One of the benefits of implementing transportation infrastructure projects is the maximization of network accessibility performance, so that system users’ mobility is optimized. However, infrastructure investment decisions rarely consider stakeholders’ preferences to network performance measures and the impact of project selection and prioritization on the network accessibility performance. This paper presents a goal programming framework that considers network accessibility performance and the total cost of road infrastructure projects or project bundles to prioritize investments, taking into account stakeholders’ preferences to the performance criteria. Results of the case study using the low-volume road (LVR) network showed that the accessibility benefits of LVR projects depend on their relative spatial location in the network, their total project cost, target performance goals, and stakeholders’ preferences to performance criteria. The study results also showed that LVR projects could maximize network accessibility even after the occurrence of network disruption events. Therefore, the proposed framework could help the decision-makers develop efficient infrastructure investment plans to mitigate natural and human-made network disruption events.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnM.CasperC.Integrating Travel Demand Model and Benefit-Cost Analysis for Evaluation of New Capacity Highway Projects. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2011. 2244: 34–40.
2.
GurganusC. F.GharaibehN. G.Project Selection and Prioritization of Pavement Preservation. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2012. 2292: 36–44.
3.
GokeyJ.KleinN.MackeyC.SantosJ.PillutlaA.TuckerS.Development of a Prioritization Methodology for Maintaining Virginia’s Bridge Infrastructure Systems. Proc., 2009 IEEE Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium, Charlottesville, VA, IEEE, New York, 2009.
4.
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. User Benefit Analysis for Highways. AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2003.
5.
ChristopherR. B.IanD. G.Modelling Road User and Environmental Effects in HDM-4, 7th ed.Vol. 7. Paris, 2001.
6.
ForkenbrockJ.WeisbrodE.Guidebook for Assessing the Social and Economic Effects of Transportation Projects. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 2001.
7.
GwilliamK. M.The Value of Time in Economic Evaluation of Transport Projects – Lessons from Recent Research. World Bank, Washington, D.C., 1997.
8.
HeggieI.Transport Engineering Economics. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1972.
9.
Opus. Review of VOC-Pavement Roughness Relationships Contained in Transfund’s Project Evaluation Manual. Lower Hutt, 1999.
10.
StopherP.MeyburgA.Transportation Systems Evaluation. Lexington Books, D.C. Health and Company, Lexington, MA, 1976.
11.
WardmanM.The Value of Travel Time a Review of British Evidence. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, Vol. 32, No. 3, 1998, pp. 285–316.
12.
ZaniewskiJ.Vehicle Operating Costs, Fuel Consumption, and Pavement Type and Condition Factors. Final Report. Washington, D.C., 1982.
13.
New York State Department of Transportation. Vulnerability Manuals for Bridge Safety Assurance Program. New York, 2002.
14.
CanterW.Environmental Impact Assessment. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1995.
15.
CohnF.McVoyR.Environmental Analysis of Transportation Systems. Wiley, New York, 1982.
16.
FaizA.WeaverC. S.WalshM. P.Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles: Standards and Technologies for Controlling Emissions. In Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (LarsenR. I., ed.), The New York Academy of Sciences, NY, 1996.
17.
Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Federal Transit Administration, Washington, D.C., 1995.
18.
OrtolanoL.Environmental Regulation and Impact Assessment. Wiley, New York, 2001.
19.
SinhaK.TelekiG.AllemanJ.CohnL.RadwanE.GuptaA.Environmental Assessment of Land Transport Construction and Maintenance. Washington, D.C., 1991.
20.
U.S. Department of Transportation. FHWA Traffic Noise Model® User’s Guide. U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2004.
21.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. User’s Guide to MOBILE6.0 Mobile Source Emission Factor Model. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002.
22.
MarrP.SuttonC.Changes in Accessibility in the Meseta Purépecha Region of Michoacán, Mexico: 1940-2000. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 15, No. 6, 2007, pp. 465–475.
23.
LinX.Multiple Pathways of Transportation Investment to Promote Economic Growth in China: A Structural Equation Modeling Perspective. Transportation Letters, Vol. 12, No. 7, 2019, pp. 471–482.
24.
SullivanJ. L.NovakD. C.Aultman-HallL.ScottD. M.Identifying Critical Road Segments and Measuring System-Wide Robustness in Transportation Networks with Isolating Links: A Link-Based Capacity-Reduction Approach. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 44, No. 5, 2010, pp. 323–336.
25.
NovakD. C.SullivanJ. L.ScottD. M.A Network-Based Approach for Evaluating and Ranking Transportation Roadway Projects. Applied Geography, Vol. 34, 2012, pp. 498–506.
26.
SantosB.AntunesA.MillerE. J.Integrating Equity Objectives in a Road Network Design Model. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2008. 2089: 35–42.
27.
CantarellaG. E.VitettaA.The Multi-Criteria Road Network Design Problem in an Urban Area. Transportation, Vol. 33, 2006, pp. 567–588.
28.
FaizA.The Promise of Rural Roads: Review of the Role of Low-Volume Roads in Rural Connectivity, Poverty Reduction, Crisis Management, and Livability. Transportation Research Circular E-C167. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2012.
29.
Federal Highway Administration. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 2009. https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/. Accessed August 28, 2020.
AprontiD.KsaibatiK.GerowK.HepnerJ. J.Estimating Traffic Volume on Wyoming Low Volume Roads using Linear and Logistic Regression Methods. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition), Vol. 3, No. 6, 2016, pp. 493–506.
32.
WoldemariamW.Framework for Incorporating Network Connectivity in Transportation Systems Evaluation. Purdue University, 2015.
33.
ShiripourS.Mahdavi-AmiriN.Disaster Relief on Destructive Transportation Networks using a Circle-Based Approach. Transportation Letters, 2020, pp. 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2020.1742417.
34.
FreiriaS.RibeiroB.TavaresA. O.Understanding Road Network Dynamics: Link-Based Topological Patterns. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 46, 2015, pp. 55–66.
35.
ChandranS.IsaacK. P.VeeraragavanA.Prioritization of Low-Volume Pavement Sections for Maintenance by using Fuzzy Logic. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2007. 1989: 53–60.
36.
GuerreJ. A.EvansJ.Applying System-Level Performance Measures and Targets in the Detroit, Michigan, Metropolitan Planning Process. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2009. 2119: 27–35.
37.
SinhaK.LabiS.Transportation Decision Making: Principles of Project Evaluation and Programming. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, 2007.
38.
Chacon-HurtadoD.KumarI.GkritzaK.FrickerJ. D.BeaulieuL. J.The Role of Transportation Accessibility in Regional Economic Resilience. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 84, 2020, p. 102695.
39.
RokickiB.StępniakM.Major Transport Infrastructure Investment and Regional Economic Development – An Accessibility-Based Approach. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 72, 2018, pp. 36–49.
40.
MouterN.van CranenburghS.van WeeB.An Empirical Assessment of Dutch Citizens’ Preferences for Spatial Equality in the Context of a National Transport Investment Plan. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 60, 2017, pp. 217–230.
41.
Cambridge Systematics. A Guidebook for Performance-Based Transportation Planning. Cambridge Systematics, Washington, D.C., 2000.
42.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Performance Indicators for the Road Sector. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2001.
43.
KarlaftisM.KepaptsoglouK.Performance Measurement in the Road Sector: A Cross-Country Review of Experience. Discuss Paper. International Transport Forum, 2012.
44.
ScottD. M.NovakD. C.Aultman-HallL.GuoF.Network Robustness Index: A New Method for Identifying Critical Links and Evaluating the Performance of Transportation Networks. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 14, No. 3, 2006, pp. 215–227.
45.
ReynaudF.SiderT.HatzopoulouM.EluruN.Extending the Network Robustness Index to Include Emissions: A Holistic Framework for Link Criticality Analysis for Montreal Transportation System. Transportation Letters, 2018, pp. 302–315.
46.
DehghaniM. S.FlintschG. W.McNeilS.Roadway Network as a Degrading System: Vulnerability and System Level Performance. Transportation Letters, Vol. 5, No. 3, 2013, pp. 105–114.
47.
BellM. G. H.A Game Theory Approach to Measuring the Performance Reliability of Transport Networks. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 34, No. 6, 2000, pp. 533–545.
48.
GeursK. T.van WeeB.Accessibility Evaluation of Land-Use and Transport Strategies: Review and Research Directions. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2004, pp. 127–140.
49.
MorrisJ. M.DumbleP. L.WiganM. R.Accessibility Indicators for Transport Planning. Transportation Research Part A: General, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1979, pp. 91–109.
50.
BeriaP.DebernardiA.FerraraE.Measuring the Long-Distance Accessibility of Italian Cities. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 62, 2017, pp. 66–79.
51.
VandenbulckeG.SteenberghenT.ThomasI.Mapping Accessibility in Belgium: A Tool for Land-Use and Transport Planning?Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2009, pp. 39–53.
52.
MartínJ. C.ReggianiA.Recent Methodological Developments to Measure Spatial Interaction: Synthetic Accessibility Indices Applied to High-Speed Train Investments. Transport Reviews, Vol. 27, No. 5, 2007, pp. 551–571.
53.
PáezA.ScottD. M.MorencyC.Measuring Accessibility: Positive and Normative Implementations of Various Accessibility Indicators. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 25, 2012, pp. 141–153.
54.
WoldemariamW.LabiS.FaizA.Topological Connectivity Criteria for Low-Volume Road Network Design and Improvement. Proc., 12th International Conference on Low-Volume Roads, Transportation Research Board, Kalispell, 2019, pp. 150–167.
55.
WoldemariamW.Murillo-HoyosJ.LabiS.Estimating Annual Maintenance Expenditures for Infrastructure: Artificial Neural Network Approach. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2016, p. 04015025.
56.
American Road & Transportation Builders Association. Frequently Asked Questions. 2020https://www.artba.org/about/faq/. Accessed December 15, 2019.
57.
van RossumG. The Python Language Reference. Python Software Foundation, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2012.
DareT.WoldemariamW.McDanielR.OlekJ.BernhardR.Comparing Tests for Near-Grazing-Incidence Noise Reduction and Sound Absorption Tests for Hot-Mix Asphalt. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2012. 2270: 1–8.
60.
WoldemariamW.OlekJ.McDanielR. S.European HMA Mixture Design Practices for Tire-Pavement Noise Reduction. Proc., 91st Annual Meeting, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2012, pp. 11–3961.
61.
AlqadhiS.GhahariS.ChenS.VolovskiM.WoldemariamW.Costs and Benefits of Highway Resurfacing: A Case Study of Interstate 465 in Indiana. Infrastructure Asset Management, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2018, pp. 45–55.
