National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Module 4 - Putting It All Together
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 82
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 83
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 84
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 85
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 86
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 87
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 88
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 89
Page 90
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 90
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 91
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 92
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 93
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 94
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 95
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 96
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 97
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 98
Page 99
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 99
Page 100
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 100
Page 101
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 101
Page 102
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 102
Page 103
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 103
Page 104
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 104
Page 105
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 105
Page 106
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 106
Page 107
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 107
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 108
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 109
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 110
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 111
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 112
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 113
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 114
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 115
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 116
Page 117
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 117
Page 118
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 118
Page 119
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 119
Page 120
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 120
Page 121
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 121
Page 122
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 122
Page 123
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 123
Page 124
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 124
Page 125
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 125
Page 126
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 126
Page 127
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 127
Page 128
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 128
Page 129
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 129
Page 130
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 130
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 131
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 132
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 133
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 134
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 135
Page 136
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 136
Page 137
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 137
Page 138
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 138
Page 139
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 139
Page 140
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 140
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 141
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 142
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 143
Page 144
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 144
Page 145
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 145
Page 146
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 146
Page 147
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 147
Page 148
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 148
Page 149
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 149
Page 150
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 150
Page 151
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 151
Page 152
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 152
Page 153
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 153
Page 154
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 154
Page 155
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 155
Page 156
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 156
Page 157
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 157
Page 158
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 158
Page 159
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 159
Page 160
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 160
Page 161
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 161
Page 162
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 162
Page 163
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 163
Page 164
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 164
Page 165
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 165
Page 166
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 166
Page 167
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 167
Page 168
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 168
Page 169
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 169
Page 170
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 170
Page 171
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 171
Page 172
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 172
Page 173
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 173
Page 174
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 174
Page 175
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 175
Page 176
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 176
Page 177
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 177
Page 178
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 178
Page 179
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 179
Page 180
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 180
Page 181
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 181
Page 182
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 182
Page 183
Suggested Citation:"Module 5 - Identifying Freight Resources." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2007. Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14036.
×
Page 183

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.

Module 5 contains the following sections: • Resources Available through FHWA’s Freight Professional Development Program (shown in Figure 5.1) • Freight-Related Databases in the United States, Canada, and Mexico (listed in Tables 5.1 through 5.5) • Current Federal Funding and Financing Programs for Freight Improvements (listed in Tables 5.6 and 5.7) • Case Studies • Freight Glossary References 5-1 M O D U L E 5 Identifying Freight Resources

5-3 Resources Available through FHWA’s Freight Professional Development Program

Identifying Freight Resources 5-5 http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/fpd/index.asp http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/fpd/library.asp http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/fpd/librarySearch.asp?SubjectA reaCriteriaString=36&StateCriteriaString= Figure 5.1. FHWA’s FPD program references.

5-7 Freight-Related Databases in the United States, Canada, and Mexico

Freight-Related Databases in the United States, Canada, and Mexico Source Modes Description/Attributes Update Cycle Geographic Coverage Agency Availability Regional Economic Information System (REIS) All Base economic information for U.S. regions outside Florida, including population, employment by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code, housing construction, tourism, and sales by business group data Every 10 years, years ending in 0 U.S. Totals, States, Basic Economic Analysis (BEA) regions, metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), and Counties U.S. Department of Commerce, BEA REIS CD-ROM version, available for purchase Statistical Abstract of the United States All National-level overviews of Freight Statistics, including operation costs, fuel consumption, employment, and revenue data Annual U.S. Totals, States, Cities, Metropolitan Areas Census Bureau, Data Users Service Division Print version, available for purchase Table 5.1. Economic databases.

Table 5.2. Socioeconomic databases. National Income and Product Account (NIPA) All Consumption Information for U.S. Annual U.S. Totals U.S. Department of Commerce, BEA Diskette version, free of charge BEA Regional Projections to 2045 All National projections of employment by industry type Annual U.S. Totals and State U.S. Department of Commerce, BEA Diskette version, available for purchase Annual Survey of Manufactures All Additional employment data and value of goods shipped by type of goods Annual U.S. Totals U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, Manufacturing and Construction http://www.census.gov/mc d/asmhome.html Survey of Employment, Payroll and Hours All Employment data for Eastern and Western Canadian regions Annual Canada, the province and territories Statistics Canada, Labor Division Print version, available free of charge Trends in Occupation and Industry All Base occupation and industry data for Canadian regions No specific pattern Canada Statistics Canada, Census Operations Division, Census of Population Print version, available for purchase Covered Employment and Wages (ES-202) Programs All General employment data (number of employees, revenues, and wages by employment type) Annual U.S. Totals, State, and County Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Print and CD-ROM versions, available for free from Florida DOT Current Employment Statistics All General employment data (number of employees, revenues, and wages by employment type) Annual U.S. Totals, fewer details for states U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics http://stats.bls.gov/data/ho me.htm Census of Manufacturers All Employment and manufacturing industries statistics as well as quantity and value of material consumed and products shipped Every five years, years ending in 2 and 7 U.S. Totals, State, and Local Geography U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau http://www.census.gov/eco n/www/mancen.html Info USA All Employment by industry using refined SIC codes as well as North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes Weekly U.S. Totals, State, Districts, and Counties Info USA Database version, available for purchase Consumer Expenditure Survey All American Households expenditures, income, and family characteristics Weekly, and per quarter U.S. Totals, Four Census regions, 26 selected Metropolitan Areas U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Print, Diskette, and Tape versions, available for purchase Source Modes Description/ Attributes Cycle Update Geographic Coverage Agency Availability Census Transportation Planning Package (CTTP) All Base year populations and households for analysis zones outside Florida Every 10 years, years ending in 0 U.S. Totals, State, County, Places with more than 2,500 persons U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau CD-ROM version, contact state/local agencies for free copy County Business Patterns All SIC Employment Data Annual U.S. Totals, State, and County U.S. Census Bureau www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/ view/cbpview.html

Source Modes Description/ Attributes Cycle Update Geographic Coverage Agency Availability North American Transportation Atlas (NORTAD) All Geospatial information for transportation modal networks, intermodal terminals, and related attribute information Not specified U.S. Totals, Canada, and Mexico U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics www.bts.gov/publications/n orth_american_transportatio n_atlas_data/ National Transportation Atlas Databases (NTAD) All Most complete database source for highway network information outside Florida and for rail, water, and air networks for the zones inside and outside Florida Not specified 50 U.S. States, District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics www.bts.gov/programs/geo graphic_information_services / National Highway Planning Network Version 2 All Highway link information in the U.S. (Real- time information on vehicle movement and highway conditions) Real-time Major U.S. Highways U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning /nhpn located under subdirectory PUB/FHWA/GIS Strategic Highway Corridor Network (STRAHNET) and Connectors All Highway link information outside Florida (real-time information on vehicle movement and highway conditions) Not specified Major Highway Systems in 50 U.S. States and District of Columbia U.S. Department of Defense, Department of Army, Military Traffic Management www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep10/ NHS/review/strahnetproc.ht ml Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) National Rail Planning Network Rail Digital representation of major continental U.S. railway systems, including Canada and Mexico Not specified 50 U.S. States, Canada, and Mexico U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration www.bts.gov/publications/n orth_american_transportatio n_atlas_data/ Table 5.3. Modal networks.

Table 5.4. Modal operations and volumes. Source Modes Description/ Attributes Cycle Update Geographic Coverage Agency Availability Highway Performance Monitoring System All National public road mileage on both a statewide and national basis Annual National, statewide, and urbanized areas U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration GIS version, available for purchase Highway User and Usage Database All Data on motor fuel consumption, registrations, driver licenses, highway finance, and road characteristics Annual National and statewide U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration http://www.fhwa.dot.gov /policy/ohpi/ Truck Weight Study Data All Database contains information on weight- in-motion and vehicle classification information collected at truck weigh sites Not specified U.S. Totals U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Free of charge if diskette is provided Terminal Area Forecast Airport Air cargo volumes by commodity type Not specified Select airports in the U.S., including those with FAA control towers and those receiving commercial service U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration Printed format Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Aviation Forecasts Fiscal Years 2000-2011 Airport Air cargo historical and forecast volumes by commodity type Not specified Select airports in the U.S., including those with FAA control towers and those receiving commercial service U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration http://www.faa.gov/data_st atistics/aviation/aerospace_f orecasts/2000-2011/ 1987 Benchmark Input-Output Accounts of the United States All Distribution of transportation service output to using industries and final purchasers, defined by mode Not Applicable U.S. Totals BEA, Industry Economics Division Diskette, available for purchase Status of the Nation’s Surface Transportation System: Condition and Performance All Highway, bridge, and transit operation and financial performance measures Biennial National Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Print version, available for purchase Profiles of U.S. Railroads Rail Annual survey of freight railroads (name, owner, operator, location, geographic boundaries, number of employees, wages, and revenues) Annual 500 U.S. freight railroads Association of American Railroads Print copy, available for purchase

p g p g g y y Motor Carrier Financial and Operating Information Program All Annual and quarterly survey of motor carriers (name, owner, operator, location, geographic boundaries, number of employees, wages, and revenues) Quarterly and annually National National Administration, Office of Federal Highway Motor Carriers www.bts.gov/mcs/prod.html Intermodal Equipment Inventory All Intermodal equipment of all U.S.– flag intermodal marine carriers and major container leasing companies operating in the U.S. Quarterly U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration Print version, available for purchase Annual Bulletin of Transport Statistics for Europe All Rail, road, inland, waterways, and oil- pipeline transport database Annual U.S., Europe, and Israel United Nations, Economic Commission for Europe Print version, available for purchase North America Airport Traffic Report. Airport Council International – North America Traffic Report Aviation Airport activity statistics in terms of passenger and cargo operations Not applicable 130 North American airports Airports Council International, North America Print version, available for purchase Railroad 10-Year Trends Rail U.S. freight industry performance, traffic, revenue, financial statistics, employment, plant, and equipment Annual U.S. Totals Association of American Railroads Print version, available for purchase Transportation Files (TRANS Files) Rail Railroad annual report, including data on freight volumes, number of employees, and wages Annual U.S. Class I Railroads Surface Transportation Board Print version, available for purchase Uniform Railroad Cost System (URCS) Phase III Movement Costing Program Rail Railroad Movement Cost estimates Annual U.S. Class I Railroads, two summary regions (east and west) Surface Transportation Board Print version, available for purchase Air Transport Aviation Passenger and freight airline statistics Annual National Air Transport Association (ATA) http://66.153.70.186/ATA_eBi z/Default.aspx?tabid=95&actio n=SUBProductDetails&args=16 8 Railroads and States Rail Amtrak and freight railroad statistics by state Annual 48 Continental U.S. States and Alaska Association of American Railroads Current publication version, www.aar.org (continued on next page)

Table 5.4. (Continued). Source Modes Description/ Attributes Cycle Update Geographic Coverage Agency Availability Airport Activity Statistics Aviation Volume of revenue passengers, freight express, and mail traffic Annual U.S. Totals, State, and City U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics Print version, available for purchase Railroad Facts Rail Summary of historic data on Class I railroads defined by the Surface Transportation Board Annual U.S. Totals, summary by east and west Association of American Railroads Print version, available for purchase National Highway and Airway Carriers and Routes All General and detailed freight shipping information (routes and warehousing information) Not specified 50 States and Canada Transportation Technical Services, Inc. Print version, available for purchase Port Facilities Inventory Seaport Detailed information on more than 4,000 major ocean and river port facilities (name, owner, operator, location, geographic boundaries, activity levels, wages, revenues, and number of employees) No specific update cycle Major U.S. ocean and river port facilities U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration Print version, available for purchase Port Series Seaport Information on U.S. port facilities (name, owner, operator, location, geographic boundaries, activity levels, wages, revenues, and number of employees) Eight to 10- year cycle U.S. Coastal, inland, and Great Lakes port facilities U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Print version, available for purchase Transportation In America All Historical statistical analysis of transportation activities, by modes in the United States Not Applicable National Foundation Eno Transportation Print version, available for purchase Transportation Statistics Annual Report All Summary of state transportation statistics with focus on economic, safety, and environmental consequences of systems Annual U.S. Totals U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics www.bts.gov/programs/tra nstu/tsar/tsar.html Waterborne Transportation Lines of the United States Seaports Information on all domestic vessel operations (freight volumes and revenues) Annual U.S. Totals U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Print version, available for purchase Transportation Technical Services (TTS) Blue Book of Trucking Companies All Motor Carriers data, including income, operating expenses, labor, units, output, assets, and liabilities. Private fleet not included Annual U.S. Totals, Canada Transportation Technical Services Disk version, available for purchase

America’s private Carriers All Charts and analysis information on private carrier segment of trucking industry Annual U.S. Totals Transportation Technical Services Disk version, available for purchase Canadian Motor Carrier Directory All Survey of trucking firms in Canada (name, owner, operator, location, geographic boundaries, activity levels, wages, revenues, and number of employees) Not specified Canada Transportation Technical Services Disk version, available for purchase Mexican Motor Carrier Directory All Survey of trucking firms in Mexico (name, owner, operator, location, geographic boundaries, activity levels, wages, revenues, and number of employees) Not specified Mexico Services Disk version, available for purchase Standard Trucking and Transportation Statistics (STATS) All Comprehensive overview of trucking industry (name, owner, operator, location, geographic boundaries, activity levels, wages, revenues, and number of employees) Annual U.S. Totals American Trucking Associations Yearly subscription The Private Fleet Directory All Comprehensive overview of private firms with 10 or more trucks or tractors (name, owner, operator, location, geographic boundaries, activity levels, wages, revenues, and number of employees) Annual U.S. Totals Transportation Technical Services Disk version, available for purchase TranStats All Data on truck movement, truck shipments that move across the Woodrow Wilson Bridge, federal gas tax, and findings from Transportation Satellite Accounts (TSA) Varies U.S. Totals U.S. Department of Transportation www.bts.gov/programs/tra nstu/analysis.htm Truck Inventory and Use Surveys (TIUS) All Physical and operational characteristics on the Nation’s truck population Varies U.S. Totals, 50 States, and District of Columbia U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau www.bts.gov/ntda/tius/pro d.html Transportation Technical Trucking Activity Report (TRAC) All Benchmarking statistics for both truckload and less-than-truckload carriers Monthly U.S. Totals American Trucking Associations Yearly subscription Analysis of Class I Railroad Rail Financial and operating statistics for each Class I railroad Not specified U.S. Totals, summary by east and west Association of American Railroads Print version, available for purchase (continued on next page)

Table 5.4. (Continued). Source Modes Description/ Attributes Cycle Update Geographic Coverage Agency Availability Highway Statistics All Statistical tabulations relating to highway use, highway finance, and highway infrastructure Annual U.S. by 50 states U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration www.bts.gov/ntda/fhwa/pr od.html Freight Transport Trends and Forecasts Seaport, Rail, Trucking Historical trends and detailed forecasts for marine, rail, and truck freight traffic, by commodity and sector Annual Canada Transport Canada Print version Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) Central Traffic Database All Historical and monitored traffic summary statistics for all General Pavement Study and Specific Pavement Study Annual U.S. Totals U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Disk version, free of charge Annual Vehicle- Miles of Travel (VMT) and Related Data (VM-1) All VMT estimates of current year and revised figures for previous years Annual U.S. Totals U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Disk version, free of charge National Transportation Statistics (NTS) All National transportation data and transportation-related energy statistics for major transportation modes Varies U.S. Totals U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics http://www.bts.gov/publica tions/national_transportatio n_statistics//

Table 5.5. Freight shipments. Source Modes Description/ Attributes Cycle Update Geographic Coverage Agency Availability TRANSEARCH All Comprehensive market research data service for intercity traffic flows Every five years, years ending in 3 and 8 Counties Reebie Associates CD-ROM, available for purchase Commodity Flow Survey (CFS) All Data on flow of goods and materials by mode of transport Not specified U.S. Totals and 89 National Transportation Analysis Region U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics CD-ROM, available for purchase Carload Waybill Sample Rail Rail shipment data such as origin and destination points, type of commodity, number of cars, tons, revenue, participating railroads, and interchange locations Annual U.S. Totals, BEA-to-BEA levels Surface Transportation Board CD-ROM, available for purchase Rail Waybill Database Rail Public-use aggregate nonconfidential rail shipment data (freight volume and revenue data) Not specified U.S. Class I Railroads U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics CD-ROM, available for purchase Latin America Trade and Transportation Study All Analysis of trade between Latin America and the United States. Emphasis on transportation impacts on southeastern states Varies Southeastern U.S. by state Southeastern Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (SASHTO) CD-ROM Domestic Waterborne Commerce of the United States Seaport Domestic waterborne commerce in short tons by commodity, vessel, operator, shipping and receiving dock, type of service, and trade segment Annual U.S. by ports U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration CD-ROM U.S. Waterborne Exports and Outbound In Transit Shipments Seaport Shipping weight and value by type of vessel service Annual Counties U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau CD-ROM The State Freight Transportation Profiles All Summaries of National Transportation Atlas Databases, CFS, United States Waterway Data, and Railroad Accident/Incident Reporting System (RAIRS) Not Specified 50 States U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics CD-ROM, available for purchase Latin American and (continued on next page)

Table 5.5. (Continued). Source Modes Description/ Attributes Cycle Update Geographic Coverage Agency Availability U.S. Exports of Merchandise All Year-to-date exports commodity information by district Annual U.S. Customs districts of exportations U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau CD-ROM, available for purchase U.S. Imports of Merchandise All Detailed general imports and imports for consumption data Annual U.S. Customs districts of entry and unlading and country of origin U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau CD-ROM, available for purchase U.S. Exports of Domestic and Foreign Merchandise All Exports by all modes to outside the United States Annual U.S. Customs districts of exportations, countries of destination U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau CD-ROM, available for purchase U.S. General Imports and Imports for Consumption All General imports and imports for consumption data Annual U.S. Customs districts of entry and unlading and country of origin U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau CD-ROM, available for purchase Trucking in Canada All Comprehensive overview of the Canadian trucking industry, both for-hire and owner-operators Annual Canada, provinces, and territories Statistics Department Print version, available for purchase Weekly Railroad Traffic Rail Information on carloads by commodity and railroads plus intermodal traffic by railroad Weekly U.S. rail carloads Association of American Railroads Print version, available for purchase Monthly Truck Tonnage Report All Information on tonnage moved by for-hire motor carriers Yearly U.S. Totals American Trucking Associations Print version, available for purchase Transportation Annual Survey All – except Aviation Data on total operating revenue, and total operating expenses that include annual payroll and employee benefits, commodities carried, end-of-year inventory of revenue generating equipment, and type of carrier Yearly U.S. Totals U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau CD-ROM, available for purchase Shifts in Petroleum Transportation All– except Aviation Movement, in ton-miles, of crude oil and petroleum products Annual 50 States, District of Columbia, and Canada Association of Oil Pipe Lines Print version, free of charge Transshipments Via Canada All Dollar value and estimated waterborne tonnage for United States exports and imports transshipped through Canada Annual U.S. Totals, Canada Association of American Railroads CD-ROM, available for purchase

p g p g g y y Transborder Surface Freight Data All- except Aviation Annual tonnage and value data by commodity type and by surface mode of transportation Monthly U.S., Canada, and Mexico totals U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Division www.bts.gov/ntda/tbscd Origin and Destination of Waterborne Commerce of the United States, Public Domain All Aggregate information on waterborne commodity movements between 26 geographical regions in the United States Yearly U.S. Totals, U.S. Territories U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Data file version, available for purchase Rail in Canada Rail Overview of size and structure of Canadian railway industry Yearly Statistics Canada, Transportation Division, Multimodal Transport Section Print version, available for purchase Coal Distribution Data All Information on coal distribution by origin, destination, consumer category, and method of transportation Quarterly Worldwide U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Diskette format Port Import Export Reporting Service (PIERS) Seaports Comprehensive statistics on global cargo movements transiting seaports in the United States, Mexico, and South America to companies around the globe Monthly Global, including U.S. Seaports Journal of Commerce Group, Inc. Commercial database available on-line U.S. General Imports and Imports for Consumption All Net quantity and value of imports for consumption and general imports Annual U.S. Customs districts of entry and unlading and country of origin U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau CD-ROM, available for purchase Weekly Railroad Traffic Rail Carloads by commodity and railroad plus intermodal traffic by railroad Weekly U.S. rail carloads Association of American Railroads Print version, available for purchase Current Industrial Reports All Current statistics on commodity production and shipments for approximately 4,500 products Annual U.S. Totals U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau CD-ROM U.S. Merchandise Trade All Tables on merchandise exports, general imports, and imports for consumption Annual Custom districts, world area by countries of origin- destination U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau Print version, available for purchase Waterborne Tonnage by State Seaports Provides one page listings of the waterborne tonnage by states for a given calendar year Annual U.S. Totals, U.S. Territories, 50 States, and District of Columbia U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Print version Canada

5-21 Current Federal Funding and Financing Programs for Freight Improvements

Identifying Freight Resources 5-23 Table 5.6. Current federal funding and financing programs for freight improvements. Current Federal Programs Impediments Section 130 Rail- Highway Grade Crossing Program Rail-highway grade crossings; improvements normally involve public and private funding Safety-oriented, not for capacity improvements National Highway System (NHS) Funds projects on designated highway intermodal connectors to intermodal facilities Connectors are normally lower priority on NHS system and there is no eligibility for rail improvements Surface Transportation Program (STP) Funds projects on any federal-aid highway, bridge projects on any public road, transit capital projects, and other state or local projects Cannot fund freight rail other than highway grade crossings Interstate Maintenance (IM) Provides funding for resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating and reconstructing most routes on the Interstate Highway System Cannot fund non-highway improvements Transportation Enhancements Supports non-traditional transportation- related improvements Limited funding available (10 percent set-aside of STP funds) Rail Relocation Grants Funds local rail line relocation and improvement projects Grants only available to states; limited funding available Truck Parking Facilities Funds projects that improve long-term parking for commercial vehicles on the NHS Improvements to facilities not on the NHS are not eligible CMAQ Can fund any transport project that improves air quality Air quality-oriented, not for capacity improvements TIFIA Provides loans and credit assistance for major transportation investments of national or regional significance Current project minimum $50 million; $15 million for ITS projects RRIF Provides loans and credit assistance to both public and private sponsors of rail and intermodal projects Limited funding available; percentage targeted to short-line railroads SIBs Allows states to establish infrastructure revolving funds that can be capitalized with federal transportation funds Must be funded by states using federal transportation funds Private Activity Bonds Allows the issuance of tax-exempt private activity bonds for highway and freight transfer facilities Limited bonding authority (capped at $15 billion) Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle (GARVEE) Bonds Allows states to issue tax-exempt debt backed by future federal-aid highway revenues States must commit future highway revenues to back bonds Coordinated Border Infrastructure Program Funds projects in border states that improve cross-border flow Limited eligibility for rail; highway needs dominate Current Eligibility (continued on next page)

5-24 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas Table 5.6. (Continued). Current Federal Programs Impediments FAA Airport Improvement Program Funds construction activities at large cargo or commercial airports Primarily focused on on-airport improvements; limited eligibility for access improvements USACE Harbor Maintenance Funds improvements to operations and maintenance of channels used for commercial navigation Funds subject to appropriations Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration Grants Funds projects that allow distressed communities to attract or retain jobs Freight projects must have ability to create or retain jobs FTA Rail Modernization Funds capital improvements on fixed guideway systems Focused on commuter rail systems (some of which also carry freight, some of which do not) Special Earmarks Freight-specific projects occasionally earmarked by Congress Normally focused on large highway projects Current Eligibility Table 5.7. Examples of state funding programs for freight improvements. Current Programs Description NYSDOT Multimodal Program Reimbursement funding for authorized rail, port, airport, and state and local highway and bridge projects NYSDOT Industrial Access Program Provided funding for road, bridge, and rail access improvements to new or existing development sites New Hampshire DOT (NHDOT) Special Railroad Fund Dedicated to the maintenance, repair, and improvement of state-owned railroad lines and is financed through revenue generated by the leasing of railroad lines and other fees from property agreements NHDOT Revolving Loan Fund Provides funding to railroad projects on short-line and cog railroads and aims to support the acquisition of railroad property and improvements to lines that will maintain the viability of railroad system. The revolving fund is supported through capital budget appropriations. Maine DOT Industrial Rail Access Program Provides funds to projects that encourage economic development and employ- ment growth, preserve essential rail service, enhance intermodal transportation, and preserve rail corridors for future transportation uses. The program is funded through revenue from General Fund bonds and provides up to 50 percent of the estimated project cost.

5-25 Case Studies

Identifying Freight Resources 5-27 Small/Medium MPO Case Studies Brownsville MPO, Brownsville, Texas Duluth-Superior Metropolitan Interstate Committee, Duluth, Minnesota Lancaster County Transportation Coordinating Committee, Lancaster, Pennsylvania Michiana Area Council of Governments, South Bend, Indiana Association of Central Oklahoma Governments, Oklahoma City Pima Association of Governments, Tucson, Arizona Polk Transportation Planning Organization, Bartow, Florida Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission, Roanoke, Virginia San Joaquin Council of Governments, Stockton, California Southwest Michigan Commission, Benton Harbor, Michigan Susquehanna Economic Development Association—Council of Governments, Lewisburg, Pennsylvania Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Council, Syracuse, New York Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments, Toledo, Ohio Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Whatcom Council of Governments, Bellingham, Washington

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Brownsville MPO Brownsville, Texas MPO Overview The Brownsville MPO covers the Brownsville area of Cameron County at the southern tip of Texas, across the Rio Grande from Matamoros, Mexico. A separate planning organization, the Harlingen-San Benito MPO, handles transportation planning for the northern part of the county. Brownsville and the southern Texas region are characterized by high population and economic growth rates that have been further spurred by the North American Free Trade Agreement (inaugurated January 1, 1994). Fast population growth over the past 10 years has been accompanied by strong increases in employment. Brownsville, like the rest of the Rio Grande Valley region, is predominantly Mexican-American. Although the region has seen an expansion in economic opportunity in recent years, it remains one of the poorer parts of the United States. Consistent with its growth and geographical advantages, Brownsville has witnessed growing freight traffic, in terms of both trucks and rail, since 1994. Brownsville serves as the deep water port for Monterrey—often recognized as Mexico’s leading industrial city and home to major multinational corporations. As such, there is a continual stream of trains and trucks originating from northeastern Mexico (including Monterrey). These trains and trucks cross into the United States at Brownsville as they make their way to the port, about 8 miles northeast of the city center or to other destinations in the U.S. interior. Brownsville also is a popular location for firms that supply Mexico’s maquiladoras (assembly facilities generally located in close proximity to the U.S. border) and is a center for warehousing and distribution related to the movement of goods to and from Mexico. Freight planning is integral to the overall transportation planning process at the Brownsville MPO. Projects ostensibly designed to improve passenger vehicle flows will take freight into account. The MPO has two standing committees: a technical committee and a policy commit- tee. Freight-related interests, including the Brownsville Economic Development Council, the Brownsville/South Padre Island International Airport, the Brownsville Navigation District (Port of Brownsville), and the Brownsville Chamber of Commerce all have seats on the MPO. While no private company is on the MPO board, private interests are represented by these other entities. Transportation Issues The Rio Grande Valley and Laredo, about 190 miles to the northwest of Brownsville, repre- sent the center of an hourglass that connects interior Mexico to the south with the U.S. indus- trial heartland to the north. As such, they are a funnel (and chokepoint) for a huge volume of trucks and railcars that make the massive scale of trade between the two countries possible. The Brownsville MPO cannot plan effectively without considering freight issues because these loom so large in daily life on the border. The issues include • Separation of rail from vehicular traffic. After a 28-year effort, Brownsville just completed the relocation of 10 miles of rail line, allowing rail traffic to bypass its downtown and head directly to the port. However, another project must be completed, the “West Rail Project,” to completely separate rail from Brownsville’s urbanized area. • Pavement damage from trucks. Mexican trucks, sometimes weighing as much as 120,000 lb, transit Cameron County’s roadways, causing pavement damage, particularly at intersections. In response, overweight trucks are now charged a $30 fee by the Brownsville Navigation Dis- trict for travel within a specified overweight truck corridor. The revenues are earmarked for 5-28 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

pavement improvement projects (e.g., replacing asphalt pavement at intersections with con- crete). This overweight truck corridor was established several years ago by legislation adopted by the Texas State Legislature. • Rapid growth and young population limit resources. Although increased trade with Mexico has resulted in much larger volumes of truck and rail traffic, fast growth and a young popula- tion translates to many infrastructure needs in Brownsville and Cameron County. Meeting the basic infrastructure demands associated with this growth can limit the availability of fund- ing for freight transportation projects. With fast growth forecast to continue, concerns are future mobility and how to afford freight-related projects (needed for safety and for the efficient move- ment of goods). • Auto and truck conflict on FM 511. Farm-to-Market road (FM 511) is used as a connector from the port for trucks going to U.S. 77 (the principal northbound artery out of the region). Also, trucks that cross at the Free Trade Bridge at Los Indios use this route from Mexico to the Port of Brownsville. Large truck volumes create safety issues with automobiles. TxDOT has designed separate FM 511 truck lanes (for future construction if funding can be obtained) to deal with this aspect of freight movement. • Limited MPO staff and resources. The Brownsville MPO has only three staff members (two technical; one administrative). While this is a limitation, it also encourages the MPO to leverage and coordinate expertise and resources with other entities (e.g., city engineering department, Cameron County, TxDOT, and the Port of Brownsville). Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities and Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives Within its jurisdiction, the Brownsville MPO must respond to transportation needs that have local, regional, state, and international impacts. Freight planning is included, explicitly or implic- itly, in all the MPO’s plans (LRTP, TIP, and metropolitan transportation plan [MTP]). A recently completed project, the Veteran’s International Bridge (a.k.a., the Tomates Bridge), responded to needs to improve safety and the movement of trucks from Mexico to the Port of Brownsville. Before the May 1999 opening of the Veteran’s International Bridge, trucks had to share the Gate- way International Bridge, in the heart of Downtown Brownsville, with about 8,000 to 10,000 pedes- trians per day. Also, truck traffic at the B&M International Bridge at the other end of Downtown Brownsville posed many safety problems, as well as noise and inconveniences. The new Veteran’s International Bridge at Los Tomates diverts truck traffic east of the city’s CBD and provides trucks originating in Mexico with a direct route to the port. Commercial (truck) traffic is no longer per- mitted at the two downtown bridge locations. Another success is the Brownsville Railroad Relo- cation Demonstration Project that relocated 10 miles of railway from the downtown area, improving safety and mobility. A combination of factors, approaches, and principles allowed these projects to be planned, programmed, and completed. These factors are now being applied to future projects. • Secure land for future transportation uses. One way to prevent plans from being shelved is to ensure that the land needed for future transportation improvements is secured. Cameron County funded a corridor study to examine how to more directly connect U.S. 281 to the Port of Brownsville. While the connector remains in the planning phase, the county, with assis- tance from the MPO and the port, has worked on ensuring that plats in the areas that will be affected by the proposed roadway conform to the plan. This county study was once termed the FM 1732 Realignment Project. The connector has since been renamed as the proposed U.S. 281 Connector. On this and other projects, the Brownsville MPO staff exerts meticulous care to make sure that the transportation improvements specified in the LRTP can be built. They “sweat the details” in the review of subdivision plats to make sure they do not conflict with the regional transportation plans (RTPs) they have developed. Right-of–way dedications Identifying Freight Resources 5-29

are exacted by virtue of the local subdivision ordinances that make reference to the MPO’s Thoroughfare Plan. – In 2001, the Brownsville MPO’s Metropolitan Area Boundary (MAB) was enlarged in sub- stantial terms. Accordingly, the small communities of the Town of Rancho Viejo and the City of Los Fresnos were added to the MPO’s study area. Due to recent annexations by the City of Brownsville, much of the vacant land near these smaller communities is found within the Brownsville Extra Territorial Jurisdiction, so the proposed subdivision plats go to the Brownsville authorities for review and approval. However, the enlargement of the MAB presents new challenges to the MPO staff in terms of coordinating planning efforts with these other communities. • Plan funding for LRPs. The Brownsville MPO has identified projects to be built through 2029. The funding streams for each of these projects also has been determined. • Leverage projects with a residential focus to benefit freight. Capacity improvements and new roadways ostensibly designed to benefit personal vehicle traffic associated with new residential subdivisions west of Brownsville also help with the flow of truck traffic. The Brownsville MPO encourages truck-friendly designs (pavements and geometries) on these roadways. • Situate MPO so it can do freight planning proactively. Freight planning in Brownsville was initially driven by the urgent need to remove trucks and railcars from the downtown area. Through the completion of the Veteran’s Bridge and the Brownsville Railroad Relocation projects, the Brownsville MPO has largely achieved this goal. Today, the MPO can be more forward thinking and address potential problems with freight movement before they arise. Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools The Brownsville MPO uses data on truck and rail flows to monitor border crossing trends. Upward trends can indicate growing traffic volumes and possible capacity issues at the border crossings as well as increased truck and rail congestion in the MPO region. Downward trends have the opposite effect and presage potential economic problems because much of the Brownsville economy depends on trade with Mexico. The MPO would like to have more infor- mation about the commodities, particularly hazardous materials, being carried across the bor- der, but the trucking companies have been very reluctant to release that information. Obtaining information about the origin and destination of goods moving across the border has proven to be even more difficult. Development of Partnerships The Brownsville MPO is an agency housed within the Brownsville city government. The city and the Cameron County governments, and their elected officials, are champions for transporta- tion planning and the securing of funding in the region. This is important as the city and county can become involved in the politics to secure special funding, while the MPO cannot. While the region’s first stop to secure project funding is through TxDOT, they also will go straight to Wash- ington because the Lower Rio Grande Valley’s infrastructure and border crossings are critical chokepoints with national implications on the flow of commerce. The completion of the Veteran’s Bridge has demonstrated that cooperative efforts breed success and has stimulated interest in additional projects. Currently, the City of Brownsville, in partnership with Cameron County, is trying to secure federal funding for the West Rail Relocation Project. The MPO also has a strong relationship with the Brownsville Chamber of Commerce, which is a voting member of the MPO. The chamber includes shippers, manufacturing, and distribu- tion interests in its membership and this relationship is a means for ensuring that freight needs are defined and addressed by the MPO. The MPO holds meetings at the chamber, the chamber is a frequent visitor to the MPO, and the chamber has been involved in the planning of the East Loop Highway that will bring trucks directly to the Port of Brownsville from the Veteran’s 5-30 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Bridge, bypassing the need to use State Highway 4. The chamber has ensured that stakeholders attend key meetings (the chamber reconfirms attendance and the MPO presents the issues) and that the community realizes the importance of transportation projects. It also has encouraged truck-friendly roadway designs and is now advocating an examination of the use of separate truck lanes on the proposed East Loop Highway. To foster a regional approach to transportation planning, the Brownsville MPO has worked with IMPLAN in Matamoros. A past cooperative effort involved software sharing to allow data sharing on their computers to improve coordination. These efforts have resulted in a coordinated binational land-use plan. This plan involved the careful lining up of truck routes, including map- ping and the alignment of infrastructure on both sides of the border. In terms of a communications strategy both to maintain credibility and gain support for its plans, the Brownsville MPO strives to maintain an image as an unbiased broker of information. This removes any perception of hidden agendas and helps the community reach consensus in its transportation planning efforts. • Act as an unbiased broker of information. The Brownsville MPO develops trust, facilitating the participation and cooperation of a wide range of entities on transportation projects by act- ing as honest broker of technical information. On some issues the MPO staff does not provide qualitative answers, but strives to operate transparently, always adhering to established guide- lines and rules. This approach gains the MPO respect, an especially important attribute when the community is faced with controversial or critical decisions. • Identify and involve stakeholders. Stakeholders need to be identified and brought into the freight-planning process. The Brownsville MPO staff does not assume what other parties want. Stakeholders need to tell the MPO about issues and needs, and then the MPO can respond. Stakeholder involvement fosters responsibility and helps with implementation. Funding agen- cies are more responsive when they hear from a business or someone that would be positively affected by a transportation improvement. The Brownsville MPO assists stakeholders in artic- ulating transportation needs. The other entities undertake the expense of traveling to Austin or Washington as part of the effort to secure project funding. The MPO considers the victories a result of a coordinated group effort. Identifying Freight Resources 5-31

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Duluth-Superior Metropolitan Interstate Committee Duluth, Minnesota MPO Overview The Duluth-Superior Metropolitan Interstate Committee (MIC) was created in 1975 by the governors of Minnesota and Wisconsin, as the designated MPO for the Duluth-Superior urban- ized area working cooperatively through the Arrowhead Regional Development Commission (ARDC) and the Northwest Regional Planning Commission (NWRPC). The ARDC and NWRPC are multicounty planning and development organizations operating in Minnesota and Wisconsin, respectively. While the ARDC and NWRPC cover a region about the size of South Carolina, the MIC’s jurisdiction is in the immediate Duluth-Superior area. Although the MIC’s jurisdiction has a population of only 146,000, the area’s role as a trans- portation hub for a large region translates to higher freight volumes than many more populous MPOs. At the extreme western end of Lake Superior, Duluth’s economic legacy is tied to its port, the busiest on the Great Lakes, handling about 40 million tons of cargo per year. Historically, the port’s highest volume commodity has been iron ore (taconite), mined in the nearby Mesabi Range, and shipped to steel facilities located throughout the Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway region. Beyond locally sourced taconite, the port ships other bulk products, including limestone, coal (arriving on unit trains from Wyoming’s Powder River Basin), and grain from the Upper Midwest and Great Plains of the United States and Canada. In the past decade, the region has experienced relatively slow population and employment growth compared with the nation’s growth. Diversifying from an economy based on mining and transportation, Duluth has become the retail and healthcare center for the vast northeastern Minnesota and northwestern Wisconsin region. The city also is the gateway to Minnesota’s North Shore, a major tourism corridor that stretches almost 150 miles along Lake Superior from Duluth to the Canadian border. The growing retail and tourism industries also have ramifica- tions for the movement of freight in the Duluth-Superior area. Consistent with its role as a major port, intermodal transfer point, and retail center, Duluth handles significant truck and rail traffic. Stronger world demand for iron, led by growth in the Chinese market, has stimulated a recent increase in mining in the Mesabi Range. Port-related rail and truck traffic (iron, as well as coal and grain), combined with trucks serving Duluth’s retail industry and travelers bound for the North Shore, create freight flow and traffic challenges in the geographically constricted Duluth-Superior area (the city developed in a narrow band between Lake Superior on the east and a steep ridge on the west). With unusually large volumes of truck, rail, and ship traffic relative to its size, freight planning is well-integrated into the transportation planning process at the MIC. This includes land use, port access, initiatives to separate truck traffic from autos in retail areas, and road network con- nectivity. The MIC has a Harbor Technical Advisory Committee (HTAC) that brings together municipal, state, federal, environmental, and private stakeholders with an interest in keeping the port competitive while strengthening the amenities that support the development of other eco- nomic opportunities in the region. Through HTAC and other initiatives, the MIC actively encour- ages and seeks private inputs to improve freight flows in the ARDC/NWRPC region. Transportation Issues In many respects, the Duluth-Superior economy is dependent on the competitiveness of its port. Goods must be able to flow into and out of the port efficiently (in terms of time and cost) and safely for the port to remain competitive. The port also must have the capacity to store goods 5-32 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

before (or following) shipment. These port-related needs must be accommodated in conjunc- tion with the region’s significant tourism and retail-related traffic. Freight issues (many of which are now being addressed with programmed infrastructure improvements) include • Separation of trucks from vehicular traffic. Several factors contribute to the conflict between trucks and autos in the Duluth area. The busy port draws a steady flow of trucks for loading and offloading. Tourist traffic is strong because of Duluth’s location between Minnesota’s North Shore and large population centers to the south. Trunk Highway (TH) 61 on the North Shore is shared by tourists and trucks, many of them originating in Canada. Scheduled freighter service between Thunder Bay and Duluth, which kept many trucks off TH 61, was canceled in the 1980s for regulatory reasons rather than for lack of demand. Finally, as a regional retail center, trucks share the same roads as cars entering and exiting shopping centers located west of the city. • Landside access to the port. Truck and rail access to the port has been an issue, with rail cross- ings and trucks limited by road geometries and rail crossings. • Competition from other ports. More iron ore destined for the Far East is being carried by rail to ports in Vancouver and Prince Rupert, British Columbia. Duluth has to maintain and improve efficiency, including the reliability of freight flows to and from the port, to increase competitiveness. • Rail crossings. Rail is a critical mode in Duluth, transporting large volumes of all three of the port’s leading commodities: iron ore, grain, and coal. Rail crossings reduce speeds, cause delays, and are a safety issue. • Terrain. Much of Duluth is sandwiched between Lake Superior to the east and a ridge to the west. This constricts vehicle flows, including trucks, to a handful of north-south corridors and even fewer east-west passages through the hills. • Port security. In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, the port area in Duluth is having to con- form to strict (and sometimes costly) security directives mandated by the Coast Guard. Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities and Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives Within its jurisdiction, the Duluth-Superior Metropolitan Interstate Committee must respond to transportation needs that have local, regional, bistate, and international impacts. The MIC, through its own initiatives and through cooperation with other entities is involved with a range of freight planning activities in the Duluth-Superior area, including a Port Land Use Plan, Truck Route Study, Freight Movement Study, Rail Study, Landside Port Access Study, and a Freight Terminal Study, all completed since the late 1990s. Freight planning is included, explicitly in the MIC’s LRP. The MIC’s freight planning process is getting tangible results in the form of new projects (several close to completion or programmed) to remedy identified deficiencies. A programmed project to improve access to the port via Arthur Avenue will add capacity for trucks, improve geometries, reduce rail crossings, and allow longer trains to reach port facilities. Another programmed project, the Midway Road Project, will rehabilitate a major connector route that allows truck traffic to bypass the downtown area. This will include climbing and turning lanes so trucks can negotiate the hills more easily without slowing down traffic. In 2007, construction is set to begin on a loop access road that will eliminate much of the retail auto traffic from making numerous turning movements on the trunk highway near the Miller Hill Mall (a large retail complex on the western side of Duluth). This will ease congestion, improve safety, and help preserve TH 53’s role as an intrastate connector. The MIC’s engagement with others involved in transportation planning and the gover- nance of the Duluth-Superior area, combined with its own approaches to data collection, analysis, and community involvement have allowed the MIC to address the Arrowhead region’s freight plan- ning needs effectively. Considerations that have contributed to this success include • Be a freight champion. Champions for freight planning can change depending on the project or issue. Sometimes the MPO spearheads efforts, at other times it can be the Port Authority or city Identifying Freight Resources 5-33

hall economic development staff. These groups worked together to move the Arthur Avenue project forward and to secure federal dollars. • Separate and organize modes in LRP into “people moving” and “goods moving” categories. • Include freight in corridor plans. • Make level of effort in freight planning proportional to need. In Duluth about half the MPO’s effort relates to freight planning, but this can fluctuate depending on need. • Include factors related to freight in evaluation criteria. Freight-related criteria, including “project need and benefit,” “impact on network mobility,” and “multimodalism” account for 70 points of a 100-point project evaluation system. Using this system, the Arthur Avenue project to improve landside access to the port emerged as a priority after scoring highly in project need and benefit. • Stay abreast of training opportunities and dedicate funds so staff can attend. The MIC’s staff attends relevant classes and seminars, including freight workshops (e.g., FHWA/NHI), GIS training, access management training (for cars and trucks—organized by MNDOT), as they become available. The costs for these training opportunities are covered in the MIC’s annual budget. • Benchmark freight planning to stay abreast of advancements in the field. The MIC learns from and shares its freight planning experiences with others. This provides new ideas and allows the MIC to gauge what it already is doing well and what it can improve. The MIC inter- acts with other MPOs by attending Transportation Research Board conferences (including one that is specifically geared for smaller MPOs, the “National Conference on Transporta- tion Planning for Small- and Medium-Sized Communities”) and American Planning Asso- ciation events (MIC observes what other panelists have to say and, in some cases, presents its own experiences). When possible, given staff time considerations, the MIC does its own case studies on topics that are of growing interest (e.g., other MPOs’ experiences with truck route ordinances). • Set aside funding for “plan implementation.” For each plan completed by the MIC, a por- tion of the budget is set aside to provide resources for follow-up activities to ensure that the recommendations are being implemented and remain relevant to the needs of the area. This funding allows the MIC to evaluate progress, determine what still needs (or does not need) to be completed, and change course, if necessary. As part of this process, the MIC revisits stake- holders to determine if the recommendations still address important needs and to understand if anything has changed that may affect the plan. Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools The MIC uses surveys to better understand the needs of carriers and shippers in the region. While this is an effective approach for gathering information (2001 Truck Route Study and the Port Land Use Study currently under development), the MIC wishes it had a more comprehen- sive list of shippers, especially smaller ones, in the region so its survey coverage could be expanded. The data and analytical tools used by the MIC include purchased Reebie data for detailed commodity and mode data, port-level freight shipments, rail frequencies (not commodities), GIS for geometries of intersections (in-house capability that is regularly updated), average daily traffic counts for trucks and autos (provided by MNDOT and WisDOT), proprietary economic forecasts (e.g., Woods & Poole), accident data, survey data, and stakeholder input (partnering— collaboration is needed to move projects forward and data, insights, and concerns from stake- holders are also needed in developing freight plans). The MIC’s forecasts are hybrids that combine proprietary and public (e.g., state demographer) sources. The MIC would like more geographically detailed (place-level) freight data than what cur- rently is available (county-level) from private providers of transportation market data. The lack of geographic detail available in the purchased datasets combined with the high acquisition costs 5-34 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

limit the applicability of these data. Individual shippers and freight generators in the Duluth- Superior area generally do not reveal specific information concerning their freight volumes. The MIC does not do any truck modeling for its freight planning and does not believe that it would be an effective use of resources given the size of the MPO and other priorities. However, freight proximity (i.e., suitability of land for freight-intensive purposes) is a factor integrated into the agency’s land-use planning models. Development of Partnerships The MIC coordinates with a number of agencies as part of its freight planning efforts. These include city and county governments, two state transportation agencies, and the Duluth Seaway Port Authority. The cities and counties are the implementers of significant portions of the MIC’s plans, so relationships must be maintained to bring projects forward. The inclusion of city coun- cil members on Study Advisory Committees gives the city councils a sense of ownership on trans- portation projects and helps the projects through the approval process. The MIC also has developed strong ties to state transportation agencies. These ties, fostered by consistency in staffing (limited turnover), have increased the MIC’s participation in state projects. The MIC has been invited to present its studies to other MPOs in Wisconsin and Minnesota. The MIC works closely with District staff to coordinate information gathering and program projects. The MIC also was a contributor to MNDOT in their effort to develop a statewide freight study. The inputs of freight stakeholders (facilities, carriers, and businesses) are brought into the decision-making and planning processes through the HTAC, which is an advisory body of the MPO. The HTAC includes representatives from the grain, iron, coal, cargo, and harbor services- related industries. As a group, they support a thriving port, including dredging and maintaining industrial land uses, while seeking a balance with other uses (recreational and residential) that help to diversify the economy. Citizen groups and the HTAC talk together, share information, and reach consensus, sharing common goals of cleaning up the harbor area and keeping it com- petitive. A balanced approach is needed because the port is a significant economic generator although total tonnage is lower today than in decades past. Another committee, the more broad- based Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC), formerly included trucking and rail members (now represented on the HTAC). The involvement of freight interests on the TAC ended because the time spent on nonfreight obligations (pedestrian, bike, and transit) generally dominated meet- ings and the HTAC provided an adequate venue for addressing goods movement. The Minnesota and Wisconsin DOTs are members of the HTAC and TAC. In addition to the HTAC, specialized advisory committees are set up to guide specific initia- tives. The Duluth-Superior Truck Route Study, completed in 2001, included trucking compa- nies as well as law enforcement agencies. It was helpful to get both perspectives on this study and provided truckers and law enforcement an additional venue for learning more about how the other operates and to improve collaboration. To successfully gather input regarding transportation needs, the MIC goes directly to the region’s businesses and other stakeholders for face-to-face meetings. This approach works far bet- ter than expecting shippers to be present at public meetings to express their concerns. The MIC attends trade meetings (e.g., International Shipmasters Association, Propeller Club, Grain Eleva- tor and Processing Society, Duluth-Superior Transportation Association, and Superior/Douglas County Development Association) that bring together stakeholders (shippers, industry) that have economic concerns about the movement of goods in the Duluth-Superior area. At these meet- ings, the MIC learns about issues, trends, as well as the future vision of companies operating in the area, including what the companies need in terms of water, rail, and road infrastructure. It also provides a venue for shippers and carriers to vent any frustrations they may have regarding transportation in the region. The criticisms voiced by participants are almost always constructive. Identifying Freight Resources 5-35

The MIC’s outreach approach keeps shippers engaged in the transportation planning process, helping to address their needs and ultimately improving the flow of goods in the region. Beyond the trade meetings, the MIC also makes site visits to collect data and information from companies. The information gathered from these types of interviews has contributed to the pro- gramming of freight-related projects (Arthur Avenue) as well as land-use planning for the port area (maintenance of industrial uses, environmental stewardship, and the conversion of property to other uses) that will have a bearing on the volume and location of future freight movements. The long-term land-use planning process involves many stakeholders, including environmental concerns, with the goal of creating a defensible plan, formed through consensus, that will satisfy a range of needs. Through HTAC, trade meetings, and site visits, the private sector makes recommendations con- cerning transportation priorities in Duluth-Superior. Although the private sector does not have a formal vote in the evaluation and selection of specific projects (other than indirectly through the HTAC), the evaluation criteria used by the MIC can encourage the passage of solid freight proj- ects that help the flow of goods in the region. Freight-related criteria, including project need and benefit, impact on network mobility, and multimodalism account for 70 points of a 100-point sys- tem and have helped such freight-specific projects as the Arthur Avenue reconfiguration gain approval. 5-36 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Lancaster County Transportation Coordinating Committee Lancaster, Pennsylvania MPO Overview The Lancaster County Transportation Coordinating Committee (LCTCC) has 22 voting mem- bers serving the needs of the nearly 500,000 residents of Lancaster County. Located in the South- eastern portion of Pennsylvania, Lancaster County is one of the fastest growing areas in the Commonwealth (adding about 4,000 people per year). Fueling this growth are very strong man- ufacturing, agricultural, and tourism industries, combined with proximity to Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore, and Washington D.C. Lancaster County can be accessed by the Pennsylvania Turnpike (two interchanges in the county), and several U.S. and state highways. Norfolk Southern provides Class I rail services and there is also short-line rail service. Public transportation is provided by Amtrak and bus service, but public transit is not a viable option for most residents and visitors. Concerned about the growth in heavy truck traffic in the region, the Executive Director and Deputy Director of Transportation Planning applied for and received federal Borders and Corridors funding to conduct a freight study. The corridor was defined as Delaware and Pennsylvania 41, U.S. 40, and Pennsylvania 287 which form a nearly straight line between the Port of Wilming- ton and Harrisburg. The perception was that freight traffic used these local roads to avoid tolls on the PA Turnpike for shipments between the Port and Harrisburg. This perception was driven by the large number of “banana trucks” (Chiquita and Dole logos visible on the trailers) and the knowledge that the Port of Wilmington is the number one ranked East Coast port for fresh fruit imports. The study sought to develop strategies for diverting this through traffic to other routes or, especially, to the railroads. One of the first things tackled by the LCTCC was establishing a steering committee. This was a multijurisdictional, public-private assembly of key regional stakeholders. It included • Two state DOTs (Pennsylvania and Delaware); • Six MPOs (Lancaster, Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission [DVRPC], Wilmington Area Planning Council [WILMAPCO], Chester County, Tri-County, and York); • FHWA; • Pennsylvania Turnpike Authority; • Trucking industry; • Railroads; and • Consultants from other major studies in the region. The committee tried to recruit at the vice president or government affairs level, but a key cri- teria was to attract members who would participate in the meetings and review draft reports. One of the primary results of the Wilmington-Harrisburg Freight Study (WHFS) was to assemble data about the movement of freight along the corridor. A surprising result was that the Port of Wilmington was responsible for a relatively small percentage of the trucks on the road (between the highly visible banana trucks were numerous unmarked trucks.) Another surpris- ing result was that two-thirds of the trucks originated or terminated along the corridor. Armed with this information, the WHFS steering committee was better able to devise strategies for deal- ing with freight movement in the region. Based on this experience, the LCTCC advises other MPOs to develop a good understanding of the movement of freight in their regions. This can clarify trends and correct misperceptions. Identifying Freight Resources 5-37

Incorporating Freight into the Transportation Planning Process Planning by the LCTCC focuses on (in this order) 1. Highway, 2. Transit, 3. Bike/Pedestrian, and 4. Freight. The LCTCC takes its lead from PennDOT and this prioritizing of transportation projects reflects PennDOT priorities. The MPO and DOT work closely on many transportation issues, though they seldom work together on freight projects. Freight has historically been viewed as a private sector issue and not a place where the LCTCC should focus attention. LCTCC does not have staff dedicated to freight transportation issues. PennDOT does have freight staff at the main office in Harrisburg, but it does not have dedicated freight staff at the district offices. Given its participation in the WHFS and growing concerns about freight issues in the Lancaster area, the LCTCC is now involved in freight “for the long haul,” though resources are still an issue. In fact, the LCTCC has just added its first pure freight project to their TIP. Expansion of Norfolk Southern Railroad’s Dillerville Yard to create additional capacity is projected to reduce trucking of rail freight into Lancaster from Norfolk Southern’s Enola yard in Pittsburgh. CMAQ was used to provide 80 percent of the funding for this project and the other 20 percent came from a local match. The project will cost $2 million for Phase I and $10 million for all three phases. In Lancaster County, the TIP is developed by the TIP Update Subcommittee. This committee comprises the LCTCC technical committee, staff from PennDOT, and the County Commissioners. The TIP is a 4-year program that is updated every 2 years. The process is 1. Determine which projects drop off the prior TIP; 2. Update the costs for the remaining projects and see how much money remains; and 3. Prioritize the new projects and add to the TIP based on available money. The prioritization process uses a combination of volume, number of accidents, congestion, and sometimes job creation. For CMAQ money, the air quality improvements have to be considered. The highest priority is given to maintenance projects (typically taking 80 percent of the available funding) and then to new projects. MPO staff believes freight projects are at a distinct disadvantage to projects that “benefit all users.” Anyone can submit a project for TIP consideration, but most of the LCTCC TIP projects come from PennDOT. The remaining projects are typically generated within the LCTCC or local municipalities. Very few are contributed by citizens or private sector companies. One hope is that the WHFS steering committee can help identify freight-related projects for the TIP. Another effort underway is to work through the local chamber of commerce to spread the word to local businesses that they can submit transportation projects for funding consideration. Responses have thus far been slow, but it is hoped that the inclusion of the Norfolk Southern rail yard on the current TIP will spur more involvement by the private sector in the identification of freight improvement projects. The LRTP does not include a freight section. However, for the first time, the most recent LRTP documents trends in truck traffic, promotes improved linkages between truck and rail, and encourages freight rail use. Development of Partnerships For the Wilmington-Harrisburg Freight Study, the LCTCC organized a steering committee focused on freight. This committee included two state DOTs, six MPOs, and private sector rep- 5-38 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

resentatives. Although there are several large shippers in the Lancaster area, they were noticeably absent from the steering committee. The steering committee was involved in developing the regional freight profile and consultant selection process for the WHFS. The steering committee attended meetings and provided direction during the study. Upon completion of the study, the steering committee decided to remain intact and meet quarterly to discuss freight issues. The steering committee is still active and trying to expand membership to include shippers. The LCTCC is fortunate to be in close proximity to the strong freight planning program at the DVRPC. A LCTCC representative is often present at the DVRPC quarterly Goods Movement Task Force meetings. One of the real strengths of DVRPC, which LCTCC is trying to emulate, is a broad-based involvement of goods movement stakeholders in identifying projects for the TIP. The DVRPC Goods Movement Task Force meetings typically include 60 to 70 attendees repre- senting a broad spectrum of freight concerns (trucking companies, Class I railroads, short-lines, ports, air freight, PennDOT, NJDOT, DelDOT, MPOs, shippers, concerned citizens, consultants, etc.). DVRPC solicits freight projects from task force members. Success Factors and Recommendations for Other Small- and Medium-Sized MPOs The LCTCC believes it is too early to determine if its freight efforts are a success, because they are “new and developing.” MPO staff believes the success it has had in conducting a multistate, multijurisdictional study can be replicated by other MPOs. The primary advice LCTCC would give to other MPOs is to develop a thorough understand- ing of freight movement in their area. This not only allows better decisions to be made about proj- ects to improve freight movement, but also better prepares the MPO to address public concerns. This information should include volumes, commodities, industries, and economic impacts. Many projects benefit both freight and passengers, but these are usually sold solely on the pas- senger benefits. It will take some effort to sell the public on freight only benefits. MPOs should continue selling projects based on the passenger benefits, but begin integrating freight benefits as a bonus to acclimate the public to freight issues. Finally, the MPO takes its lead from the state DOT. The LCTCC involvement in freight will ultimately mirror that of PennDOT. Identifying Freight Resources 5-39

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Michiana Area Council of Governments South Bend, Indiana MPO Overview The Michiana Area Council of Governments (MACOG) consists of three counties with a com- bined population of approximately 500,000. There are several large manufacturing industries in the region: • Recreational vehicle (RV) manufacturing. The MPO is home to the headquarters of every major RV manufacturer (15 to 20) in North America. These headquarters include manufac- turing, administrative, and research and development activities. • Military and sport utility vehicle manufacturing. AM General, manufacturer of Hummer vehicles, is located in St. Joseph County. Every Hummer, for both military and civilian use, is manufactured here. • Other manufacturing. Other manufacturing in the region includes rolled steel, Honeywell airplane components, and three of the four largest orthopedic/medical device manufacturers in the world. • Distribution centers. Two new distribution centers have recently opened in the region, includ- ing one for retailer A. J. Wright. Several railroads provide service to the region, including Norfolk Southern, CSX, CN, and the Chicago South Shore, a short-line providing passenger and limited freight service to Chicago. The Elkhart & Western, another short-line, serves the Hummer plant and interlines with both the CSX and Norfolk Southern (though Norfolk Southern operates the Elkhart Rail Yard). The region includes interstate highways and a toll highway which is managed by a public authority within the DOT. Transportation Issues Most of the region’s transportation issues involve highways. There are a few transit issues (the MPO operates four transit systems—three in Elkhart County and one in Marshall County), but the majority of issues are highway-related. Specific hot spots include U.S. 31, which is being upgraded to a limited access facility in the region (currently in the Preferred Alternative Miti- gation Package phase); SR 331/Capital Avenue (near the Hummer Plant), which needs to be upgraded to a six-lane limited access facility; and County Road 17 in Elkhart, a facility that is being four-laned through the entire county to the Michigan border (and possibly beyond). Highway capacity and access to the interstate system were two specific issues mentioned by the interviewees. Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities The MACOG’s freight planning program has its origins in TEA-21, in which freight was included as one of seven factors for states and MPOs to consider when conducting transporta- tion planning activities. The Indiana FHWA Division office encouraged all the MPOs in the state to take an active approach to incorporating freight into transportation planning activities. The FHWA’s encouragement was echoed by MACOG’s director, who encouraged her staff to learn more about the region’s freight transportation system and its issues. The initial freight plan (completed in 2000) was the vehicle used by the MPO to learn more about the freight system in the region, the users of that system, and the region’s freight issues. The plan was developed by using Census data to describe the region’s socioeconomic conditions. In addition, freight flows into and out of the region were described using data derived from the 1993 CFS. These data were 5-40 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

developed as part of a project of Indiana University, which disaggregated state-level data from the CFS to the county level using employment and population statistics. The MPO was intro- duced to this project through the Indiana DOT. The plan was conducted by two junior-level staffers (recent college graduates) at the MPO. This provided two key advantages for the MPO: first, these staff members were very motivated and very interested in the topic of freight trans- portation and second, they were able to dedicate large chunks of time to the project (almost act- ing as dedicated freight planning staff ). The 2000 freight plan set the stage for the 2004 update. The driver of the 2004 Regional Freight Plan was the MPO’s LRTP update (2005–2030), in which the MPO wanted to better address regional freight issues. Like the 2000 plan, the 2004 update was conducted entirely in-house. The goals of the freight plan were to • Understand the issues facing the region’s transportation system from the users’ perspective and include those issues in the LRP; • Evaluate how well freight transportation issues are being addressed in the region’s existing TIP; and • Engage the private sector freight industry (particularly the manufacturing industry) in the transportation planning process, particularly by soliciting project ideas for possible inclusion in future TIPs. The regional freight plan was used as a mechanism to better understand the region’s freight issues and assist the MPO in evaluating how it can go about incorporating freight improvement projects into the TIP. Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives Development of the MACOG Regional Freight Plan. The MACOG took the following steps in the development of the regional freight plan: • Set up steering committee. Using existing contacts (from the 2000 Regional Freight Plan) and “cold calls,” the MPO set up a project steering committee to guide the development of the regional freight plan. The MPO worked with its local chambers of commerce (which included a transportation subcommittee) to identify other potential private sector contacts. The resulting committee consisted of – Major regional warehousers, – Two regional motor carriers, – County representatives, – Regional airport authority representative, – Indiana DOT District office, and – Chicago South Shore Railroad. It is interesting to note that this group met in person only once. The rest of the MPO’s interaction with the group was via teleconference and e-mail (to review documents, data, etc.). The MPO believes that this was a key component in the group’s ability to stay together. Participation was not a “time-drain” and led to continued interaction and quality, well thought-out comments on work products. The MPO now considers this group a FAC and plans to hold annual meetings. • Develop and conduct mail-out survey. The MPO worked with the steering committee to develop a mail-out survey targeted at the region’s freight stakeholders. Four different versions of the mail-out survey were developed to target manufacturers, warehousers, motor carriers, and railroads. Questions included – What are the major transportation problems in the region that affect your profitability? (New hours of service regulations was a frequent response); Identifying Freight Resources 5-41

– What commodities do you produce/ship? (Responses were later coded into NAICS and dis- played graphically); – What are your relocation and expansion plans? How does transportation fit into those plans? – What transportation system improvements are needed? – How many trucks/trains do you operate? How many days per week? What are your inbound and outbound volumes? 531 surveys were mailed out and 139 were returned, representing a 26.2 percent response rate. • Collect other data. The MPO also collected and used other data to describe the region. Cen- sus data were again used to develop a socioeconomic profile of the region. County-level com- modity flow data, derived from the CFS by Indiana University, also were used. The airport authority, represented on the Steering Committee, provided air cargo data for the regional airport. In addition, county planners in the region were interviewed about land-use issues in the region. • Develop recommendations. The MPO compiled the list of recommended actions from the survey responses and reconciled them to the projects included in the most recent TIP. The sur- vey responses identified 21 specific projects, 12 of which already were included in the most recent TIP. The other nine projects will be included in the updated LRP and will be consid- ered for inclusion in future TIPs. Many recommendations from the private sector involved “policy” issues such as raising speed limits, designating wide-load routes, and constructing more rest areas. Currently, the development of the regional freight plan represents the only way that the pri- vate sector can recommend projects for inclusion in the TIP. The MPO is reevaluating how to better incorporate freight into the TIP development process without having to conduct a detailed survey every time. The relationships developed as part of the steering committee recruitment process may be one way to do that. There is no formal request for project ideas from the freight advisory committee (and no private sector representation on the MPO’s policy committee), but council members do provide informal recommendations to MPO staff about potential freight projects. MPO technical staff can then make recommendations to the policy committee through the technical advisory committee. Development of Partnerships Partnerships—Ties with State DOT. Indiana does not have a centralized freight point of contact, but it does have a rail division that was helpful in developing the regional freight plan. The MPO did gain access to the Indiana University CFS work via the state DOT. It is unlikely that the MPO would have been aware of this work and data without the DOT’s involvement. The MPO’s main contact with the state DOT is with the planning office. The MPO had two suggestions as to what kind of support the DOT could provide: • Assistance in identifying major shippers; and • Assistance in bringing the major freight stakeholders, particularly large shippers and carriers, to the table. Success Factors and Recommendations for Other Small- and Medium-Sized MPOs The MPO had two recommendations for other small- to medium-sized MPOs that are just get- ting started in freight planning: • Get to know your area. Freight is a key component of many areas’ transportation systems, but a lot of MPOs do not realize this. A main element in any freight planning program is to under- 5-42 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

stand who uses the system. Interviewing the local chamber of commerce is a good place to start, because it has existing relationships with local businesses and can provide good contacts. In fact, two of the chambers of commerce in the MACOG region have transportation sub- committees within their organizations. • Establish relationships. Freight planning depends on effective relationships with the private sector freight industry. Developing and maintaining these relationships can be challenging, but they are absolutely necessary for effective freight planning. Identifying Freight Resources 5-43

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Association of Central Oklahoma Governments Oklahoma City MPO Overview The Association of Central Oklahoma Governments (ACOG) is a medium-sized MPO located in Oklahoma City and serves the Oklahoma City Area Regional Transportation Study (OCARTS) area. ACOG covers multiple counties with a population just exceeding 1 million res- idents. It has an established freight system that includes all modes except waterborne. The region is experiencing moderate population growth, growing at about the same rate as the United States as a whole. The OCARTS area has a central domestic location that is equidistant to the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. I-40 cuts across the state and is a major route connecting the Los Angeles area (and its large ports) to destinations in the central and eastern parts of the country. I-35, going north-south, is a primary link for freight traffic between Mexico and the U.S. Heartland. Oklahoma City, with its General Motors auto assembly plant, other significant manufacturing facilities, and population base also is a significant generator of freight traffic. ACOG’s planning activities are organized into three teams: 1. LRTP, travel demand modeling, Congestion Management System (CMS); 2. Short-Range Transportation Planning, STIP, TIP, transit, public involvement; and 3. Socioeconomic data, land use, census (to supports activities in [1] and [2]). Within the LRTP process, staff prepares an intermodal element that gives equal emphasis to freight, transit, and bicycle and pedestrian initiatives. Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities and Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives • ACOG began development of its freight program with the passage of ISTEA. ACOG took ISTEA very seriously. Federal regulations called for stronger attention to freight planning, and the OCARTS-area MPO responded accordingly. In addition, the local FHWA office was a very strong supporter of ISTEA. As such, the 2020 LRTP OCARTS Plan contained the first inter- modal element with a freight component. This freight component has been updated with each subsequent LRTP update. The emergence and implementation of North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in the following years, and the impending large increase of truck traffic ensured that freight remained an emphasis of ACOG’s transportation planning program, as it undertook its 2025 LRTP intermodal element. • In-house staff provides the direction for OCARTS-area freight planning. Except for the 2020 LRTP intermodal element, and the stakeholder panel for the 2025 LRTP intermodal element, all freight planning activities have been done in-house at ACOG because of funding con- straints. As such, staff has built expertise with each LRTP update. The intermodal element of the LRTP provides policy recommendations for freight. However, to date, no specific freight projects have been developed. • Projects must be included in the LRTP to be in the TIP, the short-range element of the LRTP. Project identification in the LRTP is influenced by several factors, including defini- tion of future needs and review of transportation model outputs. ACOG staff recommends projects and presents them to their Technical Committee, Policy Committee, and Board. Communities provide input by approving the projects or providing additional ideas. The final list is then prioritized using a quantitative tool. All projects are included on the prioritized list, and ACOG has not had enough money available for the recommended projects. Although there is no freight factor in this prioritization process, ACOG indicated that any recommended freight project would be carefully considered for funding. 5-44 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

• Each MPO gets funding for its TIP and criteria are used to select projects following a com- petitive process. Locals are included in the review process and projects are ranked. There is a freight component in the TIP specifically to address at-grade rail crossings. There has not been close coordination with railroad plans. Trucks are treated differently because they impact pas- senger moves. However, there are initiatives underway to close many at-grade crossings. • Freight staffing is established every year in the OCARTS UPWP at approximately 0.5 full-time equivalent. • In developing the 2025 intermodal plan element, staff looked to the Tulsa MPO (INCOG-Indian Nation Council of Governments). Tulsa staff had purchased Reebie data. ACOG purchased 1995, 2005, and 2025 datasets from Reebie to support development of the 2025 LRTP. • ACOG is involved in Oklahoma DOT’s (ODOT’s) Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) project as a participant. • Staff keeps up to date on freight industry trends through FHWA’s talking freight series, FAF, TRB, FHWA, and industry. ACOG explored the possibility of hosting the NHI/FHWA Integrating Freight course during its 2004 offerings, but was unable to secure the training. • The ease of goods movement by truck is taken for granted by operators in Oklahoma. As a result, incident management is supported as a mechanism to protect mobility. Preservation of mobil- ity is crucial. Incident management and ITS deployment is a focus for ACOG. Nonrecurring incidents are a major issue in the region. ACOG assisted in implementing projects such as the passing of a quick clearance law to minimize the delays resulting from unanticipated incidents. Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools ACOG purchased Reebie’s TRANSEARCH data twice (1995 and 2000 base years) in support of the 2025 and 2030 LRTP updates. The initial purchase included forecasts for 2005 and 2025. Data were validated by comparing the base year with the CFS at the state level. Staff identified the major commodities to validate industry sectors. An analysis of the data revealed a significant volume of through trips. Base year Reebie data can be validated fairly easily as staff experience grows. However, the forecasts are a big question mark because they are done by Reebie in a con- fidential (black box) environment. There was limited information available to calibrate the fore- casts because of lack of data. Staff reverted to using the region’s forecasted employment and population information. For example, staff compared existing population with existing food and then used forecast population to forecast food. No forecasts were purchased for the year 2030 and the 2030 LRTP development because of the black box approach and the cost. As part of the 2025 LRTP update purchase, ACOG bought the third quarter 1999 freight loca- tor information. This consisted of manufacturing information along with employment infor- mation and tons produced per year. Staff geocoded the information and used these data to complete a buffer analysis to see how close freight generators were to on-ramps, highways, and so forth. More than 93 percent of manufacturing facilities with more than 20 employees were within 5 miles of the interstate system. ACOG staff also reported that the MPO’s travel model has a truck trip table. The interviewees were unsure of the details of how the truck trip table was developed. Development of Partnerships The trucking industry in Oklahoma is very active and well positioned. It has a strong presence in the state, which has helped highlight the importance of goods movement. The Highway Users Federation also promoted the importance of goods movement. The Oklahoma Trucking Asso- ciation is actively participating in the CVISN efforts. ACOG has effectively involved the freight community in its region. It distributed a trans- portation survey to identify specific needs, and it has held focus groups and meetings to gather Identifying Freight Resources 5-45

input on policy issues. These mechanisms were used to develop the initial freight component of the 2020 LRTP intermodal element. ACOG had high turnout at its meetings and received very useful input from the participants. The comments/input were implemented into the intermodal element of the LRTP. For the 2025 LRTP update, staff called upon a panel of peer experts in coordination with the FHWA peer-to-peer program; this included a transportation planning consulting firm, the Mid- America Regional Council (MARC, the Kansas City MPO), and FHWA’s Southern Resource Center. ACOG presented its freight profile to this group of experts. Following a review, the panel came back with a long list of recommendations. These recommendations were incorporated into the profile and then the profile was presented to local stakeholders, including, ODOT, railroads, trucking association, rail association, and trucking companies. Many of the local stakeholders were the same companies and agencies involved in the initial freight element completed as part of the 2020 LRTP update. As part of the 2025 LRTP update, ACOG evaluated future truck routes using its travel demand model. ACOG has strong relationships with the implementing agencies (municipalities, counties, state) in its region. However, staff noted that ACOG provides suggestions and does not have an active role in construction and maintenance activities. Therefore, there is no conflict. Success Factors and Recommendations for Other Small- and Medium-Sized MPOs ACOG’s freight program is policy driven based on data and industry input. The program is updated regularly as part of every LRTP update. To date, no critical freight issues have been identi- fied. Staff believes the mechanisms are in place to address specific freight projects in the future as they arise. Ongoing monitoring of the freight system will continue based on industry representa- tives and the public informing staff of problems (a bottom up planning approach). ACOG provided the following insights on lessons learned: 1. Building consensus and buy-in for a freight program is critical. You cannot successfully force projects, programs, and policies on local communities and industry. 2. Industry trends and current events should be tracked continuously between updates. Five- year incremental updates are not sufficient to capture the ever-changing freight environment. 3. Data availability is a very prominent issue. BTS data is great, but at the MPO level there are too many gaps in the data. Having to rely on one private company at significant cost is restric- tive and limiting. 4. It is crucial to understand the specific needs of your region. Every region is unique in some way (population, demographics, political focus, geography, infrastructure, etc.). 5. Experience to date with peer-to-peer reviews has been very useful; the exchange of informa- tion and experiences among MPOs is great and should be encouraged. In addition, ACOG identified the following as being potentially helpful to its freight planning efforts: • ACOG wants assistance in the ongoing maintenance of data and information between its inter- modal plan updates. If the U.S. DOT could provide organized freight data at the MPO level every 2 years that would be useful. This would be better than expensive and time consuming data purchases every 5 years. • Continuation, enhancement, and updates to the FAF would be helpful to ACOG’s freight activities. Role of ODOT ODOT coordinates closely with and supports the state’s MPOs. ODOT reported having solid relationships with the state’s MPOs. There is significant cooperation and coordination among 5-46 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

the MPOs and ODOT. When the MPOs have questions about freight transportation, ODOT provides them with the limited amount of information and data available. In addition, ODOT is very involved in the LRTP process. ODOT staff sits on MPO committees and represents the state system. ODOT also provides traffic count data and additional support to the smaller areas with more limited resources. All ODOT’s planning activities are centralized at the headquarters’ office while district offices emphasize maintenance and construction activities. TIPs and STIPs are revised annually. An effort is made to minimize the number of amendments, although it is paramount that TIP and STIP reflect current conditions. Volume to capacity (V/C) ratios are the most significant rank- ing factor in ODOT’s project prioritization process. Medium and long-term projects are devel- oped to address problems that have been identified throughout the state. Cost-feasibility studies are then completed, followed by incorporation of the project into the TIP based on V/C ratios, sidewalks, timeframe, and schedule. ODOT has not developed specific truck measures. If a proj- ect does not have a high enough V/C ratio, the truck percentage or volume does not matter. ODOT’s long-range intermodal plan, including a freight study, was updated in 2000. ODOT used the BEA data to analyze the volume of freight and its growth and developed estimates of volume moving into, out of, and through the state. ODOT found a larger percent of freight flows moving through the state than anticipated. These estimates were forecast to 2025. Thus far, ODOT has not done much with this study. The volume of freight was quantified and that is where the process stopped. Overview of Oklahoma Freight System and Issues. • ODOT management is more focused on existing needs and deficiencies as opposed to future conditions. Freight is not specifically included in the current program. • MPOs are interested in freight and modeling; many would like to see truck only lanes. • Oklahoma has tried to become a trucking hub, but has not been as successful as anticipated. The trailer registration program is an example of this effort. • The single largest truck complaints relate to accidents, safety, and congestion. Sixty percent of congestion is caused by unplanned incidents. • Four and one-half times more freight moves through Oklahoma than into or out of it. • Lack of rail data is an issue. Rush hour trains create problems for the state’s large number of at-grade crossings. • ODOT continues to improve its relationship with private industry. • Oklahoma’s commercial vehicle network consists primarily of the NHS; the only ODOT restrictions apply to bridge postings; gross vehicle weights (90,000 lb on state highways and 80,000 lb on the Interstates); and double and triple trailers, which are restricted to the Inter- state system with a 5-mile connector to access terminals. ODOT Freight-Related Initiatives. Specific freight initiatives in Oklahoma have focused on multistate and Interstate projects. • The Oklahoma Transportation Center (OTC) at Oklahoma State University currently is devel- oping a freight model based on the BTS’s CFS. It will be a four-step model and ODOT expects it to be too academic and data intensive for practical use by ODOT and the state’s MPOs. There is no statewide travel model in place today. There is some desire within ODOT to develop a model, however, they no longer have the staff within ODOT to do it. Tulsa, the Okla- homa City area, and Lawton have models. Tulsa will be receiving the freight model currently under development, but ODOT anticipates needing help using it. Further, if freight projects are identified and developed, ODOT expects the MPO to look to the state for funding. Identifying Freight Resources 5-47

• A freight study is currently being undertaken as part of the 2005 Intermodal Plan update. This work is being completed by a consultant and is focusing on identification of market and eco- nomic niches that are supported by transportation. In southern Oklahoma, there has been a large increase in the number of warehouses and distribution centers to support the North Texas economy. Compared with the Dallas-Fort Worth area, Oklahoma labor is inexpensive. Operations are driven by just-in-time practices and there is less congestion in Oklahoma. However, I-35 is becoming congested by these new developments and there are growing con- cerns about continued growth. This study will become the intermodal element of the LRP and it is being conducted for the Department of Commerce. Consultants will need to look at LOS, congestion, and so forth. Inputs also will be gathered from the motor carrier industry. • The I-35 NAFTA Study, completed a few years ago, developed recommendations. Currently, ODOT is completing a port needs study for landside access issues. The I-35 corridor study rec- ommendations focus on increasing lanes. • I-40 is being redesigned and relocated in Oklahoma City, including a new facility with two through lanes. Weigh-in-motion data currently indicates that 10 percent of all traffic on I-40 consists of trucks. The new facility will have barrier divided lanes to support through moves over a 3.2-mile stretch of roadway; the old I-40 infrastructure will be torn down and replaced with a six-lane boulevard; ODOT worked with the MPO on the environmental impact state- ment; the MPO was responsible for modeling the various build alternatives. • ODOT is participating in a regional multistate corridor project called Ports to Plains, which runs from the Texas-Mexico border to Colorado. This involves a four-lane-divided highway that will be designed for trucks. A marketing plan currently is under development to stimu- late use of the new corridor by trucks. Planners also are looking at bypass opportunities to create economic development. • ODOT recently became a participant in the CVISN program. ODOT Recommendations for the Guidebook. • Case studies and examples would be useful as part of the Guidebook. For example, ODOT would like to know how traffic counts can be adjusted to better reflect truck factors for the V/C calculation. Currently, there are no passenger car equivalents in the model making the traffic impact calculations conservative. • MPOs have completed inventories of their transportation systems (rail, port, NHS connectors, highways, etc.). Once they collect freight data, the question is what do they do with it to ensure freight is incorporated into the planning process? That is the missing link between freight and the LRTP process. • There have never been any citations given as penalties for lack of freight planning. Freight planning has been encouraged, but never called out as missing. ODOT leadership focuses on highways. There are no benefits for incorporating freight projects. Projects must be in the TIP or STIP to be eligible for funding; freight gets no benefit in this process. • To promote freight planning the following is needed: additional funding, guidance past devel- opment of an inventory, and federal requirements and funding as opposed to encouragement. In addition, there needs to be a champion, perhaps by linking the benefits of freight planning to economic development. 5-48 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Pima Association of Governments Tucson, Arizona MPO Overview The Pima Association of Governments (PAG) is the MPO for the Tucson, Arizona, metro- politan area. The MPO serves all of Pima County, which includes a large portion of south cen- tral Arizona. Although Pima County covers almost 9,200 square miles (about the size of Vermont), more than 70 percent of the land area is controlled by the federal or tribal govern- ments and an additional 15 percent is controlled by the state of Arizona. Most development and transportation facilities are concentrated in the eastern third of the county around Tucson. PAG’s population increased by about 29 percent between 1990 and 2002, with a 2002 popu- lation of almost 860,000. Population is expected to double again by 2050, with nearly all growth continuing to occur in the eastern third of the county. Although PAG’s median age is in line with national averages, the area has large concentrations of young adults (associated with the Uni- versity of Arizona) and retirees. PAG’s population also tends to have a higher level of educational attainment than the state and national averages, although median household income is lower in the PAG region than for the state and country, related in part to PAG’s lower than average cost of living. PAG’s employment structure is heavily oriented toward services, government, and trade. Manufacturing employment is just more than 9 percent of the total, which is less than the national average of about 13 percent. At the same time, PAG’s manufacturing employment tends to be oriented towards high tech industries such as aerospace and defense. This pattern has con- tinued over the past few years with new employers in the areas of telecommunications, aero- space, and manufacturing. There is a major initiative within the region to develop value added manufacturing enterprises that can capitalize on the large number of freight shipments that pass through the PAG region on the way to and from Mexico. There are two international border crossings in the county. The largest border crossing in the area is along Interstate 19 in Nogales, immediately south of the PAG region. Interstate 10 is the major east-west truck route through the county. Union Pacific is the only Class 1 rail- road operating in the PAG region, and there are two short stretches of track owned by regional railroads. There are two intermodal terminals in Tucson, one at Tucson Inter- national Airport and a second rail/truck terminal that has recently opened. The PAG region has only one NHS Intermodal Connector that is freight-related; the other three serve pas- senger facilities. Transportation Issues Like many other sunbelt communities, the PAG region is struggling with implementing trans- portation investments to keep up with population and employment growth while also trying to maintain and update prior investments. At the same time, PAG is continuing a transition from an economy dominated by the military and defense contractors to one that is more tourism- and service-oriented. Overlaying all of these issues is the continued control that state, federal, and tribal governments have on most of the land in the region, which greatly influences development patterns, where transportation facilities can be built, and how external passenger and freight traf- fic accesses the region. Some of the current transportation issues that these forces have spawned include facilitating cross-town travel with a limited freeway system, expanding transit versus building more roadways, accommodating increasing international truck movements, identifying infrastructure investment that will enhance economic development, and generating additional local funding. Identifying Freight Resources 5-49

Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities and Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives Jurisdictions within Pima County have been very active in addressing freight issues for more than 25 years. PAG pointed to the 1981 Transportation Plan, work for which began in 1977, as the genesis of formal planning for freight needs. This plan included a number of specific arterial roadway improvements (e.g., Alvernon Road, Kolb Road, Kino Parkway) to address unmet freight movement needs and anticipated future growth in several parts of the region. While the projects were not developed solely for “freight reasons,” the design and coordination of these facilities was influenced by existing and expected truck movements in the vicinity. Some of the other activities that have occurred since that time include • Intermodal Management System (IMS). PAG developed its initial IMS in 1995, and currently is in the process of updating this plan. PAG’s IMS tends to be dominated by smaller-scale spot improvements (e.g., improved turning radii at intersections) that have been identified by member jurisdictions and that tend to be easier to fund and implement. The projects in the 1995 IMS, all of which have been implemented, were described as each having a freight ele- ment but were not characterized as exclusively “freight-oriented.” Projects in the IMS were included in the RTP, and inclusion in the IMS is believed to have greatly eased the process of getting the projects into the TIP. • “Port of Tucson” Intermodal Facility. Shortly after the 1995 IMS was completed, Southern Pacific announced plans to close its Tucson intermodal facility. PAG became heavily involved in efforts to prevent facility closure because it believed that an intermodal facility was neces- sary for the region’s economic competitiveness, and it was concerned about the potential impact that increasing truck traffic could create on highway facilities, particularly through Downtown Tucson. PAG spearheaded a data collection effort to help understand intermodal shipping needs throughout the region, including northern Mexico. A few years later, PAG was approached by an individual who wanted to privately develop a replacement intermodal facil- ity. PAG’s data and analysis were used by this individual to help verify the economic viability for such a facility and to subsequently finance and build it. • Corridor Studies. PAG spearheaded special studies within the past 5 years of the Sahuarita Corridor, the Tangerine Road Corridor, and the Southeast Area Arterial Study. Each study addressed the impacts created by through truck traffic, among many issues. • Economic Development. Truck traffic to and from Mexico passes directly through Downtown Tucson irrespective of its ultimate destination. Over the years, PAG has conducted several studies to help conceptualize potential truck bypass routes. More recently, however, PAG has been investigating whether some of these bypass routes also could be used to encourage the devel- opment of businesses that could provide value added services for the goods that already are being shipped through Tucson. The Sahuarita Corridor is viewed as one such corridor that could combine a truck bypass and industrial development; the City of Tucson currently is working on the companion specific plan to the corridor study. • RTP. PAG currently is engaged in a major RTP update at this time. RTP debate is focused heavily on funding and transit versus roadway issues. Freight issues, quite frankly, are a sec- ondary consideration with discussions concentrated most heavily in the three special study areas. Results from the Southeast Area Arterial Study are receiving some added attention because this subregion (near Tucson International Airport) is expected to be the major indus- trial and intermodal growth area for the region. The other two studies had received more attention during the 2001 RTP update. Results from the IMS update are expected to feed into the next RTP cycle. • Project Selection. Both the RTP and TIP include a freight evaluation criteria; it is essentially a qualitative discussion of how a project could affect or interact with freight. However, it has no specific weighting for project selection. 5-50 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

At an MPO level, PAG struggles with staffing and resource issues. PAG has two staff members that explicitly address freight planning, but both also have many other responsibilities; about one-half of each person’s time is spent on freight issues. This staff time and special freight studies are funded through the UPWP using a mixture of sources; staff members were not aware of any earmarked funding for freight planning. PAG devotes resources for ample staff training, but it has had difficulty identifying appropriate freight training activities. To date, PAG has relied on FHWA freight seminars and will be jointly hosting the NHI freight planning course in September 2004. Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools PAG has been struggling with what it perceives as a lack of freight-related data. It is in the early stages of learning how to collect and compile freight data. PAG believes there is an increasing aware- ness at the state level for improving freight data accessibility. Yet technical staff does not have much good information. PAG specifically cited interest in better origin-destination data, FAF data, more reliable truck counts, rail freight data, and cross-border data. PAG’s travel model includes a single truck trip table, but has not used it to assist in freight analysis. Freight planning work in the region is undertaken with truck counts provided by Ari- zona DOT. However, PAG’s planners acknowledge the count and vehicle classification data pro- vide no information on what is being carried and whether the vehicles are empty or full. Also, they have noticed that many of the truck counts are estimated through sporadic 4-hour counts at single locations along a long stretch of freeway. PAG has also noticed issues with the vehicle classification data from the state’s Motor Vehicle Division because this agency classifies heavy pick-ups and sport utility vehicles as trucks. PAG has generally treated collection of freight data as a one-time or special activity rather than an ongoing commitment. Nonetheless, there have been many activities undertaken over the past decade to improve the quantity and usability of locally generated freight data: • Participation in the Canamex and Southern Passage studies provided general freight infor- mation that helped provide the context for the role of Tucson in interstate and international freight movements, and the role of the Nogales border crossing in influencing east-west freight shipments through the region. However, these data were not detailed enough for modeling purposes. • PAG initiated a survey of Mexican shippers in the late 1990s to help determine the types of goods that are shipped, how rail was or could be used for these shipments, and the conditions under which rail might be considered. This effort was undertaken in response to a proposal from Southern Pacific to close the intermodal freight/truck terminal in Tucson. PAG believed the survey provided compelling information on what types of freight were moved and why, and the information was used by a private sector consortium to help justify investment deci- sions in a new intermodal yard. • PAG has developed some spreadsheet-based internal tools to help with things like forecasting intermodal lists. These tools were assembled from pieces of data and reports that were pre- pared by other organizations and have tended to be developed on an as-needed basis for very specific projects. • PAG is planning to undertake an external survey that is likely to include a freight component. It is also in the midst of a freight movement study to understand the type of freight, origins and destinations, and means of conveyance for shippers across southern Arizona. Another ongoing activity is assessing the feasibility of shifting the goods processing point for international ship- ments from Nogales to Tucson. PAG emphasized the importance of understanding what is trying to be accomplished before starting to collect data. Being networked with others in the profession will help provide suggestions Identifying Freight Resources 5-51

for addressing data shortcomings. Planners also should use Internet resources and peer exchange links (e.g., FHWA’s Freight Planning Peer Exchange Listserv) to stay involved. The key is to have a willingness to make adjustments in the work plan if data cannot be found. There also was an opinion expressed that a key to successfully using freight data and address- ing freight issues is to have a staff person whose job is to deal with freight, and who takes own- ership of the issue. There was even a suggestion that new freight planners should learn what is involved with freight movement by “shadowing” someone at a freight terminal for a few days. The key is to develop some private sector perspective on the topic. Development of Partnerships PAG’s staff members expressed that they have been very successful in building strong part- nerships to promote regional planning and investment decisions, including investments that have a heavy freight orientation. While PAG does not propose or implement individual projects by itself, there is some sense that the existence of only six local jurisdictions, two tribal govern- ments, and one county spread over a very large geographic area makes it easier to have everyone maintain a regional perspective. PAG suggested that many of the local jurisdictions actively address freight access needs as a function of their economic development and land-use planning processes, and that many specific roadway improvement projects were undertaken in reaction to unmet freight needs or anticipated future growth. While the citizens and governmental jurisdictions in the region are very active in community planning processes, PAG also tries to develop realistic processes to engage the private sector. PAG has a Freight Advisory Task Force (the mailing list includes more than 100 private sector repre- sentatives) and is very aware that the private sector “operates in a different world” and needs to be engaged with sensitivity. PAG convenes the task force when there is something specific to discuss rather than on an ongoing, routine basis. PAG has found that the private sector is willing to participate when the discussion can be framed in terms of issues that directly affect business on a real-time or short-term basis (e.g., customs clearance and border slowdowns)—activities cannot move on a government timeframe. Toward this end, PAG invites task force members to provide sug- gestions on specific projects. This type of input was used to help develop the 1995 IMS and is being contemplated for the current IMS update. Also, by focusing on short-term projects, PAG has been able to completely implement the 1995 IMS. This is viewed as a major boost for credibility. PAG’s staff believes strongly that freight-related task forces need to be run differently from other routine MPO matters and committees. Meetings of such groups should be held infre- quently and only when a valid reason exists. The meetings need to move crisply, have a well- defined agenda, and stick to a limited timeframe. Also, building a partnership with a key member of the private sector and having that person serve as chair of the task force in a prominent man- ner can lend credibility to the entire process. Part of the reason that PAG came to this conclu- sion is that, in spite of repeated efforts, it has been unable to find a task force member from the private sector who is willing to serve on a separate TIP subcommittee; there is a decided lack of interest in the longer-term perspective of this other subcommittee. PAG also has been invited to participate in a few multistate freight planning studies, including Canamex and Southern Passage. Projects such as these and Arizona’s Statewide Transportation Plan provided important information on the magnitude of freight growth. However, there was some feeling that the state transportation departments dominated these studies, and some MPOs and other stakeholders that had specific data needs were “shut out” 5-52 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

of project scoping and ongoing work activities. In essence, PAG’s experience is that the data and results from these large-scale endeavors tend not be applicable to regional and sub- regional freight planning needs. This problem has been exacerbated by what it perceived as a lack of statewide coordination on freight planning and outreach. PAG believes that it would be more effective to have a two-pronged (occasional and ongoing) coordination process on freight throughout the state rather than the study-specific process that has occurred to date. Identifying Freight Resources 5-53

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Polk Transportation Planning Organization Bartow, Florida MPO Overview The Polk TPO is the MPO for Polk County in central Florida. It is charged with transportation planning for a large, economically diverse, fast-growing, and multicentered region. Polk County is the fourth largest county in Florida. No single city dominates, with five small- to medium-sized cities: Lakeland, Bartow, Winter Haven, Haines City, and Lake Wales clustered in an east-to-west band going through the center of the county. Polk County’s location, directly between the populous Tampa-St. Petersburg and Orlando metropolitan areas in central Florida and its proximity to Interstate and Florida Intrastate High- way System (FIHS) highways make it a popular distribution center for companies wishing to serve the region or the entire peninsula. Beyond freight related to warehousing and distribution, Polk County also is one the largest centers of phosphates production in the world and is a national leader in citrus farming. Phosphates and associated fertilizer production have been a foundation of the region’s economy for decades, with hundreds of trucks and railcars moving between pro- duction facilities in Polk County and the Port of Tampa on a daily basis. Polk County produces 10 percent of the nation’s oranges and the citrus industry, with its heavily loaded trucks bound for processing plants located throughout central Florida, also places significant demands on the county’s roadways. Polk County is located on Interstate 4 between two fast-growing large metropolitan areas and is also experiencing significant population growth. Between 1980 and 2000, Polk County’s pop- ulation increased by 50 percent, more than twice the rate posted by the United States, and fore- casts expect Polk County to continue to grow faster than the nation in the future. The expanding population combined with Polk County’s proximity to major tourist destinations (Disney World is just over the county line and the Gulf Coast’s beaches are only an hour to the west) puts a lot (and a growing number) of automobiles on the county’s highways. An increasing population, more personal vehicles, and tourist traffic have led to congestion that can conflict with Polk County’s freight-intensive citrus, phosphates, and distribution indus- tries. Larger numbers of vehicle trips that correspond to an expanding population, such as com- muting to jobs, going to retail centers, and bringing children to schools add to congestion on key corridors that are also used intensively by Polk County’s industries. For this reason, the Polk TPO has to meet the dual challenges of accommodating more people while keeping freight flows for its critical industries moving. With large local industries, a crossroads location, and a population that is expected to grow indefinitely, the Polk TPO has successfully initiated a series of projects to improve access, add capacity, and better separate trucks from residential traffic. While there is no formal link between Polk County’s freight stakeholders and the TPO, the needs of industry and carriers are success- fully transmitted to the TPO and result in tangible improvements. The success is due to strong cooperation between the TPO, local economic development organizations, the FDOT, local gov- ernments, and the county. Transportation Issues The future competitiveness of Polk County will depend, at least in part, on its ability to sus- tain its key industries (and attract new ones) while preserving a quality of life that continues to draw new people and retirees. Efforts to maintain efficient freight movements, mitigate conges- tion, and reduce accident rates all serve to enhance the attractiveness of the county as a place to 5-54 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

operate a business, work, visit, and live. As it works to address a range of needs in the county to meet these goals, freight-related issues encountered by the Polk TPO include • Separation of trucks from vehicular traffic. Fast population growth has reduced the per- formance of intraregional highways, such as U.S. 27 and U.S. 92, because they are used increas- ingly for local trips. The congestion adds to the costs for trucks using these routes and is a safety issue. • Fast population growth. Polk County, like other fast-growing counties, must continually add transportation capacity to keep up with residential growth. While many of these projects ben- efit freight as well, this could diminish the resources available for other freight-specific projects. Overall, the TPO believes that it directs more of its staff resources to respond to population induced demand for roadways and transit, rather than to freight. • Residential encroachment on freight routes. County roads traditionally used by citrus and phosphates trucks are experiencing more residential development. This creates conflicts with personal vehicles and, in some instances, pushes trucks to use less congested, but longer alternatives. Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities and Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives The Polk TPO addresses a range of transportation needs that affect the movement of freight throughout a greater region, extending to Orlando, Tampa-St. Petersburg, and points south. The Polk TPO’s 2025 LRTP update identifies the need for improved freight in a detailed manner. The plan is guided by the planning factors detailed in TEA-21 and includes specific projects to improve freight mobility. The TPO’s freight planning process is resulting in tangible improve- ments in the form of new projects (several close to completion or programmed) to remedy iden- tified deficiencies. One of the Polk TPO’s biggest success stories is the West Memorial (U.S. 92) Interchange on I-4 in the northwestern part of Lakeland. This full movement interchange significantly improves truck travel patterns by providing direct east and westbound access to I-4 for trucks operating to and from Lakeland’s large distribution facilities (groceries, furniture, automotive parts, etc.). Presently, trucks must use surface roads through the city of Lakeland to reach access ramps for I-4. The interchange project was the result of a focused effort, involving multiple parties, that would not have resulted from a typical planning process (i.e., FDOT models did not initially jus- tify the major expense of the project). Shippers and carriers using the industrial area in north- west Lakeland, frustrated by poor access to I-4, communicated the need for the interchange to the Lakeland and Central Florida EDCs. The communication of this need was facilitated by a longstanding relationship between the companies (includes large employers critical to the Polk County economy) and the EDCs. The importance of the improvements was then relayed to the Polk TPO. With the need for an improved interchange documented, the Polk TPO worked with FDOT to come up with an affordable and fully functional solution to the problem. The result was a full movement “hammerhead” interchange design that could be built entirely within existing right of way and at less cost than an earlier design. With support from the freight community, the mayor of Lakeland, the TPO Board, the local community, and backing from the FDOT district office, the revised interchange was programmed as part of a larger project to widen I-4 between Orlando and Tampa. Another project also involving the inputs of shippers and the economic development com- munity, the Lakeland Intown Bypass, will provide better access to the northwest Lakeland indus- trial area while removing trucks from downtown streets (and thus improving the environment for traditional retail, recreational, and commercial downtown uses). Construction on the final Identifying Freight Resources 5-55

segment of the bypass is set to begin in FY 2006–2007. Considerations that have contributed to the success of the Memorial Interchange and Intown Bypass projects and to the Polk TPO’s overall freight planning approach include • Act as a facilitator and establish a working relationship with freight stakeholders. The Polk TPO facilitates the freight planning process in the region by coordinating between local gov- ernments, local business interests, the economic development community, and FDOT. The Polk TPO works with businesses and economic development officials to understand the needs of area shippers. • Justify freight projects by tying them to economic goals. A visioning process for Polk County pointed to a need to diversify its economy by attracting higher paying jobs and nonresidential development. Transportation projects to support the movement of freight (e.g., associated with warehousing and distribution facilities, manufacturing, etc.) can be a foundation for economic development efforts to strengthen the economy. • Have a planning process that places a premium on the movement of freight. The realization of freight projects is the result of a continuum of planning activities that involves under- standing shippers’ and carriers’ needs and then translating those into programmed projects. This involves evaluation criteria that allow freight projects to rise to the top and strong rela- tionships with the implementing agencies (local, county, state, and federal) that can get the projects done. In Polk County, the transportation planning process has the ability to recog- nize freight-specific projects, put those on the top of the list, and then communicate priorities to FDOT. • Include factors related to freight in project evaluation criteria. If candidate transportation projects pass an initial screening for fatal flaws (e.g., division of communities; adverse impacts on wetlands), they are then evaluated on a 100-point system designed to adhere to the planning principles of TEA-21. Freight-related criteria (“Freight/Goods Movement—Economic Com- petitiveness”) account for 20 points and include access to major public facilities, transportation facilities (airports, rail terminals, intermodal transfer), and regional employment centers, as well as roadways that are designated as part of the FIHS. The Polk TPO’s evaluation criteria helped the Memorial/I-4 interchange and the Lakeland Intown Bypass projects become pro- grammed investment priorities. • Create parallel systems to separate regional and local traffic. The Polk TPO is involved in a subarea plan for the fast growing area along U.S. 27 in the northeastern part of the county. The primary objective of this plan is to create a local collector road grid network to parallel U.S. 27. This would separate local from regional traffic, improve safety, and reduce conges- tion. U.S. 27 is on the FIHS and is designated by FDOT’s Strategic Intermodal System, but has become a collector road for the subdivisions that have grown in tandem with Polk County’s population. A separate grid would help separate trucks from vehicles and protect the viability of U.S. 27 to serve the purpose (as an intrastate connector) for which it was built. The Polk TPO also is facilitating the development of a “Corridor Access Management Plan” (CAMP) between Bartow and Lakeland on U.S. 98 as part of a cooperative effort also involving FDOT and local governments. Under CAMP, service roads will be built to create a parallel trans- portation system that relieves local traffic from U.S. 98. Such a system will allow U.S. 98 to bet- ter function in its role as an intrastate highway, connecting different parts of the state. Development of Partnerships Regional coordination. The Polk TPO participates in two regional organizations of multiple MPOs, one representing the MPOs located within the greater Tampa-St. Petersburg area and the other representing MPOs from the greater Orlando area. The West Central Florida Chairs Coor- dinating Committee (CCC) includes Hernando, Hillsborough, Manatee, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, and Sarasota counties, while the Central Florida MPO Alliance includes Brevard, Lake, Marion, Orange, 5-56 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Osceola, Polk, Seminole, Sumter, and Volusia counties. Together, the two regional organizations include about 40 percent of the Florida population. The CCC is legitimized by a formal interlocal agreement to coordinate transportation planning. The group has developed a regional LRP that identifies key regional projects, including those that enhance freight mobility (a criteria for selecting the projects). By being a member of the Central Florida MPO Alliance, regional priorities that affect Polk County such as improvements to U.S. 27 (in both Polk and Lake counties) can be more strongly advocated with a single voice to state and fed- eral delegations. By working together, the intent of these two regional organizations is to implement a transportation system that more optimally addresses the mobility needs of the region and presents a unified voice for the region when presenting investment needs to decision-makers. The importance of regional collaboration is heightened by FDOT’s proposed regional invest- ment strategies. The policy framework developed for the SIS (Strategic Intermodal System) Strategic Plan and FDOT’s Strategic Transportation Investment Policy proposed a new frame- work for identifying and prioritizing projects of “regional significance.” Under this framework, the SIS would be FDOT’s first priority for capacity investments, and there would be increased emphasis on these regional facilities for remaining state discretionary transportation funds for non-SIS capacity projects. These projects would be identified and prioritized through a consen- sus process involving MPOs and counties not in MPO areas, augmenting existing MPO and county planning activities and reflecting regional priorities. “Regionally significant” facilities would include major regional freight terminals and distribution centers as well as rail, highway, and water- way corridors that are key components of regional freight networks, among other criteria proposed by FDOT. Ties to local and state decision-makers. The Polk TPO has good working relations with the county, FDOT, local economic development offices, and local governments. The TPO Board provides a forum to facilitate communications between affected parties and decision-makers. The Polk TPO works cooperatively with FDOT. A solid relationship, without adversity (neither FDOT nor the TPO blame the other for things out of their control), helps freight-related projects move forward in Polk County. Identifying Freight Resources 5-57

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission Roanoke, Virginia MPO Overview The Roanoke Valley–Alleghany Region has a long history as a center of freight activity within Virginia and for the eastern seaboard. It is best known as the former headquarters of the Norfolk and Western Railway (subsequently merging with the Southern Railroad to become the Norfolk Southern Corp), and sits at the intersection of several rail lines of Norfolk Southern and one of CSX Transportation (CSXT). However, today the region, which is crossed by I-81 and I-64 and several primary highways, serves more as a truck freight distribution center. Situated in relatively close proximity to Virginia’s Hampton Roads port facilities and to a number of major metro- politan areas within a 250-mile radius (sufficiently close for a truck to go and return while con- forming to a day’s regulated hours of service), the Roanoke Valley has attracted major retail distribution centers in recent years. The MPO coordinates transportation planning in the region’s urbanized area, including all or parts of five counties: Franklin, Roanoke, Botetourt, Craig, and Alleghany. The organization is housed in the Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Commission (Commission) and is staffed by the Commission. A separate rural transportation program also is managed by the Commission. The MPO is just under the 200,000 population threshold, where greater federal planning require- ments apply, and where additional resources and authority are available. Substantial growth in truck traffic on I-81 in the last decade has led to public discussion about improvements to separate trucks from passenger vehicles and pushed the awareness of freight as a transportation issue in the region. Heavy commercial vehicles constitute more than 25 percent of traffic on the Interstate with some sections exceeding 40 percent. A recent study4 found approximately half of all truck movements on I-81 are long distance or more than 1,000 miles. The question of diverting truck freight to rail is part of the debate in the region. Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives Comprehensive Freight Study. The MPO undertook a comprehensive freight study in 2001 to better understand freight issues and needs and to educate policy-makers and the public about the importance of freight to the region. The study was initiated by the MPO, but the state played a critical role by providing the freight data. Even with the data in hand, being able to contract for the technical work required careful planning and budgeting by the MPO staff to use carryover funds from 2 years as well as the current year budget. The study focused on freight originating, terminating, or circulating in the region, rather than long-distance traffic flowing through the region. The analysis was based largely on information from the 1998 Virginia TRANSEARCH Database developed by Reebie Associates and provided by Virginia DOT (VDOT) to all the state’s MPOs. Sixteen million tons of freight with a value of more than $30 billion was included in the analysis. The scope of work included an option either to develop modeling capability or to conduct a survey of shippers and carriers. The staff chose the survey option, which provided a wealth of information on current activities, attitudes, and issues of the local freight community. The study concluded in January 2003 with recommendations for 10 small-scale capital projects such as sign- age and intersection improvements, urban development and zoning changes to better incorpo- 5-58 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas 4Reebie Associates, Interstate 81 Toll Impact Analysis, prepared for Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation, December 2003.

rate freight, and the formation of a freight advisory committee. A brochure, “Freight: It’s About Time,” was developed to promote the role of freight in the region and publicize the recommen- dations of the study. Prior to the study, the MPO’s efforts were focused on passenger needs, including bicycle and pedestrian studies. The freight study has since established a framework and set of continuing activities for freight planning. The 2004–2005 work program assigns a staff person approximately 25 percent of his/her time to devote to the follow-up activities, including supporting a FAC and working with local governments on adoption of planning guidelines and zoning regulations. Other staff members also participate in the freight activities. In 2004, an updated LRP was adopted that included goals for freight, which were informed by the study. According to MPO staff, the primary support for spending resources on freight emanated from the business community. However, the idea for the study originated with the former MPO director, who did research on how other MPOs were approaching freight issues and drafted the scope for the consultant study. The staff believes the consultant effort was critical to accomplishing these objectives, as no individual would be available full-time to conduct even a limited assessment. At the state level, VDOT also has provided technical support to the MPO in addition to its purchases (and subsequent distribution) of freight data. The freight coordinator is working on a scope for a statewide freight study that will include more information on economic effects and could provide further information to the regional planning agencies. The freight study represents a very significant effort on the part of a medium-sized MPO, which faces many of the same issues and public concerns as much larger regions, but with fewer staff and budget resources. The study’s cost amounted to about one-third of the annual budget. The continued support by the board as evidenced in allocating staff time and budget for ongoing freight activities is also significant given the competing demands on an MPO staff that is equiv- alent to about three full-time employees. But the significant effort required to launch the com- prehensive freight study all but ensures that another major initiative in freight will not be undertaken for a number of years. Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools The TRANSEARCH data provides a picture of freight activity that is invaluable according to both MPO and VDOT staff. However, the data are more appropriate at the state and inter- regional level. There remains a need to collect local use (traffic counts and classification) infor- mation for developing regional plans and specific improvements. It is important to note that the VDOT supports the modeling needs of the MPOs. The state had several reasons to purchase the Reebie data, including the development of a freight compo- nent for the state model. The additional cost for use by the MPOs was less than $30,000. The VDOT freight coordinator reports that three other MPOs have made significant use of the data. Another issue impacting the usefulness of data is the confidentiality concerns associated with specific geographic regions. For example, to transfer rail data to the MPOs, VDOT had to aggre- gate the data records because of concerns over confidentiality of data obtained from the STB. VDOT statute allows the state to use disaggregated data and to refuse to divulge it if requested under Freedom of Information Act requests. The MPOs do not operate under the same privilege and, thus, data provided for rail by the STB must be aggregated to a higher level. This further reduces the value of the information to the planner. Development of Partnerships An important follow-on activity has become known as the “Regional Freight Forum.” The Forum is intended to provide business-to-business contacts among shippers, receivers, logistics, Identifying Freight Resources 5-59

and support businesses, as well as a private sector view of the transportation planning process. Three meetings have been held since the report was issued, or about one every 6 months. Invitees include the freight businesses as well as local and state planners. More than 150 invitations were sent for the most recent meeting, with about 35 attending a breakfast meeting that included presentations on key projects. Planning and holding these meetings requires significant staff time, so the objectives and possible outcomes need to be clearly established. According to both MPO and VDOT staff, there is heightened interest in freight due to the attention being given the I-81 issue and planning for a new road, Interstate 73. Thus, it is not clear whether interest in the meetings can be sustained. The MPO staff reports that one significant problem in attracting and retaining the interest of the private sector is the uncertainty surrounding the programming of projects and the long lead times involved. Under the best of circumstances, a project in the MPO plan requires 3 years before it may be implemented through the state’s capital process (6 years would be more typi- cal, with many never making it through the process). An exception in Virginia occurs when an incorporated municipality decides to take on a project. In this case, each municipality has an allocation of state funds through the Urban Program and these projects can be implemented much more quickly than those relying solely on federal and other state funds. Staff points out that the private sector has a much shorter time horizon because of the necessity of focusing on the daily needs of their businesses. This makes it hard to commit much time to a process where the return is beyond the normal business plan timeframe. A former MPO director agrees that getting freight-only projects in the pipeline is hard. He believes they generally need to have another purpose or impetus to get implemented. In the staff’s terms, the work on getting local governments to adopt freight provisions in planning and zoning regulations will be slow. Staff reports that it needs to have more examples of model pro- visions and where such regulations have been adopted. Nevertheless staff is hopeful of seeing some concepts such as the freight village included in comprehensive plans as these documents are revised. One of the MPO’s senior transportation planners also worked for another MPO within the state and tried to engage the community in planning for freight shortly before coming to the Commission. This staffer developed and conducted an additional survey of the freight commu- nity in the other MPO region and started a freight advisory group, which did not attract much interest. This staffer believes strongly that there is not enough information available on the links between freight issues and the economy, both in general and for the specific community involved, to interest decision-makers. Guidance Sought from this Guidebook. MPO staff is looking for several types of guidance: 1. Information that helps make the case that freight is an important issue in communities, par- ticularly on economic effects such as jobs creation. Information targeted to decision-makers would make it easier for staff to devote time and budget to freight, but there also is a need for information directed at the local consumer in terms of how these issues affect them and the personal pocketbook. 2. The MPO operates a regional planning academy to try to improve understanding of the plan- ning process and products. How-to information on freight planning for this more “willing” audience and information to help planners in the region get started are also needed. 3. Best practice examples are needed that describe innovations in land-use management for areas affected by freight, such as zoning and comprehensive plan provisions. 4. Techniques and suggestions for attracting and retaining the interest of the freight commu- nity on one hand and local planners on the other would be welcome. VDOT staff suggested making meetings more clearly opportunities for business and social networking. The plan- ner responsible for the outreach effort underscored the benefit of providing food and setting the time for early in the morning before potential attendees get to workplaces. 5-60 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Small/Medium MPO Case Study San Joaquin Council of Governments Stockton, California MPO Overview The San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) is the MPO for San Joaquin County in the Central Valley of Northern California. The MPO includes the cities of Stockton, Lodi, Tracy, Manteca, Lathrop, Ripon, and Escalon, and is located about 75 miles east of San Francisco and 45 miles south of Sacramento. Historically, the county has been an important agricultural cen- ter in California. Over the past 20 to 30 years, however, San Joaquin County’s population has sky- rocketed as it has grown into a bedroom community for the San Francisco Bay Area and Silicon Valley. This residential growth has been heavily concentrated in the central and southwestern parts of the county between Stockton and Tracy. SJCOG’s population increased by about 30 percent between 1990 and 2002, with 2002 popu- lation about 597,000. Population is expected to increase by another 50 percent by 2025. San Joaquin County’s population is younger than state and national averages reflecting the large immigrant population and a preponderance of young families that are attracted by the relative housing affordability compared with the Bay Area. SJCOG’s population has a significantly lower educational attainment level than state and national averages, with only about 14 percent of the population having a bachelor’s degree or higher. SJCOG’s labor force is highly influenced by the county’s proximity to the Bay Area and Sacra- mento. About 25 percent of the labor force (50,000 of the 201,000 workers) commutes to jobs out- side of the county, a significant increase over the 17 percent out-commuting in 1990. Interestingly, about 16 percent (32,000) of the jobs in the SJCOG region are held by people who reside outside of the county. SJCOG’s employment structure is relatively diversified with services, trade, and government each making up about 20 percent of the total employment in the year 2000. Manufacturing and farming represent about 12 percent and 11 percent of total employment, respectively. Services were the fastest growing employment sector during the 1990s. San Joaquin County has a fairly sizable transportation infrastructure owing to its key location between San Francisco, Sacramento, and Los Angeles, as well as the significant geographical barriers created by the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east and the Coastal Range to the west. Nearly all surface freight and passenger traffic along the west coast passes through the county, and a significant portion of rail traffic headed east of California also passes. Interstate 5 and State Route 99 are major north-south freeways that have high volumes of truck traffic, while Inter- states 580 and 205 provide access to the San Francisco Bay Area via the Altamont Pass. Union Pacific (UP) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) maintain high-volume freight lines through the county, with both rail lines continuing to the Port of Oakland. Both rail lines also maintain intermodal rail yards in San Joaquin County. The Port of Stockton is a deep draft and barge port about 75 nautical miles inland from the Golden Gate Bridge with facilities for dry and liquid bulk materials, break-bulk, and containerized cargoes. The county also has a com- mercial service airport and two short-line railroads. Transportation Issues Transportation issues in San Joaquin County tend to be dominated by economic forces from outside the region. The large extent of out-commuting to the Bay Area and the jobs-housing imbalance throughout many communities in Northern California lead to a high degree of long- distance commuting and resource needs for major infrastructure investments and transit Identifying Freight Resources 5-61

operations to serve the commute. The Port of Oakland and rail yards in the Bay Area also tend to have a spillover affect as growth and the sufficiency (or insufficiency) of landside accommoda- tions at these locations greatly influence freight terminal operations in San Joaquin County. There is also a tremendous volume of through travel, both rail and highway, in the Central Valley. SJCOG and other Central Valley MPOs often find it difficult to get a handle on the nature and origin-destination of through traffic, so it is difficult to adequately plan for these needs. Nonetheless, SJCOG finds that through traffic combined with the out-commuting mentioned, overwhelms many major transportation facilities. SJCOG staff is also trying to deal with a lack of interest of decision-makers and the general public in freight issues and through traffic. Many people seem more concerned with the impact that freight and through travel create on the community, rather than trying to accommodate it. In fact, in a survey of local elected officials, SJCOG found that freight ranked 13th in importance among 14 possible issues. SJCOG indicated that its most effective way to keep a focus on freight is to frame the issue in terms of economic development needs. In spite of its role as a major bedroom community to the Bay Area, San Joaquin County is a relatively poor community. It has great difficulty with local revenue generation, yet seemingly has overwhelming needs (many of which are related to through travel and freight). The county also is heavily agricultural in nature, which creates temporal spikes in population and trucking demand at several times in the year. Over the past few years, SJCOG also has had to begin addressing some very pressing environ- mental justice concerns for communities near the Port of Stockton. As the Port has tried to expand and improve access from Interstate 5 into the facility, SJCOG found itself moderating a very contentious situation between the Port and several low-income and minority neighbor- hoods that were opposed to increased levels of truck traffic. SJCOG expects that many MPOs face similar situations because ports and other freight facilities tend to be surrounded by Envi- ronment Justice communities. SJCOG learned that it could not approach the problem by think- ing it could simply minimize new impacts. The communities wanted existing impacts to be solved before they would even engage in discussions about new impacts. Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities and Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives Freight-related technical activities and project generation are generally focused on access routes to major destinations such as intermodal yards, the airport, and the Port of Stockton. There also tends to be interest on Interstate 580 between San Joaquin and Alameda Counties because this corridor is a major truck access route into the Bay Area. There tends not to be a high-level freight focus in the planning process due to a combination of factors, including decision-maker priori- ties, lack of dedicated funding, lack of stakeholder involvement, and staffing and resource (data) limitations at the MPO. In the few cases where this “big picture” focus exists (e.g., on Interstate 580), Caltrans or some other major external stakeholder has tended to be a major proponent. There are three major freight-related initiatives that are influencing discussion for the RTP and the proposed extension of a local-options sales tax: • The Port of Stockton continues to plan for expansion with its recent purchase of Rough and Ready Island from the U.S. Navy. However, the Port is struggling with developing a primary access route into this facility while also uniting it with the existing complex. Many commu- nity members seem focused on minimizing the impact of this expansion on specific neigh- borhoods and on Interstate 5 near Downtown Stockton rather than on trying to facilitate access for this important economic development project. Several individual port access com- ponents have been identified for the RTP, but an overall strategy is still in development. 5-62 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

• SJCOG is working with Union Pacific to fund several access upgrades to the intermodal yard in Lathrop. Specific projects have been identified for many years, but have been awaiting fund- ing commitments and prioritization. • The Arch-Sperry connector, which would connect the BNSF intermodal yard with State Route 99, is a major element within the RTP. Many separate corridor studies have been performed for this corridor, which also happens to bisect the major employment growth area for the county. The effort within the RTP has been focused on linking suggestions from these sepa- rate studies into one coherent corridor strategy. The RTP includes a six-lane concept for the corridor, and several individual elements have been subsequently programmed in the TIP. The RTP and TIP evaluation processes include special qualitative consideration for projects that support job development, but there is not specific consideration for freight issues. SJCOG staff indicated that it keeps an eye out for projects that clearly support goods movement, but most project proposals tend to include just an estimate of truck traffic within the overall evalu- ation process for factors such as congestion reduction. SJCOG characterized its own freight planning process as having minimal effectiveness; staff believes it has been able to resolve particular problems effectively, but has not had a significant effect on goods movement in the region. Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools SJCOG believes it has very few reliable data sources and tools with which to conduct freight planning. The regional travel model does not have a freight component, which restricts the abil- ity to perform “what-if” scenarios for freight projects. Most recent model refinement work has been focused on air quality analysis, and near-term enhancements are expected to be in the tran- sit area. Instead, SJCOG tends to rely on truck classification counts from local cities and the state DOT to conduct trend analysis. Staff has noted some data quality problems with the classifica- tion data and it has no information on the nature and volume of goods moving in the trucks, but the MPO has no other data alternatives. There have been a few special studies, such as the Port of Stockton’s Port Access Study, that have collected more detailed goods movement and truck traffic generation information, but these have been one-time rather than ongoing activities. The state DOT has provided financial assistance for some of these special studies, but has otherwise not been a provider of freight-specific data or training. SJCOG would like access to more and better data and tools. However, the lack of staff resources is an obstacle. SJCOG has one staff member who spends about half-time on freight issues, including public and private sector coordination. The MPO finds this time limitation a real hindrance in getting ongoing training in freight planning and analysis. There are many data sources, tools, and sketch planning routines (e.g., the Quick Response Freight Manual was men- tioned), but there is not adequate time for thorough training. SJCOG would like a freight planning Guidebook to provide specific information on how to collect better data without running up against proprietary issues. SJCOG believes that this Guidebook can be crucial in helping make the case for spending more resources on the planning of transportation needs that truly drive economic growth. Development of Partnerships SJCOG does not have a freight-related task force or subcommittee for the MPO. Instead, SJCOG participates on two multicounty task forces that address freight and broader transportation issues. The Tri-County Freight Advisory Council comprises the MPOs in San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Merced Counties, as well as the state DOT and several private sector organizations. The task force meets quarterly and tends to focus on operational issues affecting freight traffic rather than on Identifying Freight Resources 5-63

major long-term infrastructure investments. The task force is chaired by a highly respected rep- resentative from the California Trucking Association, which has been cited by many individuals as greatly enhancing the credibility of the task force. SJCOG also participates in the Interregional Partnership with the Stanislaus County MPO and the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, and Santa Clara in the San Francisco Bay Area. These five counties have a very integrated economic and residential structure, with a lot of long-distance commuting occurring between them. In prior years the group has generally tried to address issues related to jobs-housing balance, although issues more directly related to transportation and goods movement have been arising more frequently in recent agendas. The five counties are finding themselves increasingly impacted by what they perceive as an inability of the Port of Oakland to accommodate landside growth. They are finding that intermodal activity in rail yards in San Joaquin and Stanislaus Counties is driven to a large extent by what is occurring at the Port of Oakland, and this is leading to heavily increasing truck volumes on interregional routes such as Interstates 205 and 580. SJCOG was a member of an advisory council for a recently completed goods movement study undertaken by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the MPO for the San Francisco Bay Area. SJCOG is also one of the signatories for the I-5 Western Coalition that is forming among COGs and state DOTs in the western United States. The group, which is focusing on the impact of NAFTA on the Interstate 5 corridor, has recently adopted its guiding principles but has yet to formalize a work program. SJCOG also participated in a study of the California Interregional Intermodal System (CIRIS) concept, a proposed container shuttle train between the Port of Stockton and the Port of Oak- land that is seen as a way to reduce interregional truck traffic. The CIRIS project has been off and on, and was recently hindered by an inability to garner local transportation sales tax funds for initial operational strategies. Overall, SJCOG indicated that the lack of a dedicated funding source, particularly locally derived, that could assist with implementing small-scale freight projects on a quick cycle is a major hindrance in more actively engaging the private sector. This problem is compounded by the existence of many statutory allocations of state funding to specific (non- freight) categories. SJCOG’s perception is that most private sector groups, particularly the major railroads, do not like to extend significant involvement to long-term planning and corri- dor studies. 5-64 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Southwest Michigan Commission Benton Harbor, Michigan MPO Overview The Southwest Michigan Commission (SMC) covers two “study areas”: the Cities of Benton Harbor and St. Joe and the Cities of Niles and Buchanan. Staff describes the region’s economy as “flat-lining,” with very little growth expected over the next 25 years. The region was the site of some significant race riots in 2003. Staff indicated that there is still lingering resentment in the region and a “divide” between Benton Harbor and St. Joe, the main study area in the region. Benton Harbor is predominantly African-American; few residents even have a high school edu- cation (staff estimates that only one-third of those of working age have a high school diploma). Its twin city, St. Joe, is mainly white, with more than 90 percent of residents having a high school education or higher. The major industry in the region is Whirlpool Appliance, which has its world headquarters in Benton Harbor and employs approximately 3,000 in the region. Whirlpool’s facilities include administrative, research and development, and manufacturing activities. Another industry in the region, Bosch, manufactures auto brake parts and employs approximately 1,000. Atlantic Auto- motive, also an automotive parts manufacturer, employs approximately 400. The MPO has two standing committees: the technical advisory committee (TAC) and the pol- icy committee. There is no private sector representation on either of these committees, though Cornerstone Alliance, the local economic development agency, and the local airport authority are members. Transportation Issues Several transportation issues are affecting the MPO, including the following: • Pavement stress. There is a concern that “through” truck traffic may be causing inordinate pavement wear in the region, particularly on I-94. • Truck-auto conflicts. The MPO is increasingly concerned with safety and is particularly con- cerned with truck-auto conflicts, because many of the trucks serving the region travel along local streets and mix with passenger traffic. • Truck traffic patterns. The MPO also is concerned with truck traffic patterns and how these patterns affect economic development, air quality (MPO region was recently designated as nonattainment), and community livability, and is beginning to collect data to try to describe truck travel patterns. • Access to interstate highways. MPO is attempting to improve access to I-94 via U.S. 31. • Relationship with economic development agency. Cornerstone Alliance is the region’s eco- nomic development entity and is represented on the MPO’s policy board. Cornerstone Alliance recently won approval (from the state) for a new bridge between St. Joe and Benton Harbor. The MPO was very surprised by this and is concerned that not enough is known about how this new bridge will affect existing economic development efforts, traffic patterns, and environmental quality in the region (the last impact is a particular concern, because the MPO was recently designated a nonattainment area). Most in the MPO feel that the bridge is a “physical and symbolic” reaction to the 2003 riots. • Use of freight rail. While most of the MPO’s issues involve highways, they are also interested in finding out if freight rail is a viable alternative for shippers in the region. This type of analy- sis, however, may be rather advanced for the MPO right now. The MPO is somewhat con- cerned that an increase in freight rail activity may translate into an increase in truck traffic in the region. Identifying Freight Resources 5-65

Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities The MPO is currently updating its LRTP and is attempting to incorporate freight issues into that plan. In the most recent LRP (2000–2025), freight was addressed “in a paragraph” and the FHWA Michigan Division Office stressed that freight should be more fully addressed in this update (2005–2030). The MPO has decided to concentrate on truck traffic and its impact on the region’s pavement system. The emphasis on freight planning (at this initial stage) is fully sup- ported by the MPO director. The MPO is taking a three-step approach to address freight issues in the region: • Collect data. The MPO is collecting data on truck traffic using existing truck and traffic counts from the state DOT and from the regional counting program and is concentrating (at least for this update) on collecting truck volume information rather than commodity flow information. They believe that, for small- to medium-sized MPOs, knowing the volume and weight of trucks in the region is more important than knowing the commodities handled. Knowing travel time would be helpful, but the MPO is taking “baby steps” and is not collecting that type of infor- mation for this update. • Map to local roadway network using GIS. The MPO has a GIS staffer in-house (part-time employee). It is interesting to note that the MPO’s GIS network is tied into the state’s system, which makes it easier to coordinate GIS efforts between the state and MPO. • Identify high-volume truck corridors. Using the results of the GIS analysis, the MPO will identify high-volume truck corridors. This information will be used in two ways. First, it will provide freight-related information to the local implementing agencies in the MPO region (county road commissions and localities). The hope is that this information will be used by these agencies to “target” their proposals for freight (local implementing agencies bring proj- ects to the MPO for consideration in the TIP). Secondly, the MPO wants to use the information to help get “buy-in” on TIP projects from regional stakeholders by demonstrating that certain projects (those on high-volume corridors) could have regional benefits. The MPO also stressed that learning about truck travel patterns is a critical component of learn- ing about the transportation system in the MPO region—the LRP would not be complete without at least a “back of the envelope” analysis of how trucks move within the region. By understanding truck travel patterns, the MPO will be better able to address freight issues when setting goals and objectives for the LRP. Currently, there are no freight-specific criteria that the MPO uses to evaluate projects for inclusion in the TIP, although some (e.g., economic development) may benefit freight in the process. Projects are evaluated on several factors: safety (which used to be much further down the list, but now is the number 1 or number 2 priority), effect on “drivability,” benefit-cost ratio, economic development potential, access/connectivity, and environmental justice. Typically, the MPO has about $1 million per year available for projects. Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools The MPO is beginning to collect rudimentary freight data (through truck counts) to support its freight planning activities, such as freight impacts on pavement systems and congestion. The MPO is using truck counts from the DOT and its local counting program to help identify key truck corridors. The SMC is primarily interested in three types of truck movements: • Interstate/Interregional movements, which strictly travel through the region. These move- ments have little local impact other than on the interstate highway system. • Regional movements, which have an origin or destination within the MPO region. These movements have some significant local impacts, because trucks enter or exit the interstate sys- tem onto or from local roadways. 5-66 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

• Local movements, which go from point-to-point within the region. These movements also have significant local impacts. In addition, Michigan DOT has begun to support its MPOs by providing regional travel demand models. The DOT realized that out of the 14 MPOs in the state, only one (Southeast Michigan COG, the MPO for the Detroit area) had both the staff resources and the expertise to develop travel demand models in house. As a result, the state DOT has taken the lead in devel- oping these models for the MPOs. This arrangement is a “win-win” for both the state and the MPOs: the MPOs get a travel demand model from the state while the state ensures that a con- sistent modeling structure is used statewide. The development of the travel demand model for the Southwest Michigan Commission has just started; it is not certain whether the model will include a freight component or how it will account for freight vehicles. Development of Partnerships The MPO has a strong relationship with its local implementing agencies. Staff believes that this is true of most small- to medium-sized MPOs, where relationships between institutions are often conducted on a more personal level. The MPO has not done any outreach to the private sector freight industry and does not maintain any kind of formal relationship with the private sector in the region. The MPO’s relationship with the state is strong, as well, though the Michigan DOT does not have a freight planner at the central office. Instead, each MPO is assigned a state DOT coordi- nator. The relationship between the MPO and the DOT coordinator is strong. The state coordi- nator often provides guidance as to the best way to “frame” projects for inclusion in the TIP and provides workable solutions (win-wins) to complicated problems. If the state DOT had a freight coordinator, the MPO would look to that coordinator to provide the following: • Provide a peer-to-peer exchange program for small- to medium-sized MPOs. The best way to replicate successful practices in other regions is to talk to the people behind them. The MPO stressed that an active peer-to-peer program targeted at small- to medium-sized MPOs could be very beneficial. • Provide a listserv (or similar information sharing method) for small- to medium-sized MPOs. Listservs, such as the Freight Planning listserv maintained by FHWA, are effective out- reach and information sharing mechanisms. Many of the existing listservs, however, provide information about freight planning relevant to large MPOs or state DOTs that does not always resonate with smaller MPOs. There may be an opportunity to create a freight planning list- serv that is targeted to the needs and issues facing small- to medium-sized MPOs. • Train MPO coordinators in freight issues. The Southwest Michigan Commission relies heav- ily on its state DOT MPO coordinator. However, this coordinator does not have a background in freight planning. In addition to acting as a centralized POC for freight issues, the state freight coordinator could also train individual MPO coordinators in freight issues, allowing them to better support the freight planning needs of small- to medium-sized MPOs. Identifying Freight Resources 5-67

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Susquehanna Economic Development Association– Council of Governments Lewisburg, Pennsylvania MPO Overview Susquehanna Economic Development Association-Council of Governments (SEDA-COG) has been designated a local development district (LDD) by the Appalachian Regional Commis- sion (ARC) and as a rural planning organization (RPO) by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The original mission of RPOs was to promote economic development. There are seven RPOs in Pennsylvania. SEDA-COG covers 11 counties and about 750,000 people. These 11 counties rep- resent all or part of three MPOs: Centre County MPO, Lycoming County Planning Commis- sion, and Tri-County Regional Planning Commission. Pennsylvania mandates that RPOs carry out the same activities as MPOs, including LRTPs, TIPs, and UPWPs. The voting members of SEDA-COG’s executive board currently do not include a freight representative, although recently a nonvoting freight representative has been added.5 In February 2004, SEDA-COG hosted the first meeting of its new FAC. The FAC has about 55 members from both public and private sectors. A list of members’ affiliations is at the end of this summary. Staff hopes that the FAC can recommend policy actions and become involved in developing ranking criteria. The committee is evolving and is also very informal. The infor- mal character of the committee is reflected in its meetings, which are held quarterly in the morning. They include presentations, special guest speakers, agency updates, and a “free-flowing discussion.” After lunch, members of the committee interact. For instance, rail shippers and operators will have conversations and discuss their needs. SEDA-COG is “looking to build on this momentum and keep it going.” Draft TIP and LRTP project ranking criteria have been developed that emphasize freight priorities. Ultimately, staff hopes it can also get recom- mendations from the FAC on specific projects, such as access road and operating condition improvements. SEDA-COG is also unique among RPOs and MPOs, because it is probably the only such organization that also is a transportation provider. For more than 20 years, the agency has been involved in preserving rail freight service in central Pennsylvania through an entity called the Joint Rail Authority (JRA), which currently owns approximately 200 miles of freight railroad short-lines in the region along with several buildings. SEDA-COG provides planning, property management, and administrative assistance to the railroad, although the actual operations are run by a subcontractor. The JRA has been cited internationally as a best practice for public- private partnerships; it helps keep SEDA-COG involved in retaining local industry, which is important because manufacturing jobs served by rail service traditionally pay much higher wages than average. However, until the creation of the FAC, freight activities within SEDA-COG were typically operations-related and issues were dealt with on a case-by-case basis. The FAC has facil- itated a more active planning based approach to freight transportation.6 Manufacturing jobs served by rail service are traditionally much higher paying than average. Until about 1 year ago, because of the JRA tradition, freight activities within SEDA-COG were typically operations- 5-68 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas 5Although SEDA-COG covers 11 counties, for transportation planning purposes it does not include the two counties that con- stitute independent MPOs (Lycoming and Centre Counties) or the county included in the Harrisburg area MPO (Perry County). Those three counties, nevertheless, will participate in the regionwide freight planning process through their repre- sentatives at FAC meetings. 6JRA recently lost an important customer: International Paper Company, which used 8,000 carloads per year. This loss, while costly to the region and to the JRA, helped SEDA-COG to realize and, perhaps redouble its efforts to retain local industry through effective freight planning and rail operations.

related. Even truck and aviation issues were dealt with on a case-by-case basis. With the advent of the FAC, planning aims to take a more prominent role in the region’s freight activities. Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities SEDA-COG hopes to integrate freight into its next LRTP update. It will accomplish this pri- marily by soliciting input from the FAC through freight discussion topics. In return, the agency hopes to provide freight data and maps to the members. The freight emphases in the LRTP will be on economic development, safety, and congestion. Economic development is an important part of the agency’s mission because the ARC areas are losing firms to outsourcing and down- sizing. SEDA-COG has “to be competitive to retain these companies.” Since SEDA-COG also performs a TIP, it currently is in the process of identifying all freight- related projects within the program. A good portion of the improvements are truck-related. Staff has developed draft criteria that will be used in analyzing candidate projects. FHWA and other federally available resources provide some analysis methods, such as benefit-cost analyses for freight projects. SEDA-COG also considers the projects included within its member MPOs’ TIPs. Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives A program implemented by SEDA-COG along with the Federal Railroad Administration was a 1-800 emergency notification system at railroad grade crossings. Each crossing has a phone number and identification number so that problems such as signal malfunctions, rough surfaces, or physical obstructions can be reported. Instead of calling local responders (911), the phone number leads to the Clinton County emergency management system, which tracks reports and contacts individuals responsible for managing responses to incidents at the specific grade cross- ings. The success of the program, unique to the SEDA-COG region and a few parts of Texas, is strong enough that Pennsylvania is considering implementing it statewide. ARC maintains a Local Access Road funding program to improve roadway access for indus- tries that benefit the economy of the region. Every year, SEDA-COG does about two such proj- ects by building access roads into industrial facilities. As long as the facility or applicant can prove that the access improvement will increase employment or keep the company from being forced to leave the region, then it qualifies for consideration. Generally, these projects are selected based on their expected economic benefits to the region. SEDA-COG is also collaborating with Lycoming County’s MPO (Williamsport) on develop- ment of a multimodal freight transfer center. The study currently under way will determine whether expenditures for such a facility are “worthwhile.” Other freight-related initiatives include coordinating an intermodal freight project funded partially by CMAQ; planning a North Central Pennsylvania Rail Freight Summit; designing a logo and slogan for their FAC; and conducting workshops on freight planning and available resources. Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools Another program is a CFS of hazardous materials throughout the region. SEDA-COG already has completed a couple of hazmat surveys, so it “has a handle of what’s going through by rail.” This is helped by the fact that counties must perform a hazmat survey every 5 years. The Williamsport MPO has selected a consultant to provide freight data. SEDA-COG will be providing oversight to ensure a high quality of data. The study will focus on trucking informa- tion, data for which have been difficult to access. They are hoping to get good modal split data. SEDA-COG has plans to survey the freight transportation industry in the region to compile data on commodity flows, discover impediments to efficient freight movement, and request Identifying Freight Resources 5-69

project ideas. These data will support the travel demand model currently being developed for the region. As part of the model development, an inventory of all the employers in the region will be developed, which will help staff identify truck volumes. In addition, the Commonwealth is developing a new freight model as part of its LRP that SEDA-COG hopes will provide some regional opportunities. Development of Partnerships In the future, SEDA-COG plans excursions and other site visits for its FAC. In fact, in the near future, the group will travel on the JRA’s Nittany and Bald Eagle Line to visit some of the rail cus- tomers along the track. Such functions help to build relationships among the freight community and to establish the MPO/RPO as the coordinator of freight activities and an advocate of freight interests. PennDOT supports SEDA-COG’s activities in a variety of ways, primarily on the rail side. The state’s Rail Freight Assistance Program (RFAP) allocates $8 million statewide for the construction, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of rail lines, rail sidings, and grade crossings. SEDA-COG also cooperates with the highway districts on the grade crossings program and other projects. The state’s Rail Freight Properties Directory catalogs underutilized or vacant rail freight properties. The Aviation Bureau supplies data to the SEDA-COG. FHWA Section 130 (grade crossing improve- ment program) also contributes to rail freight improvements, and SEDA-COG often attempts to get earmarks through the state appropriations process. Success Factors and Recommendations for Other Small- and Medium-Sized MPOs LDDs are unique to the ARC. There are 72 of them covering 410 counties in 13 states from Alabama to New York. The “regionalization” of freight planning for small MPOs such as those within SEDA-COG allows the freight effort to capture “economies of scale.” Pooled resources, such as the membership of the FAC and state and federal program funds for improvements, allow the region to promote itself more effectively and to consider freight in planning activities more actively. Another aspect of SEDA-COG’s planning that is somewhat unique is its heritage as an eco- nomic development agency. As a result of that heritage, a lot of the planning efforts maintain an underlying emphasis on the value of economic development. Many of the transportation proj- ect selection criteria are based on economic benefits. Projects identified by SEDA-COG and regional partners often are done because of perceived economic impacts. This seems to be a more pronounced consideration in SEDA-COG than in other MPOs. As it relates to freight planning, it absolutely makes sense that the role of planners at a regional level should be to emphasize how their efforts can help with economic development. Likewise, it makes sense that economic devel- opment as a criterion in the planning process should take a prominent position. 5-70 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

FAC Membership The following is a list of SEDA-COG’s FAC members’ affiliations: Identifying Freight Resources 5-71 Anthracite Industries Boyd Station, LLC Canadian Pacific Centre County MPO Conagra Construction Specialties Con-Way Central Express FedEx FHWA Graymont G. O. Hawbaker Jersey Shore Steel Koppers, Inc. Lisa Express, Inc. Milton Area Industrial Development Association Milton Transportation, Inc. Moran Industries Norfolk Southern North Shore Railroad Company Northern Tier Regional Planning and Development Commission PennDOT Bureau of Aviation PennDOT Bureau of Rail Freight, Ports, and Waterways PennDOT District 2-0 PennDOT District 3-0 PennPORTS Pennsylvania Motor Truck Association S&L Services, Inc. SEDA-COG SEDA-COG JRA Staiman Recycling Corporation Standard Steel TCRPC–Harrisburg Area MPO University Park Airport Ward Trucking Watsontown Trucking Williamsport Area MPO (Lycoming County) Williamsport Regional Airport Yellow Transportation

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Council Syracuse, New York MPO Overview The Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Council (SMTC) is the designated MPO for the Syracuse Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). As of the 2000 Census, the MSA had a total pop- ulation of 732,117. The MSA is centered on the City of Syracuse and surrounding Onondaga County with a population of 458,336, but includes three other counties: Cayuga, Madison, and Oswego. The urbanized portion of the MSA that is the focus of SMTC planning falls within Onondaga County and covers 804 square miles. As of May 2004, the Syracuse MSA had over 350,000 payroll jobs based on the State of New York Labor Department employer survey. Manufacturing, wholesale trade, transportation, and warehousing continue to play an important role in the Syracuse economy. More than 10.5 per- cent of all payroll jobs were in manufacturing, 4.6 percent in wholesale trade, and 3 percent in transportation and warehousing. These sectors are relevant to freight planning because they are directly linked to freight service and flows. The SMTC planning area serves as a crossroad for freight activity on the interstate system and on rail. Syracuse sits at the junction of Interstate 81, a major north-south freight corridor that extends from the Southeast United States to Canada, and Interstate 90, a major east-west corri- dor that connects the Midwest and Ontario to the Northeast. A tremendous amount of inter- national trade is moved by truck from Canada, across the border at Buffalo/Niagara Falls to the Greater New York Region and Boston via Interstate 90 (it should be noted however, that Syra- cuse lies more than 100 miles away from the nearest international border crossing). In addition to the highway system, Onondaga County is served by one Class I freight railroad (CSX Trans- portation), one Class II freight railroad (the New York, Susquehanna and Western), and one Class III railroad (the Finger Lakes Railway). The CSXT Chicago Main Line runs east-west through Onondaga County connecting Chicago and points in the Midwest with New York and Boston. Onondaga County is also the location for one of New York State’s largest rail intermodal terminals. CSXT’s Dewitt Yard handles 70,000 lifts per year (200 per day). Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities Freight planning has been an ongoing part of the MPO’s planning activities since 1993. In that year, the Director of the MPO expanded the scope of the MPO’s planning program to include rail and truck issues. An intermodal planner position also was created and filled at that time to address this area. Freight planning continues to be supported by the current MPO Director. The catalysts for the emphasis on freight included the following: • The MPO management and staff recognized that freight was an important issue area for Onondaga County because of its function as a freight traffic crossroads and because of the importance of freight to the local economy; • The state DOT is engaged in statewide and regional freight planning and provides technical support through the DOT regional offices; and • The federal ISTEA planning requirements also served as a catalyst for freight planning activity at the state and regional level. Freight planning activities have been incorporated in the overall MPO transportation plan- ning activities in a number of ways. First, a discussion of freight (truck, rail, water, and air cargo) is included in the MPO’s 2004 LRTP update as well as in prior updates. The most substantial dis- cussion of freight conditions and issues is presented in the plan’s Chapter 5, “Changing Trans- portation Needs and Impacts.” 5-72 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Freight planning activities are also explicitly described in the MPO’s UPWP. The MPO pro- duced a special 2002–2003 UPWP Summary Report on Rail/Truck/Transit Planning. This report provides a status of all MPO planning efforts that are underway in these areas. The most sub- stantial work on freight is at the project level. These projects will be described in the next section. To date, the MPO has not programmed specific freight projects in the TIP, and there are no freight-specific evaluation criteria. For the highway and road projects, criteria such as conges- tion management or pavement quality can indirectly address freight issues. The MPO has a staff of 10, including the Director, communications, and administrative per- sonnel. The position of Senior Intermodal Planner focuses on a range of passenger and freight intermodal issues. This position serves as the lead for MPO freight activities with 33 percent of available time allocated to freight. Other technical staff may provide a project-specific support. Consultant resources are generally not used to support this program area other than on specific initiatives which may cover a range of transportation issues. Given the size of the MPO, the staff has been able to maintain an ongoing freight program with periodic deliverables. Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives The MPO has undertaken a number of freight initiatives since the early 1990s. This project and program activity includes the following: • Truck route study for the City of Syracuse (2000); • Central New York Rail Corridor Inventory (1996 and 2003); • Highway-rail grade crossing inventory (2001); • Taft Road-Northern Boulevard Study (multimodal 2001); • Skaneateles Traffic Study (multimodal with a truck routing component 2000); • I-481 Corridor Study (multimodal 2004); • Examination of access and operational issues of the CSX intermodal terminal in Syracuse, which is an outgrowth of the 1997 Conrail/CSX Intermodal Terminal Access Study; • Syracuse Intermodal Roundtable (1994–1998) that comprised shippers, manufacturers, wholesalers, trucking companies, and rail service providers. This roundtable provided a forum for sharing information and addressing freight issues; • Transportation Club of Central New York (an independent association of shippers from Cen- tral New York State focused on freight issues in a larger geographic territory than the MPO) (mid 1990s); and • Statewide MPO staff training on how to use state and regional freight data provided by Reebie Associates. The MPO director served as the project manager for this effort. The general strategy is to have one or more manageable freight initiatives underway at any given time. The NYSDOT provides ongoing technical support on a variety of freight, rail, and project pro- gramming issues. The MPO staff generally interacts with the DOT’s Region 3 office. Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools The MPO uses the Reebie Associates freight data purchased by the state. The challenge with this data is that they do not fully address the issues encountered at the local level. The nature of the data is better suited for statewide and interregional freight movements. The MPO sup- plements the Reebie data with local data. The MPO conducted a regional survey of truck and rail terminals in 1996 as part of the Syracuse Intermodal Roundtable. This survey will be updated by the MPO in a few years. The MPO staff also maintains ongoing contacts with a range of freight interests in the region to inform project-specific initiatives such as the I-481 Corridor Study. Qualitative information provided by regional freight interests is very impor- tant to the program. Identifying Freight Resources 5-73

The MPO does not do freight traffic forecasting to inform its planning and programming efforts. It does not have the information or the staff resources at present to do this. Freight fore- casting may be a possibility in the future. Development of Partnerships A key factor that has helped the MPO address freight issues is the establishment and ongoing maintenance of contacts with the private sector (transportation providers such as CSXT and trucking companies, shippers, and manufacturers) and with the NYSDOT. For a medium-sized MPO, contacts and partnerships with a broad array of public and private sector interests are essential to having a freight program. Small- and medium-sized MPOs don’t have the depth and breadth of staff to have positions dedicated to freight unlike MPOs in Metro- politan New York or Philadelphia. The 1991 federal transportation legislation, ISTEA, had a freight management systems plan- ning requirement which spurred interest and staff capacity both at the state and MPO level. The SMTC draws on a network of freight staff in other MPOs and in the state DOT. The MPO rep- resenting Buffalo and Niagara Falls is very engaged in freight issues because it is a major inter- national freight gateway between the Toronto Region and markets in the Northeast. As such it has skills and knowledge that SMTC can use. On a larger geographic scale, there are a series of initiatives and partnerships to address goods movement. There is an ongoing partnership between the State of New York and the Province of Ontario to address freight movement and border crossing issues referred to as the Ontario/New York Bi-Regional Transportation Strategy Working Group. There also is an Interstate 87 Corri- dor Initiative involving the New York region, Albany, and the Province of Quebec. Ongoing contacts and relationships with a wide variety of private sector freight interests also constitute a form of partnership. The rail companies, trucking companies, shippers, and manu- facturers possess tremendous knowledge of their industry that cannot be replicated. The creation of the Syracuse Intermodal Roundtable to share information and address issues was one form of partnership. The Roundtable met regularly over a 5-year period. The participants then deter- mined that regular, formal meetings were no longer necessary. The MPO now maintains the con- tacts and relationships gained through the roundtable with frequent communications, but on an as-needed basis. Success Factors and Recommendations for Other Small- and Medium-Sized MPOs Small- and medium-sized MPOs are going to be constrained by financial resources and lim- ited staffing. As such, a key recommendation is not to take on projects or programs in freight that are beyond the MPO’s capability to deliver. At SMTC, the staff takes on one or two freight project initiatives at a time and sees them through to completion before moving on to others. For example, one year the staff may focus on a rail-highway grade crossings study that may be followed in another year by a rail corridor inventory; a survey of the freight community may be done in another year. The second lesson learned at SMTC is that developing working relationships with the private sector freight community is essential. These interests do not have a lot of time for meetings or the planning process. It is up to the MPO staff to reach out to them and to try to develop an understanding of what they do and what their needs are. The knowledge base that resides in the local freight community is invaluable. The third lesson is that the MPO staff needs to learn as much as it can from the private sector, from staff at other MPOs, and from DOT staff to be effective in this area. At a certain point, the 5-74 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

MPO staff can then serve as a resource for local communities and other interests grappling with freight issues. Finally, small- and medium-sized MPOs would really benefit from guidance on freight plan- ning. The needs of small- and medium-sized MPOs are very different from the large MPOs and they have much more limited resources (it should be recognized that 90 percent of all MPOs fall into the small and medium category). Further, they are faced with freight issues to some degree. Freight movement is widely dispersed across the country and significant impacts can be found in communities of all scales. Having clear guidance on freight planning from the federal level would be beneficial. Identifying Freight Resources 5-75

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments Toledo, Ohio MPO Overview The Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments (TMACOG) handles transportation planning for a bistate area, including three counties in Ohio (Lucas, Wood, and Ottawa) and one in Michigan (Monroe). The Toledo area has always had a significant amount of freight movement, because it is located along major highway corridors, is a large freight rail hub for east-west movements, is a leading Great Lakes port, and is located adjacent to the Detroit metro region, a huge generator of domes- tic and international freight. As the hub for BAX Global, Toledo Express Airport ranks among the busiest air cargo hubs in the country. Toledo also is situated at the center of one of the most manufacturing-intensive parts of the United States, stretching from the Chicago-Milwaukee area in the west to the Cleveland-Pittsburgh area in the east. The greater region is home to the U.S. auto industry (and a host of suppliers), steelmakers, and food producers. Today, the Toledo MSA has a population of about 620,000 people and is growing more slowly than the United States or the State of Ohio. Jobs are concentrated in manufacturing related to auto assembly (Chrysler has a plant in Toledo) and automotive parts. Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities FAC. Freight has been incorporated into TMACOG’s transportation planning activities since 1984. In 1984, the TMACOG formed a Railroad Task Force to address some of the rail grade crossing issues in the region and to provide a forum to discuss the local impacts of rail opera- tions and consolidations (at the time, many of the region’s railroads were restructuring or con- solidating their operations). The Railroad Task Force consisted of both public and private sector freight stakeholders and was designed to be a “four-legged stool,” with members representing • Private sector shippers and carriers, • Public sector planning agencies, • Local governments and communities, and • Economic development agencies. It is important to note that economic development agencies have long been a key partner of the TMACOG. In fact, economic development to some degree drives transportation planning deci- sions in the region (i.e., if a transportation improvement can be shown to create jobs, it is a go). The Railroad Task Force provided input and advice to the MPO during development of the 2010 LRTP (completed in 1989), which included a freight rail element and in the 2025 LRTP update (completed in 1996), which included air and rail freight elements. In 1998, the Railroad Task Force was reorganized as one of several standing committees to the Transportation Council of the MPOs. Unlike many MPOs, which have separate technical advi- sory and policy committees, the TMACOG’s activities are guided by a Transportation Council which consists of elected officials, county commissioners, and citizen representatives. This coun- cil receives input from six standing committees: TIP, LRTP, Rail Passenger, Freight, Bike/Ped, and Data/Modeling. The freight committee, whose membership also was expanded to include other modal representatives in addition to rail, meets approximately four times per year and the group’s steering committee meets more frequently (to set agendas, etc.). This set up minimizes the time requirements of the full group and ensures that their meetings are focused and useful. Project Prioritization. The region’s economic development agencies have long been a part- ner of the TMACOG in its transportation planning activities. While the MPO does not have a 5-76 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

specific prioritization process or quantifiable criteria for projects to be included in the TIP, the MPO does require project sponsors to make statements about the project’s potential impact on the transportation system, economic development, and community livability. Potential trans- portation improvement projects that provide an economic development benefit (creating jobs, improving efficiency, etc.) are looked on favorably. MPOs should not look at “freight projects” versus “passenger projects.” Rather, MPOs should understand their transportation and eco- nomic development issues first and include projects in their TIP that address those issues. Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives Rail Corridor Study. One of the key regional issues identified by both the Railroad Task Force and its successor, the freight committee, was delays caused by at-grade rail crossings in the region. The MPO approved a Railroad Corridor Study to identify where grade separations were most needed. This study recommended grade separations, crossing closures and other improvements to major rail corridors in the area to improve safety and reduce congestion at crossings. The study addressed six specific corridors: • Corridor 1, CSX east of the Maumee River; • Corridor 2, Conrail/Norfolk Southern, western Toledo to Swanton; • Corridor 3, CSX through Perrysburg; • Corridor 4, Norfolk Southern in Maumee area; • Corridor 5, Norfolk Southern through City of Oregon; and • Corridor 6, (former) Conrail east of the Maumee River. The TMACOG took a rather unique approach to this study by forming six individual “study teams,” one for each of the corridors. These study teams consisted of railroads, shippers and local businesses, school district reps, and other neighborhood groups. Each of the study teams met individually to address the issues and needs of their specific corridor. This approach ensured that all stakeholders were represented and resulted in a high degree of cooperation and coordination among the various interests represented. Development of Partnerships Freight Listening Sessions. The TMACOG has been very successful in engaging the private sec- tor freight community in the planning process through the Railroad Task Force and its successor, the freight committee. The TMACOG also has developed a continuing process that allows it to identify freight transportation issues of the region and provide that input to the freight commit- tee through freight transportation listening sessions. These sessions are programmed annually into the MPO’s UPWP. Typically, the MPO tries to conduct four to five sessions per year (about one per quarter). The MPO has one staff member that will contact a manufacturer or carrier and set up an in-person interview. The interviews focus on identifying freight-specific issues that affect the operations of the interviewee. Interviewees often cite quick fixes, such as inadequate left turn signals, poorly maintained access roads and so forth. The interviews are summarized and pro- vided to the freight committee for information and action. The MPO has successfully identified several projects as a result of these sessions, including the rehabilitation of an access road to a major chemical manufacturer on the outskirts of town. It is unlikely that this improvement would have been included in the TIP had it not been identified during these sessions. Other Partnerships. The MPO’s Railroad Corridor Study, its freight committee, and the reg- ular completion of freight listening sessions are good examples of ways to develop partnerships with the private sector freight community and incorporate freight issues into the metropolitan transportation planning process. The TMACOG has also worked to develop partnerships with other MPOs in the region, most notably the Southeastern Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG), the MPO for the nearby Detroit region. The economies and transportation systems of the TMACOG and SEMCOG are closely linked, essentially components of a single regional Identifying Freight Resources 5-77

system. While SEMCOG has only recently begun to do active freight planning for the region, the technical planning staff of both MPOs meet twice a year to discuss issues and coordinate plan- ning efforts. In addition, the TMACOG’s Transportation Council and SEMCOG’s Technical Advisory Committee meet jointly twice a year. This kind of interregional coordination allows both MPOs to take a more regional view of transportation and helps them better understand the impacts of one subregion’s activities on the other. The TMACOG is also working with its counter- parts at SEMCOG and Michigan DOT to coordinate regional ITS architecture development to ensure compatibility of ITS deployments. Success Factors and Recommendations for Other Small- and Medium-Sized MPOs • Do not create an “us versus them” mentality. TMACOG stressed that it is important to look at regional transportation issues (whether they be freight- or passenger-related) and their impacts on the region (whether they be mobility, safety, or efficiency-related, regardless of freight or passenger). It is critical not to have a mindset of “freight versus passenger.” Rather, the MPO should be identifying issues and coming up with solutions for all the region’s trans- portation issues and not pit constituencies against one another. • The MPO is the best place to “localize” freight transportation issues. Freight movements in Toledo and in many other metropolitan areas are increasingly national and global in scope. However, these movements have clear local impacts, in terms of air quality, grade crossing delays, congestion, and overall community livability. The MPO is the single best place for all freight stakeholders (industry, government, community) to gather, identify issues, and develop consensus-based solutions. • Know your area. It is crucial to understand your area’s economic structure (leading indus- tries, economic drivers) and its transportation issues. There are several ways to further your understanding of your region. The first is by talking to the freight community (either by lis- tening sessions or some other way). Another effective method (currently being employed by the TMACOG) is to develop a freight transportation inventory of either physical transporta- tion facilities or freight services in the area. The TMACOG did this in 1994 and is updating it now. The inventory (called the Freight Transportation Access Directory) lists common carri- ers, rail carriers, freight brokers, freight forwarders, and other freight service providers. The TMACOG believes that this is an excellent way to identify potential stakeholders and under- stand the types of freight services available in an area. • Stick with it! Engaging the private sector is pivotal to the success of a transportation planning program and requires commitment and perseverance. TMACOG staff encourages MPOs to keep trying to engage the private sector even though it will often be frustrating. Over time, suc- cessful relationships will be formed. • Designation of NHS Intermodal Connectors provides an opportunity to start a freight planning program. Many of the issues identified during the TMACOG’s freight listening ses- sions involve poorly maintained or inadequate intermodal connectors. Federal aid is available for designated NHS intermodal connectors. 5-78 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Tri-County Regional Planning Commission Harrisburg, Pennsylvania MPO Overview Part of the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, the Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS) addresses transportation concerns for Cumberland, Dauphin, and Perry coun- ties in South Central Pennsylvania. This area has become a transportation hub, largely due to the intersections of the Pennsylvania Turnpike (I-76), I-81, and I-83. Norfolk Southern Railroad also has invested heavily in the area and considers it their North Atlantic Hub. The result has been an explosive growth in the number of warehouses and distribution centers in the region, espe- cially around the intersection of the Pennsylvania Turnpike and I-81 in Carlisle. Incorporating Freight into the Transportation Planning Process HATS has four staff members involved in transportation planning, including one that is des- ignated as the goods movement planner; however, these are not full-time transportation posi- tions, because each has to divide his/her time among several disciplines, such as zoning and other regional issues. HATS also has a Technical and Coordinating Committee that provides guidance. Ex Officio members of this committee include Norfolk Southern Railroad, the Susquehanna Area Regional Airport Authority, and Amtrak. The HATS LRTP was just updated last year. It included a freight section, which focused on truck and rail traffic and existing conditions. It did not provide much in the way of planning or future recommendations. The TIP is focused on highway and transit issues. Projects are ranked using criteria, including safety, congestion, and air quality. The TIP is more of a qualitative process and not based on a detailed benefit-cost analysis. Most TIP projects are submitted by PennDOT and the local municipalities. These projects are almost exclusively driven by passenger transportation needs. There are some projects on the HATS TIP that benefit freight transportation, but they are not strictly freight. MPO staff believes that the current TIP process is not conducive to freight needs and would like to attract more private sector involvement into the identification of TIP projects. MPO staff mentioned a freight rail project, the Lemoyne Connector, that was in the region but not on the TIP. This led to an interesting discussion about how the private sector would attempt to initiate freight projects. Staff felt that the current process encouraged private compa- nies to approach PennDOT and the local municipalities for funding and approval. The MPO would only be contacted as a courtesy. The Lemoyne Connector was approved and funded in just such a manner. Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives HATS was one of the participants of the Wilmington-Harrisburg Freight Study. This effort, led by the Lancaster County Planning Commission, combined Federal Borders and Corridors with local funding to examine the movement of freight along a corridor connecting the Port of Wilmington, Delaware, and Harrisburg with a goal of diverting some of this heavy truck traffic from local roads. HATS has initiated its own freight study, the South Central Pennsylvania Goods Movement Study, to build on the Wilmington-Harrisburg effort, to better manage the growth of freight traf- fic and warehouse development, and to better address the high number of accidents on the local interstates involving heavy trucks. PennDOT is providing most of the funding with a local match in the form of in-kind services. Identifying Freight Resources 5-79

Development of Partnerships One of the goals of the South Central Goods Movement Study is to assemble a freight task force that can be perpetuated. This task force would be modeled after the Goods Movement Task Force at the DVRPC. The DVRPC Goods Movement Task Force meets quarterly and typically draws 60 to 70 attendees representing a broad spectrum of freight concerns in the greater Philadelphia area (trucking companies, Class I railroads, short-lines, ports, air freight, Penn- DOT, NJ DOT, DelDOT, MPOs, shippers, concerned citizens, consultants, etc.). DVRPC solic- its freight projects from task force members for potential inclusion in the TIP. Like the DVRPC example, HATS is attempting to build a multijurisdictional, public-private task force of freight stakeholders that will identify freight projects for possible inclusion in future TIPs. Members of this task force would include • Norfolk Southern Railroad; • Trucking Companies; • PennDOT; • Amtrak; • Susquehanna Area Regional Airport Authority; • Pennsylvania Motor Truck Association; and • Shippers. Success Factors and Recommendations for Other Small- and Medium-Sized MPOs MPO staff believes that MPO freight planning is moving in the right direction. The strategy at HATS is to engage the private sector through development of a Goods Movement Task Force, modeled after the successful program at DVRPC. MPO staff also believes it is important to get a sense of what is occurring with freight in a region. This requires the MPO to move beyond its traditional methods because understanding freight movement requires looking outside the boundaries of the MPO region. This is especially true for HATS, which has to plan for warehouses and distribution centers that act as intermedi- ary points for goods originating and terminating outside its region. Finally MPO staff believes that current resources are just too limited to give freight the atten- tion it deserves. There is definitely an interest in freight issues, but there is a lack of resources and expertise at the MPO level to sufficiently address them in the transportation planning process. 5-80 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Small/Medium MPO Case Study Whatcom Council of Governments Bellingham, Washington MPO Overview Whatcom Council of Governments is the MPO for Whatcom County in Washington. The county is the northernmost county in Western Washington and lies at the border with Canada. According to the 2000 Census, the population of Whatcom County is 166,814, which is a 23.4 percent increase over the 1990 population. The largest city in Whatcom County is Bellingham, a small city of approximately 67,000 residents. Aside from Bellingham, What- com County is primarily a rural county that includes major recreation sites in the Mt. Baker area. In 1990, approximately 59 percent of the population lived in urban areas. By 2000, most of the population growth had occurred in the urban areas (67.7 percent of the population lived in urban areas). Employment in Whatcom County grew by 31 percent between 1990 and 2000 with the largest growth occurring in the trade and service sectors. Manufacturing represents 12 percent of total employment. Agricultural employment in the county actually dropped between 1990 and 2000. Whatcom County’s economy and transportation picture is most strongly influenced by its position within the I-5/Highway 99 corridor between the Puget Sound (Seattle) region and the Lower Mainland of British Columbia (Vancouver). Whatcom COG’s principal freight issues arise as a result of its location as a border community serving the active trade flows between British Columbia and Washington. There are four major border crossing facilities in Whatcom County, three of which—Pacific Highway (Blaine), Lynden, and Sumas—are commercial cross- ings. Bellingham also contains a small seaport facility and a small commercial airport. There is a free trade zone at the Bellingham Airport. Freight Transportation Issues—Cross Border Transportation The most significant freight-related transportation issues stem from the border crossings. These have both an economic and transportation component. There is a community of stake- holders whose livelihood depends on the border and this group of stakeholders is very focused on making the border work. A substantial number of these stakeholders are focused on passen- ger transportation issues that relate to the economic linkage between the Whatcom County econ- omy and that of the Lower Mainland. Whatcom County includes significant recreation and shopping destinations for Canadians traveling to the United States and there are a small but sig- nificant number of workers who commute across the border. But Whatcom County also is home to a number of businesses, including customs brokerages, cross border motor carriers, trade- oriented businesses, and various other trade support activities that are focused on freight move- ments across the border. The region’s border crossings have experienced significant trade growth and economic integration stemming first from the bilateral trade agreements between the United States and Canada and subsequently from NAFTA. Communities in the more rural parts of the state also look to the growth in trade-related traffic as a source of potential economic develop- ment. The hope is that by investing in freight support infrastructure it may be possible to grow trade-related service businesses in these parts of the county. The growth in trade-related truck traffic also has significant transportation implications for Whatcom County aside from the economic issues. Between 1991 and 2000, truck traffic through the Cascade Gateway almost doubled and grew from 3.7 percent of total traffic crossing the bor- der to 11.5 percent of total traffic. This has had an impact on capacity needs on the rural road- ways connecting to the border, traffic operations in the vicinity of the border crossings, and pavement maintenance issues throughout the corridor. Improving the all-weather performance Identifying Freight Resources 5-81

of the roadway system for trucking is a major transportation priority in Whatcom County and represents a significant cost element. Other Freight Issues While cross border issues have been the most significant freight transportation issues facing Whatcom COG, there are other freight-oriented issues. These include the following: • Economic development. This would include using the cross border and through freight traf- fic as sources of potential economic development for the region as well as freight issues asso- ciated with natural resource development, key issues in the predominantly rural county. • Weight limits and all-weather roads. The fact that the Canadian truck weight limits are higher than those in the United States has focused attention on the issue of weight limits. In addition, because of the impact of winter weather on road conditions, especially in high truck volume corridors, road maintenance and condition are factors of concern. Incorporating Freight into Transportation Planning Activities Through the 2001 LRTP development, Whatcom COG did not take a strong leadership posi- tion on freight issues aside from the International Mobility and Trade Corridor (IMTC) project (see the Development of Partnerships subsection in this module for more detail on the IMTC and how it was developed). In 2001, the LRTP did not have a freight element. Freight was dealt with to a minor extent in the MPO policies. This included policies to facilitate freight trans- portation from an economic perspective. For the most part, the LRTP policies echo policies in the local comprehensive plans, emphasizing things such as improvement of all-weather road conditions. The City of Bellingham has focused much of its transportation planning on con- nectivity among neighborhoods, spending little time or effort specifically on freight. The county has a slightly higher level of interest in freight issues as a source of economic development. The county has set aside land for an intermodal freight site but there has been no action on this yet. There also have been proposals for economic development of industrial sites along the water- front (for deep water access) as well as a proposal for a cross-county highway corridor that would bring Canadian grain down to the United States for shipment to China. The latter idea does not seem to have materialized. The MPO believes that in the next LRTP update there should be a freight chapter, but it has not developed one yet. The MPO board makeup has changed and the new board seems more interested in freight issues. There may be an opportunity to use the IMTC experience as a spring- board for a more comprehensive look at freight issues in the region. The hope is that the MPO can develop freight policy that can guide the local comprehensive plans, not the other way around. Developing Freight-Specific Initiatives Whatcom COG’s most notable achievements in the area of freight planning have come about as a result of its position as a border community. These activities have integrated both passenger and freight border issues in a comprehensive program. In the 1990s, Whatcom COG took a lead role in helping to form a binational, multiagency, public-private coalition called the IMTC to deal with trade and transportation issues in the Cascade Gateway region. The IMTC has been a model of an effective multijurisdictional, public-private partnership that has undertaken several projects with at least some freight focus: • Cross Border Travel Study. This study recognized that the available data on both freight and passenger movements across the border were incomplete and did not provide enough detail to allow for effective transportation planning. The major focus of this study was a roadside intercept survey of both passenger vehicles and trucks at the four border crossing facilities. The intercept surveys were conducted over several days (both weekend and weekday), in both 5-82 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

directions and at each facility, in the busy summer season, and in a more average autumn period. Information collected for trucks included the type of truck, the commodity carried, the origin and destination, the type of facility at origin and destination, and the reason for using that specific crossing. In addition, vehicle classification counts were conducted at each survey location. The data were analyzed to determine general origin-destination patterns and to determine the potential for various infrastructure and operational strategies. The study also included a series of logistics process surveys of shippers, carriers, and customs brokers to obtain information on how the logistics process of these companies worked and how border operational characteristics affected logistics decisions. • Rail study. A cross border rail study was conducted that again focused on both passenger and freight issues. The freight element of this study evaluated the potential for modal diversion from trucking to rail through service improvements in the Cascade Gateway corridor. Poten- tial commodities that could be shifted from truck to rail were identified. • Installation of FAST approach lanes at Pacific Highway. To obtain traffic operational bene- fits from the existence of FAST lanes (preclearance commercial vehicle lanes), the IMTC obtained funding to build separate approach lanes that would provide for flow benefits to the FAST participants. • Construction of truck-auto separations at Sumas/Abbottsford. This keeps trucks and autos completely separated on approach to the border and allows for smoother traffic operational features. • Cross Border Short-Sea Shipping Study. In cooperation with Transport Canada and with additional funding from the U.S. Maritime Administration and the FHWA, the study is being conducted in two phases to evaluate the potential of short-sea shipping to divert cross border freight movements from truck to waterborne movements. Other projects that impacted border freight operations included the construction of truck stag- ing areas at Pacific Highway and Sumas, which will streamline truck processing, and the devel- opment of a cross border model, which can be used to evaluate alternative improvement projects. Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools Whatcom COG currently is engaged in a project to develop travel demand modeling capabil- ity. The COG had a crude travel demand model without a truck or freight component that fell into disuse. The MPO had become interested in developing a forecasting capability to address border traffic issues and was able to develop interest in the idea of cross border travel demand modeling amongst a group of border region stakeholders (the following subsection describes the IMTC). This created the opportunity to pursue federal funding from both the U.S. and Cana- dian governments and the Washington State DOT (WSDOT). To justify the expenditure of local funds needed to match the federal grant, Whatcom COG agreed to incorporate within the mod- eling project the development of a substantial update of its regional Whatcom County model. The modeling project incorporates three elements: (1) the cross border model, (2) the Whatcom County model, and (3) the border simulation model. The cross border model and the border simulation model include freight elements while the county model does not. Development of Partnerships The clearest area of success for Whatcom COG has been the creation and nurturing of the IMTC. This is one of the nation’s best examples of a successful multijurisdictional partnership. That it was implemented and nurtured largely through the efforts of a relatively small MPO is a testament to what can be accomplished under the right set of circumstances. The IMTC is a U.S.–Canada coalition of government and business entities that jointly identifies and promotes improvements to mobility and security for the four border crossings between Whatcom County, Washington State, and the Lower Mainland of the Province of British Columbia. Identifying Freight Resources 5-83

The goals of the IMTC project are to • Coordinate planning of the Cascade Gateway as a complete transportation and inspection sys- tem rather than as individual border crossings; • Improve traffic data and information for this region; and • Identify and pursue improvements to infrastructure, operations, and information technology. The history of the IMTC is an interesting example of how an effective coalition can be created. In the mid-1990s a group of primarily public sector stakeholders had begun to meet to discuss border transportation issues. These were transportation agencies from both sides of the border. In the beginning, there was a sense that traffic across the border was growing rapidly and this was one of the major transportation issues facing the border region. Stakeholders identify themselves with the border and this is a primary driver of many issues in the region. It has also created the basis for continuing efforts at cross-border dialog. Before the IMTC, the transportation agencies seemed to feel intuitively that there was a need for a forum or a place to conduct a dialog about cross-border transportation issues and there were leaders in the various transportation organi- zations who were ready to champion this idea. But there wasn’t really a galvanizing issue around which other stakeholders could be brought together. Then the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) came out with a border system plan for developing the facilities at the four regional border crossings. The plan was issued without much consultation with stakeholders. Border stakeholders needed to somehow coordinate their response to the system plan and this provided a catalyst to get the organization going. The Bellingham Chamber of Commerce already had a regular “border business luncheon” and the transportation agencies reached out to this group as business representatives and the IMTC began. The transportation agencies already had begun working on terms of reference for a coali- tion so this served as a good starting point. There were several other factors that helped push the creation of the IMTC. First, a private non- profit policy research institute in the Seattle region, the Discovery Institute, had put together a program called the Cascadia Project to promote public and business policies that would encour- age trade and economic development throughout the Western British Columbia and Pacific Northwest region. The Cascadia Project became interested in forming a group like the IMTC and used its political and business connections to help support the nascent coalition building. At the same time, Congress was moving toward the reauthorization of the surface trans- portation bill that became TEA-21 and there was talk of a Borders and Corridors program. Moving ahead with the creation of the IMTC positioned the region to move quickly and effec- tively to compete for funds available through this program. The original program and grant requirements from FHWA also helped focus the coalition on information gathering as a key first step in establishing both the rationale and priorities of programs and projects. Before the availability of the federal grant money, the COG was able to convince the WSDOT to provide small grants of seed money to get the ball rolling. These funds allowed Whatcom COG to hire a ded- icated staff person to coordinate the IMTC activities. Staff support was critical to preparing information for the early meetings that kept them focused and allowed all of the key organiza- tional work to be conducted in anticipation of the more significant federal grant money that came later. How the IMTC Works. The IMTC has a three-tiered organizational structure: • The Steering Committee consists of approximately 40 agencies who meet monthly and make suggestions to the Core Group. These agencies include organizations from all levels of gov- ernment from both countries, transportation and inspection agencies, industry organizations, and private companies. 5-84 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

• The Core Group consists of more than 60 agencies (including the Steering Committee) and meets quarterly, serving as the decision-making body of the IMTC. • The General Assembly consists of the Core Group plus general border stakeholders—businesses, organizations, and agencies that depend on a functioning border-crossing system. More than 200 participants meet semiannually to provide feedback and gain information on evolving border policies and operations. Success Factors and Recommendations for Other Small- and Medium-Sized MPOs There are a number of factors that have been critical to the success of the IMTC and that should be considered when using it as a model for other small- and medium-sized MPOs: • A well-defined group of stakeholders with a clear set of common interests. It was important to discuss the border culture to help stakeholders see that they had a common set of interests. This discussion may also have created a blurry line between freight and passenger transporta- tion stakeholders, which might have made it easier to organize the partnership than it would have been if the focus had been solely on freight issues. Ironically, it may turn out to be easier in small- and medium-sized MPOs to find this commonality of interest and community around freight interests than in larger, more diverse communities. • A clear recognition of how freight issues are linked to the economy. The economic integra- tion at the border was definitely recognized by the border region stakeholders. • A catalyzing issue. While there already were efforts underway to bring the key public stake- holders together at the border, the GSA border system plan created the impetus to bring a vari- ety of other stakeholders to the table to act quickly. There was an issue at stake. • A tiered organization that brings decision-makers together at one level and provides a working support group together at the staff level. The structure of the IMTC includes vari- ous levels but ensures that very high-level decision-makers from both the public and private sector have a time and a place to come together. Meeting with peers keeps this group together and ensures that actions are taken as a result of the discussions. But the IMTC also has work- ing subcommittees and groups at the staff level that plan and monitor projects and activities in a collaborative fashion. There is a process for prioritizing project lists and for negotiating the funding participation of all of the partners. • No clear single institutional owner. While Whatcom COG provides all of the staff support for the IMTC, the coalition is not seen as a creation of the COG. Because IMTC’s primary purpose is to act as a forum and planning entity, it is important that all participants believe that they have an equal voice in the discussions and that they are free to act within their own jurisdiction as necessary. • Dedicated staff. An important contributor to the success of the IMTC has been the ability of Whatcom COG to provide dedicated staff to the program. This ensures that the information needs of the coalition are attended to and that follow-up actions receive support. Staff sup- port has been possible through funding that comes largely from Federal Borders and Corri- dors grants and other TEA-21 earmarks. In addition, the IMTC has focused much of its project efforts at developing a good information base for collective planning. The individual imple- menting agencies can then act as necessary. The Borders and Corridors funds, accompanied by local matches from the various participating agencies, pay for consultant studies to develop this information base. Identifying Freight Resources 5-85

Large MPO Freight Planning Case Studies Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Oakland, California New York Metropolitan Transportation Commission Delaware Valley Regional Planning Council, Philadelphia East-West Gateway Coordinating Council, St. Louis Puget Sound Regional Council, Seattle Identifying Freight Resources 5-87

Large MPO Case Study Metropolitan Transportation Commission Oakland, California Key Lessons: Incorporating freight into the planning process and RTP. MPO Overview The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is the MPO for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area (Sonoma, Napa, Solano, Marin, Contra Costa, Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and San Francisco). According to estimates by the California Department of Finance, the region’s population in 2004 was 7 million. The region is highly urbanized with the three largest cities being San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland. Despite the efforts of a vibrant Smart Growth program, the region continues to experience outward expansion of population into the Bay Plain region and the Outer Ring suburban community. Economic integration with the Northern San Joaquin Valley is also evident, both in terms of commute shed and regional warehouse and dis- tribution activity. Between 1990 and 2004, regional population grew by 16.9 percent. According to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), regional employment was 3.8 million, up 17.1 percent from 1990. The largest percentage growth over the decade was in the construction trades and the government and services sector. Agriculture and wholesale trade employment declined during this period. Between 2000 and 2004, total employment in the region declined, reflecting economic dislocations in the high-technology sectors that dominate Silicon Valley in the South Bay. The 2004 Regional Goods Movement study provides some perspective on the significance of freight to the regional economy. More than 37 percent of Bay Area economic output is in man- ufacturing, freight transportation, and warehouse and distribution businesses. Collectively, these goods movement-dependent businesses spend approximately $6.6 billion on transportation services. The businesses providing these services also play a critical role as generators of jobs and economic activity in their own right. Bay Area goods movement businesses provided at least 5.9 percent of the region’s employment in 1997. Since these estimates do not include employ- ment in private warehouses, it is likely that goods movement businesses provide almost twice as much employment as indicated in these figures. In addition, the types of jobs provided are crit- ical at a time when other opportunities in manufacturing are declining. More than 80 percent of the goods movement in the Bay Area involves trucking in several major corridors: I-880, U.S. 101, I-580, and I-80. Other highway corridors play supporting roles to these major goods movement corridors. The I-880 corridor has the highest volume of truck traffic in the region and among the highest of any highway in the state. Serving the Port of Oakland, Oakland International Airport, and the Oakland Intermodal Gateway Terminal (the Joint Intermodal Ter- minal) as well as a major concentration of industrial and warehouse land uses, I-880 serves as both an access route for major interregional and international shippers and a primary intraregional goods movement corridor. The I-580 corridor is the primary connection between the Bay Area and the national interstate truck network. A substantial share of Bay Area domestic trade is with South- ern California, the San Joaquin Valley, and other West Coast destinations, and most of this trade uses I-580 as a connector. This corridor has the second highest volume of truck traffic in the region, most of it long-haul in nature and involving the heaviest trucks. Increasingly, regional distribution centers have located in the San Joaquin Valley and trucks providing goods to the Bay Area use this corridor for access. I-80 has the third highest truck volume in the region, serving primarily as a con- nector to the transcontinental truck network. The U.S. 101 corridor acts as a gateway corridor in the southern end of the region with modest truck volume between Salinas and San Jose. Truck vol- ume increases substantially from San Jose to San Francisco, where the corridor serves as a primary access route to San Francisco International Airport and intraregional goods movement. 5-88 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

After trucking, rail carries the next largest fraction of Bay Area goods. The region is served by two Class I carriers, BNSF and UP. Oakland is the center of the Bay Area rail network and the most significant elements are located in the East Bay and along the Suisun Bay network (north and south). Major intermodal terminals are in Richmond and Oakland. Oil refineries and auto terminals along the Suisun Bay network also generate substantial rail traffic. The UP line to Roseville and the BNSF line to Stockton are the two major rail routes in the Bay Area. While the Bay Area has a number of public port facilities, the largest is the Port of Oakland. Bay Area maritime cargo includes containerized cargo at Oakland and San Francisco; bulk car- goes at San Francisco, Richmond, Redwood City, and Benecia; and crude petroleum products, raw sugar, and bay sand handled at private terminals. Unlike the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, export cargo volumes at Oakland exceed import cargo volumes. Containerized cargo at the Port of Oakland accounts for the largest share of tonnage and value. There are three major commercial airports in the Bay Area that handle air cargo: San Fran- cisco International Airport (SFO), Metropolitan Oakland International Airport (OAK), and San Jose International Airport (SJC). SFO handles the largest volume of cargo (approximately 50 per- cent of the regional total) and is the principal airport for international cargo. OAK is the next largest shipper of air cargo and handles a substantial amount of domestic freight. Air cargo is the fastest growing segment of the Bay Area goods movement system. Air cargo volume is forecast to triple between 1998 and 2020 with 125 percent increase in all-cargo flights. MTC does not have a regional freight model, but it does include trucks in its regional travel demand model. In the 1980s, as part of a study of the I-880 corridor, a consulting firm devel- oped a truck travel demand model based on a survey of truck owners. The data from this study and trip generation data from the Maricopa Association of Governments study (the basis for the Quick Response Freight Manual [QRFM]) were used to develop the truck trip generation com- ponent of the regional model, and the QRFM was used for developing friction factors for the truck trip distribution model. The model results have been validated effectively using Caltrans truck counts for state highways in the region. MTC currently does not have a FAC. It does have an advisory council that includes business and labor representatives who tend to be the most active advocates for goods movement inter- ests in the transportation planning process. Incorporating Freight into Core Planning Functions In the early years after the passage of ISTEA, MTC was one of the nationally recognized MPOs dealing with freight issues. A staff member was designated to take leadership on freight issues and the MPO investigated the development of freight performance measures as part of the plan- ning process. An early success on the project side was the development of the Joint Intermodal Terminal to provide improved rail access to the Port of Oakland. In part due to encouragement by Caltrans, MTC also joined many of the other MPOs in California in the formation of a FAC. The FAC continued to meet into the 2000–2001 timeframe when it was abandoned primarily due to lack of participation by the private sector. Major freight issues in the Bay Area during the 1990s revolved around the Port of Oakland and the I-880 corridor, which has the highest volume of truck traffic in the region. With increas- ing waterfront development (particularly in the Jack London Square area immediately adjacent to the Port of Oakland), there was growing conflict between port uses and residential and com- mercial uses. During this period, a number of proposals for use of the recently closed Oakland Army Base included goods movement-oriented uses that would directly support the Port. How- ever, most of these proposals were controversial and none moved to development. By 2000, MTC’s involvement in goods movement planning was beginning to decline. Most of the attention on freight issues in the state seemed focused on Southern California and the MPO Identifying Freight Resources 5-89

seemed to be losing interest in the issues. However, during the outreach program before the adoption of the 2001 RTP update, several business groups came forward to complain about a lack of attention being given to goods movement issues. There was a sense that the regional trans- portation investment strategy was not balanced, with little attention paid to goods movement needs and substantial expenditures on transit, bike, and pedestrian projects. MTC committed to taking a more active role in developing a goods movement element of the RTP. Before its 2004 update, MTC had not had a goods movement element in its LRP. MTC began pursuing funding to conduct a regional goods movement study to develop the database needed to assess existing and future conditions and to evaluate strategic investment opportunities. Ultimately, state plan- ning and research (SPR) funding was made available from Caltrans on the recommendation of the Caltrans Goods Movement Office. At about the same time things began heating up again around the Port of Oakland. Several key issues had emerged that were of interest to the Port and its stakeholders. The first was continu- ing land-use pressures on port-oriented businesses and other manufacturing operations in West Oakland. A combination of redevelopment activities favoring higher value uses, rising rents and land costs, and community opposition and parking/operational restrictions were forcing many businesses in the area to relocate. The Port and local stakeholders were hoping for some special designations and preservation of these uses as part of a rezoning process that was underway. The Port commissioned its own study of port services location factors to identify the specific types of port-related businesses that needed to be located adjacent to the Port and to take steps to ensure that there was sufficient industrial land preserved for these uses. One plan promoted by local port-oriented businesses would have provided for these uses as part of the Oakland Army Base redevelopment plans. But other interests in the city were hoping for the development of big box retail and other nonport commercial uses. The Port also was promoting the development of a short-haul rail intermodal service between the Central Valley of California and the Port. The objective was to provide options for central valley shippers, reduce congestion around the Port, and provide for an inland location where port-oriented uses that did not require land immediately adjacent to the Port could locate. The short-haul service has not proven to be a commercially feasible option for the railroads given current levels of congestion and the Port of Oakland was hoping to gain some public support based on the potential public benefits of the project. Caltrans provided some money to study the viability of the concept but there was little interest from local programming agencies (in Cali- fornia, most transportation project programming occurs at the county level). In general, the Port was frustrated by the difficulty it was having getting its access projects selected in the standard programming process. They argued that a regionally significant freight facility such as the Port should receive special consideration at the regional level. When MTC was putting plans together for a regional goods movement study, the Port of Oakland decided this would be a good oppor- tunity to develop policy and project priorities for regionally significant freight programs. The Port was willing to commit funds to the study. A third partner in the goods movement study was the Economic Development Alliance for Business (EDAB), a nonprofit economic development organization in the East Bay, supported in part by Alameda County. Alameda County is home to the Port of Oakland, the OAK, the Joint Intermodal Terminal, the two freeways with highest truck volumes (I-880 and I-580), and the largest concentration of manufacturing and warehouse space in the region. EDAB members in Alameda County included a number of goods movement-oriented businesses who were faced with the land-use and regulatory pressures described previously. EDAB also was concerned about the flight of manufacturing jobs from the region and the decline in job diversity. Ware- house, trucking, and logistics jobs represent a viable replacement for the lost manufacturing jobs, but the greatest job growth in these sectors is in adjacent San Joaquin County. EDAB had 5-90 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

planned to fund its own industry cluster analysis looking at the economic contributions of goods movement to the East Bay and decided to pool its resources with the regional goods movement study. EDAB also arranged for strong participation by the Bay Area Council, a nonprofit busi- ness group in the region and one of the organizations putting pressure on MTC to consider goods movement issues in the RTP. After the study was initiated, the Bay Area Air Quality Man- agement District also agreed to provide funding. With this team in place, MTC hired a consultant to conduct the regional goods movement study. The objectives of the study included the following: • Developing a regional goods movement investment strategy for the RTP; • Characterizing the issues and providing a better understanding of the economic significance of goods movement in the region to better educate decision-makers; and • Developing a common platform for Bay Area stakeholders to promote during federal reautho- rization discussions. Defining the Issues A key element of the goods movement study was to define issues that would resonate with stakeholders so that they would stay the course in what is likely to be a long process of bringing goods movement to a higher level of visibility in the regional transportation discussion. The fol- lowing issues emerged early in the study: • Land Use. A big question that needed to be addressed in the goods movement study was how to deal with the land-use pressures that were driving goods movement business out of the region. The goods movement study was not able to prove that this trend had negative impli- cations for the region but it did provide an opportunity to examine regional land-use priori- ties and how they affected goods movement. The region has a strong Smart Growth institution that has been promoting higher density residential and commercial uses in the central Bay Area. The goods movement study spawned a discussion about how goods movement fits in this strategy. Higher density in the urban core means increases in the pressure to upgrade exist- ing industrial and warehouse land uses and this will contribute to the geographic dispersion of these businesses. This could lead to more truck VMT, more congestion on key interregional corridors, higher costs of goods delivery to the major population centers, and potentially greater truck emissions. The goods movement study was the first real opportunity to raise the issue concerning the role of industrial land preservation as part of the regional Smart Growth discussions. • Access to International Gateways. At the beginning of the study, a number of stakeholders believed that the trade gateways were responsible for most of the goods movement activity in the region. The goods movement study showed this not to be the case. However, the goods movement study did clarify the importance of the international gateways to the regional econ- omy and identified some of the critical access issues and potential projects. • Major Investment Priorities. Some of the region’s stakeholders were concerned that South- ern California was attracting all the attention with regard to freight issues. The visibility of the Alameda Corridor and a number of other projects being promoted by Southern California stakeholders had the Bay Area stakeholders concerned that they were fighting an uphill battle to secure state and federal attention. These stakeholders were looking to identify some major projects that could provide a focus for lobbying efforts. Approach for Incorporating Freight into the Regional Transportation Plan The regional goods movement study was conducted in two phases. The first phase involved data gathering and reconnaissance. This provided the information necessary to define issues and describe them effectively to stakeholders and decision-makers. The second phase focused on Identifying Freight Resources 5-91

refining the description of key goods movement issues and developing strategies for dealing with these issues. Ultimately, the focus in the second phase was on how to incorporate results of the goods movement study in the RTP. Because the RTP update was being developed at the same time that the second phase of the goods movement study was being conducted, it provided an important target for the goods movement study and shaped the products and the interactions between the study team, MTC staff, the county congestion management agencies (the pro- gramming agencies), MTC advisory committees, and stakeholders. In the area of project selection, there were several steps in the MTC process. To satisfy federal requirements for a fiscally constrained plan, MTC identifies a set of Tier I projects for which existing funding sources must be identified. MTC suballocates its funding to the county agen- cies and these agencies submit projects to be included in the RTP. MTC then reviews the sub- mitted projects to ensure that they are consistent with the regional plan objectives and guidelines as established by the commissioners. State law also requires the MPO to conduct performance evaluations of the projects included in the plan to show how they contribute to the regional plan objectives. The way this process works in practice is that the county congestion management agencies (CMA) submit a list of proposed projects to MTC and MTC evaluates these projects against a set of performance measures. The results of the performance evaluations are then given back to the CMAs to consider as part of their final selection of projects to be incorporated in the fiscally constrained plan (subject to MTC approval). One of the criteria in the performance evaluations was the extent to which the project provided improved access to ports, airports, or intermodal facilities. During the project evaluation process, the goods movement study team sought to broaden the criteria. Proposed projects were evaluated to the extent that they were in a critical goods movement corridor (as defined by the study team during Phase I of the study), the extent to which they address a goods movement problem or issue in the corridor, and a judgment of the extent to which the project might contribute to solving the goods movement problem. Any data that the project proponents provided that could be used to evaluate potential goods move- ment benefits (such as reduction in truck VMT, reduction in truck delay, etc.) was used in the assessment. At the time that the goods movement study team became involved in the RTP proj- ect selection process, the CMAs already had submitted their initial list of candidate projects. In most cases, these projects were identified through a CMA call for projects which was open to public and private agencies. Most of these projects had been submitted to address nongoods movement issues. The goods movement study team reasoned that an incremental step toward getting greater attention paid to goods movement issues would be to identify projects submit- ted for other reasons and to show how goods movement benefits could be used to raise the pri- ority of a project that had other value. Once the “goods movement beneficial” projects were identified from the CMA lists, the study team met with the CMA directors to discuss the likeli- hood that these projects would make it into the fiscally constrained plan and to begin to raise the goods movement arguments for these projects. For the most part, this incremental approach was successful in getting the CMAs to think more about goods movement as an integral part of the project selection process. It also helped that two of the East Bay CMA directors had participated in a focus group of public sector officials to discuss goods movement issues. A second approach used to integrate goods movement into the RTP process was in the devel- opment of projects for the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP). Cali- fornia state transportation funding, like its federal counterpart, has devolved most project selection and programming activities to lower levels of governments. Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs) exist in every county and program state funds. However, a fraction of the state’s transportation project expenditures are taken off the top of the state transportation budget to be programmed by Caltrans for projects that improve interregional mobility. Each MPO or RTPA recommends projects and criteria for inclusion of projects in the ITIP. During the 2004 RTP 5-92 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

update effort, MTC proposed to the CMAs in the region that they recommend goods movement projects for inclusion in the ITIP. The goods movement study team then identified projects in interregional corridors or international gateways that were appropriate for inclusion in the ITIP based on this criterion. A third approach used to integrate goods movement into the RTP process is the development of a new set of projects that addressed regional goods movement needs for inclusion in the “Big Tent.” Big Tent projects are those projects that are important to the region’s transportation sys- tem but for which no immediate source of funding is available. In this RTP update, Big Tent proj- ects were identified with the assumption that a variety of new revenue sources might be available over the next several years (either through new programs in reauthorization, local sales tax mea- sures, or other user-based revenue sources). By putting the projects in the plan in anticipation of these funding sources, MTC was making a statement of regional transportation priorities. The goods movement study team did a more intensive evaluation of potential projects that could address the critical goods movement issues identified in Phase I of the study. These projects are being included in the RTP as part of the Big Tent. A final approach used to integrate goods movement into the RTP process was through the regional transportation and land-use platform, a statement of policy on Smart Growth issues intended to guide certain investment decisions by MTC. MTC already has several programs that provide planning grants and financial incentives to cities that are willing to promote transit-oriented development and other forms of development that further the region’s Smart Growth objectives. The transportation and land-use platform guides the development of new programs and poli- cies that are supportive of Smart Growth. Several of the goods movement stakeholders made a strong push to include guiding principles and implementation strategies for the encouragement of goods movement supportive land-use strategies as part of the transportation and land-use platform. This met with mixed reactions from the transportation and land-use advisory com- mittees who tended to see land-use issues from a different perspective. While there was much debate about some of the premises under which it would be appropriate to incorporate indus- trial land preservation in the Smart Growth program, the goods movement stakeholders were successful in getting some language regarding the goods movement land-use issue in the plat- form that will be included in the RTP. In addition, staff at MTC is interested in holding further discussions about what role MTC should play in encouraging industrial preservation as part of the Smart Growth program. There are other possible outcomes of the RTP process that bode well for long-term integra- tion of goods movement into the planning process. MTC is considering reviving the FAC. With the projects and policies identified in the goods movement study, the FAC would have a clear near- to mid-term agenda of actions to pursue, which might make it more successful. In addi- tion, business stakeholders have become involved in the process through the goods movement study and there is a basis for identifying potential participants in the FAC. MTC also has recog- nized the need to build greater freight modeling capability into the regional travel demand model. Several specific suggestions have been advanced and are being considered when funding becomes available. Success Factors and Applications for Small- and Mid-Sized MPOs The success of the MTC program remains to be seen. If the efforts initiated in the 2004 RTP update can be sustained, the factors contributing to success are • Stakeholders drive the agenda. MTC would probably have dropped consideration of goods movement issues altogether were it not for strong interest from segments of the business com- munity. Clearly the economic development implications of goods movement have been at the forefront of this interest. The timing of the 2001 RTP update at the beginning of a recession Identifying Freight Resources 5-93

that has had serious implications for the Bay Area economy certainly raised the profile of goods movement issues. This is not something that an MPO can orchestrate. However, regu- lar scanning of the business community for goods movement issues is a good way of making sure you are prepared when these issues do arise. • State funding for data gathering and issues reconnaissance. The Caltrans SPR funding was very useful to MTC in the development of a study that gathered data and worked with stake- holders to define issues and develop project concepts. • Framing freight issues in the context of local transportation issues. The connection between goods movement and land use, while controversial, receives a lot of attention in the Bay Area. This approach to tying goods movement issues to other transportation issues can be an effec- tive strategy. • Incremental approach to project selection and programming. While from a classical plan- ning perspective it may make more sense to do a thorough needs assessment and then develop projects based on this needs assessment, the approach of looking at projects that already are being proposed and looking for a goods movement “angle” has the advantage of bringing local decision-makers into thinking about goods movement gradually. It also creates coalitions between goods movement stakeholders and other stakeholders and allows them to see com- mon interests more clearly. 5-94 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Large MPO Case Study New York Metropolitan Transportation Commission Key Lessons: Development of a regional freight plan. MPO Overview Planning in greater New York City is marked by its scale: large population, large buildings, large infrastructure, and large challenges. The New York Metropolitan Transportation Commission (NYMTC) is the designated MPO for a portion of the metropolitan area. The NYMTC addresses the challenges of congestion, programming of infrastructure and operations improvements, and planning for safer, more efficient, and environmentally sensitive freight movement throughout the region. For planners, size is not necessarily an advantage; New York’s expansiveness can make the transportation system’s problems seem more confounding and intractable. New York City had a population of just more than 8 million in 2003 and a metropolitan pop- ulation well above 20 million, ranking it among the largest cities in the world. NYMTC oversees transportation planning activities for a 10-county portion of the metropolitan area including the City of New York (five boroughs); Nassau and Suffolk Counties to the east (all of Long Island); and Putnam, Rockland, and Westchester Counties to the north. With a population of 12.2 mil- lion in 2003, this area grew by 10 percent since 1990 and is expected to grow by an additional 5 percent (to 12.9 million) by 2025. Employment in the region, concentrated in Manhattan, grew by almost 9 percent between 1990 and 2000 to 6.4 million jobs. NYMTC projects 11 percent growth to more than 7 million jobs by 2025. It is important to note that NYMTC does not include any portions of northern New Jersey or southwestern Connecticut, both parts of the New York City urban agglomeration. New York is the largest consumer market in the country, meaning more goods flow into New York as a final destination than any other city. New York also produces goods for export to other countries and regions and serves as a port of entry for foreign goods. The Port of New York/New Jersey is the third largest by volume in the country. A highly complex, congested network of interstate highways, parkways, and railways crisscrosses the region, serving as the conduits for freight traffic originating in, destined for, and passing through New York. In addition, the region is served by two major cargo airports (Newark and Kennedy), dozens of rail termini and inter- modal facilities, and some 60 NHS intermodal connectors. It is not uncommon to attribute New York’s unique freight situation, its wealth, and grandeur, to the fact that “the world trades there.” Congestion is part of the daily life of New York, not only for passenger travelers, but also for freight. Many of the region’s most attractive truck routes experience “chronic” congestion, includ- ing Major Deegan Expressway (I-87) and Cross Bronx Expressway (I-95). Similarly, freight trav- eling by rail experiences delays because of shared routes with passenger trains and, in some cases, shared operators. Aside from congestion, the region also grapples with air quality concerns, exac- erbated by the fact that trucks carry more than 80 percent of all freight in the region. Successful implementation of freight planning is a long-term and complex task in New York. The institutional intricacies alone represent high hurdles. Coordinating transportation goals and activities between the MTA, Port Authority, NYSDOT, the City of New York, and many other entities is difficult but not insurmountable. On top of that, understanding the physical com- plexity, the sheer vastness of the city, and its network of flows requires a thoughtful, rigorous, and comprehensive analysis. In 1999, NYMTC began developing its regional freight plan, a multiyear project to assess the region’s freight infrastructure conditions, predict goods flows, identify key areas for concern, and select alternative improvement options for priority consideration. If adopted, projects from Identifying Freight Resources 5-95

the freight plan would be considered for insertion into the TIP, STIP, and various other avail- able implementation and funding programs channeled through the MPO. Because of institu- tional complexities and divergent freight goals among stakeholders, however, the freight plan was not adopted by the NYMTC board. Nonetheless, the experience of developing a regional freight plan in New York affords some important lessons and a dose of optimism for the useful- ness of freight plans in the context of smaller, less complex regions. Freight Planning Activities Like other MPOs, New York incorporates freight-related projects into its TIPs and considers freight in the LRP. Beyond that, NYMTC continues to seek involvement and input from indus- try. One manifestation of this outreach effort is the Freight Transportation Working Group (FTWG), a body consisting of freight providers and receivers, business associations, and com- munity stakeholders. Approved by the policy board of NYMTC, FTWG’s role is to bring freight issues into the fold of metropolitan planning. FTWG meets monthly and was responsible for the proposal to develop a regional freight plan in 1999. Later, throughout the drafting of the plan, the group acted as an intermediary, identifying and inviting select, important stakeholders from the freight commu- nity to participate in the development of the regional freight profile. NYMTC also conducts small-scale, special purpose studies. For instance, a report completed in 2003 assessed the availability of land for development of intermodal facilities. An earlier tech- nology scan identified the “most significant existing and emerging technologies which affect or could affect freight transportation” in the region. NYMTC occasionally carries out other related technical and policy studies. Development of the Regional Freight Plan The most rigorous recent undertaking related to freight within NYMTC was the regional freight plan, a study that took 5 years to complete. Despite the institutional difficulties encountered in its development, the process and outcome illustrate important lessons in freight planning. In 1999, the FTWG proposed and the NYMTC board approved the development of a regional freight plan. The plan, in part a response to TEA-21 and in part a fulfillment of goals expressed in the LRTP, was to examine freight conditions, needs, and opportunities for improvement in the NYMTC region. The regional freight plan included a number of components: • Internal and external scan. A description of freight studies undertaken in the New York area by a number of agencies, companies, and organizations in the past century and an external study of best practices in freight planning throughout the nation. • Inventory. A description of existing freight facilities, markets, and projected future demand. • Assessment of needs. Performance measures, needs, and deficiencies for all modes; analyses of economic development, environmental impacts, and forecasted commodity flow growth. • Improvements and solutions. A list of proposed infrastructure, operations, and policy improvement alternatives to address specific and general needs and deficiencies for economic development and for all modes: highway (truck), rail, maritime, and airport. • Feasibility analysis of alternatives. An in-depth quantitative and qualitative analysis of the fea- sibility of three packages of alternatives: policy, highway, and rail. The packages contained 16, 8, and 3 projects, respectively. Impacts analyzed included transportation, environmental, economic development, regional connectivity, technology, physical feasibility, and institutional feasibility. • Development of an implementation program. Recommendations for specific projects, poli- cies, and general strategies for the freight system of New York based on the cumulative studies already completed. 5-96 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Implementation of the recommended, high-priority projects and policies from the last task was to occur through the various responsible agencies of the New York region, including the Port Authority, NYSDOT, and others. First, though, to receive funding, the priority projects were to be considered for inclusion in the regional and statewide TIPs and other funding programs. However, because the final task was not adopted by the board, the identified programs and proj- ects are unlikely to receive funding or even much further consideration, at least in the near term. The board’s failure to adopt the freight plan reflects several of the shortcomings of the met- ropolitan planning process that are specific to New York. Large public agencies present consid- erable institutional barriers to the planners at NYMTC. Such barriers, coupled with passive indifference from the freight industry, which views the long-term planning process with detach- ment because of more immediate and vital industry concerns, conspire to overwhelm the poten- tial effectiveness of a long-term document like the regional freight plan. Success Factors and Applications for Small- and Mid-Sized MPOs Although the New York freight plan’s recommendations have not progressed to an imple- mentation phase, which may seem discouraging, the regional freight plan completed in New York does provide lessons for the freight planning process in other places. NYMTC’s motivation for performing a freight plan was a response to the sense that the region is choked by chronic congestion and increasing air quality woes. The short-term planning hori- zons within the freight industry are incapable of dealing with such long-term problems as in- adequate capacity, environmental problems, and economic losses due to lower productivity (resulting from suboptimal logistics operations). On the other hand, the mission of an MPO is precisely to address those types of long-term issues. In spite of New York’s difficulties in imple- menting its freight plan, other regions should still consider the freight plan as a valuable tool in setting long-term policy, particularly if the MPO wields enough clout within the region to influ- ence the policies and actions of other agencies. A common drawback for many regions is that the long-term horizon of a freight plan may seem unreasonable. As such, shorter-term projects and plans, in line with those pursued by such large MPOs as the DVRPC, at times may represent an equally or more constructive path for freight planners. MPOs can center their efforts on more narrow, small-scale, local goals and proj- ects. Shorter-term goals carry higher hopes of success and, therefore, engender feelings of accom- plishment among planners and within the freight industry. A long-term, visionary document for freight helps to fulfill statutory planning requirements, but successfully touting its usefulness to industry and successfully implementing its stated goals requires the kind of coordination among stakeholders that an ongoing, short-term focus makes easier to achieve. And without support for implementation, the freight plan risks becoming a missed opportunity. Identifying Freight Resources 5-97

Large MPO Case Study Delaware Valley Regional Planning Council Philadelphia Key Lessons: Engaging the private sector to implement freight improvements. MPO Overview A successful metropolitan freight planning program requires private sector involvement. However, private sector participants often perceive the public sector process for developing, approving, and implementing transportation improvements as slow and inflexible, which hin- ders their full participation. Having private sector participants devote a significant amount of time before realizing tangible benefits exacerbates the problem. To combat these issues, a num- ber of MPOs (including the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Council [DVRPC]) engage the private sector with quick turnaround or quick-fix projects that, through swift review and imple- mentation, avoid the pitfalls often encountered by more complex (and expensive) freight improve- ments. These quick-fix projects can provide immediate benefits to the freight community on a time scale more suitable for industry while simultaneously encouraging industry participation in longer-term freight planning efforts. The DVRPC is the MPO for the greater Philadelphia area. It handles transportation planning activities for the nation’s sixth largest metropolitan area, including five counties in Pennsylva- nia and four in New Jersey. In 2003, the Census Bureau estimated a population of nearly 5.5 mil- lion for the nine counties, representing a growth rate of 5 percent since 1990. DVRPC projects 9 percent population growth to 6.0 million people and 3 percent employment growth to 3.2 mil- lion jobs by 2025. The shift to service industries stands out in Philadelphia, where services now account for half of all jobs. Manufacturing, on the other hand, has declined from nearly 30 per- cent in 1970 to about 12 percent today of total employment. The Delaware Valley region has a number of critical freight routes and connectors, including three Class 1 railroad providers, 12 short-lines, 10 NHS freight intermodal connectors, several transload facilities and intermodal rail terminals, a large freshwater port, Philadelphia Interna- tional Airport, and six interstate highways, including Interstate 95. Ports in Philadelphia and western New Jersey handle more than 60 million tons of freight annually; much of it is bulk cargo such as crude oil and signature cargo such as cocoa beans, steel slabs, and high-grade paper, mak- ing it second in tonnage in the Northeast only to New York and New Jersey. To meet the transportation needs of its expansive freight enterprise, DVRPC emphasizes freight in its planning activities, but also engages the private sector in short-term, quick-fix proj- ects to bolster its relationships with the freight industry. Perhaps even more important than the projects themselves, however, are DVRPC’s general advocacy for freight both inside and outside of the MPO, its responsiveness to freight issues, and its customer service orientation with respect to freight interests in the region. Freight Planning Activities DVRPC’s Urban Goods (freight) program derives much of its strength from the Delaware Val- ley Goods Movement Task Force, an advisory committee for freight policy and planning issues. Membership on the task force is “open to all freight interests,” including railroads, ports, truck- ers, air cargo carriers, third-party logistics companies, and agencies at all levels of government. While the actual composition of the board is half public, half private, chairs for the three pri- mary subcommittees (data, planning, and shippers) all represent the private sector. The task force meets quarterly and hears presentations from academics, industry representatives, leaders in the freight planning field, and its own members. It provides formal links between private sec- 5-98 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

tor freight providers, DVRPC, and other governmental agencies. Since its formation in 1993, the committee has not only increased freight input into long-range planning and TIP selection processes, but also coordinated with DVRPC for delivery of quick services to industry while suc- cessfully advocating freight issues in general. One manager attributes success to a mutually ben- eficial, service-oriented mission of outreach to shippers and carriers: DVRPC provides the freight community with up-to-date MPO activities of interest to the industry, and the freight industry regularly communicates its needs and concerns to DVRPC. DVRPC’s current LRP, Vision 2025, includes a list of 12 projects consistent with freight goals. The plan identifies another 19 studies specifically aimed at the freight sector. Participation by the private sector through the task force allowed for consideration of freight projects in the TIP as well: “Since there is no special funding category for freight-related projects, the input of the com- mittee is central to assuring the advancement of eligible projects which facilitate the flow of goods and promote economic development.” As a result, the region’s most recent TIP includes several dozen projects identified by the freight task force. Five of 24 winning projects for the CMAQ (Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality) Improvement Program also were freight-specific, such as development of a transload facility and improvements to rail lines. Beyond traditional LRPs and improvement programs, DVRPC is currently undertaking a number of freight studies, including the Rail Weight Limit Study, Delaware County Highway-Railroad Grade Crossing Study, South Philadelphia Freight Complex Study, Southern New Jersey Port Inland Distribution Network Study, and South Jersey Intermodal Connectors Study. One manager points to the Freight Forward program as a small but important part of DVRPC’s advocacy for freight in the Delaware Valley region. DVRPC cooperates with public sector agencies responsible for operating facilities and implementing improvements, including the PennDOT, NJDOT, Delaware River Port Authority, Pennsylvania Turnpike, New Jersey Turnpike, and others. As described in the following subsection, the program has not necessar- ily expanded from its original scope, but because of the growing cooperation between freight stakeholders and DVRPC around Freight Forward, it stands out as one among many comple- mentary programs that has brought and kept the freight industry “in the loop” with regard to MPO activities. Development of Freight-Specific Program—Freight Forward The Urban Goods program sees itself as an advocate for freight both within the MPO and throughout the Delaware Valley. Beyond encouraging participation in traditional planning activities, DVRPC’s freight planning strategy is to develop strong relationships with freight industry constituents through the provision of tangible, short-term services. In return, the freight industry commits some of its resources to the planning process via participation with the Goods Movement Task Force. Alone, Freight Forward is but one small, tangible service; together with DVRPC’s other efforts, Freight Forward is part of a broad, successful outreach program. Freight Forward is a cooperative improvement program between DVRPC, local agencies, and the freight industry. It encourages shippers, carriers, and other freight stakeholders to propose quick-fix projects by completing a short form and sending it to DVRPC via traditional mail, e-mail, or the DVRPC web site. Candidate quick-fix projects include • Pothole repairs, • Highway and railroad grade crossing resurfacing, • Signage improvements, • Truck turning radii improvements, • Traffic signal timing adjustments, • Pavement marking improvements, and • Railroad siding improvements. Identifying Freight Resources 5-99

While large-scale improvements such as road widening require competitive consideration as part of a formally programmed TIP or another, similar process, DVRPC planners and engineers review Freight Forward’s small improvement requests and forward them to the appropriate maintenance agencies for more immediate remediation. Typically, DVRPC receives about one request per month for an improvement. On occasion, public works crews already have scheduled the improvement for repair. In other cases, the requested improvement is quickly reviewed and, if appropriate, forwarded to implementing agencies for their attention. The status of the problem and potential improvement are then reported back to the original requester. Because the MPO does not have responsibility for small capital projects, this service is simply a courtesy provided to the freight industry at little cost to the MPO. Freight Forward remains just a small piece of DVRPC’s efforts to serve the freight com- munity, but what began with patching pieces of pavement led to a more open information exchange roughly centered on DVRPC. Advocacy for freight by staff members within DVRPC is noteworthy. They have brought greater attention to the needs of and issues facing the freight community within the MPO. Sev- eral examples of advocacy, in a similar spirit as Freight Forward, but carried out concurrently, stand out: sending copies of the proposed and approved TIPs for feedback from members of the freight task force; inviting members of the freight industry, freight planning community, and academia to speak at task force meetings; submitting freight-specific stories to the monthly MPO newsletter; assisting with coordination of facility tours for visitors; nominating freight planners for MPO-wide awards; and preparing a standing presentation about freight in the region. Success Factors and Applications for Small- and Mid-Sized MPOs In Philadelphia, the relationship forged between the MPO and the private sector began with the identification of short-term, inexpensive, quick-fix projects and led to a strong relationship with industry that includes its involvement in the long-term planning process. Freight stake- holders now participate in the identification of strategic planning issues and help to guide a more appropriate and effective freight policy through planning. The ongoing presence of dedicated and competent MPO staff, combined with champions from the region’s leaders has helped drive the continued success of DVRPC. This lesson can transfer directly to small MPOs that experi- ence difficulties with involvement from the freight sector. Numerous jurisdictions overlap even within small MPOs, from state highway departments to local public works agencies to privately owned rail corridors to the MPOs themselves. Potholes, tight turning radii, and inadequate signage or striping represent straightforward problems whose solutions may not be so obvious because of the numerous agencies charged with maintenance of the infrastructure. The MPO can serve as a clearinghouse for improvement requests. By sort- ing particularly onerous or commonly heard concerns, specifying the needed solution, and pass- ing the information to the appropriate implementing agency, the MPO establishes itself as a partner in promoting the interests of its customers in the freight industry. Developing such a program will, however, require the following at a minimum: • Marketing the MPO as the first-stop resource for small-scale infrastructure needs, either as part of a larger program or through simple, direct outreach to freight stakeholders. DVRPC used the task force as its principal means for disseminating information about Freight Forward; • Designating at least one staff member to receive and process requests from the public; • Identifying implementing agencies within the MPO, their jurisdictions, and their capabilities (public works departments and state highway department districts, for example); and • Developing relationships through the program and other contacts to stay informed of the issues facing the freight community. 5-100 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

When surveyed, many MPOs identified the shortage of staff as a fundamental obstacle to com- pleting their missions, yet even for a large organization like DVRPC, the Freight Forward pro- gram requires a negligible amount of staff time. It is characterized as a “low-cost, high-benefit” program. Once implemented and marketed to the freight industry, developing relationships is the most critical step. If the purpose of the program is to engage and involve freight stakeholders for more long-term goals, then responsiveness to other short-term requests and maintaining awareness of freight needs are essential. In addition, the program must persist. Once freight stakeholders come to the table to contribute to the LRP, the MPO should continue providing incentives through short-term assistance. The relationship quickly becomes a symbiotic one. From DVRPC’s example, small MPOs can see that a customer service orientation with regard to small, short-term projects can pay large, long-term dividends. Creative programs, not neces- sarily replicas of Freight Forward, provide incentives for freight industry shippers, carriers, and other stakeholders to develop relationships with the MPO. For small MPOs, that incentive may not be exactly the same as in Philadelphia, but the same principles apply: outreach, provision of incentives, encouragement to participate in long-range planning, and, finally, cultivation of a mutually beneficial relationship. For DVRPC, this relationship is maintained largely through the freight task force, an entity which small MPOs may have difficulty organizing. Nevertheless, other avenues for fostering relationships exist such as chambers of commerce, industry associations, and other direct contacts. In many small MPOs, relationships with these groups already exist. The lesson from DVRPC is that freight planning does not have to be exclusively technical or exclusively long term. DVRPC has aptly demonstrated that good freight planning may simply require advocacy, recognition of the importance of freight to a local economy, and a willingness to inquire about and address the immediate needs and concerns of the industry. Identifying Freight Resources 5-101

Large MPO Case Study East-West Gateway Coordinating Council St. Louis Key Lessons: Development of freight performance indicators. MPO Overview Goods movement has always been important in St. Louis, a city which was founded as a fur trading post. Even today, the region’s strategic location provides it with trade advantages that few other cities can match. To a large extent, future growth and economic development stem from the ability of St. Louis to maintain its competitive trade advantage. The East-West Gate- way Coordinating Council (EWGCC) is the MPO for the St. Louis region. As part of the trans- portation planning process, the EWGCC gauges the performance of the region’s freight infrastructure operations. Private sector engagement provided a key foundation for responsive freight planning. In addition, St. Louis freight planners benefited from the lessons learned from earlier efforts to incorporate performance measures into long-range transportation planning. St. Louis had a 2003 regional population of 2.5 million that is expected to grow to 2.7 million by 2025, and employment of 1.3 million is expected to exceed 1.5 million by 2025. St. Louis is also home to many large companies that rely on efficient goods movement: Boeing, Anheuser-Busch, Ford, and General Motors all have major facilities in the area. Six Class 1 railroads provide service in St. Louis, along with several regional and short-line railroads. These railroads also rely on a net- work of intermodal facilities and the four interstate highways that serve St. Louis. Additionally, city- owned Lambert International Airport offers air cargo facilities, numerous ports line the Mississippi River, and seven NHS intermodal connectors have been identified in the St. Louis region. EWGCC focuses part of its planning efforts on performance measures, including measures for its freight infrastructure and operations. EWGCC describes the development of the LRTP, Trans- portation Redefined, as follows: East-West Gateway planners follow a performance-based planning process centered around the transportation customer that evaluates needs and prioritizes transportation investments against six focus areas, including system preservation, safety, congestion, access to opportunity, sustainable development and the movement of goods. EWGCC comprises three counties in Illinois, four counties in Missouri, and the City of St. Louis. Although the fur trade is long gone, the St. Louis region still serves as a critical hub for the nation’s goods movement network. Freight Planning Activities In the early 1990s, EWGCC established a FAC. Its 40-plus members include officials from all levels of government and freight representatives from the trucking, rail, air cargo, barge, ware- housing, and shipping industries. Figure 5.2 depicts an early conceptualization of the freight planning process, including the advisory committee’s role. In recognition of the “profound” impact of goods movement on the local economy, EWGCC established a regional freight movement system called the Priority Goods Movement Network (PGMN). The network includes descriptions of all surface, air, maritime, and intermodal infra- structure as well as critical features of the distribution and manufacturing sectors. The PGMN represents the first step in a process of “identifying, analyzing, and programming the needs of the freight community.” EWGCC cites several advantages to the development of the PGMN; for instance, it serves as a catalog of readily identifiable improvements for long-range planning and improvement programs. In addition, planners and industry representatives collaborate in help- ing to identify necessary components of the PGMN. 5-102 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

The PGMN and other data collected from the freight industry make up the freight “report card.” A report card allows for comparison of existing conditions (measures) to a set of prior agreed-upon performance indicators. Although development of performance indicators seems like an uncomplicated process, it actually entails a number of potential pitfalls. The experience of St. Louis provides lessons for MPOs or other organizations interested in developing per- formance indicators for application to freight. Development of Performance Indicators for Freight EWGCC has been innovative in developing performance indicators for all facets of the trans- portation planning process. Early attempts at defining indicators, however, encountered prob- lems for several reasons. First, as part of a Major Investment Study (MIS), indicators considered were not representative of the specific projects to which they were subsequently applied. Fur- thermore, data required for the indicators were unavailable, and the high number of indicators (about 50) was too large. A second attempt at using performance indicators tied to project selec- tion for the TIP proved inadequate for measuring progress toward overall transportation goals. Having learned from its previous efforts, EWGCC’s third iteration was neither too ambitious nor too ambiguous; it was “just right.” The third attempt developed performance indicators spe- cific to the freight system in St. Louis that coincided with important goals shared by the FAC. In addition, the number of indicators was manageable in size and could be measured with available or easily obtainable data. The refined list of indicators was divided into five summary categories, and the regional freight plan recommended their use in a regional TIP. The list of indicators follows: Identifying Freight Resources 5-103 Data Gathering/ Monitoring Planning/ Evaluation Review/ Refinement Implementation • Transportation Data • Commercial Data • Economic Data • Freight Directory • Freight Survey • Outreach • Priority Goods Movement Network • Intermodal Management Information System • Other EWGCC Management Systems • Freight Advisory Committee • EWGCC Staff Initiative Areas Infrastructure Institutional Financial Planning Technology Annual Freight Report Card EWGCCBoard Updated Short- and Long-Range Plans Updated TIP Annual Update Process Figure 5.2. Update of performance indicators for freight. Connectivity/Congestion • Average speed on the St. Louis region’s roadway network. • Truck counts at several key locations on the PGMN. Safety • Number of at-grade railroad crossings in the region or on the PGMN. • Number of overpasses in the region (or on the PGMN) that have vertical clearance restrictions.

• Number of weight-restricted bridges in the region (or on the PGMN). • Intersections with inadequate turning radii for 53-foot trailers in the region (or on the PGMN). • High-accident locations on the PGMN as well as total number of accidents. • Ramp geometry where sight distance to poor or sharp turns is required. • Pavement life remaining on PGMN routes. Reliability • LOS below C on PGMN roadways. Intermodal • Tons of air freight departing STL. • Tons of cargo transported through the port. • Number of intermodal lifts that occur yearly at the local intermodal facilities. Economic/Environmental • Value of freight moved from, to, and within the region. • Number of people employed in five major economic sectors in the region (e.g., trans- port and manufacturing). • Amount of warehouse space available in the region and current occupancy rate of the warehouse space. • Number of projects and dollars expended on the PGMN. 5-104 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas EWGCC carefully considered the constraints imposed by previous experience with perform- ance indicators. As a result, the refined list reflects a balance between the need for meaningful indicators that truly inform the process for programming improvements and the need for indi- cators that are easily measurable. Success Factors and Applications for Small- and Mid-Sized MPOs Because St. Louis has gone through several iterations of performance indicator development in its MPO activities, its lessons and insights are particularly informative. According to the NCHRP Report 446, the third iteration had much more success than previous attempts. Measurement of performance requires several distinct efforts on the part of an MPO of any size. First, the indicators require input from industry. Freight stakeholders work in the field everyday and their perspectives on the most important aspects of the goods movement sys- tem are essential. As a result, MPOs should consult with the shippers and carriers of their respective regions when developing performance indicators. Secondly, potential indicators are by themselves meaningless if they cannot be measured. They require data for measure- ment, so MPOs must be mindful of their capacity for data collection in drafting the indicators. Third, the process is dynamic. Over time, indicators must change to reflect improved under- standing of issues and associated problems, especially as informed by the involvement of industry participants. Once applied, measurements of performance provide several layers of usefulness for MPOs interested in improving freight planning activities and nourishing relationships with freight industry stakeholders. For example, the adage that “what gets measured is what gets done” likely holds true. Although freight traditionally receives less attention than other transporta- tion issues in the planning process, those aspects of the freight system that are measured are more likely to garner attention and have a greater chance for being addressed. Furthermore, performance measurement provides a link with industry. An MPO can expand the realm of inputs for its planning process by inviting collaboration with freight stakeholders to develop indicators. Lastly, because of the link between infrastructure and productivity, improving goods movement benefits the regional economy. In this way, freight performance measurement has a direct tie to the operational and infrastructure improvements that facilitate economic growth.

Several other lessons from the development of freight performance indicators in St. Louis merit consideration: • Use measurements as tools to identify performance improvement opportunities rather than as a means to lay blame for apparent shortcomings. • Resist the temptation to expand the number of indicators and thereby reduce their effect (the EWGCC considers 15 to 20 indicators to be optimal). • Some prospective measures may be too peripheral to offer value to the planning process; these indicators should be identified and removed from consideration. • Since “what gets measured is what gets done,” select indicators carefully to ensure that all critical program areas receive attention. Developing performance indicators, gathering data for measurement, reporting performance, and updating indicators to reflect changing freight circumstances requires substantial effort on the part of MPO staff. Nevertheless, for organizations interested in developing performance measurements, the St. Louis experience provides lessons and techniques for the designation of performance indicators that can save time, money, and effort by focusing on those that can be realistically evaluated and reflect program goals. Identifying Freight Resources 5-105

Large MPO Case Study Puget Sound Regional Council Seattle Key Lessons: Development of focused freight initiatives. MPO Overview Based on trade volumes as a share of gross state product, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) web site affirms that Washington is “the most trade-dependent state in the nation.” Con- sequently, PSRC and other responsible public agencies devote considerable attention to freight planning and advocating for freight projects. The primary vehicle for addressing freight-related issues in the region is a commission called the Freight Action STrategy (FAST) Corridor, though the MPO also recognizes the importance of freight through core planning initiatives such as the LRTP and TIP. The PSRC serves as the MPO for four counties (King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish) in the Seattle-Tacoma-Everett metropolitan area in northwestern Washington. Members of the MPO in addition to the counties include 70 cities and towns; two federally recognized Indian tribes; six tran- sit agencies and the Seattle Monorail Project; the WSDOT and Washington Transportation Com- mission; and the Ports of Everett, Seattle, and Tacoma. The fast-growing metropolitan region, with a current population of about 3.3 million, expects a 1 percent annual rate of increase through 2030, when the population is projected to exceed 4.5 million. Demographers expect a slightly higher annual rate of growth for employment, from 1.8 million jobs in 2000 to 2.5 million jobs by 2030. About 13.4 percent of jobs in the region are manufacturing jobs, and nearly one-third of those jobs are in the aerospace industry, dominated by Boeing and affiliated companies. The Seattle region also has two major interstate highway routes (I-5/I-405 and I-90), two Class I railroads (UP and BNSF), about half a dozen short-line carriers, more than 30 NHS intermodal connectors (many of which connect to freight facilities), three major ports, more than 30 transload facilities, Sea-Tac International Airport, and Boeing Field. Together, these facilities make up the area’s “freight movement package” to compete with other major west coast port cities such as Vancouver, Portland, San Francisco-Oakland, and Los Angeles-Long Beach. Freight Planning Activities The PSRC operates within the context of a very freight-conscious region and state. A variety of state task forces as well as public and private sector partnerships focus on freight needs, per- form freight planning, and identify freight projects in need of funding. The PSRC’s contribu- tion to these activities has been largely in a supporting role, although the MPO, along with WSDOT, runs the FAST Corridor program, which has identified a very specific list of freight improvements. Since 1995, the PSRC has published about a dozen freight and goods mobility reports, with topics ranging from general discussion of the development of FAST partnerships to analyses of existing freight movements and conditions in the region to a regional “business plan” for FAST. The PSRC’s LRTP, Destination 2030, includes a section supporting the efforts of FAST Corri- dor. In particular, the plan supports adoption of recommended infrastructure improvements from Phase I and Phase II of FAST as part of the LRP and continued inclusion of identified improvements from FAST. While recognizing that the FAST recommendations largely fall into the near-term category, Destination 2030 mentions its commitment to “corridor improvements, truck priority and truck geometrics projects, intermodal and multimodal infrastructure proj- ects, and information infrastructure projects” throughout the planning horizon. Presumably, such projects will be included in the LRP as they are identified by FAST Corridor. 5-106 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

Development of Freight-Specific Initiative—The FAST Corridor In 1996, the PSRC and WSDOT partnered to create the FAST Corridor (originally called FAST CAST) program. Members of the FAST partnership include transportation agencies, ports, cities, economic development organizations, as well as trucking, rail, and other business interests. Now entering Phase II, the primary accomplishments of FAST Corridor members have been to iden- tify and promote projects for the freight sector. The task force takes a multipronged approach to freight planning, including marketing Puget Sound as a desirable port to international shippers, advocating for freight-specific projects and favorable legislation at all levels of government, and encouraging private sector freight members to invest in freight infrastructure. The PSRC hosts meetings of the FAST members each month at its headquarters. In the late 1990s, Phase I of FAST Corridor identified 15 projects in the Seattle area to improve the freight transport infrastructure. Seven of those projects are now complete, one is under con- struction, six are scheduled to begin construction by 2005, and right of way currently is being pur- chased for another. Among the completed projects is an overpass above State Route 509 into the Port of Tacoma, a project to reduce congestion on SR 509 and to “hasten the flow of trucks in and out of the Port of Tacoma.” Another completed project, South 180th Street in the Town of Tukwila, provided a grade separation for a four-lane road at a BNSF/UP crossing, where approximately 40 trains pass per day. Most of the 10 Phase II projects are currently in the design phase. Although several have been chosen to receive funding, not all of the projects currently are programmed. Never- theless, language in the official LRP for PSRC suggests that FAST Corridor recommendations will receive priority consideration in both the LRPs and improvement programs. FAST Corridor members recently convened in a workshop setting to assess the progress of the task force and to define its future direction. One conclusion of the meeting was an insistence among members to review the progress and effectiveness of Phases I and II before moving to Phase III. Also, based on presentations from major freight businesses, including Boeing, UPS, DHL, and the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma, the report from the workshop concluded that increas- ing the region’s competitiveness with other American ports of entry should be a primary driver of the coalition’s strategy. Particularly, members need to herald their successes in implementing projects that benefit regional mobility and facilitate economic expansion. By pointing out to elected officials that the region’s freight facilities and shippers are responsible for a large num- ber of jobs (according to the Port of Seattle, its activities generate 165,000 jobs), members hope to bring greater public funding to the freight sector. Strategies include quantification of freight benefits and, essentially, advocating the importance of freight to decision-makers, the general public, and members of the freight sector. An implicit benefit of gathering freight stakeholders to participate in FAST Corridor is their exchange of information, concerns, and strategies. For instance, presentations from corporations such as Boeing and UPS and the Seattle-area ports at the recent workshop each included a list of recommended freight strategies. Ranging from the relatively concrete and short-term (“docu- ment and share height and weight of bridges and overpasses” and “extend marine gate hours to 24 hours”) to the more abstract and strategic (increase capacity “through land, technology, and efficiencies”), participants should be able to understand better how the distinct pieces of the freight enterprise interact and to identify shared needs more readily. Success Factors and Applications for Small- and Mid-Sized MPOs The context within which the PSRC’s FAST Corridor operates gives more attention to freight. Seattle’s strategic location and its reliance on trade compel an efficient goods movement infra- structure that is well-planned, well-maintained, and well-funded. Efforts by FAST Corridor to publicize its vision, to encourage greater attention to freight among the public and policy-makers, and to sustain a sense of urgency among freight planners and operators in the region have con- tributed to the success of the program. Identifying Freight Resources 5-107

In some small- and mid-sized MPOs, goods movement and trade play roles as important as in Seattle. In such instances and others, the strategies to encourage the involvement of freight stakeholders and to secure greater funding for freight infrastructure include engagement of the major employers and users of the freight network. Inviting these industries (as well as ports and carrier companies such as UPS) to present their concerns at the MPO or freight task force meeting has the dual benefit of allowing the MPO to understand more clearly the needs of the industry while allowing the industry to realize that its voice is an important part of the freight improvement process. Another strategy is to recognize when freight mobility becomes an urgent concern, then com- municate that urgency to the private sector and to governmental funding agencies. When this approach is coupled with freight advocacy strategies that explain the impact of goods movement on the local economy, it frames the discussion of freight in terms to which decision-makers are more likely to respond: for example, number of jobs generated by goods movement and overall economic benefit to the local economy. As with other MPO freight initiatives, Seattle’s FAST Corridor efforts reflect the shorter time scale on which the needs of the freight industry operate. While longer-term planning remains a product of the PSRC, the PSRC’s FAST Corridor program has advocated for and implemented 7 projects in fewer than 10 years of existence, with another 8 projects near completion and about 10 in the design phase. Yet, despite these apparent successes, FAST members have recommended that they resist the temptation to look too far forward by beginning another cycle of project identifications. Instead, they plan to assess the value of the work completed to date and examine the effectiveness of the processes that they follow in identifying and selecting projects. Validat- ing past work, although likely only applicable to organizations that have actively participated in freight planning for a number of years, nonetheless illustrates a strategy of self-assessment that can improve the effectiveness of MPO-level involvement in freight. 5-108 Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

5-109 Freight Glossary References

Freight Glossary References There are several freight and freight planning glossaries available to MPO freight planning staff. Table 5.8 provides links to several of these resources. Identifying Freight Resources 5-111 Table 5.8. Freight and intermodal glossaries. Glossary Name Link FHWA Freight Professional Development Program Freight Glossary http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/fpd/glossary/ Intermodal Association of North America Intermodal Glossary http://www.intermodal.org/statistics_files/Intermodal%20Glossary.html Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals Supply Chain and Logistics Glossary http://www.cscmp.org/Downloads/Resources/glossary03.pdf American Association of Port Authorities Glossary of Maritime Terms http://www.aapa- ports.org/Industry/content.cfm?ItemNumber=1077&navItemNumber=545

Next: Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications »
Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 570: Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming in Small- and Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas explores how freight policy, planning, and programming processes can be most effectively designed, initiated, and managed in metropolitan areas of these sizes. The report examines lessons learned from experiences in small- and medium-sized metropolitan areas that resulted in more effective consideration of freight issues in policy, planning, and programming decisions.

  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!