been implemented in a number of large cities, and are bitterly opposed by receivers, who have to absorb the additional costs of receiving supplies during nighttime hours, and who consider the ban detrimental to the local economy. In response, city agencies such as those in Beijing, Shenzhen, and Changsha, China (Changsha Bureau of Public Security 2013; Shenzhen Bureau of Public Security 2013; Beijing Traffic Management Bureau 2014), and Rome, Italy, have enacted numerous exceptions to make the bans more palatable to the business sector. Feedback to the ban in Beijing indicates that carriers are unhappy because: (1) “the receivers required the shippers to deliver in the non-allowed time periods;” and (2) “they have to travel when they are told” (Beijing Traffic Management Bureau 2014). In most cases, the fines are paid by the carriers as part of the cost of doing business in the area. In Rome’s Limited Traffic Zone, trucks with laden weights of less than 3.12 tonnes (35 q) are only allowed to transit and park from 8:00 p.m. to 10:00 a.m., and 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., while trucks with laden weights larger than 3.12 metric tons are only permitted from 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. As a result, congestion and pollution may worsen, as small trucks are less effi- cient than large trucks (Holguín-Veras et al. 2013b). Daytime delivery bans could lead to both congestion reductions during the daytime and productivity increases and cost savings to the carriers operating in the off hours. However, they also can lead to higher costs to receivers, which would reduce the net economic benefits. An implementation of these initiatives is described in the Case Study 1 in Atlanta, in Section 3. Table 26 also summarizes essential char- acteristics of Initiative 24. Initiative 25: Nighttime Delivery Bans Prohibitions on freight activity during nighttime hours are designed to protect local com- munities from night noise (Browne et al. 2006). However, they increase daytime congestion by forcing the 4–5% of deliveries that under normal conditions would take place during the off hours to be conducted during the daytime. To mitigate this problem, and allow companies to do night deliveries, the PIEK Program (Goevaers 2011) is fostering the use of low-noise truck technologies,

60 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide so that the night deliveries do not impact local communities. Table 26 also summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 25. Traffic Control and Lane Management Traffic control and lane management strategies promote the effective use of available road capacity by trying to optimize the allocation of lane rights-of-way. In urban areas, where road capacity is limited, lane management often is used to improve lane utilization and mobility. By segregating trucks, which are often wider and heavier than other vehicles, mobility and safety for other road users are improved. At the same time, truck lanes reduce travel delays and improve reliability. Based on the types of users allowed in the lanes, the strategies can be grouped into restricted multi-use (shared) lanes, and exclusive truck lanes. Initiative 26: Restricted Multi-Use Lanes These lanes can only be used by a restricted set of vehicle types. Lane usage can be allocated to different users using time windows: it can be shared by all users at specific time periods or assigned only to certain users all day. For example, Barcelona, Spain, has created seven multi- functional lanes in its commercial center. The implementation has been very successful, leading to an estimated reduction of 12–15% in overall travel time (SUGAR 2011), though it could confuse drivers (Ogden 1992). Other restricted multi-use (shared) lanes are not regulated by time and allowing mixed traffic at all times. Examples are bus and truck lanes (no-car lanes), and lanes that allow buses, trucks, and high-occupancy vehicles. No-car lanes are used to segregate wider vehicles from standard- size vehicles, hence improving lane mobility and safety. Because these strategies reduce travel delays, they are used as incentives for the implementation of other strategies. For example, the city of Gothenburg (Göteborg), Sweden, allows clean freight vehicles to use public transport lanes, which promotes the use of environmentally friendly trucks; in the United Kingdom, Bristol allows freight vehicles that use its consolidation center to use the bus lane to foster the use of its consolidation center (START 2009). The lanes must be designed properly to permit vehicles to safely interact. A key decision concerns the truck types allowed in these lanes. If all truck types are allowed, too many vehicles may use the lane, increasing congestion. On the other hand, restricting the use of the lane to only select types of trucks can be confusing to drivers, and enforcement is more challenging. Another type of multi-use lane allows trucks to temporarily park in bus lanes to unload; truck travel is not allowed in the lane. An example of this type of multi-use lane is the “Lincoln” delivery bays implemented in bus lanes in Paris (BESTUFS 2007). Table 27 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 26. Initiative 27: Exclusive Truck Lanes (Dedicated Truck Lanes) Exclusive truck lanes often afford a significant improvement in truck operations, with better reliability of delivery times and lower environmental impacts and risk of accidents. Exclusive truck lanes often are adjacent to general-purpose lanes, typically separated by barriers. Proposals for exclusive truck lanes in metropolitan areas are relatively rare; one of the few is a truck-only toll lane network in the Atlanta region (Georgia Department of Transportation 2007; U.S. Envi- ronmental Protection Agency 2013) and the multi-state I-70 Dedicated Truck Lane study that proved a business case for building dedicated truck lanes on I-70 across Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Missouri, including the Columbus, Indianapolis, and St. Louis metropolitan areas (Indiana Department of Transportation 2011).

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 61 The Handbook for Planning Truck Facilities on Urban Highways (Douglas 2004) provides a comprehensive report covering truck climbing lanes, truck lanes and truck-ways, truck-only ramps, interchange bypasses, and truck roadways and guide-ways. This report includes real- world experiences, lessons learned from previous implementation, typical issues planners face early in the planning process, and a framework and methods for evaluating the benefits and impacts of truck facilities. Examples from both U.S. and international countries are presented. Dedicated truck lanes/corridors within cities or mega-regions should be developed with a pavement management system or plan to counter the negative effects of heavy freight vehicle use. This could include a pavement plan to deepen and harden pavements on local roads that were not designed for their current uses. Many cities have managed pavement by limiting heavy vehicle access on roads that cannot support the traffic. A good example, New York City currently bans 53-foot trucks within the city. Although this theoretically would help maintain pavement quality, these policies can result in additional smaller trucks being used to meet the demand. In New York, this has created challenges for John F. Kennedy (JFK) International Airport’s ability to shift air freight to the ground mode. Table 28 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 27. Initiative 28: Traffic Control Traffic control initiatives monitor and control traffic with signs, equipment, and other devices. Signs that provide information about speed limits, access restrictions, loading zones, and other regulations have been used to assist truck drivers (BESTUFS 2007). The effectiveness of such signage can be enhanced with real-time traffic information and variable message signs. In Barcelona, variable message signs display real-time access regulations on multi-use lanes (SUGAR 2011). Signal coordination can also play a role, as most such systems are calibrated for passenger vehicles. In areas with heavy freight traffic, adjusting the signal timing and progression to account for the speed and reaction times of trucks could improve traffic flow (Ogden 1992). Table 29 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 28.

62 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 18: Vehicle Size and Weight Restrictions Description: Restrictions to prevent vehicles of a certain weight, size (length or width), or number of axles from using a particular road or area, often the result of concerns about the perceived congestion or traffic accidents caused by large trucks Targeted mode: Large trucks Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Traffic management: vehicle size restrictions Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Vehicle size and weight restrictions require careful planning to consider freight movements and land use in the target area, involving extensive stakeholder engagement and coordina- tion with other municipalities. A full analysis should be conducted of possible positive and negative outcomes for the entire system, not just the target area. Implementation and enforcement by local authorities may require control access stations, such as weighting stations. Other costs include the installation of sited traffic signs, and those associated with meeting local and other municipality requirements. Advantages inside target area: Enhance safety Reduce congestion Improve urban mobility Reduce infrastructure damage Reduce noise emissions Disadvantages inside target area: Difficult to enforce Advantages outside target area: Disadvantages outside target area: High probability for unintended consequences: - Increase congestion - Increase operational costs - Increase environmental impacts - Decrease quality of life - Hamper economic activity Weight and size regulations often conflict with those of other municipalities Typical example: Implementation of commercial vehicle weight restrictions in California, United States (California Department of Transportation 2012) Vehicle size and weight restriction in New York State (New York State Department of Transportation 2013) Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE Table 21. Vehicle size and weight restrictions.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 63 Related alternatives: 1. Removal of Geometric Constraints at Intersections; 2. Truck Routes; 3. Daytime Delivery Restrictions; 4. Night time Delivery Bans; 5. Vertical Height Detection System; 6. Mode Shift Programs References: Allen et al. 2000; Allen et al. 2003; Vleugel and Janic 2004; BESTUFS 2007; Dablanc 2007; Quak 2008; Holguín-Veras et al. 2011a; California Department of Transportation 2012; Qureshi et al. 2012; Wilbur Smith Associates 2012; Holguín-Veras et al. 2013b; New York State Department of Transportation 2013 Source: New York State Department of Transportation 2013 Table 21. (Continued).

64 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 19: Truck Routes Description: A special type of vehicle restriction that specifies the components of the transportation network that can be used by freight traffic; there can be multiple layers of truck routes. Truck routes are sometimes used to prevent freight vehicles from using unsuitable or sensitive routes. Targeted mode: Large trucks Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Traffic management: truck traffic/route regulations Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Truck routes require careful planning to consider the freight movement, origins and destinations, characteristics of the road network, and land use patterns in a target area. The planning process should involve extensive stakeholder engagement, and assess both positive and negative impacts in the target and contiguous areas. The costs are mainly those associated with the installation of guide signs, and efforts to enforce the truck routes ordinance. These restrictions should be developed with a pavement management plan in order to negate any negative externalities of increased wear on these designated corridors. Advantages: Enhance safety Ensure hazardous materials are transported far from population centers Provide guidance to transport over-dimensional cargo Discourage unnecessary truck movement in sensitive areas Reduce infrastructure damage Inform carriers about geometric and structural conditions of the network Enhance livability Improve State of Good Repair on previously used corridors Disadvantages: High probability for unintended consequences: - Increase operational costs - Increase vehicle-miles-traveled - Increase congestion Challenging to ensure accessibility Require proper communication, education, and enforcement by authorities Require high coordination among jurisdictions Examples: Advisory truck routes: legal advisory route system, California, United States (California Department of Transportation 2012) Statutory truck routes: truck-route system, which categorizes truck routes into three classes with different constraints on truck weights and dimensions, Chicago, Illinois, United States (Illinois Department of Transportation 2014) Truck routes have been implemented in Italian cities; Bremen, Germany; Athens, Greece; Crete, Greece; Palma de Mallorca, Spain; Usti, Czech Republic; Vratsa, Bulgaria; New York City, New York, USA (New York City DOT 2003; BESTUFS 2007) Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE Related alternatives: 1. Ring Roads; 2. Acceleration/Deceleration Lanes; 3. Removal of Geometric Constraints at Intersections; 4. Vehicle Size and Weight Restrictions; 5. Real-Time Information System; 6. Relocation of Large Traffic Generators (LTGs) References: New York City DOT 2003; BESTUFS 2007; Quak 2008; Holguín-Veras et al. 2011a; Suffolk County Council 2011; California Department of Transportation 2012 Table 22. Truck routes.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 65 Initiative 20: Engine-Related Restrictions Description: A special case of vehicle restriction granting access to a target area only for vehicles that meet a certain level of environmental standard. These strategies try to reduce the environmental externalities of freight traffic by fostering the use of environmentally friendly technologies. Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Area Type of initiative: Traffic management: environmental/vehicle restrictions Primary objective: Reduce pollution Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Engine-related restrictions require careful planning that should include stakeholder engagement, a full assessment of possible outcomes, and an analysis of the initiative’s objectives. For efficient implementation, additional strategies may be required (e.g., dedicated loading/unloading zones, UCCs). Advantages: Environmental sustainability When combined with eco-loading zones: - May increase efficiency - May decrease operational costs Disadvantages: High probability for unintended consequences: - Increase operational costs Require carriers to upgrade their fleets Hard to enforce Examples: European cities: Copenhagen, Denmark; Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Berlin, Germany; and London, England (Quak 2008; PARFUM 2009; LEEZEN 2010) Combined Engine Relate Restrictions with Eco-Loading Zones: Bremen, Germany (LEEZEN 2010) Clean Truck Program Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach, California, United States (Port of Los Angeles 2013a) Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE Related alternatives: 1. Emission Standards; 2. Low Noise Delivery Programs/Regulations; 3. Low Emission Zones 4. Operational Incentive for Electric/Low Emission Vehicles; 5. Anti-Idling Programs References: Quak 2008; PARFUM 2009; LEEZEN 2010; Port of Los Angeles 2013a; Port of Los Angeles 2013b; American Transportation Research Institute 2014 Table 23. Engine-related restrictions.

66 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 21: Low Emission Zones Description: Low emission zones (LEZs) are environmentally sensitive areas where vehicle access (both passenger and freight) is constrained. LEZs may ban all vehicular traffic, or just vehicles that do not meet a minimum environmental standard (engine-related restrictions) Targeted mode: All traffic/large trucks Geographic scope: Area Type of initiative: Traffic management: environmental restrictions Primary objective: Environmental sustainability Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The planning process should involve extensive stakeholder engagement to analyze impacts both in and out of the impacted area, and should be done in accordance with environmental legislation. The main costs may be related to enforcement technologies, such as license plate recognition. Advantages: Environmental sustainability - Improve air quality - Reduce noise Society support Reduce congestion inside the target area Disadvantages: High probability for unintended consequences: - Increase operational costs - Increase congestion - Hamper economic activity Examples: European cities: Stockholm, Sweden; Göteborg, Sweden; Malmo, Sweden; Lund, Sweden; Rome, Italy; Milan, Italy; Berlin, Germany; Amsterdam, The Netherlands; London, England; Madrid, Spain; Paris, France; Copenhagen, Denmark; and Budapest, Hungary (Quak 2008; TURBLOG 2009; C-LIEGE 2010; LEEZEN 2010; Transport for London 2012) Oregon, United States (Oregon Department of Transportation 2009) Related alternatives: 1. Emission Standards; 2. Engine-Related Restrictions; 3. Road Pricing; 4. Operational Incentives for Electric/Low Emission Vehicles; 5. Anti-Idling Programs References: Quak 2008; Oregon Department of Transportation 2009; TURBLOG 2009; C-LIEGE 2010; LEEZEN 2010; Transport for London 2012 Source: Oregon Department of Transportation 2009 Table 24. Low emission zones.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 67 Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE Initiative 22: Load Factor Restrictions Description: To reduce the number of freight trips entering a target area, these strategies require a minimum load factor (percent of truck capacity being used) per truck Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Area Type of initiative: Traffic management: vehicle restrictions Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: These restrictions require careful planning, stakeholder engagement, and a complete understanding of the markets, supply chain practices, and industries. A full assessment of possible outcomes is required, as is an analysis of the initiative’s objectives. These types of restrictions are very difficult to enforce, as they require physical inspection of freight vehicles. Advantages: Induce cargo consolidation - Increase efficiency - Environmental sustainability Reduce infrastructure damage Improve accessibility Enhance safety Enhance livability Disadvantages: May not be reasonable; load factors are the result of market conditions, not logistic decisions Target area may be at the end of delivery route, where the load factor is expected to be low High probability of unintended consequences - Increase congestion (more smaller vehicles per large truck deterred) - Increase operational costs - Increase vehicles-miles traveled outside target area - Increase infrastructure damage Very hard to enforce: require physical inspection of the vehicles - Increase congestion outside target area - Resource consuming Examples: The cases of Ravenna, Italy (START 2009); Göteborg, Sweden, and Copenhagen, Denmark (BESTUFS 2007) Related alternatives: 1. Daytime Delivery Restrictions; 2. Daytime Delivery Bans; 3. Road Pricing; 4. Pick- ups/Deliveries to Alternate Locations References: BESTUFS 2007; START 2009; Holguín-Veras et al. 2011a Table 25. Load factor restrictions.

68 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE Initiatives 23–25: Time Access Restrictions/Delivery Time Windows Description: Strategies that restrict the times at which freight activity can take place, including delivery time windows, daytime delivery bans, or nighttime delivery bans Targeted mode: All traffic/large trucks Geographic scope: Area Type of initiative: Traffic management: access time restrictions Primary objective: Reduce congestion/improve environmental sustainability Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Time access restrictions require planning that considers the characteristics of the area’s freight movement, industries, and land use, extensive stakeholder engagement, and an assessment of both positive and negative impacts to all economic agents involved. The costs are associated with the installation of traffic signs, and efforts associated with meeting the requirements of local businesses. Advantages (daytime delivery restrictions): Improve parking availability during ban interval Improve service time Improve reliability Decrease operational costs Environmental sustainability Enhance safety Decrease congestion Disadvantages (daytime delivery restrictions): High probability for unintended consequences: - Increase idling - Increase vehicle-miles traveled - Increase congestion outside target area - Increase operational costs Require high coordination among jurisdictions Advantages (daytime delivery bans): Reduce congestion Decrease operational costs Reduce congestion during daytime Environmental sustainability Enhance livability Disadvantages (daytime delivery bans): High probability for unintended consequences: - Increase receivers’ costs - Increase congestion in the early morning or at end of working day - Increase noise impact May require incentives to offset additional costs Advantages (nighttime delivery bans): Environmental sustainability: reduce noise emissions Disadvantages (nighttime delivery bans): Increase congestion during daytime Increase operational costs Reduce operational capacity Examples: Time windows in Lucca, Italy; Toulouse, France; Paris, France; London, England (City Ports 2005; SUGAR 2011) Time windows and loading restrictions in Göteborg, Sweden (START 2009) Related alternatives: 1. Staggered Work Hours Program; 2. Load Factor Restrictions; 3. Voluntary Off-Hour Delivery Program; 4. Vehicle Size and Weight Restrictions; 5. Urban Consolidation Centers; 6. Time-Slotting of Pick-Ups and Deliveries at Large Traffic Generators References: Allen et al. 2003; City Ports 2005; Department for Transport 2006; BESTUFS 2007; Quak and de Koster 2007; Quak 2008; van Rooijen et al. 2008; Quak and de Koster 2009; START 2009; C-LIEGE 2010; Holguín- Veras et al. 2011a; SUGAR 2011; Holguín-Veras et al. 2012c Table 26. Time access restrictions.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 69 Initiative 26: Restricted Multi-Use Lanes Description: These initiatives promote the use of available road capacity by allocating restricted lane right-of-way to trucks, buses, and occasionally high-occupancy vehicles. The lane usage can be allocated to different users using time windows, shared among designated users all day, or restricted to special use for certain users. Restrictions can be by vehicle type, or they can allow mixed traffic during the restriction interval. Targeted mode: All traffic/large trucks Geographic scope: Area Type of initiative: Traffic management: lane management Primary objective: Optimize road capacity Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Lane management strategies and restrictions to multi-use lanes require thorough planning to consider the characteristics of the network and the needs of different users. Planning should involve extensive stakeholder engagement, and weigh both the positive and negative impacts to all agents that are part of the system. The costs are mainly associated with the installation of variable message signs or changeable message signs, and enforcement resources. Advantages: Reduce congestion Enhance safety Increase efficiency Enhance livability Can be used as incentive to foster other strategies Disadvantages: May confuse drivers May conflict with other traffic users May not be adequate for sensitive locations Hard to enforce Lane geometry may not be adequate for large trucks Examples: Multifunctional lanes in its commercial center: Barcelona, Spain (City Ports 2005) Clean vehicles are allowed to use public transport lanes: Göteborg, Sweden (START 2009) Consolidation vehicles are allowed to use bus lanes: Bristol, England (START 2009) Truck lane restricted to right lane: New York City, New York, United States (The City of New York 2012), North Carolina, United States (Federal Highway Administration 2011; North Carolina Department of Transportation 2013) Ban on through-trucks on Interstate inside the perimeter freeway: Georgia, United States (Georgia Dept. of Public Safety 2010) Source: Federal Highway Administration 2011 Related alternatives: 1. Acceleration/Deceleration Lanes; 2. Traffic Control; 3. Dynamic Routing References: Ogden 1992; City Ports 2005; BESTUFS 2007; START 2009; Georgia Department of Public Safety 2010; Federal Highway Administration 2011; SUGAR 2011; The City of New York 2012; North Carolina Department of Transportation 2013 Table 27. Restricted multi-use lanes.

70 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Source: Federal Highway Administration 2011 Initiative 27: Exclusive Truck Lanes Description: Allocation of restricted lane right-of-way exclusively to trucks Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Corridor Type of initiative: Traffic management: lane management Primary objective: Decrease congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Exclusive truck lanes require careful planning, extensive stakeholder engagement (both private and public), and an assessment of the potential impacts to all agents of the freight and other relevant economic systems. This initiative requires a large capital investment. Advantages: For interstate areas - Increase efficiency - Improve reliability - Enhance safety - Environmental sustainability Revenue stream using tolls can overcome investment and operating costs Disadvantages: Require high capital investments Reduce road capacity for other vehicle types May not be adequate for metropolitan locations Examples: Georgia DOT Statewide Truck Lanes Needs Identification Study Georgia DOT State Route 6 “Truck Friendly Lanes” Georgia Managed Lane System Plan I-70 Truck Lane Feasibility Study Related alternatives: 1. Ring Roads; 2. Acceleration/Deceleration Lanes; 3. Traffic Control References: Texas Transportation Institute 2002; Holguín-Veras et al. 2003; Reich et al. 2003; Meyer 2006; Georgia Department of Transportation 2008; Burke et al. 2011; Federal Highway Administration 2011; Georgia Department of Transportation 2011c; U.S. DOT 2012a; Georgia Department of Transportation 2013 Table 28. Exclusive truck lanes.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 71 Source: Oregon Department of Transportation 2013 Initiative 28: Traffic Control Description: Strategies to monitor and control traffic with signs, equipment, and devices. Among the approaches used to assist truck drivers are signs that provide information about speed limit, access restrictions, loading zones, and other regulations. Another type of initiative focuses on the coordination of traffic signals. Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Corridor Type of initiative: Traffic management: traffic control Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Traffic control strategies should consider road users, network characteristics, and traffic patterns. The planning should involve stakeholder engagement to assess the impacts to all relevant economic agents. This initiative requires investments in variable message signs (VMS), and the collection, analysis, and dissemination of real-life traffic information. Advantages: Decrease congestion Enhance safety Increase efficiency Coordination of traffic signals - Improve system performance - Reduce number of stops - Environmental sustainability - Reduce travel times Disadvantages: Traffic signal coordination is often calibrated for passenger vehicles, not truck traffic May produce adverse effects on other modes Examples: Variable Message Signs (VMS) are used in Barcelona, Spain to inform about access regulations (City Ports 2005, 23) VMS are used in Oregon, USA for truck advisory (Oregon Department of Transportation 2013) Related alternatives: 1. Restricted Multi-Use Lanes; 2. Exclusive Truck Lanes (Dedicated Truck Lanes); 3. Dynamic Routing References: Ogden 1992; BESTUFS 2007; SUGAR 2011 Table 29. Traffic control. Table 30 summarizes the planning and design considerations for the 11 initiatives listed under traffic management.

Ve h i c l e s i z e a n d w e i g h t r e s t r i c t i o n s T r u c k r o u t e s L o w e m i s s i o n z o n e s E n g i n e - r e l a t e d r e s t r i c t i o n s L o a d f a c t o r r e s t r i c t i o n s D a y t i m e d e l i v e r y r e s t r i c t i o n s D a y t i m e d e l i v e r y b a n s N i g h t t i m e d e l i v e r y b a n s R e s t r i c t e d m u l t i - u s e l a n e s E x c l u s i v e t r u c k l a n e s T r a f f i c c o n t r o l 1 s there enough right-of-way available to complete the project? 2 3 ow will this project be funded? 4 5 6 7 8 9 I Will other projects be required to fully complete the project? H What is the anticipated duration of the project/policy? What is the geographic scope of the project? Where is it located? What is the desired size/capacity/connectivity? Will the use of policy/project be mandatory or voluntary? Is there any incentive for participation (or penalties for not)? 10 What is the level of incentives? 11 What is the level of price(s)/fine(s)? 12 How will the policy/project be enforced? 13 What is the target group? 14 What are the criteria for participation? 15 Which agency will lead? 16 What are the resources needed to operate the project? 17 What permits are required to initiate/complete the project? 18 Who are the stakeholders? 19 Should the private sector be engaged? If so, how? 20 Is there a need to engage and coordinate with public agencies? How? 21 Is there a risk of the technology/project becoming obsolete? 22 Could benefits be provided to community or pedestrians? 23 Are there any safety/security issues that should be resolved? Planning considerations Operational considerations Stakeholder engagement Risk management and integration with other transportation policies TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT Access Restrictions Time AccessRestrictions Traffic Control and Lane Management Questions Table 30. Planning and design considerations for traffic management initiatives.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 73 Pricing, Incentives, and Taxation These strategies use monetary signals to achieve such pre-defined public goals as revenue generation, fostering the use of emerging technologies, or demand management, among many others. Pricing Initiative 29: Road Pricing Freight road pricing has been recommended to reduce freight traffic by promoting a better utilization of transportation capacity (Ogden 1992; City Ports 2005; BESTUFS 2007; Allen and Browne 2010; PIARC 2011). In theory, the increase in transportation costs produced by the toll would lead to a reduction in truck traffic. The empirical research conducted indicates, however, that in the case of cordon time-of-day pricing in competitive markets, this is not the case. Carriers cannot unilaterally change delivery schedules and have limited power to transfer the toll costs on to their customers. For example, following the 2001 toll increases enacted by the PANYNJ Time-of-Day Pricing Initiative, only 9% of the carriers were able to pass the toll costs on to the receivers (Holguín-Veras et al. 2006b). If no price signal reaches the receivers, cordon time-of- day pricing will not impact their behavior. In both the PANYNJ case and in London, England, cordon time-of-day pricing had no noticeable impact on peak-hour truck traffic. This reflects the highly competitive market conditions produced by truck over-supply. As a result, carriers tend to absorb the toll costs and to avoid any operational changes that could upset their customers and lead to loss of business. Although cordon time-of-day tolls do not change freight demand—because the toll is a fixed cost that most carriers find difficult to pass on—time-distance-pricing tolls could be passed on to the customers as a variable cost that enters into their distance-based contracts (Holguín-Veras 2011). For time-distance-pricing tolls to change receiver behavior, however, the tolls have to be very high, which may not be politically acceptable. The current thinking is that cordon time-of-day tolls road pricing is of limited effectiveness for freight demand management, though it could play a key role in revenue generation. Table 31 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 29. Initiative 30: Parking Pricing Parking pricing is intertwined with the allocation of curb space among all potential users. A proper amount of spaces, and the locations of the spaces allocated to freight vehicles are essential to program success. The main issue is that often cities fail to allocate enough parking for freight activity, which results in significant parking violations and fines (Jaller et al. 2012). In New York City, for example, most carriers spend between $500–$1,000/month per truck on parking fines (Holguín-Veras et al. 2007; Holguín-Veras et al. 2008b). Given a fair and proper allocation of curb space, parking pricing can play a key role in a sustainability initiative, protect historical areas, and improve traffic conditions (PIARC 2011) by increasing turnover, reducing parking dwell times, and generating revenues for infrastructure and mobility improvements (City Ports 2005). In Copenhagen, Denmark, differential parking charges were set in the medieval part of the city to reduce pollution and foster the use of environmentally friendly vehicles. Similarly, the New York City DOT’s Commercial Parking/Congestion Pricing program uses parking prices to foster turnover and a better use of curb space. Table 32 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 30.

74 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Incentives These programs seek to foster sustainable practices by incentivizing one or more participants in the supply chain, using both monetary and non-monetary incentives. In this context, combining the power of incentives and regulations is likely to have a meaningful impact on the behavior of freight agents. The public sector can provide incentives to foster adoption of environmentally friendly vehicles or engine replacement, while charging penalties to carriers using inefficient vehicles, and regulating minimum environmental standards. Incentive programs can be enhanced by promoting sustainable practices among stakeholders. Citizens and end-users/consumers should be involved, as they have the power to reward best practices with their purchases, potentially influencing behavior throughout the supply chain. The “Carrotmob” concept provides an interesting model of a program that could play a trans- formative role, by using the power of consumers to foster change in the urban freight system (Diziain 2013). Initiative 31: Recognition Programs Recognition programs use the power of public acknowledgment of outstanding achieve- ments to indirectly encourage others to follow suit. Unlike certification programs, however, recognition programs do not necessarily assist other companies with the means—advice, plans, or benchmarking systems—to achieve the level of performance necessary to receive recognition (Noise Abatement Society 2013). Not much literature exists on the effectiveness of public recog- nition programs or how to structure them. One of the very few research efforts is related to the Off-Hour Delivery (OHD) project in New York City (Holguín Veras et al. 2014), where econo- metric models have shown that public recognition does increase the likelihood of participation in unassisted OHD. Recognition of good behavior fosters good behavior. Moreover, such pro- grams tend to improve relations between the private and public sectors, which can pave the way for other more challenging implementations and cooperation. Table 33 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 31. Initiative 32: Certification Programs These programs recognize participants that achieve a minimum level of performance and follow a clear path to certification. These schemes can be structured in various ways, depend- ing on the metrics and attributes considered, and who is participating and/or included in the system. Comprehensive programs aim to address the majority, if not all, aspects of a company’s operations (Transport for London 2013b), such as driver skills and driver management, vehicle maintenance, transport operations, and performance management. In most cases, these are vol- untary programs that set specifications for reaching different achievement levels such as bronze, silver, or gold. Area-specific recognition programs often concentrate on environmental impacts. Other focus areas include managing driver skills, safety, and the use of information technol- ogy to enhance operations (Freight Transport Association 2013; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013). Table 33 also summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 32. Initiative 33: Operational Incentives for Electric/Low Emission Vehicles This group of strategies provides operational incentives to carriers, such as preferential access to restricted areas, to foster use of electric/low emission vehicles (BESTUFS 2007). For example, urban consolidation centers (UCCs) in Norway use “clean vehicles” for last-mile deliveries to take advantage of priority lane policies. In Germany, the city of Bremen provides preferential access to choice parking places to freight vehicles that meet the strictest environmental standards (PARFUM 2009). The allocation of a scarce public good, like parking, in such a way could foster

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 75 sustainability of urban freight operations. In New York City, Green Loading Zones are con- sidered a solution to incentivize the adoption of electric vehicles, as they provide curb space exclusively to electric trucks (New York State Department of Transportation 2014). Table 33 also summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 33. Taxation Initiative 34: Taxation Taxation is routinely used to raise revenues and foster behavior changes that will lead to public benefits. Examples include tax incentives for consumers who buy electric vehicles or for companies that use energy efficient equipment (City Ports 2005; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013). For the most part, because of compliance verification considerations, tax incentives or penalties are usually tied to purchases that are easy to verify. A central principle of these efforts is to ensure that the tax signals reach the key decision maker. In this regard, the important role of the receiver has often been overlooked. If properly designed, a mix of incentives and penalties could be more effective than solely punitive policies, and would be more likely to be accepted by the public and business community. Tax-incentive programs geared to carriers could accelerate the adoption of electric/low emission vehicles, as has been seen in the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and France (BESTUFS 2007). The Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department (2011) has a number of incentive pro- grams: a $3.2 billion program to help operators replace non-compliant vehicles with new ones that comply with the latest emission standards; tax incentives by which carriers can deduct capital expenditures on environmental-friendly vehicles; and the “Pilot Green Transport Fund” to encourage freight carrier operators to test out green and low-carbon transport technologies. In the United States, some federal and state incentives exist for electric trucks (e.g., Plug In America 2013), including the Environmental Protection Agency’s SmartWay finance program that assists small carriers by providing access to low-cost financing for SmartWay-verified tech- nologies and clean trucks (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013). Table 34 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 34.

76 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 29: Road Pricing/Incentives Description: A demand management tool in urban areas to reduce traffic, promote a better use of transportation ca- pacity, and reduce environmental impacts. Pricing revenues often are used to finance the construction and mainte- nance costs of urban infrastructure, and often are implemented using (electronic) cordon tolls located at the fringe of the cities in tunnels and/or bridges. Targeted mode: All traffic, large trucks Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Pricing, incentives, and taxation: road pricing/incentives Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The planning process should involve thorough stakeholder en- gagement to analyze impacts both in and outside the impacted area. The differences between truck types should be considered to avoid overpricing large trucks. Pricing strategies are effective when implemented as part of a group of strategies (e.g., to finance freight-related programs, to foster the use of environmentally friendly vehicles). The costs are mainly those associated with the construction and operation of toll facilities. Advantages: Revenue generation If implemented as part of a broader program involving incentives for receivers: - Reduce congestion - Environmental sustainability - Increase efficiency - Improve reliability Disadvantages: Limited effectiveness as a freight demand management tool: most truckers have to travel when customers demand it Politically unfeasible: effective time-distance pricing would be extremely high Difficult to define the optimal charge Probability for unintended consequences: - Operators to relocate their economic activities - Decrease operational costs - Increase vehicle-miles-traveled (use of smaller vehicles) Examples: London, England, congestion charging New York City, New York, United States Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, California, United States SR 91 express lanes in Orange County, California, United States Stockholm, Sweden, congestion charging Source: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop08039/images/ ch5_1.jpg Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE Related alternatives: 1. Low Emission Zones; 2. Load Factor Restrictions; 3. Taxation References: Ogden 1992; City Ports 2005; Holguín-Veras 2006; BESTUFS 2007; PierPASS 2007; Holguín-Veras 2008; Allen and Browne 2010; C-LIEGE 2010; Holguín-Veras 2011; PIARC 2011 Table 31. Road pricing/incentives.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 77 Initiative 30: Parking Pricing Description: Charging for the use of curb space; some based on fixed rates, while others involve variable or differen- tiated pricing schemes. Targeted mode: All traffic, large traffic Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Pricing, incentives, and taxation: parking pricing Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Stakeholder engagement should play a part in the planning process, to analyze potential impacts in and out of the target area. To avoid overpricing large trucks, the differences between truck types should be considered. These pricing strategies are effective when implemented as part of a group of strate- gies (e.g., to finance freight-related programs, to foster the use of environmental-friendly vehicles). Advantages: Revenue generation: finance construction and maintenance of parking facilities Enhance livability: protect historical areas Reduce parking dwell times If implemented as part of a broader parking program: - Reduce congestion - Environmental sustainability - Increase efficiency - Improve reliability Disadvantages: Limited effectiveness as a freight demand management tool Difficult to define the optimal charge Increase operational costs: operational constraints often result in parking violations May not induce a shift to alternative modes: lack of alternative modes in the United States Require large curb space to be allocated for freight vehicles Potential for unintended consequences: - Increase congestion Examples: Copenhagen, Denmark: differential parking Park Smart Program in New York City, New York, United States Source: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/images/motorist/parksmart-decal.jpg Related alternatives: 1. Freight Parking and Loading Zones; 2. Loading and Parking Restrictions; 3. Vehicle Parking Reservation Systems References: City Ports 2005; Cambridge Systematics 2007; Holguín-Veras et al. 2007; Holguín-Veras et al. 2008b; PIARC 2011; Jaller et al. 2012 Table 32. Parking pricing.

78 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiatives 31–33: Certification/Recognition Programs/Incentives Description: Platforms implemented to encourage and reward sustainable practices throughout the supply chain. There are three main types: comprehensive, area-specific, and award programs. Targeted modes: All traffic, waterways, rail, air Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Pricing, incentives, and taxation: certification/recognition programs Primary objective: Environmental sustainability Expected costs and level of effort to implement: All agents in the logistics chain should be included in the program, which may necessitate extensive outreach. These programs are often the product of partnerships between public agen- cies and freight transportation associations. Carriers generally have to pay to enter the certification program. Advantages: Environmental sustainability Enhance economic competitiveness Reduce congestion Foster the use of alternative vehicles Enhance safety Disadvantages: Require exceptional dissemination Require training programs Require high coordination among multiple jurisdictions and stakeholders Appropriate for carriers serving large generators Examples: The Noise Abatement Society John Connell Award: United Kingdom (Noise Abatement Society 2013) Fleet Operator Recognition Scheme (FORS): England (Transport for London 2013b) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency SmartWay program: United States (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013) Related alternatives: 1. Receiver-Led Delivery Consolidation Program; 2. Engine-Related Restrictions; 3. Operational Incentives for Electric/Low Emission Vehicles; 4.Driver Training Programs; 5.Voluntary Off-Hour Delivery Program; 6. Emission Standards; 7. Low Noise Delivery Programs/Regulations; 8. Low Emission Zones; 9. Recognition Programs; 10. Certification Programs References: Care4Air 2013; Cargonews Asia 2013; Foundation for Promoting Personal Mobility and Ecological Transportation 2013; Freight Transport Association 2013; Noise Abatement Society 2013; Transport for London 2013b; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013 Source: http://www.epa.gov/cleanschoolbus/sw-overview.htm Table 33. Certification/recognition programs/incentives.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 79 Initiative 34: Taxation Description: Initiatives used to raise revenues and foster behavior changes that will lead to public benefits Targeted mode: All traffic, large trucks Geographic scope: Nation, city Type of initiative: Pricing, incentives, and taxation: taxation Primary objective: Generate revenue Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The planning process should involve extensive stakeholder en- gagement to analyze potential impacts. Care should be taken to ensure that the objectives of the taxation policy are clear, and that the type of taxation chosen will reach the intended decision maker. As with other types of taxation, this initiative may encounter political opposition. Advantages: Revenue generation Designed as a mix of incentives and penalties: - May be more effective than punitive policies - May gain society support Disadvantages: Low probability for unintended consequences: - Tax signals may not reach key decision makers - May induce undesirable behavioral changes Difficult to define the optimal charge Examples: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency SmartWay program (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013) Stockholm, Sweden electric vehicle program (Vittoriano et al. 2011) Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department (Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department 2011) Related alternatives: 1. Emission Standards; 2. Road Pricing; 3. Relocation of Large Traffic Generators (LTGs) References: City Ports 2005; BESTUFS 2007; Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department 2011; Vittoriano et al. 2011; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013 Source: Nagurney et al. 2002 Source: Vittoriano et al. 2011 Table 34. Taxation. Table 35 summarizes the planning and design considerations for the six initiatives listed under pricing, incentives, and taxation.

Ro a d p r i c i n g P a r k i n g p r i c i n g R e c o g n i t i o n p r o g r a m s C e r t i f i c a t i o n p r o g r a m s O p e r a t i o n a l i n c e n - t i v e s f o r E V / L E V 1 s there enough right-of-way available to complete the project? 2 3 ow will this project be funded? 4 5 6 7 8 9 I Will other projects be required to fully complete the project? H What is the anticipated duration of the project/policy? What is the geographic scope of the project? Where is it located? What is the desired size/capacity/connectivity? Will the use of policy/project be mandatory or voluntary? Is there any incentive for participation (or penalties for not)? 10 What is the level of incentives? 11 What is the level of price(s)/fine(s)? 12 How will the policy/project be enforced? 13 What is the target group? 14 What are the criteria for participation? 15 Which agency will lead? 16 What are the resources needed to operate the project? 17 What permits are required to initiate/complete the project? 18 Who are the stakeholders? 19 Should the private sector be engaged? If so, how? 20 Is there a need to engage and coordinate with public agencies? How? 21 Is there a risk of the technology/project becoming obsolete? 22 Could benefits be provided to community or pedestrians? 23 Are there any safety/security issues that should be resolved? PRICING, INCENTIVES, AND TAXATION Risk management and integration with other transportation policies Operational considerations T a x a t i o n Incentives Planning considerations Stakeholder engagement Questions Pricing Table 35. Planning and design considerations for pricing, incentives, and taxation initiatives.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 81 Logistical Management The main objective of these strategies is to alter the way deliveries are undertaken to reduce the negative externalities produced. However, these strategies can also improve the efficiency of the last-mile delivery journey through appropriate fuel and driver management, reducing empty or low-volume journeys, and consolidation of delivery trips. Cargo Consolidation Initiative 35: Urban Consolidation Centers UCCs are facilities that seek to reduce freight traffic in a target area by consolidating cargo at a terminal. In theory, carriers that might otherwise make separate trips to the target area with relatively low load factors will instead transfer their loads to a neutral carrier that consolidates the cargo and conducts the last leg of the deliveries. The carriers pay the UCC operator a fee per delivery made, and save money by not having to make the final leg of the delivery themselves (Holguín-Veras et al. 2008a). During the 1940s, the PANYNJ implemented what would be the first modern UCCs (located in Manhattan in New York City and in nearby Newark, New Jersey), though these operations closed down in the 1950s because of union opposition and a lack of carrier participation (Doig 2001; Doig 2010). More recently, UCCs have been tried in a number of European and Japanese cities in response to government incentives (Taniguchi and Nemoto 2003; Browne et al. 2005; Panero and Shin 2011). Most UCCs are small operations that focus on a section of a city or on individual buildings, such as the Shinjuku UCC in Japan. UCCs can reduce freight traffic, and thus congestion and pollution levels. Nilsson describes the experience of the Swedish Convention Center in 2008, when deliveries destined there were rerouted instead to an outside terminal to be consolidated (Nilsson 2009). The total number of truck trips arriving at the Convention Center dropped from 400 per week to 20 per week. Significant benefits have been estimated: a reduction in the total distance traveled, and thus in congestion; improvements in load factors; reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and in conflicts between freight vehicles and other users leading to greater safety; and in curbside occupation time (Tri-State Transportation Commission 1970; Transport & Travel Research Ltd. and Transport Research Laboratory 2010; Quak and Tavasszy 2011). The potential benefits of UCCs have led many to recommend them (City Ports 2005; BESTUFS 2007; START 2009; SUGAR 2011). It appears that sizable portions of the carrier industry would consider the use of UCCs. A survey conducted in the New York City area found that 16–18% of carriers would be highly/extremely likely to participate in such a consolidation program (Holguín-Veras et al. 2008a), while a separate survey in California reported an 18% likelihood of participation (Regan and Golob 2005). UCCs have a mixed success record, however, because they have struggled to attract a sufficient number of users. Some obstacles UCCs face include: competitive pressures that push suppliers away from participation; overall costs that are frequently higher than direct deliveries, once the UCC’s space costs are included (Kawamura and Lu 2008); and the difficulty finding enough suitable space for a UCC in urban areas, where property is at a premium and often unavailable (Browne et al. 2005; Transport & Travel Research Ltd. and Transport Research Laboratory 2010; van Rooijen and Quak 2010; Quak and Tavasszy 2011; Holguín-Veras et al. 2012b). As a conse- quence, public subsidies often are necessary, and if the subsidies do not materialize, most UCC operations come to an end. However, some analysts believe that UCCs could be financially viable if they attract a meaningful amount of cargo (Transport & Travel Research Ltd. and Transport Research Laboratory 2010).

82 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Despite the challenges, a number of UCCs are in operation (Panero and Shin 2011). The consensus position among several researchers (Browne et al. 2005; Allen et al. 2012) is that UCCs are more likely to be successful when: • Strong public-sector support exists via a regulatory mandate for use of the UCC • Significant congestion/pollution problems are recognized within the area • Complementary policies are in place, such as penalties for carriers that do not participate In major metropolitan areas it may be difficult for some shippers and carriers to acquire enough real estate to properly conduct their operations. This might be particularly true if a com- pany has grown and needs to expand. This problem is even more apparent for large distribution centers that require large plots of land. In some cases, businesses are forced to operate separate locations nearby, which can lead to congestion because trucks are forced to travel between the locations, contributing additional expenses to the company—and, in turn, to the customer. A promising concept was pioneered by the Binnenstadservice, a network of UCCs in The Netherlands (van Rooijen and Quak 2010). The promoters of this project realized early on how critical the support of the receivers would be. Instead of trying to convince carriers to participate, the promoters convinced the receivers to ask their vendors to send deliveries to the UCC as a way to help the environment. The receivers were promised no increases in delivery rates. Once the receivers committed, the promoters approached the suppliers and offered to conduct the last leg of the deliveries in return for a small fee, which the carriers agreed to pay because it was smaller than their own costs of making the deliveries. Based on the fact that they have expanded to other cities, the Binnenstadservice operations have proved successful. Receivers’ participation could be the key to counteracting market pressures, such as the desire to foster brand recognition that may deter shippers from participating in UCCs. An important consideration when planning UCCs relates to insurance. Before operation begins it should be arranged who will be responsible for lost or damaged goods during the process. In a traditional delivery system it is more straightforward to determine where the damage occurred, but in a UCC—where additional layers of handling occur—it is necessary to have a system that assigns responsibility during the various stages of consolidation and delivery. Table 36 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 35. Intelligent Transportation Systems Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) could play a key role in increasing the efficiency and reliability of urban distribution (BESTUFS 2007). Several ITS programs have proven effective (SUGAR 2011). In Berlin, Germany; London, England; and Paris, France, urban traffic man- agement centers provide route guidance to freight drivers regarding preferred routes, vehicle height and weight restrictions, access and loading regulations, and locations of truck parks. Slot booking systems are used to coordinate truck arrivals at major sites generating large flows and reducing congestion. Initiative 36: Real-Time Information Systems To facilitate planning and logistics responding to traffic changes, the freight sector needs real-time information in terms of (1) road safety (e.g., situational safety, accidents, vertical height information, weather information, road conditions, and roadwork zones); (2) congestion (e.g., congestion data, cost information, toll facilities, parking facilities, and kiosks at truck stops); (3) regulatory compliance (e.g., road restrictions, limit travel speed, and weigh station locations); and (4) supply chain information (e.g., loading and unloading information, delays, pick-up/ delivery notification, pre-notification of truck arrival, real-time container status and gate activity,

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 83 wait times at intermodal facilities, and advanced notice of fees due) (U.S. DOT 2003; RITA 2011; Ranaiefar 2012; U.S. DOT 2012b; Butler 2013). An implementation example of a real-time information system (RTIS) is described in Case Study 8, from the city of Seattle, Washington, in Section 3. Table 37 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 36. Initiative 37: Vertical Height Detection Systems Vertical height detection systems (VHDS), also known as over-height vehicle detection systems, are ITS implemented to warn truck drivers when their vehicles surpass the maximum height of an upcoming road structure (e.g., bridge, tunnel, or sign gantry) (NZ Transport Agency 2011; International Road Dynamics Inc. 2014). VHDS have a detector with a transmitter that pulses a beam of infrared light or visible red light across the highway to a receiver. If an over-height truck is crossing the location of the VHDS, the truck will interfere with the beam, and a warn- ing (audible alarm and/or visible sign) will be generated to make the driver aware of the hazard ahead. The system provides alternatives (e.g., a sign showing available road exits) to the driver to take an alternate route and avoid crashing into approaching infrastructure (International Road Dynamics Inc. 2014). VHDS work well under conditions of normal weather, rain, fog, and snow, and they are capable of detecting an over-height truck traveling between low speeds (1 mph) to high speeds (75–100 mph) (Mattingly 2003; International Road Dynamics Inc. 2014). VHDS have been very effective in reducing damages to structures by over-height vehicles. For example, Mattingly (2003) analyzed VHDS in 29 states in the United States and found significant reductions in 73% of the states where VHDS were implemented. This type of system has been successfully imple- mented in London, England (SUGAR 2011). For example, in the Blackwall Tunnel in London, the use of VHDS reduced by 38% the number of over-height incidents (ITS International 2013). Although VHDS are often reliable, in some cases false positives (e.g., birds) have produced system failures. This has occurred in the United States in Pennsylvania, where in a road car- rying 6,000 to 12,000 trucks every day, the system fails occasionally and generates on average one collision every 2 months (Mattingly 2003). Table 38 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 37. Initiative 38: Dynamic Routing The implementation of in-vehicle routing and navigation systems seeks to improve the safety and efficiency of commercial vehicle operations. The public sector’s initial interest was to provide routing guidance and to implement ITS for commercial operations focused mainly on road safety, congestion reduction, and securing of efficient regulatory compliance (BESTUFS 2007; Wolfe and Troup 2013). Therefore, most of the dynamic routing systems managed by the public sector guide truck drivers to routes that comply with access regulations, and when RTIS are available the routing also seeks to deviate truck traffic from roads that are already congested. Dynamic routing systems rely on on-board technologies such as vehicle telematics, global posi- tioning systems, and in-cab communication systems for real-time guidance. Private sector in-vehicle routing and navigation systems often are part of a decision-support system to provide truck drivers with a route that minimizes travel costs while complying with customer constraints (Kritzinger et al. 2012). The efficiency of these systems and their ability to optimize the route depend heavily on the availability of high quality real-time traffic data provided by RTIS. The total cost savings and the reduction in vehicle usage when implementing dynamic routing have been estimated using both historical and real-traffic information from Southeast Michigan (Kim et al. 2005). The cost savings achieved using historical traffic data and real- time traffic data was about 4% and 7%, respectively, during the peak hours. The authors estimate that vehicle usage can be reduced by about 7% during peak hours when using historical data, and

84 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide by about 12% when using real-time data. In Vienna, Austria, researchers have estimated that the implementation of dynamic routing using historic travel times from GPS installed in taxis could save about 10% of travel time for commercial vehicles (Kritzinger et al. 2012). In Barcelona, Spain, an experimental study estimates that real-time traffic information could reduce travel times by 25% (Grzybowska and Barceló 2012). Implementation of this initiative requires (1) that the public sector put in place an infra- structure for RTIS (where it is not yet in place); (2) a communication architecture to provide dynamic travel times, and (3) investment in fleet management software and equipment from the private sector. Some cities that have implemented this initiative include Berlin, Germany; London, England; Paris, France; and New York City, New York, United States (BESTUFS 2007; PIARC 2011). Table 39 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 38. Last-Mile Delivery Practices Initiatives that relate to last-mile delivery practices seek to improve the final section of the supply chain, where goods are delivered to their ultimate destinations, which is often one of the chain’s most expensive components. To increase the effectiveness of public-sector initiatives, the private sector must also invest in efforts to improve their logistics activities. For example, effort is required to optimize the loading of vehicles at their origins in order to conduct effective and efficient offloading activities at the destinations. Cargo must be loaded in such a way as to minimize the time required for unloading, reception, and verification activities. Initiative 39: Time-Slotting of Pick-ups and Deliveries at Large Traffic Generators This initiative reduces the negative impacts of pick-ups and deliveries to large traffic generators (LTGs) such as government offices, colleges, hospitals, and large buildings housing hundreds of commercial establishments. Often located in high-value locations where space is at a premium, these properties tend to have minimal loading and storage space for deliveries. If drivers cannot find space in the loading dock, they often have to double-park or circle around to find a space. Reducing the externalities produced by LTGs is crucial, as they generate a sizable portion of the truck traffic in large cities. On Manhattan Island in New York City, just 56 large buildings generate 4% of the total truck traffic (Jaller et al. 2013). LTGs, and the associated parking and loading/ unloading maneuvers around them, generate substantial congestion. Time-slotting of deliveries at LTGs provides an opportunity to efficiently use the delivery areas and avoid these problems. Table 40 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 39. Initiative 40: Driver Training Programs These programs seek to change driver behaviors and enhance driver competencies to improve delivery efficiency, energy consumption, environmental impacts, and the safety of all road users. Drivers can be trained to drive in eco-friendly ways that save fuel and reduce emissions, or to handle deliveries in a quiet manner so that night deliveries do not disturb neighborhoods (Goevaers 2011). Training includes presentations, vehicle checks, driving assessment, driver debriefs, demo drives, and driver knowledge tests. On completion of the training, participants receive written assessments and certificates (Department for Transport 2007). Experience sug- gests that driver training programs are a cost-effective approach to improving delivery efficiency; however, implementation of these programs requires close collaboration between the public and private sectors; clearly defined goals; professional instructors; well-organized training materials; and a carefully planned certification program to ensure success. Table 41 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 40.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 85 Initiative 41: Anti-Idling Programs These programs attempt to reduce the pollution caused by idling trucks. In the United States, various programs have been implemented that focus on technologies, economic incentives, regulations, and education. One important step toward the reduction of idling is truck stop electrification, and the 5-minute limitation on diesel truck idling implemented across the states (California Department of Transportation). The U.S. Department of Energy has sponsored research and development to produce new anti-idling technologies. Although several implementations have been conducted in the United States (Skukowski 2012), these technologies are unfortunately underutilized, and they have not achieved their full potential. The EPA launched the SmartWay Transport Partnership in part to foster use of anti-idling technologies (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013). The success of these programs relies on an integrated consideration of regulations, technologies, incentives, public education, and effective stakeholder coordination. Table 42 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 41. Initiative 42: Pick-ups/Deliveries to Alternate Locations These initiatives foster the use of alternate locations for pick-ups and deliveries, such as delivery lockers and post offices, which are used as local freight collection and distribution mini-depots (Augereau and Dablanc 2008). Instead of trucks making the final deliveries, customers travel to the pick-up area to retrieve their goods. These practices are believed to reduce delivery costs and the number of delivery attempts. However, some researchers argue that compared to home deliveries, having customers pick up the orders using their own cars may increase the overall traffic. To be socially beneficial, the alternate locations need to be located at places where customers only need to make short deviations from their daily routines (BESTUFS 2007). Table 43 summa- rizes essential characteristics of Initiative 42.

86 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 35: Urban Consolidation Centers Description: Urban consolidation centers (UCCs) are operational concepts that reduce freight traffic circulating with- in a target area by fostering consolidation of cargo at a terminal. In most cases, carriers that otherwise would make separate trips to the target area with relatively low load factors instead transfer their loads to a neutral carrier that con- solidates the cargo and conducts the last leg of the deliveries. Conceptually, this may include “joint delivery systems,” “cooperative logistics,” and “urban distribution centers,” although strictly speaking, these operations are not necessari- ly equivalent to a UCC. Targeted mode: Urban deliveries Geographic scope: Area Type of initiative: Logistical management: urban consolidation centers (UCCs) Primary objective: Reduce freight traffic Expected costs and level of effort to implement: UCCs require large physical spaces located at the fringes of cities or urban areas. These properties are usually unavailable, or available only at a premium, so costs associated with UCCs are almost always high. The planning process should involve extensive stakeholder engagement to reduce op- position from unions and suppliers. UCCs are most likely to be successful if they can be imposed, controlled, and complemented with supporting policies. Advantages: Improve load factors Reduce congestion Reduce vehicle-miles traveled Environmental sustainability Reduce curbside occupation time Disadvantages: Low probability for unintended consequences: - May face opposition from unions and suppliers - May require public subsidies - May increase the operational cost Require high capital investments - Require extremely large physical space Difficult to enforce Increase in traffic at/in the vicinity of the area/facility Examples: The Binnenstadservice in Nijmegen, The Netherlands (van Rooijen and Quak 2010; Quak and Tavasszy 2011) Stadsleveransen in Göteborg, Sweden (Stadsleveransen 2013) UCCs at La Rochelle and Monaco, France (BESTUFS 2007) Source: Hensher and Figliozzi 2007 Related alternatives: 1. Daytime Delivery Bans; 2. Nighttime Delivery Bans; 3. Pick-Up/Delivery to Alternate Locations; 4. Mode Shift Programs; 5. Relocation of Large Traffic Generators (LTGs); 6. Integrate Freight into Land Use Planning Process References: Tri-State Transportation Commission 1970; Wood 1970; Doig 2001; Ieda et al. 2001; Taniguchi 2003; Taniguchi and Nemoto 2003; Crainic et al. 2004; Kohler 2004; Nemoto 2004; Browne et al. 2005; City Ports 2005; Regan and Golob 2005; Holguín-Veras et al. 2006b; Patier 2006; BESTUFS 2007; Holguín-Veras et al. 2008a; Kawamura and Lu 2008; Nilsson 2009; START 2009; TURBLOG 2009; Allen and Browne 2010; Doig 2010; Transport & Travel Research Ltd.and Transport Research Laboratory 2010; van Rooijen and Quak 2010; Holguín- Veras et al. 2011a; Panero and Shin 2011; Quak and Tavasszy 2011; SUGAR 2011; Allen et al. 2012; Holguín-Veras et al. 2012b Table 36. Urban consolidation centers.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 87 Initiative 36: Real-Time Information Systems Description: Real-time information systems (RTIS) are a set of technologies and strategies that can help monitor and manage traffic based on real-time traffic information in terms of (1) road safety, (2) congestion, (3) regulatory compliance, and (4) supply chain information. RTIS rely on a computer system that responds to activities/facts (captured data) generating an immediate response (information to user). RTIS have a direct impact on real-time decision making for freight transportation system users and managers. Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Logistical management: intelligent transportation systems (ITS): real-time information systems (RTIS) Primary objective: Improve logistic operations Expected costs and level of effort to implement: RTIS are based on ITS; they require careful planning to consider the freight movement, road network, and land use in the area. The planning process should involve the engagement of stakeholders and the participation of the government (e.g., DOTs). The costs are mainly those associated with the operational cost of the management system, data collection, analysis, and dissemination. There are different RTIS, ranging from low-cost technology installations (e.g., toll and parking facilities) to large-scale networks of systems (e.g., intermodal facilities). Advantages: Increase efficiency Reduce operational costs Improve reliability Reduce congestion Environmental sustainability Reduce fuel consumption Disadvantages: Require management of data Require real-life traffic information Require very high/high capital investments Examples: In the United States: - The PANYNJ implemented the Freight Information Real-time System for Transport evaluation (FIRST) (U.S. DOT 2003) - The U.S. DOT implemented the Freight Advanced Traveler Information System (FRATIS) in the Los Angeles-Gateway Region, Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas and South Florida (U.S. DOT 2012b; Butler 2013) - Some 65 travel management centers inform motorists of any incidents that occurs on the highway displaying travel time messages on dynamic message signs during non-incident periods (U.S. DOT 2013) - The Washington State DOT uses the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) to obtain real-time travel information, monitoring, and enforcement for commercial vehicles (Washington State Department of Transportation 2012; Washington State Department of Transportation 2014b; Washington State Department of Transportation 2014a) - There are 45 active locations (38 states and 7 metropolitan areas) that use the “511: America's Traveler Information Telephone Number System” to obtain a safer, more reliable, and efficient transportation system (Federal Highway Administration 2014) In Barcelona, Spain, variable message signs (VMS) display real-time access regulations on multi-use lanes (SUGAR 2011) Source: Iowa Department of Transportation 2014 Related alternatives: 1. Vehicle Parking Reservation Systems; 2. Truck Routes; 3. Dynamic Routing; 4. Vertical Height Detection System References: Taniguchi and Thompson 2002; U.S. DOT 2003; Marquez et al. 2004; BESTUFS 2007; CASTLE 2009; Department for Transport 2009; START 2009; C-LIEGE 2010; PIARC 2011; Reynolds 2011; RITA 2011; SUGAR 2011; Ranaiefar 2012; U.S. DOT 2012b; Ben-Akiva et al. 2013; Butler 2013; U.S. DOT 2013; Federal Highway Administration 2014; Iowa Department of Transportation 2014 Table 37. Real-time information systems.

88 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 37: Vertical Height Detection Systems Description: Vertical height detection systems (VHDS) detect over-height trucks moving toward road structures, warning the truck driver to avoid collision with the structure Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Logistical management: intelligent transportation systems (ITS): Vertical height detection systems (VHDS) Primary objective: Reduce damage to structures by over-height vehicles Expected costs and level of effort to implement: VHDS are based on ITS; they require careful planning to consider the freight movement, road network, and land use in the area. The planning process should involve the engagement of stakeholders and the participation of the government (e.g., DOTs). The costs are mainly those associated with the initial capital investments and operational costs. (Some VHDS use solar energy as the power source.) Advantages: Decrease damage to infrastructure Reduce damage to trucks/trailers and occupant injuries Decrease traffic backups due to a reduction of vehicle Collisions with overhead structures Reduce accident claims due to a reduction of truck- overhead structure accidents Automatic notification of incident/violation Disadvantages: Require real-life traffic information Require very high/high capital investments Presence of false positives (e.g., birds) Examples: Over-height vehicle detection on the Blackwall Tunnel, London, England (ITS International 2013) Over-height vehicle detection system at the Duhail Interchange of the Doha Expressway (Qatar) (Traffic Tech Group 2013) Sources: ITS International 2013; Traffic Tech Group 2013 Related alternatives: 1. Vehicle Size and Weight Restrictions; 2. Real-Time Information Systems; 3. Dynamic Routing References: Mattingly 2003; BESTUFS 2007; NZ Transport Agency 2011; SUGAR 2011; ITS International 2013; International Road Dynamics Inc. 2014 Table 38. Vertical height detection systems.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 89 Initiative 38: Dynamic Routing Description: Dynamic routing systems are used by public authorities to enhance safety and prevent violations of access regulations. The private-sector uses are in-vehicle routing as part of a decision-support system to enhance the efficiency of fleet management. Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Logistical management: intelligent transportation systems (ITS): dynamic routing Primary objective: Improve traffic flow/improve efficiency, enhance safety Advantages: Increase efficiency Reduce operational costs Improve reliability Reduce congestion Environmental sustainability Reduce fuel consumption Disadvantages: Require real-life traffic information Require very high/high capital investments Examples: Examples of CVOs for truck guidance and coordination include Berlin, Germany; London, England; and Paris, France (BESTUFS 2007, 27) New York City, United States; Paris, France; and London, England, have successful freight traffic management centers (PIARC 2011) Source: Dong et al. 2004 Related alternatives: 1. Restricted Multi-use Lanes; 2. Traffic Control; 3. Real-Time Information Systems; 4. Vertical Height Detection Systems References: Taniguchi and Thompson 2002; Marquez et al. 2004; BESTUFS 2007; CASTLE 2009; Department for Transport 2009; START 2009; C-LIEGE 2010; PIARC 2011; Reynolds 2011; SUGAR 2011; Ben-Akiva et al. 2013 Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Truck routing and the decision-support system are based on ITS; they require high quality real-time traffic data, information on the road network, and land use in the area. Large benefits can be expected when the guidance system is connected to commercial vehicle operation (CVO) systems to optimize fleet management. The planning process should include extensive stakeholder and government involvement. The costs are mainly those associated with the operational cost of the management system, data collection, analysis, and dissemination. There are different CVOs, ranging from low-cost technology installations to large-scale networks of systems. Table 39. Dynamic routing.

90 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 39: Time-Slotting of Deliveries/Pick-ups at Large Traffic Generators Description: Designed to be used at LTGs, time-slotting of deliveries/pick-ups allows drivers to book their space before arriving to the delivery/pick-up place. Given that LTGs are usually managed by property management firms, managers are responsible for the daily operations of the facilities and they coordinate time slots, depending on the availability of the delivery/pick-up area. Targeted mode: Large traffic generators (LTGs), urban deliveries Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Logistical management: last-mile delivery practices/time-slotting of deliveries/pick-ups for large traffic generators (LTGs) Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Time-slotting of deliveries requires extensive collaboration between receivers, LTG managers, and carriers. Costs are those associated with the platform/technology used to manage the appointments, bays, and spaces. Advantages: Increase efficiency Reduce congestion Improve parking availability Reduce vehicle-miles traveled Environmental sustainability Disadvantages: Low probability for unintended consequences: - Some carriers may claim the booking system would increase their work load Require high/moderate coordination among multiple stakeholders/jurisdictions Require high/moderate capital investments Typical example: Implementation of delivery space booking in Bilbao, Spain (C-LIEGE 2010) Implementation of off-peak gate program at the Port of Vancouver in Canada (Dablanc et al. 2013) Implementation of truck booking and time-slotting at GrainCorp in Australia (Regan and Garrido 2001) Source: Regan and Garrido 2001 Related alternatives: 1. Loading and Parking Restrictions; 2. Timesharing of Parking Spaces; 3. Improved Staging Areas; 4. Nighttime Delivery Bans; 5. Staggered Work Hours Program References: Regan and Garrido 2001; TURBLOG 2009; C-LIEGE 2010; FREILOT 2010; Holguín-Veras et al. 2010; Dablanc et al. 2013 Table 40. Time-slotting of deliveries at large traffic generators.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 91 Initiative 40: Driver Training Programs Description: Programs to improve deliveries by altering driver behaviors and enhancing driver competencies. Drivers’ attitudes and behaviors can directly affect delivery efficiency, energy consumption, environmental impacts, and the safety of all road users. Driver training programs vary according to their specific goals, which may include noise reduction, energy efficiency, or economic driving (also known as eco-driving, which is more environmentally friendly and fuel efficient). Training can include presentations, vehicle checks, driving assessment, driver debriefs, demo drives, and knowledge tests. On completion, participants receive written assessments and certificates. Targeted mode: All traffic Geographic scope: Nation, area Type of initiative: Logistical management: last-mile delivery practices/driver training programs Primary objective: Improve efficiency Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Driver training programs require coordination of public and private sectors; they should have clearly defined goals, professionally trained instructors, well-organized training materials, and a carefully planned certification program. The costs are those associated with developing training sessions, and with the intelligent transportation systems (ITS) required to monitor driver behavior (on-board, on the road). Advantages: Increase efficiency Reduce vehicle-miles traveled Improve load factors Environmental sustainability Reduce fuel consumption Enhance safety Disadvantages: Require moderate capital investments - May require additional systems to be installed on vehicles or on the road network Require moderate coordination among multiple stakeholders/jurisdictions Typical example: Safe and Fuel Efficient Driving (SAFED) training program implemented in Bristol, United Kingdom, as part of the management of operations to reduce mileage and increase load factors (Department for Transport 2007) FREILOT Eco-Driving program, European Union (FREILOT 2010) Sources: FREILOT 2010; Yushimito et al. 2013 Related alternatives: 1. Low Noise Delivery Programs/Regulations; 2. Certification Programs; 3. Anti-Idling Programs References: Department for Transport 2007; C-LIEGE 2010; FREILOT 2010; Goevaers 2011; American Transportation Research Institute 2014 Table 41. Driver training programs.

92 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Source: Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department 2011 Initiative 41: Anti-Idling Programs Description: Programs to reduce the pollution caused by idling truck engines. The most popular anti-idling technologies are fuel-operated coolant heaters, auxiliary power units, and truck stop electrification. Targeted mode: Large trucks Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Logistical management: last-mile delivery practices/anti-idling programs Primary objective: Reduce environmental impacts Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Anti-idling programs will play a more critical role as gas prices and environmental awareness increase. The main costs may be anti-idling technologies and environmental awareness campaigns. The success of these strategies, however, depends on an integrated consideration of regulations, technologies, financial incentives, public education, and an effective coordination between all involved stakeholders. Advantages: Reduce fuel consumption Environmental sustainability Disadvantages: Difficult to implement broadly Require high/moderate capital investments Examples: All six New England states in the United States have anti-idling regulations: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013) Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department (Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department 2011) Related alternatives: 1. Engine-Related Restrictions; 2. Low Emission Zones; 3. Driver Training Programs References: Perrot et al. 2004; Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department 2011; PIARC 2011; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013; American Transportation Research Institute 2014 Table 42. Anti-idling programs.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 93 Initiative 42: Pick-ups/Deliveries to Alternate Destinations Description: Strategies based on a change of pick-up/delivery destinations to either a central pick-up/drop-off point or delivery lockers, instead of to homes. Staffed pick-up/drop-off sites and locker banks are two complementary ways to optimize the final leg of deliveries. Targeted mode: All traffic, large trucks Geographic scope: Area Type of initiative: Logistical management: last-mile delivery practices/pick-ups/deliveries to alternate destinations Primary objective: Reduce failed delivery attempts Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Staffed pick-up/drop-off sites and locker banks can be considered, based on careful examination of specific local conditions. The main costs may be related to security assurance and inventory reorganization. In addition, when staffed, labor costs are involved; for unassisted strategies, such as locker banks, initial investment may be high. Advantages: Reduce operational costs Environmental sustainability Reduce vehicle-miles traveled Increase efficiency Locker banks can be used to replace post offices in rural areas Disadvantages: Low probability for unintended consequences: - May cause security and liability issues - May induce an increase in traffic at/in the vicinity of the area/facility Require economies of scale on the vendor’s side - Require warehouse management and inventory reorganization Require very high/moderate coordination among multiple stakeholders/jurisdictions Examples: Belgium, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, France, Germany (Dortmund and Mainz), the United Kingdom, and Benelux (BESTUFS 2007) FedEx in the United States (Apivatanagul and Regan 2008; FedEx 2010) Source: Downs 2004 Source: Apivatanagul and Regan 2008 Related alternatives: 1. Load Factor Restrictions; 2. Urban Consolidation Centers; 3. Staggered Work Hour Program; 4. Receiver-Led Delivery Consolidation Program References: Siikavirta et al. 2003; BESTUFS 2007; Apivatanagul and Regan 2008; Augereau and Dablanc 2008; FedEx 2010 Table 43. Pick-ups/deliveries to alternate destinations. Table 44 summarizes the planning and design considerations for the eight initiatives listed under logistical management.

Re a l - T i m e I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m s V e r t i c a l H e i g h t D e t e c t i o n S y s t e m s D y n a m i c R o u t i n g T i m e s l o t t i n g o f p i c k - u p s / d e l i v e r i e s D r i v e r t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m s A n t i - i d l i n g p r o g r a m s P i c k - u p / d e l i v e r y t o a l t e r n a t e l o c a t i o n s 1 s there enough right-of-way available to complete the project? 2 3 ow will this project be funded? 4 5 6 7 8 9 I Will other projects be required to fully complete the project? H What is the anticipated duration of the project/policy? What is the geographic scope of the project? Where is it located? What is the desired size/capacity/connectivity? Will the use of policy/project be mandatory or voluntary? Is there any incentive for participation (or penalties for not)? 10 What is the level of incentives? 11 What is the level of price(s)/fine(s)? 12 How will the policy/project be enforced? 13 What is the target group? 14 What are the criteria for participation? 15 Which agency will lead? 16 What are the resources needed to operate the project? 17 What permits are required to initiate/complete the project? 18 Who are the stakeholders? 19 Should the private sector be engaged? If so, how? 20 Is there a need to engage and coordinate with public agencies? How? 21 Is there a risk of the technology/project becoming obsolete? 22 Could benefits be provided to community or pedestrians? 23 Are there any safety/security issues that should be resolved? Risk management and integration with other transportation policies Operational considerations LOGISTICAL MANAGEMENT Last-Mile Delivery Practices U r b a n c o n s o l i d a t i o n c e n t e r s Planning considerations Stakeholder engagement Questions Intelligent Transportation Systems Table 44. Planning and design considerations for logistical management initiatives.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 95 Freight Demand/Land Use Management Negative externalities produced by truck traffic are addressed in these strategies by modifying the underlying demand as opposed to modifying the logistical activities or the vehicle traffic. Two families of strategies are considered: the first seeks to modify the nature of freight demand; the second focuses on land use. Demand Management Initiative 43: Voluntary Off-Hour Delivery Programs To reduce congestion and pollution during daytime hours, this program induces a shift to deliveries made during the off hours (7:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.) by providing incentives to receivers for their commitment to accept off-hour deliveries (OHD). This concept is fundamentally dif- ferent from pricing and regulation strategies. First, its voluntary nature guarantees an increase in economic welfare simply because those businesses that decide to do OHD do so only if it benefits them. Second, it focuses on the receivers as the key decision makers. It could be argued that a congestion charge to receivers would also be effective (as in the PierPASS Program in California’s Alameda Corridor), but there are substantial differences in political acceptability. Whereas the receiver congestion charge is bound to provoke stiff opposi- tion from the business sector, the use of incentives as part of a voluntary participation program will likely engender substantial business support, as the New York City experience clearly dem- onstrated. The central element of the New York City OHD program is the use of incentives to convince receivers to accept OHD. Once the participation of receivers is secured—given that receivers are the ones who might initially oppose the program—the support of suppliers will be forthcoming because they stand to gain from the lower costs of OHD. Financial incentives are needed to overcome the market failure that prevents the urban freight system from reaching its most efficient outcome: OHD. Due to the potentially large reductions in truck travel during regular hours, OHD has been used very effectively as a demand management measure for special events, during which crippling congestion could lead to a paralysis of business activity. OHD was identified as one of the key factors in the success of the Games of the XXX Olympiad (2012 Summer Olympics) in London, England, where urban congestion was kept at a manageable level (Hendy 2012). OHD has been the subject of significant research on the effectiveness of incentives and pricing in changing behavior (Holguín-Veras et al. 2007; Holguín-Veras et al. 2008b); the necessary conditions for OHD and pricing to succeed; formulations to estimate participation in OHD; market conditions that limit the effectiveness of freight road pricing (Holguín-Veras 2011); and the impacts of the pilot test conducted in New York City (Holguín-Veras et al. 2011b). The pilot revealed that the provision of a one-time-incentive could lead receivers to agree to receive unassisted OHD. Essentially, for some receivers, there is no need for an ongoing incentive, making it easier for the public sector to implement OHD. Moreover, the research indicates that a willingness to accept unassisted OHD can be influenced by a variety of factors, including the one-time incentive, carrier discount, business support, public recognition, and the avail- ability of trusted vendors (Holguín Veras et al. 2013c). An interesting concept worthy of further study is a self-supported freight demand management system that uses the revenues raised by a small toll surcharge to finance an unassisted OHD program, and other freight-specific enhancements (Holguín-Veras and Aros-Vera 2013). Table 45 summarizes essential charac- teristics of Initiative 43.

96 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Off-Hour Deliveries in New York City The New York City Off-Hour Delivery (OHD) program is an example of freight demand management, an emerging field that endeavors to increase the sustainability of freight activity by modifying the nature of the demand that generates freight vehicle traffic. The OHD project has been implemented through collaboration between the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) and the New York City DOT. Freight carriers travel during congested hours (slower trips, higher costs, parking fines, etc.) only because their customers (the receivers of the supplies) demand it. The OHD program exploits this fact by inducing receivers to accept deliveries during the off hours (7:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.). Incentives were offered to receivers in exchange for their commitment to accept OHD. A proactive voluntary program, OHD leads to a range of beneficial impacts for congested urban environ- ments: reduced congestion and air pollution; increased economic productivity; and enhanced sustainability and quality of life, with fewer conflicts between freight traffic and passenger vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. The New York City OHD project has gained the support of the private sector, which is cooperating in its implementation. Leading partners include: the Manhattan Chamber of Commerce, New York State Motor Truck Association, New Jersey Motor Truck Association, SYSCO, Whole Foods, Wakefern, Duane Reade, the Waldorf- Astoria, Beverage Works, and others. More than 200 New York City companies have switched to OHD. The project has wide ranging potential impacts on the economy, environment, and quality of life in urban areas. OHD’s focus is on urban deliveries, which dwarf all other freight trips; deliveries to restaurants in Manhattan alone attract and produce more daily truck trips than do deliveries to the combined Ports of New York and New Jersey. It has been estimated that the New York City OHD program has produced economic savings of $100–$200 million per year to carriers, shippers, and receivers. Given that it could influence large numbers of deliveries, the program could lead to reductions of: 202.7 metric tons (t) per year of carbon monoxide; 40 t/year of hydrocarbons; 11.8 t/year of nitrogen oxide; and 69.9 kg/year of particulate matter (Holguín-Veras et al. 2011b). By removing the interferences produced by freight deliveries, OHD programs could facilitate the implementation of other sustainability initiatives, such as bus rapid transit systems, bike lanes, and enhanced pedestrian walkways that also need curb space. Most of all, the OHD project has dramatically confirmed the potential of public-private sector and academic cooperation in solving urban congestion. Consider two sets of estimates: The first set of estimates represents the conges- tion and pollution savings accrued by all regular-hour travelers as a result of switching freight deliveries to the off hours. The savings were estimated using the Best Practice Model (the federally approved transportation network model used by the New York City area’s MPO). The second set of estimates represents the pollution impacts accrued by the OHD trucks when they travel in lighter traf- fic. Together, these estimates provide complementary views of the program’s congestion and pollution impacts. 1. Congestion and Pollution Savings Accrued by Regular-Hour Travelers: Different levels of pollution savings were estimated based on the percentage

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 97 of deliveries shifted to the off hours. For example, if 20.9% of the deliveries in Manhattan were shifted to the off hours, each receiver would be responsible for a reduction of about 551 vehicle-miles traveled, and 195 vehicle-hours traveled, and a reduction in CO of 12 kg. One could obtain an estimate of total congestion and pollution savings by multiplying these numbers by the number of receivers accepting OHD. 2. Pollution Savings Accrued by OHD Trucks: Using GPS data collected from the participating companies, the team computed fuel consumption and emissions using the Comprehensive Modal Emission Model (CMEM) (California Depart- ment of Transportation; De Jong 2009; Lloret-Batlle and Combes 2013). The re- sults shown here correspond to three key segments of the network that were used in both regular deliveries and OHD. Given the second-by-second speed profiles, the fuel consumption rate and emissions rates (in terms of CO2, CO, HC, NOx) are estimated by CMEM. The emissions results were tabulated for both fuel consumption and emissions. Total emission reductions and emission reductions per receiver per year are shown in Figure 7. The “difference” row in the two tables shows the improvement of the two measures for off hours versus regular hours. (Negative values indicate reductions.) It was also found that the average fuel consumption rate and total emission rate during the off hours were significantly lower than the rates during regular hours for the same segment. The exception was the fuel consumption for a particular highway segment that seemed to be anomalous. The differences were gener- ally larger than 20% for highway and toll road segments, and larger than 50% for urban arterial road segments, because: (1) traffic is generally much smoother during off hours than regular hours, leading to reduced fuel consumption and emissions for off-hour deliveries; and (2) for toll roads and urban arterials, such a smoothing effect is more significant (e.g., vehicles stop less frequently at toll booths or signals), leading to more dramatic reductions of fuel consumption and emissions. The results confirmed that OHD do help reduce fuel consumption and emissions during urban freight activities. Off-Hour Deliveries in New York City (Continued) Average fuel consumption rates. Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Off-hours 823.8 467.6 695.3 699.6 905.9 811.8 601.1 1259.3 675.7 Regular hours 801.8 752.3 1051.5 1251.5 1127.1 1143.4 2417.6 7109.6 2642.8 Difference +2.7% -37.80% -33.90% -44.10% -19.60% -29.00% -75.10% -82.30% -74.40% Average Fuel Consumption Rate (FR) Highway (grams/mile) Toll Road (grams/mile) Manhattan (grams/mile) Average CO2 emission rates. Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Off-hours 2566.2 1496.2 2225.4 2232.4 2899.6 2286.8 1921.5 4028.8 2160.5 Regular hours 2636.8 2408 3365.9 4006.4 3607.9 3660 7747.8 7036.3 8458.7 Difference -2.70% -37.90% -33.90% -44.30% -19.60% -37.50% -75.20% -42.70% -74.50% Manhattan (grams/mile)Average CO2 Emission Rate (ERCO2) Highway (grams/mile) Toll Road (grams/mile) Figure 7. New York City OHD program fuel consumption and emission results. (continued on next page)

98 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Projected Financial Impacts on Carriers Based on the research, one could estimate that for every delivery tour that switched from regular to the off hours, carriers save on average $212.50 per day or $42,500/year/OHD-tour (assuming 200 days/year). The parking fines in New York City average about $750/truck-month. Because it is easier for truckers to find legal parking spaces near their delivery locations during off hours, every OHD route that replaces a regular-hour route saves about $9,000/year/OHD-tour in parking fines. Essentially, the total savings to carriers amounts to about $51,500/year/ OHD-tour. It is estimated that approximately 40–50 daily delivery tours in Manhattan have been switched to the off hours, equaling a total savings to all participating carriers of over $2,250,000 per year. The New York City OHD program is sustainable on all fronts. Economically, by removing the market failure (the receivers’ reluctance to accept OHD) that restricts OHD from taking place naturally, the program allows entire supply chains to switch to their most efficient outcome. The ensuing increases in productivity enhance the economic competitiveness of congested urban areas, reducing the cost of doing business for both the receivers and the carriers. The program allows for lasting, sustainable economic shifts through entire supply chains, and the resultant potential for realizing sustainability goals. The OHD program is a win-win solution that benefits carriers, receivers, and urban communities at all hours, enhancing quality of life, economic development, and environmental sustainability. Off-Hour Deliveries in New York City (Continued) Initiative 44: Staggered Work Hours Programs In passenger transport, there is a long history of staggered work-hour programs, which were originally intended to redistribute workers’ demand for public transportation. Such programs were considered as early as the 1920s. Formal experiments started in the 1950s, with interest increasing in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, though their use has declined since then. A similar concept can be applied to freight demand management by staggering receivers’ delivery hours, which could lead to reductions in truck traffic during peak periods. However, this idea has not yet been pilot tested. Table 46 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 44. Initiative 45: Receiver-Led Delivery Consolidation Programs Delivery consolidation is closely related, yet subtly different from UCCs, as it does not require the use of terminals. The deliveries are often consolidated at one of the shippers’ facilities rather than at a consolidation center (Nemoto 1997). At the receiver’s request, one supplier delivers its goods to another supplier, and has the latter make the final delivery to their common customer. Instead of shipping goods separately to their customers, suppliers combine their delivery services and make consolidated shipments. Such practices have been implemented by Transport for London in the form of delivery servicing plans by which LTGs, and receivers in general, assess their delivery patterns to identify areas that can be improved to mitigate impacts of those deliveries on traffic and the city (Transport for London 2013a). Other improvements, such as consolidating purchases to reduce the number of vendors and independent deliveries and delivery time changes to mitigate impacts on peak traffic, could also be considered.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 99 The lower the number of deliveries received, the more productive the business becomes with- out damaging profitability. A pilot test in London led to a reduction of 20% in the total number of deliveries made to a building (Transport for London 2013c). From the receiver’s perspective, such a practice helps save time spent receiving goods, and it minimizes interruptions to business. From the suppliers’ perspective, it increases truck load factors, and it reduces the number of deliveries and their costs. This combination of benefits could lead to a win-win solution. Table 47 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 45. Initiative 46: Mode Shift Programs The aim of a mode shift program is to encourage the use of alternative modes to reduce the number of trucks in the city center. Although appealing to many, this initiative faces major obstacles in urban areas, where finding modal alternatives that effectively compete with trucks is seldom possible. However, some pilot tests and small implementations suggest that it is possible to induce small changes to mode shifts in niche markets, where conditions allow. The Petite Reine UCC in Rouen, France, which uses electrically assisted tricycles for deliveries, is a successful demonstration project. Truck drivers unload their parcels at the special delivery areas, and the parcels are then loaded onto “cargocycles” for last-leg delivery (SUGAR 2011). Another example of a mode shift program is the Cargotram in Zurich, Switzerland. A tramway is used to collect goods, such as bulky waste and electronic equipment, which are then forwarded to a waste collection center in the suburbs (SUGAR 2011). In the United States, New York City is evaluating the feasibility of using freight-tricycles as part of the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points certified supply chain (Kamga and Conway 2012). Table 48 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 46. Land Use Policy The spatial concentration and distribution of economic activities that produce and consume freight—often called “land use” by economists—play a large role in freight-trip generation. This is a very important and frequently overlooked fact. Although LTGs, such as marine ports and truck terminals, frequently are considered the key traffic generators, most urban truck traffic is produced by small establishments in the food and retail sectors. For example, in New York City, the roughly 6,800 restaurant and drinking establishments in Manhattan produce more truck traffic than do the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey—though hardly anyone would list such establishments as being among the top producers of congestion (Jaller et al. 2013). Moreover, more than half of the industry sectors that produce and consume freight in conjunc- tion with their primary activities have constant freight-trip generation that does not depend on business size (Woudsma 2001; Holguín-Veras et al. 2012a). Thus, in proportion to size, small establishments generate proportionally more traffic than large ones. These effects, which are only now beginning to be understood, could have major implications on Smart Growth and other emerging concepts like Complete Streets. These important interconnections have not yet been studied in depth. Initiative 47: Relocation of Large Traffic Generators In considering the relocation of LTGs to improve traffic conditions, misconceptions abound and the potential for unintended effects is very high. Although it is natural for local communities in close proximity to a LTG to want it relocated because of the externalities it produces, experience suggests that careful consideration should be given to the potential unintended impacts of this initiative. New York City, where port activity was left to wither in the 1950s, offers a dramatic example, given that the demise of the port on the New York City side, along with the development of the

100 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide port on the New Jersey side, led to massive amounts of cargo destined for New York City being unloaded in New Jersey. From there, this cargo must be trucked over a handful of congested bridges and tunnels to its final destinations in New York City. Over the decades, the cost of the additional congestion produced by this traffic is likely to reach tens of billions of dollars. In essence, the disappearance of the New York City port opened the door to urban redevelopment, though at a monumental cost to the regional economy in terms of congestion and pollution. During the last several decades, because of land costs, regulations, and traffic conditions, many cities have experienced logistics sprawl. For example, Dablanc and Rakotonarivo mapped the locations of the 17 largest companies that provided parcel and express transport service to the city of Paris, France, between 1974 and 2008 (Dablanc and Rakotonarivo 2010). Over those 35 years the companies’ freight terminals moved, first from the urban core to the inner sub- urban ring, and later to the greater metropolitan area. On average, these terminals have moved about 6 miles away from the city center. As a consequence of the additional distance traveled, more than 13,000 tons of carbon dioxide are generated every year (Dablanc and Rakotonarivo 2010; Dablanc 2013). Another example is the relocation of the South Water Produce Market in Chicago, Illinois, to the Chicago International Produce Market. The original market was con- structed when horse-drawn vehicles brought the produce to market, and evolved as trucks were introduced. Over time, as the trucks grew in size, the efficiency of the market declined. In an effort to improve conditions, the market was relocated to a brand-new, more spacious facility that could manage the freight-vehicle traffic in the zone more comfortably (Chicago Produce Market n.d.). The relocation has been successful in that the efficiency of the trucks has been improved, but some negative consequences also have been observed, such as an unexpected growth in the market because retailers have been able to expand their operations beyond what they had established at the South Water Produce Market location. Table 49 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 47. Initiative 48: Integrating Freight into the Land Use Planning Process A proactive approach is to incorporate the consideration of freight in the urban land use planning process. To achieve this, it is first important to understand the sources of conflict between freight and other land uses based on which strategies enabling compatible development can be selected. NCFRP Report 13: Freight Facility Location Selection: A Guide for Public Officials, NCFRP Report 16: Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes, and NCFRP Report 24: Smart Growth and Urban Goods Movement can all provide helpful guidelines for agencies to achieve the integrated planning (Steele et al. 2011; Christensen Associates et al. 2012; Bassok et al. 2013). Some local authorities have already put this initiative into practice successfully. For example, the Chicago DOT accommodates site expansion associated with a rail terminal into city planning, and takes proactive measures to coordinate surrounding land use and the freight infrastructure. Table 50 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 48.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 101 Initiative 43: Voluntary Off-Hour Delivery Programs Description: Programs that produce a shift of deliveries from regular hours (6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) to off hours (7:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.). As opposed to pricing and regulation schemes, this travel demand management initiative targets receivers as the key decision makers, seeking to convince them to accept deliveries during the less congested off hours through the use of incentives. Targeted mode: Urban deliveries, large traffic generators (LTGs) Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Freight demand management: volun- tary off-hour deliveries (OHD) program Primary objective: Reduce congestion and pollution Expected costs and level of effort to implement: OHD programs require raising funds to provide incentives to receivers. Potential exists to implement a self-supported freight demand management system that uses the revenues raised by a small toll surcharge to finance the incentives. The implementation of the program—whether self-supported or not—requires a multi-layered, multi-stakeholder, collaborative approach to gain substantial business support and to accomplish a large shift to off hours. Advantages: Reduce congestion Increase efficiency Environmental sustainability Improve reliability Enhance livability Disadvantages: Low probability for unintended consequences: - May increase perceived noise impact - Increase operational costs Require fundraising to provide the incentives Require very high/high coordination among multiple stakeholders/jurisdictions Examples: The City of New York OHD Program, New York, New York, United States (Holguín Veras et al. 2013b; Holguín Veras et al. 2014) Source: Glaeser 2011 Related alternatives: 1. Low Noise Delivery Programs/Regulations; 2. Daytime Delivery Restrictions; 3. Daytime Delivery Bans; 4. Recognition Programs; 5. Certification Programs References: Dessau, 1892; Churchill 1970; Ancient Worlds 2003; Holguín-Veras et al. 2005; Holguín-Veras et al. 2006a; Holguín-Veras et al. 2007; Holguín-Veras 2008; Holguín-Veras et al. 2008b; NICHES 2008; Silas and Holguín-Veras 2009; Brom et al. 2011; City of New York 2011; Federal Highway Administration 2012a; Hendy 2012; Silas et al. 2012; Holguín Veras et al. 2013c Table 45. Voluntary off-hour delivery programs.

102 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 44: Staggered Work Hours Programs Description: Programs to diminish truck demand during peak periods by distributing the receiving hours throughout the day. This initiative targets receivers as the key decision makers and seeks to convince them to spread out the reception of deliveries. Targeted mode: Urban deliveries, large traffic generators Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Freight demand management: staggered work hours program Primary objective: Improve delivery efficiency Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Staggered work hours programs involve the engagement and collaboration of multiple stakeholders. Business support is key to accomplishing the main goal of smoothing congestion during peak hours. Advantages: Reduce congestion Environmental sustainability - Reduce noise emissions Increase efficiency Improve reliability Low to moderate implementation costs Disadvantages: Require very high/high coordination among multiple stakeholders/jurisdictions - May require the inclusion of incentives to convince businesses to participate Typical example: The initiative has not been tested or implemented in any projects. Related alternatives: 1. Peak-Hour Clearways; 2. Daytime Delivery Restrictions; 3. Time-Slotting of Pick-ups and Deliveries at Large Traffic Generators; 4. Pick Up/Delivery to Alternate Locations References: O’Malley and Selinger 1973; Maric 1978 Table 46. Staggered work hours programs.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 103 Initiative 45: Receiver-Led Delivery Consolidation Programs Targeted mode: Large traffic generators Geographic scope: Area Type of initiative: Freight demand management: delivery consolidation program Primary objective: Improve load factors Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The planning process should involve extensive stakeholder engagement. Business support is the cornerstone for the implementation of this policy, and complementary strategies (e.g., additional parking spaces) can also catalyze implementation. Advantages: Improve load factors Reduce congestion Reduce vehicle-miles traveled Environmental sustainability Low to moderate implementation costs Disadvantages: Low probability for unintended consequences: - May increase operational costs Require high/moderate coordination among multiple stakeholders/jurisdictions Lack a firm financial base Examples: Tenjin, a central business district in Fukuoka, Japan (Nemoto 1997) Delivery & Servicing Plans, London, England (Transport for London 2013a) Source: Transport for London 2013a Related alternatives: 1. Recognition Programs; 2. Pick-ups/Deliveries to Alternate Locations; 3. Mode Shift Programs References: Nemoto 1997; Transport for London 2013a Description: Efforts initiated by receivers or shippers to consolidate their deliveries. Delivery consolidation or delivery bundling programs often take place at one of the shippers’ facilities rather than at a facility provided by the public sector (as opposed to a UCC). This initiative aims to increase the productivity and cost-efficiency of deliveries. Given that its successful implementation requires the commitment of all the agents involved, it is more effective when suppliers for the same receiver are located in close proximity to each other. Table 47. Receiver-led delivery consolidation programs.

104 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 46: Mode Shift Programs Description: A shift of cargo flows from road to intermodal transport, using a combination of road and short sea shipping, inland waterways, rail, or tricycles Targeted mode: Urban deliveries Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Freight demand management: mode shift program Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: Mode shift programs require the management and facilitation of information access and exchange among large, small, public, and private stakeholders across all business sectors and transport modes. Public-sector capital investments are required to provide sufficient facilities to support flexible mul- timodal transport. Depending of the scope of the program, the implementation cost could be moderate to high. Advantages: Energy savings Reduce congestion Reduce fuel consumption Environmental sustainability Enhance safety Facilitate multimodal freight Particularly appropriate for heavy and non- perishable goods Disadvantages: Low probability for unintended consequences: - May increase operational costs Require specific city and regional conditions - Require integration of freight deliveries with current transportation system - Only feasible where additional modes are present Require very high/high coordination among multiple stakeholders/jurisdictions - Require incentives to foster a mode shift Examples: B-Line Sustainable Urban Delivery, Portland, Oregon, United States Freight-Tricycle Operations in New York City, United States (Kamga and Conway 2012) “Cargo cycles”—electrically powered tricycles with a container implemented by La Petite Reine in Paris, France (TURBLOG 2009; C-LIEGE 2010) “MOVEBYBiKE” in Göteborg, Sweden Urban rail used by Monoprix in Paris, France, to distribute their goods to the stores (C-LIEGE 2010) Public transit used to move cargo: Greyhound Courier Express, Canada and United States; Matkahuolto, Finland; ic:kurier, Germany; A Way Express, Canada; Dabbawalas, India; CarGo Tram, Germany; Cargotram, Switzerland; Guterbim, Austria; Tramfret, Paris (Vert chez vous), France; City Cargo, The Netherlands; Garbage Subways, USA; San Diego Imperial Valley Railroad, USA (Cochrane 2012) Sources: (Kamga and Conway 2012) Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE Source: Cochrane 2012 Related alternatives: 1. Vehicle Size and Weight Restrictions; 2. Urban Consolidation Centers; 3. Receiver-Led Delivery Consolidation Program References: MOSES 2001; C-LIEGE 2010; SUGAR 2011; Cochrane 2012; Kamga and Conway 2012 Table 48. Mode shift programs.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 105 Initiative 47: Relocation of Large Traffic Generators optimize the overall functioning of the urban freight system. LTGs are specific facilities that house a significant number of businesses that collectively receive a large number of daily deliveries, such as airports, ports, container terminals, government offices, colleges and universities, hospitals, and large buildings. Targeted mode: Large traffic generators Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Freight demand management: relocation of large traffic generators Primary objective: Reduce congestion Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The implementation of this program requires a multi-layered, multi- stakeholder collaborative approach to gain substantial business support. The policy may be easily accepted because the cost (e.g., land cost) of locating big companies outside of the city is less than at city center. However, to implement, public incentives or other taxation strategies may be needed. Besides the relocation costs, LTGs must allocate areas for parking and loading/unloading zones. Advantages: Reduce congestion Reduce operational costs Less cost in terms of land use Reduce curbside occupation time Disadvantages: Very high/high probability for unintended consequences: - Environmental impacts associated with new construction - Induce urban sprawl Land regulations may not allow for LTG relocation May require developing incentive or other taxation policies Examples: Belo Horizonte, Brazil (TURBLOG 2009) Paris, France (C-LIEGE 2010) Relocation of the South Water Produce Market to the Chicago International Produce Market in Chicago, Illinois, United States Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE Related alternatives: 1. Freight Cluster Development (Freight Village); 2. Truck Routes; 3. Taxation; 4. Urban Consolidation Centers References: Woudsma 2001; Smart Growth Network and ICMA 2002; TURBLOG 2009; C-LIEGE 2010; Dablanc and Rakotonarivo 2010; Jaller et al. 2013 Description: Moving large traffic generators (LTGs) to proper locations to change the pattern of freight generation and Table 49. Relocation of large traffic generators.

106 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 48: Integrating Freight into the Land Use Planning Process Description: Incorporate freight consideration in the land use planning process to timely identify the sources of con- flict between freight and some land uses. Targeted mode: Urban deliveries Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Freight demand management: integrating freight into land use planning process Primary objective: Reduce congestion, enhance safety, improve delivery efficiency Advantages: Improve urban planning Enhance livability Reduce unintended consequences Reduce congestion Disadvantages: Require moderate/high coordination among multiple stakeholders/jurisdictions Examples: Chicago DOT included in the city planning the implications of expanding a rail terminal Chicago’s designated industrial corridors and planned manufacturing districts Related alternatives: 1. Freight Cluster Development (Freight Village); 2. Enhanced Building Codes; 3. Truck Stops/Parking Outside of Metropolitan Area; 4. Urban Consolidation Centers References: Steele et al. 2011; Christensen Associates et al. 2012; Hartshorn and Lamm 2012; Bassok et al. 2013 Source: Hartshorn and Lamm 2012; original from city of Chicago Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The implementation of this initiative requires a multi-layered, multi-stakeholder collaborative approach and cooperation among different public agencies. Table 50. Integrating freight into the land use planning process. Table 51 summarizes the planning and design considerations for the six initiatives listed under freight demand/land use management.

Vo l u n t a r y o f f - h o u r d e l i v e r y p r o g r a m s S t a g g e r e d w o r k h o u r s p r o g r a m s R e c e i v e r - l e d d e l i v e r y c o n s o l i d a t i o n M o d e s h i f t p r o g r a m s L a n d u s e p o l i c y R e l o c a t i o n o f l a r g e t r a f f i c g e n e r a t o r s I n t e g r a t i n g F r e i g h t i n t o L a n d U s e P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s 1 Is there enough right-of-way available to complete the project? 2 Will other projects be required to fully complete the project? 3 How will this project be funded? 4 What is the anticipated duration of the project/policy? 5 What is the geographic scope of the project? 6 Where is it located? 7 What is the desired size/capacity/connectivity? 8 Will the use of policy/project be mandatory or voluntary? 9 Is there any incentive for participation (or penalties for not)? 10 What is the level of incentives? 11 What is the level of price(s)/fine(s)? 12 How will the policy/project be enforced? 13 What is the target group? 14 What are the criteria for participation? 15 Which agency will lead? 16 What are the resources needed to operate the project? 17 What permits are required to initiate/complete the project? 18 Who are the stakeholders? 19 Should the private sector be engaged? If so, how? 20 Is there a need to engage and coordinate with public agencies? How? 21 Is there a risk of the technology/project becoming obsolete? 22 Could benefits be provided to community or pedestrians? 23 Are there any safety/security issues that should be resolved? Risk management and integration with other transportation policies FREIGHT DEMAND/LAND USE MANAGEMENT Planning considerations Operational considerations Stakeholder engagement Questions Table 51. Planning and design considerations for freight demand/land use management initiatives.

108 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Stakeholder Engagement Increasing the understanding of freight issues among public-sector and agency leader- ship, and outreach to the private sector, are the critical defining tenets of effective stakeholder engagement. The public sector cannot address freight issues without understanding the under- lying phenomena involved. Often, policy decisions relating to zoning, urban design concepts, parking regulations, and restrictions on truck routes can result in unintended problems (Jones et al. 2009). Effective engagement of the private sector requires creating mechanisms to discuss freight issues with the private sector and with communities to identify potential solutions, establish the roles of the various stakeholders, and secure commitments to a strategy of improvements. The reader is referred to A Guidebook for Engaging the Private Sector in Freight Transportation Planning (Wilbur Smith Associates and S. R. Kale Consulting 2009) for further reading about mechanisms for engaging the private sector in freight transportation planning. Multiple ways are available to accomplish these goals; the initiatives listed in this section offer a useful starting point (Holguín Veras et al. 2013b). Initiative 49: Designate a “Freight Person” at Key Agencies Having a designated “freight person” in place will likely significantly impact outreach efforts because, in time, this individual will become the focal point of communications between the public and private sectors. In addition to training in transportation planning, this person should have a basic background in urban design concepts, logistics, and most importantly, in commu- nications skills. As is often done for other focal positions, establishing procedures to identify and prepare a successor should the designated freight person leave the agency can help ensure that institutional history and connections are not lost in the transition. Table 52 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 49. Initiative 50: Create a Freight Advisory Committee The freight advisory committee (FAC) will ideally become the forum for discussion of freight issues, where critical input is provided and received. As trust is developed, the relationship between the public and private sectors will improve, and this will facilitate implementation of novel solutions. It is good practice to complement FAC input with targeted outreach efforts to ensure that the public sector receives feedback from all segments of the industry. Table 53 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 50. Initiative 51: Educate Elected Officials About Freight Members of the FAC and freight staff are in an excellent position to educate elected and appointed officials about freight. The goal of this initiative is not to train the officials in freight planning; rather, it is to create an overall understanding of the importance of freight to their metropolitan areas and how they might contribute to enhancing system performance. Several MPOs (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Columbus, Ohio; and Seattle, Washington, to name a few) have succeeded at this by holding site visits, at which officials can see with their own eyes how important freight is to their region. Educational tools and presentations also can be useful. Table 54 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 51. Initiative 52: Create a Technical Advisory Committee A technical advisory committee (TAC) is a forum at which the public-sector staff at the various agencies with jurisdiction on subjects that impact freight activity meet to discuss freight

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 109 Community Engagement Several years ago in a suburban town near Albany, New York, the county government designed a project to reconstruct County Route (CR) 52 (Cherry Ave./ Elm Ave.). CR-52 is a 2-lane suburban road with residential development on both sides of its entire length. During the public meetings for the project, the resi- dents who lived along CR-52 complained strongly about the large trucks using CR-52 to travel across town between the Selkirk Rail Yards in the southeastern section and the intersection of I-87 and I-90 in the northwest section. Large car carriers (empty and full) and other tractor-trailer units would travel the road at all times of day and night. The residents complained about the noise (trucks hitting potholes, bumps, sewer grates, and manhole covers; down-shifting, etc.) and the safety impacts (truck conflicts with school children, children riding bikes, and senior drivers). Because CR-52 is a state-designated truck route, however, trucks could not be prohibited from using it. As a result of the public meetings and stakeholder engagement, town and county officials met with the trucking companies located near the Selkirk Rail Yards. Some of these companies did not even realize that their drivers were traveling CR-52. Because of these discussions, the company owners agreed to re-route their trucks onto State Route 32 (the Delmar Bypass), and then onto the intersection of I-87 and I-90 in downtown Albany, completely avoiding CR-52 and the residents alongside it. Before the road reconstruction project—and its stakeholder engagement process— it was normal to see large trucks using CR-52 throughout the day. Today, it is a rare occurrence. This change has been successful for both the community and the truckers. Freight Advisory Committee The Capital District Transportation Committee (CDTC) is the MPO for the Albany, New York, region, and the FAC is made up of a wide variety of freight stakeholders. At one recent FAC meeting, a representative of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association complained about parking and access for trucks in the area around I-90 (the New York State Thruway) Exit 25A (see Figure 8). This area, just southeast of Albany, has a successful truck stop and several freight generators, including the Rotterdam Industrial Park and the Golub Distribution Center (a large grocery distribution center). The local highways in this area are narrow with very tight turning radii, and company owners do not allow trucks to park on their property while waiting for their delivery time. As a result, very few parking options are available for these trucks. After this meeting, CDTC began working with several area municipalities to conduct a study to determine strategies to improve truck access and parking. As part of the study, CDTC plans to discuss these issues with local stakeholders, state and local road owners, and company owners to find the optimal solutions. (continued on next page)

110 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide policy. Having such a forum is important in complex metropolitan areas, where the need for coherent public-sector coordination is the highest. Table 55 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 52. Initiative 53: Create a Freight Quality Partnership A freight quality partnership (FQP) creates an environment that fosters formal working relation- ships between private-sector and public-sector groups with the specific intent of implementing practices that ameliorate the negative impacts of freight activity (Department for Transport 2010a). The earliest use of the term is from work in the UK by the Freight Transport Association (FTA) in 1996. Public-private partnerships to tackle freight problems have been growing in recent years, and there are now some very good examples in Europe, North and South America, and Japan. The development of FQPs has been most pronounced in Europe; the examples presented in the text boxes in this section have been drawn from there (Lindholm and Browne 2013). For implementations in the United States, please refer to Case Studies 3, 4, 8, and 9 in Section 3. Table 56 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 53. Source: CDTC Community Engagement (Continued) Figure 8. Area map of truck routes.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 111 London, England The Central London Freight Quality Partnership (CLFQP) is a partnership between local governments (the seven boroughs of Central London: the City of London, Westminster, Camden, Islington, Southwark, Kensington and Chelsea, and Lambeth); local businesses; the freight industry; and others with an interest in freight issues within Central London. The aims of the partnership are to develop an under- standing of freight transport problems and to develop constructive solutions. The partnership was initiated in 2005 after a recommendation from a public-private collaboration. Membership is free of charge and has no formal responsibility or mission from the local or national government. The CLFQP has ordinary meetings four times per year, plus four to five meetings regarding special issues. The meetings are open to anyone with an interest. Normally, attendance is about 20–25 people, divided more or less equally among public-sector and private-sector participants. After each ordinary partnership meeting there is a steering group meeting. The steering group consists of 12 people: six from the boroughs and six key stakeholders from industry. (One borough participates in the partnership but chose not to be represented on the steering group.) The partnership and the steering group are managed and chaired by the University of Westminster. FQPs in London, including the Central London partnership, were initially funded by Transport for London (TfL), but TfL funding ceased in 2011. Since then, fund- ing has been replaced by a mix of support from the public and private sectors. Operating costs are low, and the FQPs are seen as a good way to ensure an exchange of information and ideas regarding freight transport initiatives in Central London. The members of the partnership welcome the opportunity to interact and exchange information with other stakeholders, and the regular meetings make this possible. The authorities and the different stakeholder groups cite the opportunity to discuss problems and possibilities with others as the main reason for attending the meetings. According to the participants, the most important outputs from the meetings have been specific projects, such as: a loading and unloading code of practice, reduction in penalty charges for loading offences, and an electric vehicle charging point initiative (Lindholm and Browne 2013).

112 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Göteborg, Sweden Göteborg introduced a local freight network during the EU START project (2005–2009). This freight partnership continued after the START project ended, and now has three meetings every year with about 20 to 25 participants rep- resenting a range of stakeholder groups: trade associations in the inner city, large shopping centers, a variety of transport operators and haulers, commercial property landlords, a transport association, university, the vehicle industry, and civil servants from the traffic and public transport authority, the city planning authority, and the department of exemptions and permissions. Stakeholders have shown ample interest and support for the partnership. The chairman of the partnership puts a lot of effort into making the group work, focusing on collaboration and cooperation. Because participation is voluntary, it is acknowledged that there must be good reasons for people to give up their time to attend. The meetings are well organized and well run, so participants can count on them to be productive. It is estimated that the total time required to organize and chair the meetings represents about 10% of a full-time post. An important benefit of the partnership for the city authority is that such involve- ment and cooperation with stakeholders—particularly those from the private sector—is essential to achieving higher-level strategic objectives (for example, complex access considerations for a pedestrianized zone). Other key outcomes of Göteborg’s partnership approach include a better exchange of information between participants, and an increased understanding of each other’s issues. Concrete effects of the partnership have been a higher level of successful enforce- ment of regulations within the urban area; a brochure on parking restrictions for heavy vehicles; increased numbers of “walking-speed areas” that enable deliveries to be made as long as vehicles drive at “walking speed”; and a length limitation for vehicles in the inner city. Initiative 54: Foster an Industry-Led Best Practices Dissemination Program These initiatives could play a key role in sensitizing and teaching private-sector companies how to conduct their activities in ways that mitigate the negative impacts produced. They provide a solid foundation for private-sector engagement, which can be modified and improved as demanded by circumstances. Adapting the governance structure of such dissemination programs to local conditions is fundamental to the success of improving urban freight in metropolitan areas. Table 57 summarizes essential characteristics of Initiative 54.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 113 Initiative 49: Designate a “Freight Person” at Key Agencies Description: Designating a freight person at key agencies facilitates outreach efforts because, in time, this individu- al becomes the focal point of communications between the public and private sectors. In addition to training in transportation planning, the designated person should have a basic background in urban design concepts, logistics, and most importantly, communications skills. As for any focal position, succession planning is advisable. Targeted mode: All modes Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Stakeholder engagement: designate a freight person at key agencies Primary objective: Stakeholder engagement Expected costs and level of effort to implement: The main cost of this initiative is related to hiring an analyst with a background in freight transportation, or training a member of the staff in urban design concepts and logistics. Advantages: Facilitates the implementation of freight initiatives Creates communication channels between different stakeholders Improves outreach efforts Reduces probability of unintended consequences Disadvantages: Requires high coordination among different stakeholders Examples: Office of Freight Mobility at the New York City DOT, New York City, New York, United States Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States City of Seattle Department of Transportation, Policy and Planning Division, Seattle, Washington, United States Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC), Columbus, Ohio, United States Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP), Chicago, Illinois, United States References: Holguín Veras et al. 2013b Table 52. Designate a “freight person” at key agencies.

114 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 50: Create a Freight Advisory Committee Description: A freight advisory committee (FAC) is composed of a group of different freight stakeholders and serves as a forum in which novel solutions for urban freight problems are discussed. It is a good practice to com- plement the FAC input with targeted outreach efforts to receive feedback from all segments of the industry. Targeted mode: All modes Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Stakeholder engagement: create a freight advisory committee (FAC) Primary objective: Stakeholder engagement Expected costs and level of effort to implement: This initiative requires coordination among the multiple stake- holders involved. Advantages: Facilitates the implementation of freight initiatives Creates communication channels between different stakeholders Improves outreach efforts Reduces probability of unintended consequences Disadvantages: Requires high coordination among different stakeholders Examples: National Freight Advisory Committee (NFAC), Washington, District of Columbia, United States (for the entire country) FAC of the Capital District Transportation Committee, Albany, New York, United States Columbus Region Logistics Council, Columbus, Ohio, United States North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), Arlington, Texas, United States New York City DOT Industry Advisory Group (IAG), New York City, New York, United States Seattle Freight Mobility Advisory Board, Seattle, Washington, United States Source: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute – CITE References: Columbus Chamber of Commerce; North Central Texas Council of Governments; Holguín Veras et al. 2013b Table 53. Create a freight advisory committee.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 115 Initiative 51: Educate Elected Officials About Freight Description: The main goal of this initiative is to create an understanding among elected officials of the importance of freight for metropolitan areas, and their potential role in enhancing system performance. Ideally, members of the FAC and freight staff from MPOs should be responsible for the training. Targeted mode: All modes Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Stakeholder engagement: educate elected officials about freight Primary objective: Stakeholder engagement Expected costs and level of effort to implement: This initiative requires coordination among the multiple stake- holders involved. Advantages: Facilitates the implementation of freight initiatives Creates communication channels between different stakeholders Improves initiatives’ efficiency Reduces probability of unintended consequences Improves engagement of stakeholders Disadvantages: Requires high coordination among different stakeholders Examples: Metropolitan planning agencies, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Columbus, Ohio; Seattle, Washington, United States City of Philadelphia, Mayor’s Office of Transportation and Utility (MOTU), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Unit- ed States Economic Development Corporations (various locations) Trade groups, such as the American Trucking Associations (ATA) and New York State Motor Truck Association, United States Philly Freight Finder, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States Source: Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission References: Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission; Steele et al. 2011 Table 54. Educate elected officials about freight.

116 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 52: Create a Technical Advisory Committee Description: A technical advisory committee (TAC) is a forum in which the public-sector staff at the various agencies with jurisdiction on subjects that impact freight activity meet to discuss freight policy. This is important in complex metropolitan areas, where the need for coherent public-sector coordination is the highest. Targeted mode: All modes Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Stakeholder engagement: create a technical advisory committee (TAC) Primary objective: Stakeholder engagement Expected costs and level of effort to implement: This initiative requires coordination among the multiple stakeholders involved. Advantages: Facilitates the implementation of freight initiatives at all levels Provides technical support for initiatives implementation Facilitates the coherent public-sector coordination in complex metropolitan areas Improves outreach efforts Reduces probability of unintended consequences Disadvantages: Requires high coordination among different stakeholders Differences in points of view among jurisdictions Examples: Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization, Freight Transportation Advisory Committee (FTAC) References: Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization; Southern California Association of Governments Table 55. Create a technical advisory committee.

Overview of Public-Sector Initiatives 117 Initiative 53: Create a Freight Quality Partnership Description: A freight quality partnership (FQP) is a voluntary partnership between private and public-sector groups to foster the implementation of practices that ameliorate the negative impacts of freight activity. Partnerships between the public and private sectors to tackle freight problems have been growing in recent years, and there are now some very good examples in Europe, North and South America, and Japan. Targeted mode: All modes Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Stakeholder engagement: create a freight quality partnership (FQP) Primary objective: Stakeholder engagement Expected costs and level of effort to implement: This initiative requires coordination among the multiple stakeholders involved. Advantages: Creates formal working environments between private and public-sector groups Facilitates the implementation of freight initiatives Creates communication channels between different stakeholders Improves outreach efforts Disadvantages: Requires high coordination among different stakeholders Examples: The Central London Freight Quality Partnership (CLFQP), London, England (Lindholm and Browne 2013) Local freight network, Göteborg, Sweden (Lindholm and Browne 2013) Source: http://www.dft.gov.uk/rmd/project.asp?intProjectID=10987 References: Department for Transport 2010a; Lindholm and Browne 2013 Table 56. Create a freight quality partnership.

118 Improving Freight System Performance in Metropolitan Areas: A Planning Guide Initiative 54: Foster an Industry-Led Best Practices Dissemination Program Description: This initiative provides a solid foundation for private-sector engagement in sensitizing and teaching them how to conduct their activities in ways that mitigate the negative impacts produced. These best practices can be modified and improved as demanded by circumstances. Targeted mode: All modes Geographic scope: City, area Type of initiative: Stakeholder engagement: foster an industry-led best practices dissemination program Primary objective: Stakeholder engagement Expected costs and level of effort to implement: This initiative requires the coordination among the multiple stakeholders involved. Advantages: Facilitates the implementation of freight initiatives at all levels Provides support to private-sector companies in how to minimize the negative freight externalities Improves outreach efforts Reduces probability of unintended consequences Disadvantages: Requires high coordination among different stakeholders Requires adapting the governance structure to local conditions Examples: Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals Roundtables (UK Freight Transport Association) UK Freight Transport Association Logistics Carbon Reduction Scheme (UK Freight Transport Association) UK Freight Transport Association Van Excellence Programme (http://www.vanexcellence.co.uk/about/) Source: UK Freight Transport Association References: Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals; Freight Transport Association 2013 Table 57. Foster an industry-led best practices dissemination program.