National Academies Press: OpenBook

Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools (2022)

Chapter: Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making

« Previous: Chapter 7 - Overview of Land-Use Initiatives
Page 125
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 125
Page 126
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 126
Page 127
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 127
Page 128
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 128
Page 129
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 129
Page 130
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 130
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 131
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 132
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 133
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 134
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 135
Page 136
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26737.
×
Page 136

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.

125   The main intent of this chapter is to provide the reader with a sense of the process used in freight transportation planning and management, and how decisions are made to address freight transportation issues at the metropolitan level. Although many different approaches to trans- portation planning exist (based, for example, on organizational size, resources, and structure), professional planners follow a basic planning process. This section describes the general process of public-sector transportation decision-making that underpins both management and planning of urban freight systems. It provides details on how each step, and the tasks within, can be used to find solutions to freight issues. It addresses how to integrate public-sector initiatives into the urban freight transportation decision-making process to improve the overall performance of the system. By design, the descriptions here are general, because there could be cases where some steps may not be formalized. This section of the Guide is not intended to prescribe a by-the-book methodology but, instead, to offer one that is flexible and practical, applicable to a variety of cases and settings. There are many ways to combine, divide, and ultimately describe the various steps in the decision-making process and the tasks conducted for each step. The decision-making process is iterative; each step builds on knowledge gained through other activities, and all the steps are revisited throughout the process. In transportation decision-making, virtually every decision or recommended course of action can result in predictable and unpredictable, intended and unintended, immediate and long term, positive and negative impacts. In most cases, the complex issues facing metropolitan areas have no perfect solutions. This reality forces transportation decision-makers to accept compromises that require a proper understanding of the trade-offs involved. In the planning process, such trade-offs should be identified and fully explored while evaluating and selecting alternatives. The importance of this assessment should not be underestimated. For example, if a trans- portation agency is considering building a bypass to eliminate congestion within an urban area, there will be trade-offs involved. Local businesses inside the urban area may be negatively impacted by a reduction in customers, while the increased access provided by the bypass may result in business relocations from the congested area to nearer the bypass, diminishing the vitality of the urban core. Moreover, given funding limitations, building the bypass may result in other projects not being funded. The decision-making process typically includes some variation or combination of the following steps: 1. Define goals and objectives to be achieved. 2. Define performance measures (measures of success). 3. Identify root causes of the problems. C H A P T E R 8 Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making

126 Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools 4. Identify potential initiatives. 5. Conduct performance analysis of potential initiatives. 6. Evaluate choices (based on identified measures of success) and select preferred alternative(s). 7. Create an Action Plan that – Describes the preferred alternative, its trade-offs, and related recommendations and – Proposes an approach to implement the recommendations. 8. Implement and monitor the Action Plan. 9. Follow up: reassess and, when necessary, modify the plan based on received feedback. Each step is formed by a set of tasks that need to be executed to obtain the desired outputs. Such tasks include stakeholder outreach and agency coordination; data collection and informa- tion gathering; and assessment and analysis. Figure 22 summarizes the urban freight transportation decision-making process described in this Guide. Each step of the process is presented with examples of potential activities that could be undertaken while moving through the step. This process is generally consistent with the transportation planning process summarized by FHWA in Integrating Demand Management into the Transportation Planning Process: A Desk Reference (the FHWA Desk Reference). It includes (1) regional vision and goals; (2) setting objectives; (3) definition of performance measures; (4) assessment and selection of strategies and programs to support objectives; (5) inte- gration of strategies into plans and funding programs; and (6) monitoring and evaluation of progress toward objectives (Federal Highway Administration 2012c). Many procedures, tools, and techniques are similar, and readers can refer to the FHWA Desk Reference for more details. The process described in this section supplements the general transportation planning process described in the FHWA publication by addressing the specific needs of freight transportation management, such as the more complex stakeholder engagement. This process also applies to short-term management efforts. The decision-making process described in this section can be used for any size geographic area, jurisdiction, or specific location (e.g., statewide, regional, metropolitan, or site specific); various types of management and planning exercises (e.g., land-use, bicycle, or freight); different challenges and issues (e.g., congestion, safety, or site); and timeframes of various durations (e.g., short-, medium-, or long-range). At each step in the decision-making process, tasks (activities) need to be conducted, including stakeholder outreach and agency coordination; data collection; and assessment and analysis. Each task produces a set of outputs, typically used as inputs in subsequent stages. It should be noted that these activities do not take place in a vacuum; the only successful way to foster change is to constructively engage all stakeholders to develop consensus-based strategies. Such a process of engagement is best conducted as part of a suitable process of col- laborative decision-making and partnership. This important aspect underpins successful Figure 22. Planning process described in NCFRP Report 33.

Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making 127   freight transportation decision-making as a proper and constructive process of engagement of the multiple stakeholders involved in freight issues and their potential solutions. Two key factors relate: 1. Multiple stakeholders—private, public, and community—are impacted by freight issues and could potentially play a role in developing their solutions. 2. No single stakeholder is capable of completely solving the most acute freight issues affecting metropolitan areas. Given these two factors, stakeholder cooperation and engagement may be the only means to progress. The main role of such an engagement effort is to create an environment and a management process whereby all stakeholders can be heard and can participate, in a constructive fashion, to improve the freight system. Public-sector agencies are bound to play a key role as conveners of the effort. Some key stakeholders to bring to the table include large and prominent shippers, carriers, and receivers; the corresponding trade groups that represent key freight agents (local trucking associations, warehouse associations, retail sector groups, restaurant associations, and the like); the local Chamber of Commerce; public agencies with jurisdiction in the areas that impact the freight system; civic or neighborhood groups; researchers who could play a role in both research and outreach; and any other companies with the potential to contribute to the solution. 8.1 Definition of the Freight Issue to Be Addressed In many situations, the success of a decision-making process hinges on correct and consistent identification of the problem that the process is meant to address. At any given time, many freight challenges compete for attention and resources. Too broad a focus may result in overly com- plicated decision-making and planning, which makes a successful outcome less certain. Too narrow a focus may result in unsatisfactory allocations of resources, as smaller issues may be addressed while larger but still feasible challenges remain unsolved. One benefit of engaging stakeholders is that doing so encourages identification and examination of problems from multiple vantage points. The initial engagement of stakeholders and consensus-building efforts help ensure that each problem is carefully vetted, clearly defined, and agreed on so that all parties understand what the decision-making process will and will not address. 8.2 Identification of Root Cause The task of identifying the root cause of a freight challenge may be the most important part of the decision-making process. With the root cause identified, a planner or manager can begin to determine the spectrum of potential solutions. On the other hand, the misidentification can take the entire effort in the wrong direction. It is imperative that the process be as unbiased, objective, and accurate as possible. This is of great relevance in urban freight. Although trucks may be the visible indication of freight activity, the sources of a problem involving trucks may lie elsewhere. For example, truck idling is frequently the result of the inability or unwillingness of receivers to accept deliveries, and the congestion produced in the vicinity of large buildings is frequently aggravated by delivery time restrictions that shorten the time when deliveries can be made. In these situations, fining the drivers or charging higher tolls during peak traffic hours may fail to reduce the congestion because carriers cannot change delivery times without the concurrence of the receivers. In this

128 Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools example, recognizing the chief role played by the receivers (the root cause) leads to a different set of solutions, such as the establishment of appointment systems for deliveries, allowing delivery trucks to use off-street parking spaces, and an OHD program to induce receivers to accept deliv- eries outside regular business hours. The careful identification of the root causes of a problem can lead to more appropriate and effective solutions. The identification process typically involves technical analyses (e.g., traffic counts, capacity and level-of-service analyses, and travel time and delay studies), and consultations with stake- holders to develop an understanding of the potential reasons behind the problem. These con- sultations are very important to provide to public-sector professionals, who may lack familiarity with the underpinnings of the freight system, with insights into real-world cause and effects. Key tasks involved in the identification process are as follows: • Stakeholder outreach and agency coordination. – Agency staff ask stakeholders, decision-makers, and the agency leadership to identify what they view as a freight issue, and the factors that create it. Involvement at this stage will garner greater understanding and buy-in for the implementation of any ultimate solution. • Data collection, assessment, and analysis. – To minimize the risks of misinformation or being influenced by biased views of an issue, the agency staff should seek input from multiple individuals within the same stake- holder group. In-depth interviews and focus groups with private-sector representatives, and interviews with staff from trade groups provide invaluable information about the root causes of the freight issue. This information is carefully filtered by the agency staff to account for any inherent bias that may be reflected in the opinions offered by some stakeholders. – It is important to collect information to analyze and assess future conditions because issues and problems change over time. This is especially true with freight that is market- driven; new products, technologies, population shifts, and infrastructure changes can alter the way freight is transported. • Generation of outputs. – For each condition or issue of concern, agency staff develop a solid identification of the root causes that produce it and the analyses that support the conclusions. 8.3 Definition of Goals and Objectives to Be Achieved Defining goals and objectives requires a shared vision among all stakeholders of what the urban freight system, or a specific aspect of it, should be in the short, mid, and long term. It also requires a clear idea of what roles and responsibilities the stakeholders will have in making that vision a reality. Developing a shared vision requires working with stakeholders to identify their goals based on a clear understanding of (a) the problems and issues that are the focus of the effort and (b) the parameters that characterize the desired future state or goal(s). For example, a goal may be “to reduce congestion to enhance freight mobility.” A more specific description of an aspect of that goal may be “to improve travel speeds at key arterials.” Clarifying and defining the goal can delineate it into a series of component objectives. Agency staff can work with stakeholders to help them understand the potential conse- quences of skipping this critical step. It is important to develop a consensus around the goals and objectives that should Guide the effort. This almost always requires the public sector playing a key role in securing the support of the various stakeholders. If stakeholders are negatively impacted or inconvenienced by the goals of the freight initiative, the public sector could con- sider the use of incentives of various kinds to mitigate these impacts.

Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making 129   Tasks involved in defining the goals and objectives to be achieved are as follows: • Stakeholder outreach and agency coordination. – The individuals and groups that will define the goals take steps to include agency lead- ership and public- and private-sector stakeholders. Agency leaders are critical for winning and securing long-term support for the decision-making process, and the recommenda- tions that may come from it. It is also critical to engage private-sector stakeholders, as they operate the system and could provide invaluable input regarding desirable and not-so- desirable goals and objectives. – Before defining the goals and objectives, the study area needs to be defined, recogniz- ing that supply chains interconnect wide areas. For example, restricting large trucks from entering a congested downtown may force carriers to use a larger number of small trucks— which, in turn, could increase congestion beyond the level that was produced by the large trucks. – In defining the goals and objectives, it is important to maintain ongoing interactions with all stakeholders. As the planning process proceeds, goals and objectives evolve and become more specific. Throughout the decision-making process, stakeholder positions, percep- tions, and recommendations may change as more information becomes available and stakeholders gain a better understanding of each other’s positions and concerns. • Data collection and information gathering. – Data and information explaining current conditions help stakeholders formulate goals and objectives. For example, traffic counts estimating the number and percent of trucks and passenger vehicles could be important to develop an unbiased idea of the relative role of each as contributors to congestion. – Ideally, information is gathered from all stakeholders, as different groups will view problems and define goals from their own perspectives. For example, the public may perceive the problem as there being too many trucks on a roadway, whereas truckers may perceive the problem as there being too many passenger vehicles, and railroads may perceive the problem as not having enough rail access. • Assessment and analysis. – All goals and objectives are reviewed to confirm that they are reasonable given constraints of time, budget, environment, and regulations. For example, a goal to drastically reduce the number of trucks in an area may not be realistic without sufficient funding to pro- vide alternative freight transport choices. When the goals and objectives are drafted, it is important to present them to the agency leadership and to public- and private-sector stakeholders to confirm that (a) they are appropriate, and (b) they address all relevant issues and concerns. Additional information about existing and future conditions, and the opinions and perspectives of stakeholders help in the review, refinement, and finalization of objectives. • Generation of outputs. – Outputs from this task are a set of goals and objectives, agreed on by all stakeholders, that will clearly specify the desired future state of the system. The objectives should follow the SMART criteria; that is, they should be Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, and Timely (Federal Highway Administration 2012d). 8.4 Definition of Performance Measures Performance measures (PMs) are an important aspect of the decision-making process and are central to gauging the degree to which goals and objectives are achieved. During the planning stage, PMs are used to screen and select a preferred solution among the possible alternatives. Once a solution has been implemented, PMs provide a method to evaluate the level of success

130 Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools that was attained in achieving intended goals. PMs can be defined in numerous ways, but prac- tice shows that they work best when they are (1) directly related to a single objective; (2) easily quantifiable; and (3) able to gauge the entire range of levels of achievement (a PM that is defined as a continuous variable is better than one that takes only two values, like “achieved” or “not achieved”). Chapter 3 in the FHWA Desk Reference also provides a detailed list of PMs that can be used for various objectives (Federal Highway Administration 2012d). Tasks involved in defining PMs are as follows: • Stakeholder outreach and agency coordination. – Different stakeholders are likely to have different ideas about what PMs should be used, and how to measure them. For example, the delivery costs paid by receivers may be a good metric to measure the objective of “increasing the competitiveness of downtown.” However, freight carriers may argue that delivery costs do not account for the full cost of a delivery given that carriers, typically, absorb parking fines and tolls due to the pressures of the market. – Respecting the confidential nature of commercially sensitive data is crucial. Many useful PMs—such as the full cost of a delivery just mentioned—could require the use of data that carriers may refuse to share, such as driver wages, indirect costs, and fringe benefits. Engaging private-sector associations and trade groups could enable the public sector to create solid cost estimates for use as inputs to the PMs. Gaining stakeholder support in the process of defining the PMs, and securing the corresponding input data, is essential. • Data collection. – PMs are by definition quantitative, requiring data on the existing or base conditions, and in the case of planning efforts, estimates of their future values. Producing such estimates requires the use of planning models, simulations, or both. Freight planning staff work closely with the modelers at the MPO and state DOT to ensure that the available models can produce the desired PMs. If the models are not capable of providing the necessary PMs, either the PMs must be redefined to suit what the models can provide, or the models must be modified to provide the desired PMs. Careful consideration is needed to deter- mine whether adjusting the PMs or adjusting the models will yield the most applicable and useful data. – Freight PMs may require data from all modes of transportation, and may include analysis of safety, mobility, system conditions, pavement conditions, travel times, congestion, acces- sibility, parking, or environmental conditions related to freight movements. – Freight data availability is often an issue in defining PMs. Engaging stakeholders in the definition of PMs and securing their support to get the necessary input data, can mitigate the data availability issue considerably. • Assessment and analysis. – PMs are used at several steps in the management and planning processes, such as to assess the base case conditions surrounding a freight issue, and to compare the results of the assessment to conditions in other jurisdictions. Such comparisons provide context to PMs that may otherwise be difficult to interpret. – PM analyses must account for such important factors as the variability of the input data used; the time it takes to collect the data and update the PMs; and the sensitivity (or lack thereof) of the PM to changes in the input variables. For example, PMs that use highly variable data (e.g., travel times), need to be analyzed with caution to ensure the robustness of the results. A PM that relies on data collected every 2 or 3 years will fail to capture rapidly changing conditions, whereas a PM that is too sensitive, or too insensitive, may be difficult to analyze. All these factors need to be taken into account. Adjustments may be needed to the definitions of the PMs and the necessary input data to ensure that the PMs fulfill their roles.

Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making 131   • Generation of outputs. – Outputs from this task are as follows: ◾ A set of PMs that assess the degree to which goals and objectives are achieved at dif- ferent points in time ◾ A data collection plan, a modeling plan, or both to assess the PMs ◾ A collaboration agreement that outlines the role and responsibility of each of the various stakeholders in providing data as needed to estimate the PMs 8.5 Preliminary Identification of Potential Initiatives This step addresses how to select, from the spectrum of initiatives described in the Guide, those that are most likely to be effective in solving a freight issue. Clearly, detailed planning and design exercises offer the best chance of identifying the most appropriate solutions to a freight issue. No guide can offer an estimation of the specific costs and benefits produced by a given initiative, or an assessment of the trade-offs inherent in the allocation of time required and the limited funding available. These factors are best reviewed through a formal decision-making process. The Guide provides an initiative identification process, an approach designed to match needs-on-the-ground with a range of strategies, and a fuller picture of what those strategies can offer. The impacts of the various initiatives have been characterized in terms of the nature of the problem they are intended to mitigate or solve; the geographic and temporal scope of the impacts; and the target population(s). Before considering which potential initiatives will best match their needs, transportation professionals will specify the following inputs: • Type of Initiatives. Users will be able to search for land-use and transportation initiatives, or ones that cut across both categories. • Geographic Scope of the Problem. Identify the area(s) where the problem occurs to define the scope of the necessary public-sector initiative. Examples include nationwide, city/MSA, area, corridor, parcel, building or a specific point in a city. • Undesirable Effects. Clearly identify the problem that needs solving and the rationale for a public-sector initiative. Examples include congestion, livability issues due to freight facilities, livability issues due to freight traffic, logistics sprawl, noise, pollution, safety, and systematic inefficiencies. • Perceived Problem Source. It is important to identify the likely sources of the problem to be addressed. Examples may include all traffic, double-parking, inadequate infrastructure, incompatible land uses, stakeholder issues, LTGs, large trucks, other parking issues, sidewalk conflicts, through traffic, and urban deliveries. Once these inputs have been defined (most come from the outputs generated by the tasks described so far in this section), the initiative descriptions presented in Chapter 9 in this Guide can be used to identify possible alternatives. Then public-sector decision-makers, stakeholders, and transportation agencies can conduct detailed assessments of the pros and cons of each initia- tive, with data relevant to their situation, to identify the most appropriate course of action. Tasks involved in identifying potential initiatives are as follows: • Stakeholder outreach and agency coordination. – Agency staff work with all stakeholders to confirm that all alternative solutions have been identified. If an alternative advocated by a stakeholder is not considered, even if that alter- native does not prove entirely realistic or feasible, the selected approach may not garner the stakeholder’s commitment. • Data collection. – Agency staff become familiar with the general features of the potential initiatives: advan- tages and disadvantages, political issues and constraints, applicability to local conditions,

132 Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools and so forth. Given that all of these elements will need to be considered at some point, it is important to gather information on each element early in the process. • Assessment and analyses. – Agency staff and stakeholders analyze the data collected to determine which initiatives are worthy of further consideration in the formulation phase. It is important to consider the widest range of potential initiatives during the formulation phase; only alternatives with virtually no chance of implementation should be eliminated from further analyses. – The initiatives suggested are analyzed to ensure that, as a whole, they support each other rather than conflict with each other, or with any other needed transportation project. For example, redesigning an intersection to facilitate truck traffic could make a bicycle path impossible if the intersection is not designed with the bicycle path in mind. An intersection redesign that makes sense by itself may be counterproductive from a corridor point of view if it creates problems at other intersections downstream. With a broader analysis, compre- hensive corridor-level solutions may make more sense than a single intersection redesign. – Transportation decision-makers also need to be mindful of the long timeframes involved in many public-sector interventions, versus the shorter private-sector decision-making pro- cess that is driven by quarterly results. Because of this paradox, public-sector planners often must consider implementing short-term solutions while the correct long-term solution is being developed (e.g., relocation of some constraints like utility poles). • Generation of outputs. – Outputs from this task are a preliminary list of potential initiatives to address the freight issue(s) to be solved or mitigated, along with descriptions of the initiatives under consider- ation, a qualitative assessment of their advantages and disadvantages, and an identification of the potential synergies to take advantage of, and conflicts to be avoided. To support this step of the process, an Initiative Selector for Improving Freight System Performance and Freight-Efficient Land Use has been expanded (Holguín-Veras et al. 2021). This Initiative Selector is a decision-support system that will serve as a tool to aid in the selection of potential alternatives for various metropolitan freight problems and to assist with initiatives for FELUs. The Initiative Selector is an HTML webpage that, for a given set of inputs, will pro- vide practitioners with suggestions about possible initiatives that could be implemented to fix a given problem. The Initiative Selector is not a replacement for engineering and planning, but it offers a point of departure for in-depth planning processes, with a list of solutions that might be considered for various situations. 8.6 Formulation and Performance Analysis of the Alternative Solutions In this step of the decision-making process, agency staff further develop the potential initia- tives identified so that both decision-makers and the spectrum of stakeholders have a thorough appreciation of their potential impacts. For example, an initiative to reduce truck double- parking in a busy downtown area is the implementation of a delivery appointment system to ensure that delivery trucks are able to find off-street parking. As part of the formulation phase, important questions must be answered: What size buildings would be the focus of the initiative? Would the system be required, or encouraged? Would incentives be provided? If so, in what amounts? What geographic area would be the focus? What impacts would be produced by the initiative? The answers to these questions provide a fuller view of the benefits, costs, and level of effort associated with the initiative(s). Such information, both qualitative and quantitative, provides a solid foundation for decision-making. In estimating the performance of the various initiatives, it is important to be thorough but pragmatic. Essentially, the data collection and performance analysis need to be commensurate

Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making 133   with the scope and potential impact of each initiative. The FHWA Desk Reference provides a detailed discussion of the process, tools, and techniques that can be used to analyze the perfor- mance of traffic management strategies (Federal Highway Administration 2012d). The behavioral micro-simulation model (Silas and Holguín-Veras 2009; Holguín-Veras and Aros-Vera 2014) and the freight demand estimation model (Holguín-Veras and Aros-Vera 2014) are specifically helpful for analyzing alternatives involving freight demand management. However, large data collection and modeling exercises are best reserved for only the largest and most impactful projects. Tasks involved in formulation and performance analysis of solution alternatives are as follows: • Data collection. – Data are collected that relate to each possible alternative. The data collected include cost, time and effort required for implementation, complexity, and potential risks and benefits. – Agency staff lead a process to provide a clear picture of what each initiative would entail. Doing this allows an understanding of the full spectrum of impacts, including what will be required from the public sector and all stakeholders for a successful implementation. • Assessment and analysis. – Agency staff assess the key impacts of the various alternatives. Traffic simulation models could be used to assess the local impacts of proposed initiatives (e.g., to assess how a new land-use policy would impact freight traffic volumes, a regional planning model could be used to get a general idea about regional congestion impacts). These modeling endeavors are designed to ensure a reasonably solid understanding of the behavioral changes that a proposed public-sector initiative could induce. Possible methods include in-depth inter- views with selected industry representatives, focus groups, or stated-preference surveys. Guessing how the freight industry would react to any given initiative is a significant challenge, so outreach to those industry sectors that would be impacted is highly advisable. Projected unintended impacts of the alternatives (e.g., traffic increases in sensitive areas due to adding an extra lane, or population shifts from building a bypass) need to be identified and evaluated. – Additional assessments of budget, staffing, and timing for the selected alternatives may be needed. For example, before recommending an OHD program, it is advisable to check with the private sector to determine the feasibility of the idea. • Generation of outputs. – Outputs from this task are as follows: ◾ Clear and solid descriptions of the initiatives being considered, together with technical assessments of their potential impacts. ◾ Preliminary conclusions concerning the merit of each initiative. 8.7 Evaluation and Selection of Preferred Alternatives The process of evaluating and selecting alternatives involves judging how each alternative would meet the goals and objectives defined in prior tasks. Too many evaluation and selection techniques exist to be reviewed in this Guide; however, these techniques can be broadly classi- fied into two categories: (1) economic and (2) multi-criteria. Economic techniques transform meaningful impacts into monetary values as costs or benefits. Non-market impacts, such as environment-related impacts, are translated into monetary estimates using economic valuation techniques (Bateman et al. 2002). The benefits and costs produced during the project’s economic lifespan are taken into account to produce economic indicators of performance such as net present value, internal rate of return, and benefit-cost ratio.

134 Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools Multi-criteria techniques do not translate impacts into monetary units. This category of eval- uation techniques often makes use of a matrix to compare the performance of each alternative with respect to identified objectives. If quantitative PMs have been produced, these can be placed in the corresponding criteria cells. If only qualitative analyses are available, agency staff try to make sure the estimates are as objective and unbiased as possible. The performance of each alter- native usually is summarized according to the selected measures via colors, codes, or key words that explain the results depicted in the matrix, making it understandable to decision-makers. An example of an alternatives comparison matrix can be found online at (Warner Town 2013). Tasks involved in the evaluation and selection of preferred alternatives are as follows: • Stakeholder outreach and agency coordination. – Public and private stakeholders need to be actively involved in the evaluation and rating of alternatives for several reasons: ◾ They may rate one decision criteria as more important than the others. ◾ Stakeholder agreement on the evaluation is needed to ensure their long-term support and to advance the implementation of the initiative. ◾ The agency leaders, not the agency staff conducting the analyses, will be the decision- makers. – Planners usually recommend and explain the trade-offs among alternatives as well as the consequences of inaction, to the decision-makers. Group problem-solving processes, such as the Delphi method to prioritize and select the highest priority projects or initiatives (Linstone and Turoff 2002), and the nominal group technique (Delbecq et al. 1975), can be used to facilitate the coordination of stakeholder rating. • Data collection. – It is important to ensure that the stakeholders participating in the decision-making process provide specific information about the level of importance they attach to each of the various decision criteria, and that a consensus is reached about these valuations of importance. It is highly advisable to conduct such an exercise before the actual evaluation process takes place, as this reduces the possibility of any manipulation of the process to favor specific alternatives. – During the evaluation of alternatives, it may be necessary to supplement data and infor- mation collected to inform stakeholders about the alternatives that they need to make decisions. • Assessment and analysis. – Because of the trade-offs involved, often there is no clear best alternative. In such cases, it is important to get input from stakeholders about the relative importance of the different decision criteria, because this will help the selection process. • Generation of outputs. – Outputs from this task are a prioritized list of the alternatives to be recommended for implementation, with estimates of the time and resources required, responsible agency and stakeholders, and any other information deemed useful to be included in the Action Plan. 8.8 Creation of the Action Plan An Action Plan that defines the recommended policies, programs, processes, and improve- ments to be conducted is one of the key products of the planning process. The tasks involved in the creation of the Action Plan are as follows: • Stakeholder outreach and agency coordination. – Plans are typically presented in draft form to stakeholders, advisory groups, and agency leadership for review and comment prior to finalization. This would be true of any freight plan and is recommended for plans based on any of the initiatives identified in this Guide.

Urban Freight Transportation Decision-Making 135   • Data collection. – Agency staff collect information on the reactions to the draft plan, both to gather support and address any outstanding issues. – In the case of alternatives that require engineering design, additional data may need to be collected to support the design process. • Assessment and analysis. – Recurring concerns about the plan are noted and addressed. – Engineering designs may be needed for some initiatives. Agency staff ensure that the design teams have access to the data and design parameters needed. – Pilot tests could be planned to gain insight into the practicality and potential benefits and costs of proposed initiatives. • Generation of outputs. – Outputs from this task are as follows: ◾ Produce a list of prioritized initiatives to be considered for implementation. ◾ Produce a plan of specific actions needed to implement these initiatives, including the following: ♦ Sequencing ♦ Key success factors ♦ Key actors and critical partners in each action ♦ Resources (time, facilities, equipment, and funding) ♦ Timeline for completion ♦ Plan and timeline for measuring the performance of the Action Plan 8.9 Pilot Testing and Implementation The fundamental reason to conduct the urban freight decision-making process outlined in this Guide is to address specific freight issues by implementing policies, programs, or projects that could mitigate or eliminate the issues. Ideally, implementation of a public-sector initiative should proceed only when the agency staff is certain that it is the best course of action. Such certainty necessitates careful assessment of the input provided by all stakeholders. In some cases, pilot testing of a novel concept may be advisable. Pilot testing, particularly in urban freight management, could play a key role in demonstrating to the private sector that the public sector is interested in proceeding carefully with the imple- mentation of new ideas, assessing the real-life impacts of potential initiatives, and implementing only those that successfully pass the pilot tests. Pilot tests provide an opportunity for all stake- holders to find out more about an initiative and mechanism so that they can decide whether to (a) move ahead with a full implementation phase, or (b) stop and reassess. To fulfill that role, however, pilot tests need to be properly designed; a poorly designed pilot could lead to either a false success (a bad idea that performs well in the pilot), or a false failure (a good idea that does not perform well in the pilot). 8.10 Follow up: Reassessment and Modification Planning is a process that should be continuous, given that problems, issues, and needs in any region continually change. FHWA defines “monitoring and evaluation of progress toward objectives” as the last step of a transportation planning process, and describes several examples of successful monitoring programs in the United States and Europe (Federal Highway Adminis- tration 2012d). MAP-21 highlights the importance of freight, and encourages the develop- ment of PMs to determine the impacts of the strategies, programs, and funding used to address

136 Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools freight issues. FAST Act also requires incorporation of PMs and targets to follow up the progress of the plans (Federal Highway Administration 2016a). Agency staff need to continually revisit and reassess freight strategies—both those recommended and those in place—to determine what is working and what may need to be adjusted to successfully improve the performance of the freight transportation system. In urban freight, it is important to conduct honest and timely follow up of programs and initiatives because an erroneous course of action can have long- lasting consequences to the vitality of the local private sector, and by extension, to the economy. The benefits of follow up and reassessment are similar to those for pilot testing. Both testing and follow up convey to the private sector that the public sector is interested in carefully con- sidering the impacts of their initiatives. Also, it is said that “success breeds success.” Being able to demonstrate the success of freight initiatives that have been recommended and implemented builds support for future initiatives. If properly conducted, follow up and reassessment foster an environment in which public- and private-sector involvement is ongoing; then, proactive freight planning can prosper.

Next: Chapter 9 - Overview of Transportation Initiatives »
Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Land-use planning is essential to fostering quality of life and harmony among the myriad social and economic activities that take place and compete for space in urban and metropolitan areas. Land-use planning also profoundly affects the commercial supply chains that deliver the goods and services that constitute urban and regional economies, and contribute to the quality of life.

The TRB National Cooperative Highway Research Program's NCHRP Research Report 998: Planning Freight-Efficient Land Uses: Methodology, Strategies, and Tools is designed to prepare practitioners to make land-use decisions that minimize the private and external costs associated with the production, transportation, and consumption of goods by providing them with the tools needed to analyse the freight efficiency of current and future land uses in their jurisdictions, and identify and select land-use and transportation initiatives.

Supplemental to the report are a tool for assessment of the overall impacts of freight land uses, a document about the research effort, and a presentation.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!