National Academies Press: OpenBook

Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes (2012)

Chapter: Chapter 10 - Conclusions

« Previous: Chapter 9 - Education about Freight Transportation Issues
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 76
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 77
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 78
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 79
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 80
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 81
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 82
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 10 - Conclusions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14650.
×
Page 83

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.

72 The U.S. surface freight transportation network includes 4,016,741 miles of highways, 94,942 miles of Class I freight railroad tracks, 46,474 miles of regional and shortline rail- road tracks, and 26,000 miles of navigable inland waterways. Other important components of the freight transportation network include air freight and pipelines. Freight-transportation-related services often come into con- flict with other land uses. These conflicts create, or have the potential to create, barriers to the efficient provision of freight transportation. Because of the important role of freight trans- portation in producing products and getting them to their end users, conflicts between freight and other land uses have an impact on the performance of the U.S. economy and consumer welfare. These impacts are evident from the fact that, for every person in the United States, an average of 11,000 ton-miles of freight is transported annually. The goals of the NCFRP Project 24 research were to (1) create an awareness of these conflicts, their sources, and consequences and (2) propose solutions to prevent or resolve such conflicts. Conflicting Land Uses and Barriers to Freight-Transportation-Related Services When competing and incompatible land uses exist close to each other, these uses often interfere with each other, resulting in conflicts between them. Conflicts could be physical in nature and/or involve nuisance, health, or safety concerns. Most residential, educational, and medical-related land uses are often incompatible with freight activity. Among the major conflicts non-freight interests have with freight-transportation- related services are • Air and water pollution, • Light pollution, • Noise pollution, • Effects of vibration, • Safety issues, and • Congestion. Some conflicts, such as noise, light, and vibration are common to all of the primary freight modes. Other con- flicts are more specific to particular modes. For example, the potential for dangerous trespass tends to be specific to railroads. From the perspective of freight interests, barriers to efficient freight-transportation-related services are often the result of these conflicts. In this context, barriers can be defined as impediments to the economically efficient transportation of freight due to land-use or policy decisions that create conflicts with other land uses. Examples of barriers or interference with freight-transportation-related services resulting from conflicts with other land uses include • Speed restrictions, • Limitations on hours of operation, • Height and clearance impacts, • Size and weight limitations, • Corridor design impacts, • Difficulty of dredging operations and disposing of dredged material, and • Gentrification that drives up land values, making siting of transportation or industrial uses costly. Some barriers can be mode-specific (e.g., highway and road design impacts on trucking activities or dredging impacts on waterway transportation), while other barriers may be more general across modes (e.g., limitations on hours of operation). Barriers not only affect freight activities along particular corridors and facilities, but also can affect route choices and the ability to access freight and manufacturing facilities. C h a p t e r 1 0 Conclusions

73 Sources of Conflicts and Barriers The land-use planning and zoning functions of government are the primary areas where conflicts between freight and other land uses are either avoided or created. In the United States, land-use planning and zoning are mostly the respon- sibility of local governments. The NCFRP Project 24 research identified a number of ways in which land-use planning and zoning contributed to conflicts and barriers, including 1. Land-use planning processes generally plan inadequately, if at all, for freight, for a variety of reasons, including the following: • Land-use planners are typically not taught about freight and do not understand why it is important to the econ- omy or how it works. • There is a lack of maps that identify freight facilities and corridors. • Freight entities are generally not significantly involved in local land-use and transportation visioning and planning processes. • Cash-starved jurisdictions have an incentive to zone for uses with higher tax values. 2. State and regional planning does not do much to fill the gap in freight planning. 3. Regional visioning exercises generally do not deal adequately with freight. 4. Funding is often lacking or insufficient for freight planning and preservation. 5. Although most cities and counties utilize an “industrial” zoning designation, they generally do not create specific zoning categories for freight facilities and corridors. Freight is industrial activity, yet its impacts are distinct from other forms of heavy industry. In addition, the NCFRP Project 24 research found that poor communication is at the core of many conflicts between freight entities and other stakeholders. One example of poor communication is the lack of notice in many real estate transactions regarding possible freight-related impacts on the intended land use (e.g., residential development). Poor communication also exists between various levels of gov- ernment entities in many cases. Among other things, lack of communication leads to conflicting expectations and lack of buy-in for solutions. Suggestions for Achieving Freight-Compatible Development The research conducted under NCFRP Project 24 and previous experiences of the project team uncovered a number of approaches for preventing or resolving land-use conflicts between freight entities and other relevant stakeholder groups. These approaches were organized into “tools” under the guiding principle of freight-compatible development. The two main objectives of freight-compatible development are to (1) ensure that freight-transportation-related services are not affected by, or do not affect, other land uses placed close to freight corridors or facilities and (2) reduce and minimize community impacts that arise because of the proximity of sensitive land uses, including residences, schools, hospitals, and emergency services. The four major tools available—either individually or in combination—to achieve the goals of freight-compatible development are 1. Long-range planning, 2. Zoning and design, 3. Mitigation, and 4. Education and outreach. Long-range planning and zoning are primarily prospec- tive in nature with the goal of avoiding conflicts. Education and outreach also can be a prospective tool, as awareness and understanding of freight and land-use issues can lead to forward-looking solutions. The following are examples of specific prospective tools: 1. State enabling acts should ideally be amended to require that freight be one of the key elements that states, local jurisdictions, and planning agencies account for in both transportation planning and land-use planning. 2. Guidance needs to be provided to land-use planners regarding appropriate planning and zoning practices that relate to freight. For example, zoning overlays and indus- trial protection zones can be put in place not just for the industrial areas that are serviced by freight, but also for the corridors that link to them. 3. Accurate mapping of freight facilities and corridors should become part of the comprehensive planning process. Mapping of such facilities will contribute to the preserva- tion and protection of these facilities. 4. Cooperative regional planning efforts, such as regional visioning processes, should include freight entities as key stakeholders and make freight a significant focus. 5. State and national associations related to planning or development should provide the appropriate education and tools related to freight planning for city and county planners. 6. Freight entities should participate as stakeholders in local, regional, and state planning and visioning processes. 7. Private-sector groups, including local chambers of commerce, can play an important role in keeping freight issues on the agenda and ensuring buy-in from the business community when a preservation project is proposed.

74 8. Freight groups (both private sector and government) need to partner with educational institutions to ensure that the underlying principles of freight activity are included as part of the curriculum at the graduate and under- graduate levels in planning, architecture, policy, engineer- ing, business, and law disciplines. 9. Ports, which have started tracking port-related job impacts throughout the region, need to make a similar scale effort to quantify the congestion and noise impacts that they produce outside of the immediate port area. Port master plans should illustrate affiliated congestion and choke points beyond their own properties. Similar activities should be undertaken by other types of freight operations that cannot be easily relocated. 10. Innovative funding practices, including public-private partnerships and rights of first refusal, are needed for freight planning and preservation. 11. Real estate contracts and other notice-type documents provided to purchasers and lessees should include sections discussing the possible freight-related impacts that may occur as a consequence of living in proximity to freight activities. However, in many cases, incompatible land uses already exist close to freight-transportation-related services and conflict has resulted. In these cases, at least in the short run, measures such as design standards and mitigation approaches are a means to minimize conflicts. Implementation Plan for Disseminating Research Results The ultimate value of the research conducted under NCFRP Project 24 will be reflected by its usefulness to the various stakeholders who are involved with, or are affected in one way or another by, the freight transportation system. The research team believes that this largely depends on the ability and willingness of the freight, planning, and develop- ment communities to understand and communicate with each other. To this end, an innovative contribution of NCFRP Project 24 is the development of the EnvisionFreight website and its associated guidebook. The “beta” versions of the website and guidebook were previewed at the NCFRP Project 24 workshop, held in January 2011. As discussed, the following are exam- ples of how various stakeholders can use the EnvisionFreight website: For planners and elected officials, EnvisionFreight has been designed to help to • Understand how freight fits into the local, national, and global economy; • Understand the issues that arise from conflicts and how these impact freight-transportation-related services and communities; • Begin to consider the kinds of tools, scenarios, commu- nication, and educational outreach that they might want to use to improve their freight planning and preservation capacity For developers, EnvisionFreight aims to ensure that they consider how freight activities may affect and intersect with residential and other sensitive types of land use they may be planning. With a better understanding of these components, developers should be able to choose appro- priate sites and design and incorporate construction and mitigation components to reduce conflicts that may arise. For freight entities, EnvisionFreight is intended to provide education and assistance regarding land-use planning and zoning processes. With a better understanding of these processes, as well as tools that can be used to more effec- tively deal with freight in land-use planning and zoning, freight entities can be more effective participants in such processes. For individual citizens or community groups, the goal of EnvisionFreight is to provide basic information about the various freight modes, impacts that arise because of freight activity and proximity to incompatible land uses, and show the types of tools that can be utilized to more effectively plan for freight. For state legislators and staff, EnvisionFreight is designed to provide information and ideas for potential legislative changes that would facilitate better integration of freight and land-use planning. In addition to the development of the EnvisionFreight web- site, as part of the implementation plan for NCFRP Project 24, the research team recommends that the following activities be undertaken to disseminate the research findings and to obtain support from organizations that link to the EnvisionFreight website: 1. Dissemination of results at the TRB 2012 annual meeting. • Organize a panel for the TRB 2012 annual meeting. – Recommend a host in conjunction with NCFRP Project 23, “Research on Freight Facility Location Selection.” 2. Conduct FHWA “Talking Freight” seminars. • Recommend delivering two “Talking Freight” seminars during 2011. – Combine with NCFRP Project 23 research output. 3. Make presentations at conferences such as • Annual meetings of organizations like the Journal of Transportation Research Forum, American Planning Association, National Association of Counties, National

75 League of Cities, National Association of Regional Councils, Association of Metropolitan Planning Orga- nizations, Urban Land Institute, and American Bar Association; • Freight group meetings hosted by the American Asso- ciation of Port Authorities (AAPA), Association of American Railroads (AAR), American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA), FRA, Inter- modal Asso ciation of America (IANA), AASHTO, American Water ways Operators (AWO), state DOT and freight task forces; • National Governor’s Association, Republican and Democratic Governor’s Associations, as well as Western, Southern, and New England Governors Associations; and • Note: members of the research team were scheduled to present at – Baltimore Industrial Group meeting (February 2011), – National Association of Counties Meeting on Freight (April 2011), – Preservation Maryland Annual Meeting (May 2011), and – FRA Grade Crossing Conference (2012). 4. Request that groups and organizations place a link to the EnvisionFreight website on their websites, including • Trade groups, such as AAR, AAPA, AASHTO, AWO, CARB, and North America’s Superior Corridor Coalition (NASCO); • Planning entities such as APA and Urban Land Institute; • The university transportation centers (note: University of Texas at Austin—Center for Transportation Research [UT-CTR] will place a link to EnvisionFreight, and their communications team will put out a blog posting on the website once it is fully live—this blog is picked up by many of the university transportation research centers); and • NASCO has already agreed to put a link to the Envision- Freight website on their website. 5. Notify NCFRP Project 24 workshop participants, and other interested parties who are known to the research team, of final version of the EnvisionFreight website. 6. In order for the NCFRP Project 24 research to be useful over the longer term, the research team will look for per- manent sponsorship for the EnvisionFreight website for upkeep. Possibilities include industry trade groups, plan- ning associations, and/or government agencies. Publication Plan The research team will commit to publishing the study results in a manner that reaches a wide audience to broaden the impact of the research. In addition to the EnvisionFreight website, which is the principal mechanism of disseminating the results of the study, the research team will draft a brief summary of key findings for potential publication in a trade journal, such as the Journal of Commerce. The purpose of this piece will be to quickly highlight the most important lessons learned from the research and to refer interested parties to the website. The research team also plans to develop at least one in-depth article for a scholarly publication. The most likely forum for this publication would be the Transportation Research Record. Other options for publication include planning journals such as the Journal of the American Planning Association.

76 Abbott, Carl. 2008. Portland’s Working Rivers: The Heritage and Future of Portland’s Industrial Heartland, prepared for the Working Water­ front Coalition. January. Accessed at http://www.schnitzersteel.com/ documents/PortlandsWorkingRivers_CarlAbbott_WhitePaper.pdf. Aichele, Richard O. 1996. “A Vital Rail Link.” Business News New Jersey, July 10. America 2050, Megaregions webpage. 2010. Accessed at http://www. america 2050.org/megaregions.html. American Planning Association. 2006. “Section 4.7: Model Residential Cluster Development Ordinance,” in Model Smart Land Development Regulations. March. Accessed at http://www.planning.org/research/ smartgrowth/pdf/section47.pdf. American Trucking Associations. 2011. Hazardous Materials webpage. Accessed at http://www.truckline.com/AdvIssues/HazMat/Pages/ HazardousMaterials.aspx. Anderson, Larz T. 1995. Guidelines for Preparing Urban Plans. Planners Press, American Planning Association. Chicago, IL. Association of American Railroads. 2010. “Hazardous Materials Trans­ portation.” Accessed at http://www.aar.org/safety/Hazmat.aspx. Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations. 2003. Accessed at https://www.ampo.org/content/index.php?pid=50. March. Atlanta Journal and Constitution. 1996. “Cobb, Fulton Neighbors Fight Proposed Rail Yards.” September 30. Atlanta Logistics Innovation Council. 2010. “Atlanta – Major Intermodal and Freight Rail Hub.” Accessed at http://www.logisticsatlanta.com/ rail.asp. Atlanta Regional Commission. 2007a. “Atlanta Regional Freight Mobil­ ity Plan: Community & Environmental Impact Scan and Assess­ ment, Technical Memo.” August 16. Accessed on April 18, 2011 at http://www.atlantaregional.com/File%20Library/Transportation/ Roads%20and%20Highways/tp_community_assessment_report_ 8­16­07.pdf. ———. 2007b. Freight Mobility Needs Assessment. Accessed at http:// www.atlantaregional.com/File%20Library/Transportation/ Roads%20and%20Highways/tp_ARFMP_needs_assessment_ 8­24­07.pdf. ———. 2008a. Atlanta Regional Freight Mobility Plan. Final Report, February. Accessed at http://www.atlantaregional.com/ transportation/freight/freight­mobility­plan/freight­mobility­plan. ———. 2008b. Atlanta Regional Freight Mobility Plan: Executive Summary. May. Accessed at http://www.atlantaregional.com/ File%20Library/Transportation/Roads%20and%20Highways/ tp_ARFMP_exec_summary_5­30­08.pdf. ———. 2010a. Accessed at http://www.atlantaregional.com/transpor tation/freight. ———. 2010b. Accessed at http://www.atlantaregional.com/land­use. ———. 2010c. Accessed at: http://www.atlantaregional.com/html/ 1767.aspx. Baldwin, Tom. 1998. “Rail Link to New York Port Nearing Reality, Officials Say.” Journal of Commerce Week, October 14. Basu, Anirban. 2009. “An Economic Impact Assessment of the MIZOD in Baltimore.” Sage Policy Group. Blair, William G. 1982. “No. 1 No More, New York Port Seeks To Strengthen Its Role.” New York Times, September 24. Blaszak, Michael W. 2003. “The 21st Century Freight Yard: BNSF’s Logistics Park Near Chicago.” Trains Magazine, January 1. BNSF Railroad. 2010. Explore the Rail Corridors. Available at: http:// www.tradecorridors.com/explore­the­corridors/. Booney, J. 2009. “Untangling the Chicago Knot.” Journal of Commerce, April 20. Retrieved from http://www.createprogram.org/PDF/ 2009.2.20_Untangling%20the%20Chicago%20Knot.JOC.pdf. Broadwater, K. 2009. “The Importance of MIZOD in a Competitive and Growing Port of Baltimore.” PowerPoint presentation at the Maryland Freight Summit, September 14, 2009. Accessed at http:// www.marylandtransportation.com/OFL/2009FreighSummitprese ntations/MIZODandImpactonthePort.pdf. Brown, Bob. 1998. “NYC Commissioner Kills Marine Plan.” Waste News, June 29. Brick, Michael. 2002. “Village Says, ‘Yes, in My Backyard,’ to Rail Center.” New York Times, July 17. Brisbane City Council. 2000. Brisbane City Plan 2000. Accessed at http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/planning­building/tools­forms/ city­plan­2000/city­plan­2000­document/index.htm. ———. 2008. Brisbane City Council Transport Plan for Brisbane 2008– 2026. Accessed at Brisbane City Council website: http://www. brisbane.qld.gov.au/traffic­transport/plans­projects/transport­ plan­for­brisbane­2008­2026/index.htm. ———. 2009. How the Brisbane City Plan Could Change: Options for a Sustainable Future. March. Accessed at Brisbane City Council website: http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/planning­building/tools­ forms/city­plan­2000/new­city­plan/Statement­of­Proposals/ index.htm. ———. 2010. “Brisbane Planning and Development Online.” Accessed at http://pdonline.brisbane.qld.gov.au/MasterView/masterplan/ enquirer/default.aspx, http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/planning­ building/tools­forms/index.htm, and http://www.brisbane.qld. Bibliography

77 gov.au/planning­building/assessing­development­applications/ index.htm. Bucks County Pennsylvania. 1987. “Zoning Map, East Rockhill Township.” May. Cadell, Christopher, Nicholas Falk, and Francesca King. 2008. Regener­ ation in European Cities: Making Connections, the Kop Van Zuid Case Study at http://www.urbed.com/cgi­bin/get_binary_doc_ object.cgi?doc_id=250&fname=extra_pdf_3.pdf. California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board. 2005a. Statewide Railyard Agreement. June 30. Accessed at http:// www.arb.ca.gov/railyard/ryagreement/ryagreement.htm. ———. 2005b. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. March 29. Accessed at http://www.arb.ca.gov/ ch/landuse.htm. Cambridge Systematics. 2009a. Regional Freight System Planning Rec- ommendations Study: Draft Freight Stakeholder Outreach Technical Memorandum (technical memorandum), October 16. Retrieved from Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning website: http:// www.cmap.illinois.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=17894. ———. 2009b. Regional Freight Planning Recommendations Study Policy Options, December 3. Retrieved from Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning website: http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/WorkArea/ DownloadAsset.aspx?id=18015. Campbell, Colin. 1981. “World’s Biggest Dump for Garbage Just a Monumental Problem on S.I.” New York Times, May 28. Canada Transportation Act. 2007. PRB 05­73E, Rail Shipper Protection Under the Canada Transportation Act. Accessed at http://www2. parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb0573­e.htm. Canadian Transport Agency. 2011a. “How the Agency Handles Disputes.” Accessed at http://www.otc­cta.gc.ca/doc.php?sid=3&lang=eng. ———. 2011b. “Guidelines for the Resolution of Complaints Over Rail­ way Noise and Vibration.” Accessed at http://www.otc­cta.gc.ca/ doc.php?did=923&lang=eng. ———. 2011c. “Consultation Guide on Railway Noise and Vibration Guidelines.” http://www.otc­cta.gc.ca/doc.php?did=924&lang=eng. Carroll, Maurice. 1983. “Staten Island Wonders If Secession Can Succeed.” New York Times, August 7. Center for Applied Transect Studies. SmartCode Version 9.2. Accessed at www.transect.org\codes.html. Centerpoint Properties. 2010a Accessed http://www.centerpoint­prop. com/projects/article.aspx?id=151&mode=INFRASTRUCTURE. ———. 2010b. “CenterPoint Intermodal Center–Joliet, Illinois.” Accessed at http://www.centerpoint­prop.com/showAttachment.aspx?id=239. ———. 2010c. “CenterPoint Intermodal.” Accessed at http://www. centerpoint­prop.com/projects/article.aspx?id=209&mode=INFR ASTRUCTURE. Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning. 2011. Congestion Manage- ment Process Freight System Planning Recommendations Project, Final Report. Website accessed at http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/ cmp/freightsystem.aspx, http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/WorkArea/ linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=5588, and http://www.cmap. illinois.gov/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=5582. City of Anaheim, California. 2004. Zoning Code Title 18, Section 18.04. 060.020. Accessed at http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/ California/anaheim/title18zoning?f=templates$fn=default.htm $3.0$vid=amlegal:anaheim_ca$anc=. ———. 2006. Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Crossing at Anaheim. Accessed at http://www.anaheim.net/images/articles/1288/Vol1_ InitialStudy/5_Mitigation_Monitoring_Plan.pdf. City of Baltimore, Planning Department. 2004. Map of Maritime Industrial Overlay District. City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. 2010. Available Land Inventory. March. Accessed at http://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/maps/ landinv.pdf. City of Long Lake, Minnesota. 2002. Design Standards. Section 475.046. Subd. 13. Accessed at http://www.ci.long­lake.mn.us/zoning ordinance/Design%20Standards.pdf. July. City of Pasadena, California. 2005a. Zoning Code, Article 1, Chapter 17.10, Section 17.10.010—Purpose of the Zoning Code. Accessed at http:// ww2.cityofpasadena.net/zoning/P­1.html#17.10.010. ———. 2005b. Zoning Code, Article 2. Accessed at http://ww2.cityof pasadena.net/zoning/P­2.html#17.20.020. ———. 2005c. Zoning Code, Article 5, Standards for Specific Land Uses, Chapter 17.50, Section 17.50.350, Urban Housing, Paragraph M, Urban Noise Levels. Accessed at http://ww2.cityofpasadena.net/ zoning/P­5.html#17.50.340. City of Peoria, Arizona. 2005. City Code, Chapter 14–Motor Vehicles and Traffic, Section 14.76. Accessed at http://www.peoriaaz.com/ CityCode/PDF/Ch14/sec14­76.pdf. City of Portland, Oregon. 2006. “Council Minutes,” July 19. Accessed at http://www.portlandonline.com/auditor/index.cfm?c=26997. City of Portland, Oregon, Auditor’s Office. Plans for Waterways, Terminals, and Water Sites, Vol. 1. 10/18/21, Stanley Parr Archives and Records Center, Portland Oregon. Cited in Karin Dibling, Julie Kay Martin, Meghan Stone Olson, and Gayle Webb, Guild’s Lake Industrial District: The Process of Change over Time, 2006 Oregon Historical Society, Vol. 107. No. 1. City of Portland, Oregon Bureau of Planning. 1989. 1987 Vacant Land Report, February. Accessed at https://scholarsbank.uoregon. edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1794/7968/Portland_Vacant_Land_ Report.pdf?sequence=1. ———. 2001. Guild’s Lake Industrial Plan Report, December 21. Accessed at http://www.portlandonline.com/bps/index.cfm? &a=59602. ———. 2003. Citywide Industrial Land Inventory and Assessment, July. Accessed at http://www.pdc.us/pdf/bus_serv/CILI­report­ final_7­31­03.pdf. ———. 2004. Industrial Districts Atlas. Accessed at http://www.portland online.com/bps/index.cfm?c=47561&a=71533. ———. 2006. Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies. July, at http://www. portlandonline.com/bps/comp_plan_goals_policie__complete.pdf. City of Portland, Oregon Bureau of Planning and Sustainability. 2006. Northwest District Remand Ordinance. City of Portland, Oregon, Office of Transportation. 2006, Freight Master Plan, February, at http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/ index.cfm?c=38846&a=112552. City of Portland, Oregon, Bureau of Transportation and Bureau of Planning and Sustainability, Northwest District Plan Remand Transportation Model Technical Report, May 27, 2010, Exhibit B. Accessed at http://www.portlandonline.com/bps/index.cfm?c=50598 &a=302748. City of Shelbyville, Indiana. 2004. Zoning Ordinance, Article 3: Performance Zoning. City of Vancouver, Canada. 1984. Port of Vancouver City Policies. Accessed at http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/guidelines/P006.pdf ———. 1998. Central Waterfront Official Development Plan. Accessed at http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/BYLAWS/odp/cw.pdf. City of Wheaton, Illinois. 2001. Chapter 62. Article III. Design Standards, Division 1. Section 62­152. Subdivision bordering on railroad right­ of­way or highway. Accessed at http://www.wheaton.il.us/custom/ citycode/13403000.HTM, November 19.

78 Commission of the European Communities. 2008. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: Rail noise abatement measures addressing the existing fleet (COM(2008) No. 432). July 8. Retrieved from Europa website: http://eur­lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:20 08:0432:FIN:EN:PDF. Corfman, Thomas A. 2000. “Stock Price Rises This Year for Oak Brook, Ill.­Based Real Estate Trust Firm.” Knight-Ridder Tribune Business News: Chicago Tribune–Illinois, November 21. CREATE. 2010. Chicago Regional Environmental and Transportation Efficiency Program website accessed at http://www.createprogram. org/about­partners.html. CTS Corp. v. Dynamics Corp. of America. 1987. 481 U.S. 69, 107. Daamen, Tom, and Marcel van Gils. 2006. “Development Challenges in the Evolving Port­City Interface: Defining Complex Development Problems in the European Main Seaport­City Interface: Rotterdam and Hamburg.” Delft University of Technology, 10th International Conference: Cities and Ports, Sydney Australia, November 5–9. DePalma, Anthony. 1987. “Measuring an Ominous Cloud over the Port of New York.” New York Times, January 11. Department for Communities and Local Government. 1994. Plan- ning Policy Guidance 24: Planning and Noise, September, London, England. ISBN: 0 11 752924 9. Retrieved from Communities and Local Government website at http://www.communities.gov.uk/ documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/156558.pdf. ———. 2001. Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport. March, London, England. ISBN 0 11 753558 3. Retrieved from Communities and Local Government website at http://www.communities.gov.uk/ documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/155634.pdf. ———. 2008. Planning Policy Statement 12: Creating Strong Safe and Prosperous Communities through Local Spatial Planning. June 4, London, England. ISBN 978 0 11 753996 9. Retrieved from Commu­ nities and Local Government website at http://www.communities. gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/pps12lsp.pdf. ———. 2009. Comprehensive List of Nationally Defined Consultees in the Planning Application Process–Information Report. December, London, England. ISBN: 978­1­4098­2148­9. Retrieved from Planning Portal website at http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/kpr/ Draft_list_of_stat_and_non_stat_consultees.pdf. ———. 2010. Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) Housing. 3rd ed, June, London, England. ISBN: 978 011 753976 7. Accessed at Com­ munities and Local Government website at http://www.communi­ ties.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/planningpolicy statement3.pdf. ———. 2011. Planning Policy Statements (PPS) and Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPG). Accessed at http://webarchive.national archives.gov.uk/+/http://www.communities.gov.uk/planning andbuilding/planning/planningpolicyguidance/planningpolicy statements/ and also http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/ http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning/ planningpolicyguidance/planningpolicystatements/planningpolicy guidance/. Department for Transport. 2004a. Planning for Freight on Inland Water ways, April. Retrieved from Department for Transport website at http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/freight/waterfreight/pfiw/ fullguide.pdf. ———. 2004b. The Future of Transport: A Network for 2030, July, White Paper. Accessed at http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ 20040722012351/http://dft.gov.uk/strategy/futureoftransport/ index.htm. ———. 2006. The Railways (Abolition of the Strategic Rail Authority) Order 2006. No. 2959 (December). Accessed at http://www.opsi. gov.uk/si/si2006/20062925.htm. Dorsch, Kirstin. 2007. City Reserves 56,000 Acres for Industry, June 8. Accessed at http://www.iric.com/bizjourn245.htm. Dratch, Dana. 1992. “Protests go Unheeded as Austell Planners Back Industrial Rezoning.” Atlanta Journal and Constitution, June 18. ———. 1993. “Railroad Developing Plans for Piggyback Facility.” Atlanta Journal and Constitution, November 4. Dupin, Chris. 2001. “NY­NJ Port Authority Acquires Land to Expand Howland Hook Terminal.” Journal of Commerce Online, January 12. Dwyer, James. 2008. “Talking Freight” Web Conference. Presentation by James Dwyer of the Maryland Port Administration to the Federal Highway Administration, November 19. Earth Tech Canada, Inc. 2007. Proximity Guidelines and Best Practices The Railway Association of Canada & The Federation of Canadian Municipalities, eds., August. Proximity Issues website at http://www. proximityissues.ca/english/MaterialsContent/2007_Guidelines_ eng.pdf. East Tennessee Development District. 2009. Industrial Land Inventory. June. Accessed at http://www.discoveret.org/etdd/PDF/industrial landinventory09.pdf. ECO Northwest with Group Mackenzie and Johnson Gardner, LLC. 2003. Market Demand Analysis Report for the Citywide Industrial Lands Inventory and Assessment, prepared for Portland Development Commission, July. Accessed at http://www.pdc.us/pdf/bus_serv/ mkt­demand­analysis.pdf. Edwards and Kelcey, Fish Transportation Group, Kowalenko Consulting Group, & Chicago Department of Transportation. 2008. Chicago Downtown Freight Study. PowerPoint Presentation presented at Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning–Freight Committee meeting, November 6. Accessed at http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/ WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=11552. Engineering News-Record. 2000. “Mega Projects Get Go­Ahead as N.Y. and N.J. Settle Feud,” June 12. Engquist, Erik and Tommy Fernandez. 2006. “S.I. Freight Trains Ready to Roll; Refurbished Bridge will Bring Back Trash; Bids Sought for Two Bronx Industrial Sites.” Crain’s New York Business. July 17. Faga, Barbara. 2006. Designing Public Consensus. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. FAST Corridor. 2006. “FAST Corridor Keeps the Puget Sound Gateway Open.” In FAST Corridor brochure, (April): 2. Accessed at http:// www.psrc.org/assets/1833/fastbrochure.pdf. Federal Aviation Administration. 2009a. National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS). Accessed at http://www.faa.gov/airports/ planning_capacity/npias/. ———. 2009b. National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS): 2009–2013. Report to Congress. Accessed at http://www.faa.gov/ airports/planning_capacity/npias/reports/media/2009/npias_ 2009_narrative.pdf. Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and the Railway Asso­ ciation of Canada (RAC). 2011. Accessed at http://www.proximity issues.ca. Feiden, Douglas. 1992. “City Seeking S.I. Railroad, but Timing May Derail Deal.” Crains New York Business, April 6. Firstman, Richard C. 1987. “The Hills of Fresh Kills: The Planet’s Largest Landfill.” Newsday, December 13. Frank, Al. 1999. “Paving the Way for Commerce–As Cargo Traffic Grows, Antidotes to Bridge Gridlock Are Resurrected.” Star-Ledger Newark, NJ, September 9.

79 Frankston, Janet. 2005. “Trucks Could get Toll Lanes on Interstates.” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, August 1. Gilbert, Pat R. 1995. “Tolls at Hudson River Crossings Help Offset Millions in Losses at the Port Authority’s Lesser­Known Ventures. Bridging a Gap Losing Ventures Take Toll on PA.” Record, March 5. Gillis, Michael. 1992. “Joliet Arsenal Pushed as Site for 3rd Airport.” Chicago Sun-Times, August 4. Golab, Art. 1998. “Developer Dangles Landfill Alternative, New Use for Joliet Arsenal Sought.” Chicago Sun-Times, January 21. GoogleEarth. 2010. Hart, Ariel. 2008. “Community News: ARC Honored for Antici­ pating Transportation Shortfalls.” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, November 8. Hentschel, John J., and Daraius Irani. 2009. Charting the Future of Balti- more’s Industrial Waterfront. Abell Foundation, January. Accessed at http://www.abell.org/pubsitems/CD_BaltWaterfront_0109.pdf. Hutson, Nathan. 2010. Photo. July 26. Joliet Arsenal Development Authority. 2010a. TMA Feasibility Study for Southwest Will County, Illinois, May 4. ———. 2010b. Joliet Arsenal Area Transportation Plan Update. May 9. Journal of Commerce Online. 2002. “Howland Hook Breaks Ground on Expansion.” October 30. ———. 2004. “N.J. Towns Take Rail Line Fight to Washington.” January 19. Kaufman, Lawrence H. 2000. “BNSF to Develop Intermodal Terminal, Auto Facility in Joliet.” Journal of Commerce Online, August 10. Lanigan, Jack, Sr., John Zumerchik, Jean­Paul Rodrigue, Randall Guensler, and Michael O. Rodgers. 2007. “Shared Intermodal Terminals and the Potential for Improving the Efficiency of Rail­Rail Interchange.” Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, Paper #07­2563. Lloyd’s List International. 1989. “Norfolk Southern Doubles Capacity in Atlanta.” June 16. ———. 1996. “Volumes—New York, Cargo Trade Up by 18% in First Half.” October 11. ———. 1997. “Capital Boost for New York.” July 3. ———. 2002. “Race Against Time to Upgrade Howland Hook Box Terminal.” March 14. Long, Katie. 1998. “Despite Boom, Austell Has No Place to Grow.” Atlanta Constitution and Constitution. November 28. Lydon, Mike. 2009. Miami Adopts Largest Known Form-Based Code. Planetizen.com, October 22. Accessed at http://www.planetizen. com/node/41370. Marcelo, Philip. 2010a. “Providence Waterfront Rezoning Idea Garners Mixed Reaction.” June 2. Accessed at http://www.projo.com/news/ content/PROVIDENCE_WATERFRONT_HEARING_06­02­10_ CVIND3_v19.183b6e6.html. ———. 2010b. “Developer’s Criminal Past Clouds Proposal for Providence Waterfront.” June 28. Accessed at http://www.projo. com/news/content/STANTON_SHIFMAN_06­28­10_1TITJ9C_ v51.15a566a.html. MarcoSys Research and Technology 2005. Logistics Costs and U.S. Gross Domestic Product. August 25: 7–8. Martin and Associates. 2008. “The Economic Impacts of the Port of Baltimore.” Prepared for the Maryland Port Administration, revised February. Material Handling & Logistics. 2010. “State of the Logistics Industry is Soft but Rebounding,” June 10. Accessed at http://mhlnews.com/ distribution/state­of­logistics­industry­soft­rebounding­0610/ index.html. Mathers, Rob and Greg Theisen. 2008. Portland Harbor Public/Private Partnerships. Presentation to American Association of Port Author­ ities Port Property Management Seminar, June. Accessed at http:// aapa.files.cms­plus.com/SeminarPresentations/2008JuneToronto Seminar/08_torontoseminar_theisen.pdf. Mayer, Christopher. 1990. “Atlanta Achieves Major Growth as Piggy­ back Centre – Expands Intermodal Freight Services.” Lloyd’s List International, October 25. McKinley, Jr., James C. 1994. “Restoring the Rails on Staten Island; Plans for Economic Revival Stretch Along 15 Miles of Track.” New York Times, November 11. McLaughlin, John. 1999. “New York Proposal for ‘Super­Port.’ ” Lloyd’s List International, February 18. Metro Atlanta Chamber, accessed April 18, 2011 at http://www. logisticsatlanta.com/rail.asp. Metropolitan Area Employment and Unemployment (Monthly) News Release. 2010. Accessed at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ archives/metro_07282010.htm. Michael, Andrew. 2006. “MIZOD Case Study Report.” M&T Bank. August 11. Mon Valley Land Use & Transportation. 2010. Freight Movement. Accessed at http://monvalleyhelp.com/resource/freight­movement. Morgan, C., Warner, J. Huang, J., Barkley, R., Loftus­Otway, L., Hutson, N., Cruz­Ross, A., and Niven, R. 2011. Abandoned Rail Corridors in Texas: A Policy and Infrastructure Evaluation. March. Texas Transportation Institute at http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/ 0­6268­1.pdf. Mullen, Michael M. 2005. “Centerpoint Intermodal Center.” Economic Development Journal, April 2. New York City Department of City Planning. 2010. About NYC Zoning. Webpage accessed at http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/zone/ zonehis.shtml. ———. 2009. Under “Current Population Estimates.” Accessed at http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/census/popcur.shtml. New York City Government. 2007. “Mayor Bloomberg Officially Reactivates the Staten Island Railroad.” Press Release, April 17. New York Times. 1990. “Sea­Terminals Closes Staten Facility–58 Acre Howland Hook Container Terminal Closes.” November 3. Newman, Andy. 1998. “New Jersey May Cancel Staten Island Rail Link.” New York Times, August 21. North Carolina Department of Transportation. 2010. Website on Corridor Preservation accessed at http://www.bytrain.org/corridor/. N.W.D.A. v. City of Portland. 2005. 198 Ore.App. 287, 108 P.3d 589. NWDA Community Association v. City of Portland. 2005. Accessed at http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A126345.htm. Oregon Industrial Conversion Study Committee & Department of Land Conservation and Development in conjunction with the Economic Revitalization Team. 2004. Promoting Prosperity: Protecting Prime Industrial Land for Job Growth. November. Accessed at http:// www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/economicdevelopment/indconvrep. pdf?ga=t. Otak Inc. 1999. Port of Portland and Metro Regional Industrial Lands Study for the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. December 1. Accessed at http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/regionalindustriallandstudy. pdf and http://www.pdx.edu/ims/regional­industrial­lands. Perfater, Michael A. 1989. Highway Corridor Preservation: A Synthesis of Practice. Virginia Transportation Research Board. August. Accessed at http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/perfat.html. Phair, Matthew. 2006. “D’Annunzio Reactivates Staten Island Rail; The Contractor Rebuilds, Expands and Reconnects Staten Island’s Dormant Freight Line.” Constructioneer. January 16.

80 Philip E. Grillo and Miller Nash LLP. 2005. The Energy Cluster in Linnton. Prepared for Olympic Pipeline Company, BP West Coast Products LLC and Kinder­Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. June 27. Accessed at http://www.workingwaterfrontportland.org/pdfs/ linnton_energy_cluster.pdf. Podmolik, Mary. 1997. “Rail Facility Planned for Joliet Arsenal.” November 21. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. 2007. “Staten Island Rail Road: Chemical Coast Connector.” Accessed at http://aapa.files. cms­plus.com/PDFs/FacilitiesEngAwards/2007/2007_Facilities EngAwards_NYNJ.pdf. ———. 2009a. Hazardous Materials: Transportation Regulations at Tunnel and Bridge Facilities. March. Accessed at http://www.panynj. gov/truckers­resources/pdf/red­book.pdf. ———. 2009b. “Port Authority, New York City Sign Lease Extensions for Maritime Terminals in Staten Island, Brooklyn.” Press Release, October 15. ———. 2010. Environmental Initiatives at the Port of New York and New Jersey. Accessed at http://www.panynj.gov/about/port­initiatives. html. Port of Los Angeles, Clean Truck Program. 2009. Truck Routes and Parking Plan for Concessions Performing Drayage Services for the Port of Los Angeles. Accessed at http://portofla.org/ctp/CTP_Parking_ Plan_v2.pdf. ———. 2010a. Port Community Advisory Committee. Accessed at http://www.portoflosangeles.org/community/pcac.asp. ———. 2010b. Truck Routes and Parking Plan for Concessions Per­ forming Drayage Services for the Port of Los Angeles webpage. Accessed at http://portofla.org/ctp/CTP_Parking_Plan_v2.pdf. Port Strategy. 2010. “Freight Strategy Delay Concerns.” March 26. Accessed at http://www.portstrategy.com/news101/australasia/ freight­strategy­delay­concerns. Portland Development Commission. 2003. Citywide Industrial Land Inventory and Assessment, Inventory Report, Final Draft. July. Prepared by the City of Portland Bureau of Planning and Portland Development Commission. Accessed at http://www.pdc.us/pdf/ bus_serv/CILI­report­final_7­31­03.pdf. Portland Metro Region. 2011. Urban Growth Boundary Website. Accessed at http://www.metro­region.org/index.cfm/go/by.web/id=277, April 14. Presault v. United States. 1996. 100 F. 3d 1525. PRNewswire. 2000. “Centerpoint Re­Development of Joliet Arsenal Advances with Approval of Elwood TIF District.” June 13. ———. 2001. “CenterPoint Announces 300,000­Sq.­Ft. Build­To­Suit at Joliet Arsenal.” October. Puget Sound Regional Council. 2011. Accessed at http://www.psrc.org/ about/advisory/roundtable/. and http://www.psrc.org/transportation/ freight/, and http://www.psrc.org/about/advisory/roundtable/ roundtablepast/. Queensland Government. 2009. “Guide to the Sustainable Planning Act.” December 18. Accessed at http://www.dip.qld.gov.au/guide­to­the­ sustainable­planning­act/index.php. Queensland Government, Department of Local Government and Plan­ ning. 2010a. “Smart EDA Delivers Online.” Accessed at https://www. smarteda.qld.gov.au/index.action%3bjsessionid=29A329C03A236 FB486DBEE4430314CFC. ———. 2010b. “Planning Schemes.” Accessed at http://www.dip.qld. gov.au/integrated­planning­act/planning­schemes.html. ———. 2010c. “Planning for the Future.” Accessed at http://www.tmr. qld.gov.au/Community­and­environment/Planning­for­the­ future.aspx. ———. 2010d. “Rail Services and Infrastructure.” Accessed at http:// www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Business­and­industry/Transport­sectors/ Rail­services­and­infrastructure.aspx. ———. 2010e. “Business with Us.” Accessed at http://www.tmr.qld.gov. au/Business­and­industry/Business­with­us.aspx. ———. 2010f. “Projects.” Accessed at http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/ Projects.aspx. ———. 2011a. IDAS Guide 2: Referrals in Relation to Public Passenger Transport (Including Airports) and Railways. March 28. Accessed at http://www.dip.qld.gov.au/resources/form/idas­spa/idas­guide­2­ referrals­in­relation­to­public­transport.pdf. ———. 2011b. IDAS Guide 3: Guide to Referrals in Relation to State- Controlled Roads. March 28. Accessed at http://www.dip.qld.gov. au/resources/form/idas­spa/idas­guide­3­referrals­in­relation­to­ state­controlled­roads.pdf. Queensland Government Department of Transport and Main Roads. 2009. Rail Network Strategy: Policy Guidelines for Queensland’s Rail Network. Accessed at http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Business­ and­industry/Transport­sectors/Rail­services­and­infrastructure/ Rail­Network­Strategy.aspx. ———. 2010a. “Southern Freight Rail Corridor Study.” Accessed at http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Projects/Name/S/Southern­Freight­ Rail­Corridor­Study.aspx. ———. 2010b. “IDAS Triggers Mapping.” Last updated September 23. Accessed at http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Community­and­ environment/Development­assessments/IDAS­triggers­mapping. aspx. Railway Labor Executives’ Association v. Staten Island Railroad Corpo- ration. 1986. United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, 792 F.2d 7. Accessed at http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/792/792. F2d.7.85­7483.336.html. Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc. 1984. Urban Development Siting with Re- spect to Hazardous Commercial/Industrial Facilities. San Francisco Planning Department. 2010. Commerce & Industry Inven- tory, October. Accessed at http://www.sf­planning.org/Modules/ ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=8341. Schumacher, Edward. 1980. “Modernized Rail Freight Leaving New York Behind.” New York Times. July 8. Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, and Secretary of State for Transport. 2007. White Paper: Planning for a Sustainable Future. May. Accessed at Communities and Local Government website at http://www. communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/ planningsustainablefuture.pdf at p 6. Seltzer, Ethan, and Armando Carbonell (eds.). 2011. Regional Planning in America: Practice and Prospect. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy (Cambridge: MA). Smichenko, S. 2008. Action Strategy Report Paper: Goods Movement (Volpe Center, ed.), October. Retrieved from Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning website at http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/ WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=15225. Soo Line R. Co. v. City of Minneapolis. 1998. 38 F.Supp.2d 1096, 1101 (D. Minn.). State of California. 2003. General Plan Guidelines, p. 16. Accessed at http://www.opr.ca.gov/planning/publications/General_Plan_ Guidelines_2003.pdf. Strategic Rail Authority. 2001. Land Use Planning and the SRA: Guide for Local Planning Authorities and Regional Planning Bodies. November. Accessed at http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/legislation/sgd/use planningandthesraands3318.pdf.

81 Sullivan, John. 1996. “Rail Projects, for Airport Link and Freight, Gain Approval.” New York Times. June 7. Talbott, Basil. 1996. “Clinton OKs Joliet Arsenal Site for Prairie, Development.” Chicago Sun-Times. February 11. Town of Empire, Wisconsin. 2010. Land Division Ordinance, Article F: Design Standards, Section 10­1­62 Limited Access Highway and Railroad Right­of­Way. Accessed at http://www.empire­town.org/ land_design.html. Trucking Info.com. 2010. Boston Strikes Deal with MMTA on Hazmat Route. June 30. Accessed at http://www.truckinginfo.com/news/ news­detail.asp?news_id=70874. Tuck, Cindy. 2004. “Council for Environmental and Economic Balance (CCEEB)”, presentation to ARB Study Session on Relationship between Location of Sensitive Receptors and Pollution Sources. California, October 4. Accessed at www.arb.ca.gov/ch/presentations/ cceeb.pdf. University of Illinois at Springfield and Crawford, Murphy & Tilly, Inc. 1999. Strategic Plan for the Development of the Joliet Arsenal Development Authority Property. December 1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Navigation Data Center. 2010a. Dredging Information System. Accessed at http://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army. mil//dredge/ddcosts.htm. ———. 2010b. Maintenance Dredging Expenditures and Quantity Dredged, Years 1963–2009. February. Accessed at http://www.ndc. iwr.usace.army.mil//dredge/ddhisMsum.pdf. United States Code 23 U.S.C. 134. 2007. Sec. 134. Metropolitan trans­ portation planning. January 3. Accessed at http://frwebgate.access. gpo.gov/cgi­bin/usc.cgi?ACTION=RETRIEVE&FILE=$$xa$$ busc23.wais&start=997506&SIZE=63189&TYPE=TEXT. United States Code 23 U.S.C. 135. 2007. Sec. 135. Statewide transportation planning. January 3. Accessed at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/ cgi­bin/usc.cgi?ACTION=RETRIEVE&FILE=$$xa$$busc23.wais &start=1060701&SIZE=41795&TYPE=TEXT. U.S. Census Bureau. 2007. Sector 48: EC0748A1: Transportation and Warehousing: Geographic Area Series: Summary Statistics for the United States, States, and Metro Areas: 2007. Accessed August 9, 2010, at http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/IBQTable?_bm=y&­geo_ id=D&­ds_name=EC0748A1&­_lang=en. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 1996. Siting of HUD-Assisted Projects near Hazardous Facilities, HUD­1­60­ CPD, September. Accessed at http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/ environment/training/guidebooks/hazfacilities/. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. 2000. Transportation Corridor Preservation: A Survey of State Gov- ernment Current Practices. May. Accessed at http://www.fhwa.dot. gov/realestate/cp_state.htm. ———. 2006a. Freight Professional Development, Engaging the Private Sector in Freight Planning. June. Accessed at http://ops.fhwa.dot. gov/freight/fpd/Docs/fpd_flyer0606.pdf. ———. 2006b. “Tonnage of Container on Flat Car and Trailer on Flat Car Intermodal Moves: 2006.” ———. 2006c. Freight Planning webpage accessed at http://ops.fhwa. dot.gov/freight/fpd/Docs/sector.htm, June. ———. 2007. Accessed at http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_ analysis/nat_freigh__stats/images/hi_res_jpg/top25ftrgateval 2007.jpg. ———. 2010. Highway Traffic Noise Barriers at a Glance. Accessed at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/keepdown.htm. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Adminis­ tration, Freight Management and Operations. 2007. National Statistics and Maps, 2007. Accessed at http://www.ops.fhwa. dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/tonhwyrrww 2007.htm. ———. 2009. “Freight Analysis Framework,” Version 2.2. ———. 2009a. Accessed at http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/ freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/images/hi_res_jpg/nnnhs.jpg U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. 2009. Hazmat routes by state appear at http:// www.fmcsa.dot.gov/documents/safety­security/Routes­for­the­ website­9­28­09­508­2.pdf. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration. Chapter 6 from FRA’s report on the costs associated with rule for the use of locomotive horns. Accessed at http://www.fra.dot.gov/ downloads/safety/reg_eval/reg­eval_part6.pdf. ———. 2002. “Compilation of State Laws and Regulations Affecting Highway­Rail Grade Crossings.” October. Accessed at http://www. fra.dot.gov/Pages/806.shtml. ———. 2006. Train Horn Rule Fact Sheet. December. Accessed at http:// www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/PubAffairs/TRAIN_HORN_RULE_ FactSheet.pdf. ———. 2007a. “Research Results,” RR 07­19. June. Accessed at http:// www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/Research/rr0719.pdf. ———. 2007b. “National Hazardous Materials Audit.” February 5. Accessed at http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/2006_national_ hm_audit_report011207DJL%20_25v3edits.pdf. ———. 2008a. “Rail Hazmat Routing Rule Fact Sheet.” Accessed at http://www.fra.dot.gov/Downloads/FRA%20Rail%20Hazmat%20 Routing%20Rule%20Fact%20Sheet%20(December%202008). pdf. ———. 2008b. “Research Results,” RR08­10. October. Accessed at http:// www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/Research/rr0810.pdf. ———. 2010a. A Bill. Accessed at http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/ safety/8_treslaw.pdf. ———. 2010b. Guidance on the Quiet Zone Creation Process. Accessed at http://www.fra.dot.gov/Pages/1475.shtml. ———. 2010c. Quiet Zone Calculator Help tool. Accessed at http:// safetydata.fra.dot.gov/quiet/quietzonehelp.htm. U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration. 2011. Ships and Shipping, Marine Highway Program. U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics. 2009. America’s Container Ports: Freight Hubs that Connect Our Nation to Global Markets. June. ———. 2009a. U.S. Census Bureau 2007 Economic Census: Trans­ portation Commodity Flow Survey, December. Accessed at http:// www.bts.gov/publications/commodity_flow_survey/final_tables_ december_2009/html/table_01b.html. ———. 2010. National Transportation Statistics. US Fed News. 2008. “City Economic Development Corporation, Port Authority of New York, New Jersey, CSX Announce Dedicated Intermodal Service on Staten Island Railroad,” November 10. U.S. General Accountability Office. 2008. Freight Transportation, National Policy and Strategies Can Help Improve Freight Mobility, GAO­08­287. January. USA Today. 1987. “EPA Adds 99 Superfund Sites.” July 22. Village of Slinger, Wisconsin. 2007. Chapter XXXII Land Division Ordinance, Section 7.00 Design Standards, 7.02 Limited Access Highway and Railroad Right­of­Way Treatment, Paragraph A. Non­ Access Easement and Planting Area. October 25. Accessed at http:// www.vi.slinger.wi.gov/vertical/Sites/%7BD5D1A78E­0ECF­4A0F­

82 902C­E66DCBAB6874%7D/uploads/%7BE2DF5C77­AE6C­ 4077­8316­3E498CFB0759%7D.PDF. Walla Walla Union Bulletin. 2011. Traffic Resumes on Columbia-Snake River System. March 28. Available at http://union­bulletin.com/ stories/2011/3/28/traffic­resumes­on­columbia­snake­river­system. Warren, Reid. 1990. “Supply Outstrips Demand at Austell Industrial Park.” Atlanta Journal and Constitution, March 15. Will County (Illinois) Center for Economic Development. 2006. Model Container Ordinance. Accessed at http://www.willcountyced.com/ MidwestEmpire/. Williams, Kristine M. and Margaret A. Marshall. 1996. Managing Corridor Development: A Municipal Handbook. Center for Urban Transporta tion Research. October. Accessed at http://www.cutr. usf.edu/pub/files/corridor.pdf. Winston, Clifford, and Chad Shirley. 2004. Impact of Congestion on Shipper’s Inventory Costs. Final Report to the Federal Highway Administration. February, p 1. Yardley, Jim. 1999. “As Governors Feud, Dockworkers Fear for Their Jobs.” New York Times. April 26. Zehnder, Joe. 2010. Memo from Chief Planner, to City Commissioners, City of Portland. May 28. Accessed at http://www.portlandonline. com/bps/index.cfm?c=50598&a=302741. Ziemba, Stanley. 2000. “Arsenal Industrial Park Land Transfer Near.” Chicago Tribune. May 20.

83 The appendixes to the contractor’s final report are included herein as CRP-CD-103. The ISO image of this CD is also available for download from the TRB website. A p p e n D I X e S

Next: Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications »
Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) Report 16: Preserving and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes provides guidance to decision makers involved in freight facility operations, freight transportation planning, and land use on how to avoid conflicting land uses or mitigate existing uses.

The report provides information about freight transportation and its importance to people’s everyday lives; illustrates the types of conflicts between freight and other land uses and their consequences; and provides tools and resources designed to help preserve facilities and corridors, including prevention or resolution of conflicts.

In addition to the report, EnvisionFreight.com was developed as part of this project. The website is designed to complement the report by including more detailed materials then could be included in the report.

A CD-ROM packaged with the print version of the report includes the appendices to the report.

The CD-ROM is also available for download from TRB’s website as an ISO image. Links to the ISO image and instructions for burning a CD-ROM from an ISO image are provided below.

Help on Burning an .ISO CD-ROM Image

Download the .ISO CD-ROM Image

(Warning: This is a large file and may take some time to download using a high-speed connection.)

An article on NCFRP Report 16 was published in the January-February 2013 version of the TR News.

CD-ROM Disclaimer - This software is offered as is, without warranty or promise of support of any kind either expressed or implied. Under no circumstance will the National Academy of Sciences or the Transportation Research Board (collectively "TRB") be liable for any loss or damage caused by the installation or operation of this product. TRB makes no representation or warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, in fact or in law, including without limitation, the warranty of merchantability or the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, and shall not in any case be liable for any consequential or special damages.

  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!