|
Items in cart [1] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| ||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 166
Appendix 3
Samuel Lau, "Truck Travel Surveys: A Review of
the Literature and State-of-the-Art," MTC
Oakland, CA, January 1995 (Excerpts)
OCR for page 167
Jack Faucett Associates, Inc. Final Report
March 1997
TRUCK TRAVEL SURVEYS: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
AND STATE-OF-T~-ART-MTC OAKLAND (EXCERPTS)
This literature and state-of-the-art review reveals that few urban areas in the country have had
extensive experience in conducting truck surveys and truck travel demand forecasting. Most
metropolitan planning organizations (MPOS) or regional transportation planning agencies continue
to generate their truck trip estimates based on orig~n-destination surveys conducted in Me 1960s
and 70s. In the last ten years, only a few metropolitan areas, namely Chicago (1970 and 1986),
Ontario (1978, 1983, and 1988), Vancouver (1988), Phoenix (1991), Alameda County, California
(1991), New York-New Jersey (1991-94), E1 Paso, Texas (1994), and Houston-Galveston (1994)
have undertaken significant efforts to collect truck travel data or develop new techniques in
forecasting truck traffic. Out of the eight urban areas, only Chicago and Phoenix have had Weir
truck model development and forecasting methodologies documented in detail, and only Ontario
and the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey (PANYNJ) have systematically collected truck
travel data. This report documents the experiences of different urban areas in Me U.S. and
Canada. The following is a summary of Me results.
Types of Data Collected
· The eight most recent truck travel surveys all collected orig~n-dest~nation information (see
Exhibit A3-1).
With the exception of roadside surveys conducted In New York and New Jersey, most
truck surveys requested land use at destination and truck odometer readings from
respondents.
Most surveys classified trucks by weight, number of axles, or by truck type.
With the exception of roadside surveys, all other survey types included trip diaries
(Chicago, Phoenix' E1 Paso' Houston-Galveston, and Alameda County).
NCHRP Multimodal Transportation A3-1
Planning Data
Project 8-32(5)
OCR for page 168
Jack ~aucett Associates, lac.
Final Report
March 1097
I ...... .. ~'m~ o.~ ~,ru9,~ ,l't ve' ~.v ~ ~ ~I: : :
Chicago
Ontario
Phoenix
N.Y. & NJ.
Alameda
County,
Calif.
N.Y. &
NJ.
-
El Paso
1986
1988
1991
1991
1991
1992-94
1994
Houston- | 1994
Galveston
Mailout-
Mailback
Roadside
Interview
Combined
Telephone
Mailout
Mailback
Roadside
Interview
Combined
Telephone
Mailout
Mailback
&
Roadside
Interview
Roadside
Interview
Telephone
Interview
Combined
Tdephone
Mailout
Mailback
19,225
270
4,500
2,200
over 8,000
14,671
188
900
(1) Cost induded data collection, data coding, and model development.
(2) This was the sampling rate. No response rate was given.
(3) This was a multi-agency effort, with partnership from the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), the New York Metropolitan Transportation
Council (NYMTC), and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. The survey was conducted at 18 locations with 3 interviewers per toll plaza for 24
hours.
(4) Cost induded sample design, survey design, data collection, coding, reporting, survey analysis, and model development.
(5) The higher cost was due to a high number of incomplete surveys.
· Truck travel model development
· CorridorlRoute analysis
· Effects of toll on trucks
· Truck speed simulation mode
· Truck activity mapping
96.5%
30.0%
NA
79%
NA
37.8%(2)
42.6%
35%-40%
· Time series comparison
· Evaluate & design road geometries
· Pavement management planning
· Truck accident analysis
· Dangerous goods regulation &
enforcement analysis
· Truck driver characteristics
· Driver education program
· Truck travel model development
· Evaluate dedicated route/corndor
proposal
· Traffic management for highway
reconstruction
· Time series freight analysis
· Frdght-economic analysis
· I-880 corridor analysis
· Create truck travel submodel for
corridor analysis
· Generate 24-hour & PM peak
volumes by axle
NA
· Truck travel model development
· Part of regional travel study
· Truck emissions analysis
· Truck travel model development
$200,000
NA
S90,000(1)
NA
NA
$312,000(3)
$65,000(4)
$150,000
S57/survey
NA
S125tsurvey(1)
NA
NA
$21/survey
$345tsurvey(5)
S167/sun~ey
NCHRP Multimodal Transportation
Planning Data
A3-2
Project 8-32(5)
OCR for page 169
Jack Faucett Associates, lace Final Report
March 1997
The commodity data collected ranged from a simple classification of commodity by type
to detailed description of the actual commodities being carried.
The 1988 Ontario survey is the only commercial vehicle survey that gathered information
on truck driver characteristics.
The 1994 E1 Paso commercial truck survey was the only survey
route choice information for the surveyed trip.
Uses of Truck Survey Data
The most common uses of truck data are for regional truck travel model development and
corridor/route analysis. Chicago, Phoenrx, E1 Paso, and Vancouver have used their truck
survey data to develop regional truck travel demand models.
Ontario has seen the most use of its truck survey information. The truck data have been
used for time series comparisons, evaluation of road design and geometries, pavement
management planning, truck-related accident analysis, dangerous goods movement
regulation and enforcement, understanding truck driver characteristics and for planning
truck driver education programs.
E1 Paso has mainly used its truck data for regional travel and truck emissions modeling.
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has used its truck data for traffic
management purposes during highway and bridge/tunnel reconstructions and freight-
economic analysis.
Chicago has used its truck data to generate truck activity maps of the Greater Chicago
region; truck speed simulation; and modeling the effects of toll facilities on truck route
choices within the context of the Chicago regional travel model.
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has used its truck travel data
to estimate heavy truck VMT and model truck emissions in the South Coast Air Basin
(SCAB) for the Los Angeles area. It has also used truck data to conduct analysis of truck
traffic to the Port of Hueneme in Ventura County.
Caltrans and Alameda County has used its truck survey data to estimate truck traffic
entering and leaving the County, as well as seaport planning for the Port of Oakland.
NCNRP Multimodal Trar~sport~ion A3-3
Planning Data
Project 8-32(5)
OCR for page 170
Jack Faucett Associates, Inc. Final Report March 1997
Truck Travel Survey Methods Used
.
The most common survey method for conducting truck travel surveys in urban areas was
the combined telephone-mailout-mailback method. Three urban areas in the country
Phoenix, Arizona; Alameda County, California; and Houston-Galveston, Texas - have
recently conducted truck travel surveys using the combined telephone-mailout-mailback
method.
The combined telephone-mailout-mailback survey method is more cost-effective and yields
a reasonably high response rate.
The second most used survey method was the roadside interview method. The
Province of Ontario, Canada and the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey have
conducted numerous roadside interviews.
Roadside interviews produce very high response rates with complete information. They
are ideal for cordon surveys or surveying trucks traveling in from outside the survey area.
The most common source for drawing the survey sample is the Department of Motor
Vehicle (DMV) registration files. Other sample sources include lists of truck registration
files available from commercial vendors (R.~. Polk, Texas Vehicle Information and
Computer Services, Inc., etch.
A summary of different survey characteristics for eight urban truck travel surveys is found in
Table A-l, and a summary of different truck travel survey methods (typical response rate,
advantages, and disadvantages, etc.) is found in Table A-2.
Number of Completed Surveys and Response Rate
The approximate number of completed surveys from the eight urban truck surveys varied
from ISS to 19,225.
Roadside surveys produced the highest number of completed surveys and the best response
rate (nearly 100 percent).
NCHRP Multimodal Transportation AM Project 8-32~5)
Planning Data
OCR for page 171
Jack Faucett Associates, Inc. Final Report March 1997
· Mailout-mailback surveys produced the lowest overall and item response rates. Combined-
telephone-mailout-mailback surveys produced improved response rates over mailout-
mailback or telephone surveys alone (See Exhibit A3-l and Exhibit A3-2~.
Survey Cost
· Telephone interviews are the m. ost costly to conduct. They require a large number of staff
and time for data collection.
.
Combined telephone-mailout-mailback surveys are the most cost-effective to conduct.
They yield reasonably high response rates over mailout-mailbacks alone. The phone
contact portion of the survey can help assess non-response biases when analyzing and
weighting the mailback survey samples.
Comparison of Survey Findings
A summary of the general findings from various truck travel surveys is provided below.
Characteristics of Commercial Vehicles
Average Vehicle Weight: The only survey that reported average vehicle weight was the
1991 Phoenix Commercial Vehicle Survey. The average vehicle weight per commercial
trip was ll,870 lbs.
Truck Size: The share of different truck sizes used varied from urban area to urban area.
Characteristics of Commercuz! Vehicle Trips
.
.
Average Trip per Commercial Vehicle: Light trucks have a higher average trip frequency
than for heavy trucks.
Regional vs. Through Trips: Most truck trips serve local regional needs. Of the few
through trips (usually less than 10 percent), most are made by heavy trucks.
NCHRP Multimodal Transportation A3-5 Project8-32~5)
Planning Data
OCR for page 172
Jack Faucet' Associates, lace
Pinal Report
March 1997
s mm f r Or
Telephone
Interview
Mailout
Mailback
Combined
Telephone
-Mailout
Mailhn~k
_ _
Roadside
Intercept/
Interview
N.Y.(1964)
Calgary(71)
El Paso(94)
Chicago(86)
Phoenix(91)
Houston(94)
Alameda,
CA(91)
Calgary(71)
Ontario(78, 83,
88)
N.Y. & N.J. (74,
82, 85, 91-94)
Alameda
County, CA(91)
4%-15%
1%-5%
3%-10%
8%-35%(3)
40%-50%
10% 45%(1)
30%-V0%(2)
95%-1 00%
· High response rate
· Easy to follow-up
· Less costly
· Good response rate
"/certified mail
· Only follow-up Of
nonresponses is necessary
Improved response rate over
mailout-mailback alone
Early identification of
owners who agree to
participate & potential
nonresponses through phone
contact
Phone contact may help
adjust sample size for
mailout-mailback
Complete information
High response rate
BeKer sampling control
Good representative sample
of trucks entering or leaving
a cordon line
· Easy comparison with
mainstream traffic through
field counts at survey
location
(l) The higher response rate was due to better survey participation front large truck Beet operators. l
(2) The higher response rate was due to an employer survey conducted in California (1991 Caltrans-Alameda County Survey).
(3) The higher percentage is from the 1988 Ontario survey which curve-Is For;- Al ^ · 0~= ~
· Can only call during business hours
· "Phone-tagging" problem
· Limited time on phone if respondent is
busy
· Requires access to vehicle registration file
· Low overall & item response rate
· Possible bias due to better response from
some drivers/owners
· Low response from small truck owners
· Low response from out-of-state trucks
· Need to follow-up on nonrcsponses
· Difficult to ensure that the driver will fill
out the form, instead of the owner or Beet
manager who receives the survey forms
· Requires access to registration file
· Same disadvantages as telephone survey
method above
· High cost of telephone follow-ups
· Need phone reminders for trip diary
· More costly than above methods
· Potential disruption to traff c
· Quality and conduct of survey affected by
weather, lighting
· Hazardous to survey crew
· Time constraint
· No follow-up possible
· Enforcement problems
· Drivers avoiding the survey station
· Only represent trucks traveling on road
along survey station, not entire region
vets ",C. ~ ~,oa~nour period throughout the Ontario Province.
NCHRP Multimodal Transportation
Planning Data
A3-6
Project 8-32~5)
OCR for page 173
Jack Faucett Associates, Inc. Final Report
Average Trip Length: Heavy trucks make longer trips than lighter trucks.
· Vehicle Miles Traveled: Heavy trucks log a higher VMT per day than light trucks.
March 1997
Time of First Commercial Vehicle Trip: Most "first" truck trips occur early in the morning
(between 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.). This pattern, however, varies by weight category.
Light trucks were more likely to start their first Hip between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m.
Heavy trucks, however, started their first trip before 6:00 a.m.
Time-of-Day Distribution: Most truck trips seem to occur during the midday period
between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Truck "through" traffic seems to avoid peak periods and
tend to travel at night.
Truck Travel During Peak Periods: The results vary by urban area and by individual
locations. In New York and New Jersey, over 35 percent of trucks made trips during the
morning peak period (6:00 a.m. to 10:00 am.). In comparison with AM and PM peaks for
private vehicle travel, the results found that the AM peak period travel was as important
for commercial vehicles as for private vehicles.
Truck Travel During Peak Periods as Percent of Total Vehicular Volume: Truck traffic
range from less than 9 percent to as high as 17 percent of the total vehicular volume during
peak periods.
· Day-of-Week Distribution: Truck traffic typically occurs on weekdays and decreases
significantly on the weekends.
.
Average Trip Duration: Trip time generally increases with vehicle weight. The 1991
Phoenix survey recorded that the overall average trip tune for truck travel was 28.1
minutes.
· Truck Travel by Facility Type: Few surveys or studies have attempted to analyze truck
trips based on facility types used. Only the Canadians used facility types to classify their
truck trips. A 1991 Barton Aschman Study of Alameda County truck trips found that
many of the approximately 5,000 daily truck trips in the Port of Oakland area are local
trips that never access a freeway.
· Route Choice for Return Trips: The only survey that analyzed route choice for return trips
was the 1991 New York and New Jersey Truck Commodity Survey. It found that 73
percent of the truck drivers interviewed in the toll direction indicated that they would use
the same route for the reverse trip.
NCHRP Multimodal Transportatwn A3-7
Planning Data
Project 8-32~5J
OCR for page 174
I
1
Jack Faucett Associates, Inc. FinalReport March 1997
On-Street Stops: The 1991 Phoenix survey was the only to report the number of on-street
stops made by trucks. The results found that over one-third of all commercial vehicles
stops were made on-street. Light vehicles made half of their stops on-street.
Commercial Vehicle Trips and [and Use
Trips by Land Use: Light trucks make more residential scrips than anv other trek r~tr'~r~rv
Retail attracted many more light and medium truck trips.
terminal/warehouse land uses.
1 A ~ ^_ __ ~
Heavy trucks dominated
Activities at Trip Ends: Light trucks are heavily used for service delivery and personal
business. Heavy trucks are most used for loading and unloading cargo at their trip ends.
Other Truck-Related Findings
.
.
Truck Travel and Dangerous Goods Movement: The Ontario survey (1988) was the only
survey that obtained information on dangerous goods movement. It found that a total of
about 5 to 6 percent of all truck trips surveyed involved the carrying of dangerous goods.
Flammable liquids (47 percent) were the most frequently transported dangerous goods,
followed by compressed gases (24 percent)' and corrosive substances (20 percent).
Truck-Related Accidents: The 1988 Caltrans Urban Freeway Gridlock Study found that
5 to 10 percent of all truck-related incidents were found to cause major incidents which
closed two or more freeway lanes for at least two hours.
Recommendations
This report recommends the following for conducting a regional truck travel survey and truck
travel demand forecasting model if MTC should be interested in developing new truck data and
tools:
NCHRP Multimodal Transportation A3-8 Project8-32~5)
Planning Data
OCR for page 175
Jack FauceuAssocia:tes, Inc. Final Report March 1997
Survey Conduct
· For internal-to-internal or internal-to-external truck trips, draw the survey sample from the
DMV registration file or regional truck registration files ¢~PUC, or private truck
registration databases). Conduct either a telephone or mailnut-mnilhn~k Rev an
combination of both to obtain a better response rate.
.
.
~ ~^ ~ _} , ~ ~
For external-to-internal or external-to-external truck trips, conduct roadside intercept
surveys at various roadway facilities and links in the network. The best places to conduct
them are "weigh-in-motion" stations. This would minimize tragic delay for the mainline
~ ~ 1 ~ _ 1 ~ 1~ ~ _ _ ^_ ~ i_ .( _
Ally WUU1U O~ sarer tar me survey crews compared to conducting the survey at the
roadside.
Consider conducting intercept surveys at bridge toll plazas. For a better explanation of
how to conduct roadside surveys at toll plazas, review We experiences in New York and
New Jersey.
For roadside interviews or cordon surveys, conduct vehicle classification counts at the
same time and at the same location where the actual survey/interview is conducted. This
will provide the basic information for sample expansion and analysis.
For obtaining trip diaries, using a combination of fleet-employer samples and truck unit
samples is desirable. Sub-sampling fleet employers will provide better sample control and
reduce the problem of over sampling large fleet operators.
Over sample smaller or individual truck operators. The 1986 CATS survey has shown that
large fleet operators tend to respond better (more manpower, time, or incentive to reply
to surveys) and smaller operators tend to yield higher nonresponses.
To reduce the cost of conducting a full-scale truck survey, consider making the survey a
multi-agency effort.
Consider soliciting the help of private freight/trucking agencies or organizations. Open
a dialog with interested parties to facilitate cooperation and to request assistance, especially
in the design of the survey.
Truck Travel Analysis
NCNRP-Multimoda/ Transportation A3-9 Project 8-32¢5)
Planning Data
OCR for page 176
Jack Faucett Associates, inc. Final Report March 1997
· Time-of-day (24-hour), day-of-week, and seasonal variations in truck travel should be
examined.
Analyze trips by facility types used (include questions Hat obtain facility type information
for each trip).
Conduct further analysis on the impact trucks have on peak period congestion. Several
surveys (New York, New Jersey, and Ontario) have found Nat in comparison with AM
and PM peaks for private vehicle travel, AM peak period travel was as important for
commercial vehicles as for private vehicles.
Estimate total truck hours of delay by facility to help reduce truck operating cost.
Conduct further analysis on Be impact of truck traffic on pavement, especially Me impact
of waste-refuse trucks and buses (considered as "passenger~arrying trucks") on residential
arterials and streets.
· The origins and destinations of trips that begin and end within the study area should be
geocoded to the transportation analysis zones (TAZs) rather than at the city or zip code
level. This would improve the accuracy of truck trip generation models based on zonal
socioeconomic attributes.
.
Exercise extreme caution when using or applying vehicle ' equivalency factors (VEQs) in
truck travel analysis.
NCHRP-Multimode Transportation A3-10 Project 8-32(5)
Planning Data
Representative terms from entire chapter:
truck trips
