Sustainability Strategies Addressing Supply-Chain Air Emissions (2014)

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.

110 A P P E N D I X D Inland Perspectives Introduction This case study cluster provides an overview of the inland perspective, focusing on Kansas City and Chicago, two major interchange points for rail shipments from the West Coast. Both locations are characterized by significant through (rail and truck) traffic, as well as cross-town “rubber tire” move- ments between intermodal facilities. Both the Kansas City and Chicago case studies consider ini- tiatives to improve conditions around rail intermodal facilities. Rail intermodal transportation can reduce costs for shippers and diversion of truck to rail can result in significant green- house gas (GHG) benefits. However, intermodal shipment cre- ates additional truck movements for pickup and delivery to the rail ramps, typically in more urban areas where criteria air pollutant (CAP) emissions issues are acute. (Research has yet to be completed that compares the long-haul environmental benefits to CAP emissions and social justice issues at the rail facilities.) These case studies provide evidence of an approach to managing freight air emissions, which is based on partner- ship between the public and private sectors, an integrated approach to transportation and freight planning, and invest- ment in infrastructure and technology that enables efficiency improvements in the freight sector at the same time that air emissions benefit. Kansas City Overview This case study considers various initiatives underway in Kansas City and provides a review of the SmartPort concept; the integration of transportation and environmental con- siderations through the freight planning process, led by the Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) and SmartPort; the Cross-Town Improvement Project (C-TIP); and the new inter- modal facility at Gardner. This latter development comprises a logistics park and a 440-acre intermodal facility that is pre- dicted to handle 790,000 and 870,000 annual lifts by 2030 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Kansas City District, 2009). Context Kansas City owes much of its historical growth to its strate- gic position as a major trans-shipment point for freight, and today remains an important center for rail, truck, barge, and airfreight industries. Located at the intersection of four Class I railroads, Kansas City is home to five intermodal railyards and numerous switching yards, classification yards, and transload facilities. It is the second largest rail center in the United States based on number of carloads and tonnage that pass through the region. Kansas City is also among the top five trucking centers in the nation because of its excellent highway connec- tivity: 440 miles of interstate facilities provide east-west and north-south linkages (including to the Mexican border). Kan- sas City International Airport provides a cargo terminal for the region, while two port authorities operate on the Missouri River (although commercial waterway traffic is limited). Although currently not designated an air quality non- attainment area, the metropolitan area typically experiences 10 to 15 days each year during which air quality does not meet federal standards, primarily due to high concentrations of ground-level ozone. The region is classified as a “mainte- nance area” with respect to the 1-hour ozone air quality stan- dard. Although the largest emission sources are utility power plants, diesel emissions are a contributor, and there is con- cern that Kansas City could be designated a “nonattainment” area in future. The 18-county Kansas City region handled an estimated total of 291 million tons of freight in 2007, with an estimated total value of $826 billion. An additional 650 million tons of through-rail volume passed over the region’s rail network. Regional rail and truck freight is projected to increase from 246 million tons in 2007 to 349 million tons in 2027, a 20-year

111 compound annual growth rate of 1.8 percent (Kansas City SmartPort et al., 2009). Kansas City is not only a “through” location but is also home to a strong manufacturing base. However, the vast majority of goods consumed in the region are produced outside of the metropolitan area, and most goods produced in the region are consumed elsewhere, emphasizing the importance of freight to the local economy. Cooperation in Freight Planning The Kansas City region has a strong tradition of inter- agency cooperation in freight planning, as well as partnership between the public and private sectors to promote Kansas City as a freight hub. There is also a close link between freight planning and environmental planning, with responsibility for these functions housed within a single agency, thereby enabling a degree of coordination. Public engagement is a core aspect of the planning process. Kansas City SmartPort Recognizing the role that freight and distribution play in the regional economy, the Kansas City region had been actively engaged in freight planning since 1995. The Mid- Continent Tradeway Study (MARC, 1998) identified the need for an agency whose focus is the growth of the transportation sector. This led to the formations of Kansas City SmartPort— a nonprofit, investor-based economic development organiza- tion supported by both the public and private sectors, whose aim is to promote the Kansas City region as a leading North American logistics hub. SmartPort has a twofold mission: • To attract businesses with significant transportation and logistics elements; • To make the industry and the region more competitive in goods movement. Funded by both public and private interests, SmartPort has played a key role in connecting the public and private sec- tors to promote a strong image of Kansas City outside of the region and identifying solutions to business needs related to transportation. Mid-America Regional Council MARC is the metropolitan planning organization. It con- sists of an association of city and county governments pro- moting regional cooperation and innovation in the Kansas City region. MARC provides a forum for • Dealing with regional issues and engaging the public in decision making; • Coordinating regional planning policies and developing regional transportation and environmental plans; and • Advocating for regional issues at the state and federal levels and allocating regional resources. MARC coordinates planning for all types of transporta- tion, including freight movement and is responsible for directing the investment of federal and state funds to address the region’s long-term goals. Projects are developed through public input and an evaluation process. Freight Plans MARC’s Efficient Transportation and Healthy Envi- ronment functions worked closely together in developing “Transportation Outlook 2040” (MARC, 2009)—the new long-range transportation plan adopted by June 2010. The plan will guide $18 billion in multimodal investments in the region to 2040 and includes a specific section on freight. “Kansas City Regional Freight Outlook” was completed in 2009. The study was a joint effort of Kansas City SmartPort, MARC, the Federal Transit Administration, and Federal High- way Administration (FHWA), and was administered by the Mis- souri and Kansas Departments of Transportation. The study findings are intended to guide and manage freight growth in the Kansas City region, identifying freight infrastructure needs and outlining a strategic freight plan to attract future freight growth. The overarching aim of the study is to build a “compre- hensive freight plan that balances the needs of the community with freight interests.” The study fed into the long-range trans- portation plan, “Transportation Outlook 2040.” “Transportation Outlook 2040” outlines a new vision for how transportation investments will relate to land use in the future. Policy goals address transportation’s impacts on cli- mate change and energy use, place making, and the condition of existing transportation systems. The plan was developed through an extensive public outreach process that spanned 2 years and involved thousands of elected officials, planners, businesses, community organizations, and citizens across the region. The plan includes a comprehensive framework to review conditions, assess needs, and provide direction for prioritiz- ing freight infrastructure investments, based on the desig- nation of Corridors of Freight Significance linked to traffic volumes. A key strategy identified in “Transportation Out- look 2040” is the development of freight corridor plans for the Corridors of Freight Significance. The plan calls for review of physical conditions and use of the system network for safety and a mobility index along these corridors to help identify freight-specific improvements or opportunities. In recognition of the importance of data to the freight planning process, the region is expanding the use of existing

112 technologies and tools to monitor freight-specific data. Kansas City SmartPort’s Trade Data Exchange, C-TIP, and the Kansas City Scout traffic-management system are all technology-based solutions designed to facilitate and improve the region’s freight transportation system and facilitate economic development. Engaging the Private Sector and Communities The region has established strong public-private partner- ships to plan for freight and market the region. Beginning with the “Regional Freight Outlook” study, extensive private- sector consultation was undertaken. This included surveys of over 400 businesses and representative of industry sectors. Fifty participants (including representatives of the business community, Kansas City SmartPort investors, city/county staff, elected officials, and local residents) contributed to focus groups. These focus groups identified the need for future investments in freight infrastructure, education on freight issues, and coordinated freight transportation planning across the region. This was necessary to mitigate impacts and to pre- empt some of the issues and public objections that often arise in response to freight infrastructure development projects. Although not a mandated agency for freight planning, Kan- sas City SmartPort provides a forum for collaboration between the public and private sectors, plays an active role in regional freight strategic planning, and provides a platform for the coordination of public and private investment. Through Kan- sas City SmartPort and MARC’s Goods Movement Commit- tee, the region laid the foundation for active dialog on freight transportation. As part of “Transportation Outlook 2040,” the region confirmed its commitment to continued dialog and established new channels of communication to ensure agen- cies are informed and coordinated as growth continues. Ongoing dialog with stakeholders was identified as being a core strategy for achieving “Transport Outlook 2040” policy goals, which cover aspects such as improved freight accessi- bility, reduced climate change impact and decreased use of fossil fuels, enhanced economic vitality, protection of natu- ral resources, and improved public health. The plan identi- fied the need for MARC’s Goods Movement Committee to meet on a regular basis (at least quarterly) to review freight data and corridor analyses. The plan also called for ongoing freight-planning coordination with other metropolitan plan- ning organizations and continued support for Kansas City SmartPort. Integrating Economic and Environmental Objectives One of the ways in which sustainable outcomes can be achieved is to ensure that agencies engaging in freight planning have responsibility for both environmental and economic objectives. For example, in the Kansas City region, MARC is responsible for both efficient transpor- tation (developing the regional transport plan and freight plan) and healthy environment (including developing air quality forecasts and preparing plans for meeting air quality standards). MARC has made a concerted effort to integrate environ- mental considerations into the planning process, and was awarded funding from the FHWA Eco-Logical grant pro- gram, which they used to create the “Linking Environmental and Transportation Planning Action Plan,” along with a best practices guide. The action plan initiative emphasizes inter- agency cooperation at the local, regional, and state levels. Although it does not deal with freight specifically, the action plan has relevance to the freight sector. Three priority areas are identified as follows: 1. Align decision making with a vision: a. Develop plans in the context of a sustainable vision; b. Assemble and merge transportation, environmental, and land-use data early in the process; c. Convene interdisciplinary teams to advise on decision making; d. Align project selection and funding with the vision, goals, and measures outlined; e. Coordinate public engagement efforts across agencies; and f. Develop new and enhanced environmental policies for construction, operation, and maintenance (including consideration of alternative fuels, anti-idling). 2. Formalize ongoing collaboration. 3. Create a regional mitigation strategy. This dual responsibility for transportation and the envi- ronment is reflected in the Kansas City Regional Freight Outlook Strategic Plan, which includes three core objectives: improve goods movement system performance, support busi- ness attraction and retention, and ensure the region’s quality environment. Critical strategies identified in association with the last objective include encouraging the freight community to take a proactive stance by joining the dialog on regional air quality standards; measurement and regulation (through involvement in the Air Quality Committee); and promoting sustainability by encouraging a balanced approach between growth in goods movement and promoting environmental standards (MARC and Kansas City SmartPort, 2009). The “2009 KC Regional Freight Outlook Report” includes a section on freight and the environment. This component con- sidered national GHG emissions from freight activity, as well as the likelihood that the region will move into non attainment status for ground-level ozone in the future. Nonattainment would require a new regulatory plan to reduce emissions in

113 Kansas City, along with new and tighter regulatory require- ments (e.g., anti-idling, vehicle inspection, reduced speeds) and will also likely require extensive air quality and transpor- tation coordination as well as modeling to ensure that future projects do not undermine the ability of the region to regain/ maintain attainment. In parallel with freight planning initiatives, MARC is tak- ing voluntary action to maintain air quality through the “Clean Air Action Plan.” This plan claims to be the first to set out a strategy for clean air, outside of a regulatory require- ment enacted by a region, promoting retrofits for on-road diesel engines (although no funding is currently available), truck-stop electrification, idling reduction, switching loco- motive emissions control technologies, and land-use policies in support of air quality. Use of Technology to Improve Environmental and Economic Performance of the Freight Sector: C-TIP C-TIP is focused on improving intermodal goods move- ment within the Kansas City region. Typically, multiple “rub- ber tire” truck movements are required when the intermodal facilities of the various railroads are not in close proximity or not equipped for a direct rail-to-rail transfer. These multiple truck moves frequently result in empty moves where there is no backhaul associated with the original move. This adversely affects the overall efficiency of the transportation network and transportation safety, adds to congestion, escalates carri- ers’ fuel use, increases air emissions, and undermines quality of life in adjacent communities. C-TIP aims to coordinate information between the terminals to improve efficiencies and eliminate empty moves, thus reducing the overall num- ber of moves, saving time and money, and reducing emissions. C-TIP is a collaborative project between government and industry. The initiative is supported by the FHWA Office of Freight Management and Operations as well as the Inter- modal Freight Technology Working Group, a partnership of public- and private-sector interests, focused on the identifica- tion and evaluation of technology-based options for improv- ing the efficiency, safety, and security of intermodal freight movement). It has involved Kansas DOT (KDOT), Missouri DOT (MODOT), as well as MARC, the railroads, and truck- ing companies. C-TIP is based on the concept of an intermodal moves database for coordinating cross-town traffic, tracking inter- modal assets, distributing information to truckers wirelessly, allowing the railroads, facility operators, and truckers to share information about available loads, delivery information, traf- fic, and scheduling. The results of the initial testing proved the concept to be viable. However, since this reporting, C-TIP has not yet progressed further. Kansas City Climate Protection Plan In 2006, the Kansas City Council adopted a resolution sup- porting a climate protection planning process. The Kansas City (2008) Climate Protection Plan was published in July of 2008 and has been supported since that time. The Council has adopted a goal of a 30 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions over 2000 level by the year 2020 with a recom- mended a target of 80 percent reduction by 2050 and attaining a climate-neutral Kansas City. The Climate Protection Plan supports three primary initiatives: reduction in vehicle GHG emissions; conservation of electrical energy; and understand- ing the impact of buildings. (Note that this latter initiative is also supported in the Regional Freight Outlook Strategic Plan, which promotes the use of Leadership in Environmental Design, or LEED, for warehousing and distribution centers.) The plan sets out two strategies to address these initiatives: a strong reliance on community involvement (not only as a planning tool, but as a building block for the future), and building on existing initiatives within in the region. Working groups were established to tackle target areas for improvement. Although communities and businesses were included in the work groups and encouraged to drive the initiative for- ward, the freight community was not invited to participate because it was believed that this segment would be unrespon- sive both to inquires regarding actual emissions data and to setting improvement goals. Some information was included from the results of traffic studies relative to truck emissions, but the reduction goals that were set did not include initia- tives developed with the freight transportation sector. Key Metrics Both the Climate Protection Plan and C-TIP each apply one primary metric to their work. In the case of the Climate Protection Plan, the metric is greenhouse gas emissions (measured as metric tons of CO2 equivalent). C-TIP mea- sured effectiveness based on a reduction in truck trips with the understanding that fewer truck trips over certain dis- tances would reduce emissions. Both of these metrics are simple and effective and can be employed in jurisdictions of varying size. Although other metrics are employed in different regions and under different conditions for application, these two are easy to understand, employ, and measure for maintenance and improvement against standards. Gardner Intermodal Facility Air quality issues came to the fore following the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ approval of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway intermodal facility at Gardner/Edgerton,

114 30 miles southwest of Kansas City. The intermodal railyard will enable the transfer of cargo between trains and trucks, and is expected to generate an estimated 33,500 daily vehicle trips and 110 daily train movements by 2030. The facility will generate significant employment and revenue for the State of Kansas. The Corps found that there were no significant adverse environmental effects from the project, and that the maximum predicted concentrations of criteria pollutants from the facility are below both the applicable National Ambient Air Quality Standards and the U.S. EPA’s reference concentrations for pro- tection of human health. Nevertheless, a lawsuit filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council (together with a similar suit filed by local environ- mental and community groups and private citizens) claimed that the approval does not address human health impacts from increased diesel pollution as a result of truck traffic (Natural Resources Defense Council, 2010). Residents of the nearby town of Gardner objected to the project, leading the neigh- boring town of Edgerton to annex the land so that the project could proceed in the chosen location. The lawsuit found in favor of BNSF Railway and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, and the project is proceeding. The project was found to be necessary to meet policy objectives at federal and state levels aimed at making the intermodal network more efficient and competitive with trucking. It will help to alleviate capacity issues and bottlenecks on BNSF’s mainline, which cause train delays of up to 36 hours. These delays are forecast to increase as the number of intermodal units shipped through Kansas City rises. Design elements such as an automated gate system, larger container storage, and trailer parking areas are intended to minimize truck idling emissions per trip. The use of elec- tric gantry cranes (rather than diesel cranes at the existing facilities) also is expected to reduce emissions from handling equipment. Locomotive idling control is to be implemented (but there is no indication that alternative-fuel/electric yard hostlers or hybrid locomotives will be used). To accommo- date traffic, KDOT and the county are invested in a new inter- change and upgrade of the roads linked to it (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Kansas City District, 2009; Natural Resources Defense Council, 2010). Chicago: Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency (CREATE) Overview This case study considers the CREATE Program, which is a public-private partnership approach to addressing the issues of freight transportation efficiency, air emissions, and con- gestion in the Chicago region. Context Chicago is a major freight crossroads and the only U.S. city where all six major U.S. and Canadian Class I railroads come together to interchange freight. Seventeen intermodal termi- nals are located in the region and almost half of all intermodal containers in the nation are interchanged here. In addition to two transnational interstates, the region also has two major airports, a seaport on Lake Michigan, and canal access to the Mississippi River. Rail constitutes 36 percent of total intercity freight ton- nage passing through the city, while 60 percent of commodity flows occur by truck (FHWA, 2005). It has been estimated that Chicago-area railroads operate 1,200 daily trains and gener- ate more than 3,200 daily truck trips to transfer cargo between yards (FHWA, 2005). This problem is compounded by increas- ing volumes of intermodal freight, and is expected to worsen with the forecast 200 percent growth in intermodal rail freight by the year 2035 (AASHTO, 2003). Commuter train traffic makes Chicago’s rail system even more complex. Chicago has the highest overall rail freight emissions of all regions in the United States, approximately twice the rail freight emissions of the Los Angeles region (with the exception of car- bon monoxide emissions) (AASHTO, 2003). Trucking is also a significant source of on-road PM emissions because of the high proportion of pass-through traffic that is predominantly composed of Class 8b (diesel-powered) large combination vehicles used for long-haul trips (FHWA, 2005). The Chicago metropolitan area is a designated nonattainment area for PM and ozone. Impetus Severe snowstorms during the winter of 1998–1999 made railyards and highways impassable and created delays that rippled across the North American rail system for weeks. That event, coupled with public concerns about merger dis- cussions among the railroads, led railroad officials and civic leaders to join forces to develop a regional operations and infrastructure strategy that would avoid a future transporta- tion service breakdown. In 2003, the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago joined with six of the nation’s freight railroads together with Chi- cago’s commuter railroad (Metra) to formalize a partnership to reduce rail bottlenecks. This led to the establishment of CREATE. The program goals are to (CREATE, 2010) • Reduce freight rail congestion to boost regional and national economic competitiveness, • Reduce motorist delay due to rail conflict at grade crossings, • Enhance public safety,

115 • Promote economic development, • Create and retain jobs, • Improve air quality, • Reduce noise from idling or slow-moving trains, and • Improve passenger rail service. Organization CREATE is a public-private partnership established to imple- ment 70 rail infrastructure projects consisting of (CREATE, 2010) the following: • Twenty-five road/rail grade separations, • Six passenger/freight rail grade separations, • Railroad projects to improve rail infrastructure and upgrade technologies, • A viaduct improvement program, • Grade crossing safety enhancements, and • Rail operations and visibility improvements. The $3.2 billion program is currently funded to $952 mil- lion, of which $116 million is from the railroad partners and the remainder is from public funds. The partners are seek- ing additional funds for completion of the program. Prog- ress to date includes (CREATE, 2010) 14 completed projects, 12 projects under construction, 4 projects in final design, and 15 projects in environmental review. Air Emissions Reductions and Benefits Although the impetus for the program was to reduce several rail bottlenecks and inefficiencies, the projects also have air quality benefits for the region. It is estimated upon full project completion, the program will result in (CREATE, 2011) the following pollution reduction from locomotive emissions: – Nitrogen oxides (NOx)—1,453 tons per year, – Carbon monoxide (CO)—225 tons per year, – Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)—80 tons per year, and – Particulate matter—51 tons per year. This is coupled with the following pollution reduction from highway vehicle delay: – NOx—6 tons per year, – CO—213 tons per year, and – VOC—24 tons per year. Once CREATE is in full operation, NOx emissions reduc- tions are forecast to reach the equivalent of seven NOx-free summer days per year. Moving freight by rail instead of trucks also reduces gas emissions by 75 percent, on average. With the projects completed thus far, rail simulation showed that passenger delay has been reduced by 33 percent and freight delay reduced by 28 percent. If all of the proj- ects are completed in 20 years, passenger delay is expected to be reduced by 66 percent, freight delay by 50 percent, and motorist delay by 25 percent (CREATE, 2011) Partnering and Collaboration Collaboration is key to program implementation. Proj- ects were identified for implementation via “owner-neutral” rail modeling, which identified areas of the most significant bottlenecks and delay. From the modeling, it was clear that neither commuter nor freight operations could grow without significant infrastructure improvements. Given the complexity of the program, whereby improve- ments can impact and benefit multiple parties, the partners developed a sophisticated management structure to oversee the required collaboration. CREATE is unique in that it is governed by unanimous agreement, with the Association of American Railroads (AAR) representing the six freight rail- roads and Metra, together with representation from the state, the city, and FHWA, as a nonvoting member responsible for overseeing the federal aspects of the program. Governance To manage the collaboration and construction for this program, the partners created a clear governance structure to oversee all the program’s needed operational, financial, per- mitting, construction, and outreach responsibilities consist- ing of the following: • FHWA CREATE program manager based in Chicago serv- ing as the onsite full-time federal officer responsible for the federal interests for the project. • Stakeholder Committee consisting of three members (AAR president and CEO, Chicago DOT [CDOT] commissioner, and Illinois DOT [IDOT] secretary) that makes decisions unanimously. • Management Committee made up of one member each from Chicago Transportation Coordinating Office, AAR, the six Class 1 railroads, CDOT, and IDOT. Nonvoting mem- bers to this committee include Amtrak, FHWA, and two short-line railroads. The committee must decide matters unanimously, and any member may elevate an issue to the Stakeholder Committee for resolution. Reporting to the Management Committee are the – Implementation Team, comprised of one member from Chicago Transportation Coordinating Office, AAR, Metra, the six Class 1 railroads, CDOT, and IDOT, tracks budget and construction, recommends project changes, and meets monthly.

116 – Finance and Budge Committee, which is comprised of one member from each of the organizations above. This group works with the Advocacy Committee to identify sources of public funds worth pursuing. It also moni- tors project costs versus actual expenditures. – Advocacy Committee, comprised of government affairs officers from each partner. They are responsible for addressing community concerns, conducting public outreach, and advocating for CREATE. This governance structure enabled numerous projects to proceed concurrently while minimizing impacts to rail oper- ations as well as the surrounding roadways and communities. The unique requirement for unanimous decision making, rather than the more common majority decision-making protocol, ensured that minority issues were addressed and that no partner would drop out if their concerns were not met directly. Given that decisions for the CREATE Program are made unanimously by the partners, there are no unintended consequences to report to date. Also, to ensure meetings are productive, members are to make decisions when the group meets. It is expected that all members are empowered to speak and render decisions for their organizations to avoid delay to the program. Environmental Process The other innovation brought about by CREATE is in its environmental process. There was considerable concern that if each individual project required its own federal National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) review, given the federal funding and regulatory involvement, the overall pro- gram would never be implemented. A project-by-project approach would also have been vulnerable to legal segmen- tation challenges. A tiered or programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for CREATE as a whole would reduce the segmentation risk but would result in delay for low risk/low impact projects. To address this issue, FHWA, together with IDOT and CDOT, created a strategy termed Systematic, Project Expediting, Environmental Decision-Making, or “SPEED.” This process looks at proportional impacts so projects that are low/no risk can be granted categorical exclusions or can be assessed in an environmental assessment and granted a Finding of No Significant Impact, enabling them to proceed on a more expedited basis than those undergoing full Environmental Impact Statement review. This methodical process allowed the multimodal program to proceed with risk-appropriate environmental reviews for individual projects without hold- ing up small projects with the more complex ones, while lim- iting the risk of legal segmentation challenges to the NEPA process. Replicability Despite the grand scale of the CREATE program, the part- ners take the view that other communities can replicate their lessons learned. They advise • Look beyond the highway perspective. Metropolitan planning organizations ought to look at investments inter- modally, examining rail, truck, landside, waterside, and air opportunities equally for projects that can reduce air pol- lutants. • Engage consistently and keep stakeholders informed. Start from the top and look at problems from a macro per- spective. Engage with the railroads to review a list of poten- tial projects. Make them aware of what transportation projects are being considered and obtain early feedback. • Require project agreements between partners. These should describe clear roles and responsibilities for a series of projects and become the road map on how to get the projects done. Lessons from this Case Study Cluster Interagency coordination—Kansas City’s strong history of interagency cooperation in freight planning has been instrumental in the region’s success. The integration of envi- ronmental and transportation functions within MARC was essential to a balanced approach to economic development and environmental protection. Engagement—Engaging the community has been effec- tive in mitigating impacts and pre-empting issues and public objections that often arise in response to freight infrastruc- ture development projects. However, in the case of the Gard- ner facility, a lack of communication and information led to legal challenge and delay. Forums such as Kansas City SmartPort and MARC’s Goods Movement Committee provided a forum for public-private cooperation, and a joint approach to economic development and environmental mitigation in Kansas City. Public invest- ment in future projects is a key aspect of keeping the private sector engaged in Chicago. These case studies illustrate how the public and private sectors can cooperate and find con- sensus on economic development and environmental issues when time is taken to identify common goals. Freight trans- portation companies and private fleets benefit financially from infrastructure-investment programs that reduce oper- ating costs or produce service improvements. These also can have environmental benefits. Encouraging the freight com- munity to take a proactive stance by joining the dialog on regional air quality standards, measurement, and regulation ensures they remain aware of, and consider, the impacts of their actions.

117 Organization and governance—Groups working together, for example among FHWA, IDOT, and CDOT, enabled the streamlining of the environmental process in the case of CREATE, allowing the multimodal program to proceed with risk-appropriate environmental reviews for individual projects ensuring that small projects were not held up by more complex ones. CREATE’s clear program governance is a key element of the project’s success. This reduces conflict regarding roles and responsibilities. The governance model included public outreach as part of planning and project development. The organization of the responsible parties under this framework is one way to streamline decision making. Integration of plans and initiatives—Integrated and par- allel plan development (e.g., Kansas City Regional Freight Outlook Strategic Plan, and the Clean Air Action Plan) enable common goals and performance measurements to be applied. The C-TIP initiative in Kansas City provided a means to engage the private sector in an emissions-reduction effort that has potential business benefits. Metrics—The projects demonstrate success with perfor- mance measures from the simplest—reduction in truck trips in Kansas City—to more complex measures as shown in CREATE. For small and potentially less sophisticated communities, the simple measurements may give the best starting point with the opportunity to become more detailed as experience grows.