National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 3 MARKET-BASED FREIGHT-PLANNING FACTORS
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 27
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 28
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 29
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 30
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 31
Page 32
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 32
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 33
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 34
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 35
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 36
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 37
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 38
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 39
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 40
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 41
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 42
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22459.
×
Page 43

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.

25 Highway planning efforts have traditionally involved a wide range of stakeholders, depending on the interests and goals of the project and the needs of the individual organizations. Important stakeholders in a traditional planning process for highway capacity additions may include the following: • Local governments; • Residents within the study area and neighborhood associations; • Commuters; • Community leaders, including representatives from chambers of commerce and industry associations; • Advocacy groups such as those representing environmental concerns and bicycle, pedestrian, or transit users; or • Regulatory agencies (local, regional, state, and federal). Each stakeholder group has a role to play and generally a strong position on the desired outcome of the projects. Often their interests are limited to local impacts. By contrast, freight stakeholders often have interests that cover a much broader area (i.e., their interests and travel patterns might spread across several MPO regions or states and beyond). For example, a manufacturer whose plant is located near a proposed highway improvement project may represent just one of several freight stakeholders potentially affected by the decision. Others include the suppliers, customers, vendors, and truck drivers who deliver to and pick up from the facility. 4 ENGAGING FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS

26 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS This chapter focuses on methods to engage freight stakeholders in the highway planning process by answering the following questions: • Who are the freight stakeholders? • When is it best to engage freight stakeholders? • What are the methods to engage freight stakeholders? • How to increase the efficacy of freight stakeholder outreach? WHO ARE THE FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS? The freight stakeholders in your jurisdictions are the people, firms, organizations, or agencies that are somehow affected by goods movement. The Freight Stakeholders box illustrates—at a high level—the types of freight stakeholders directly involved in the movement of freight. Given the diversity of firms, agencies, and other groups inter- ested, there is no single approach to engaging freight stakehold- ers in the planning and decision-making process. The interests of each firm or organization depend on its unique characteristics: its mission, its operations, the way it moves goods, its manufactur- ing process, product, profitability, marketing, and so on. Manu- facturers, for example, are in the business of producing products and are less concerned with how finished goods get from point A to point B, and more concerned that they do get there—at a low cost and in the time frame promised to the customer. Other freight stakeholders, such as motor carriers, are in the business of moving cargo from origin to destination; they are often most concerned about potential routes and have a strong institutional knowledge of the highway system and its strengths and weak- nesses. Still other freight stakeholders, such as BCOs, want the products they purchase to arrive at the destination as scheduled, as ordered, damage-free, and at the most economical cost. To improve collaborative decision making, it is critical to understand what motivates different types of freight stakeholders. This sec- tion discusses the primary motivations and interests of freight stakeholders, starting with the private sector. Private-Sector Freight Stakeholders Beneficial Cargo Owners BCOs may benefit from the time savings or other efficiencies provided by transportation improvements. Engaging BCOs in the freight-planning process is important because they understand the nuances and dynamics of supply chains and how those supply chains use multimodal transportation systems. BCOs may be especially helpful in prioritizing freight investments because of Freight Stakeholders Private-Sector Freight Stakeholders BCOs Logisticians Motor carriers Railroads Industrial real estate developers Chambers of commerce and other business associations Economic Development Agencies Port Authorities and Marine Terminal Operators (MTOs) Local Governments Transportation Agencies FHWA, state DOTs, MPOs Other Stakeholders Environmental and community groups, general public

27 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS their broad understanding of the location and transportation characteristics of their business operations. BCOs can also identify transportation system deficiencies from the supply chain perspective and may offer potential solutions to address those issues. BCO engagement can be difficult to obtain for a variety of reasons. This guide addresses the challenges of drawing out the voices of BCOs and third-party logis- tics service providers early and often in planning cycles. It also offers some potential strategies to more effectively make these stakeholders an integral part of the process and describes the benefits that public agencies can derive from implementing these strategies. Logisticians Logisticians arrange freight transportation for BCOs. Some BCOs employ their own in-house logisticians, but many BCOs hire third-party logistics (3PL) service pro viders. Logisticians perform a number of different functions, including the procurement of waterborne, rail, air, or trucking transportation required to move a product or input from production to consumption. They may also arrange transfers, warehousing, and fulfillment. The logistician’s job is to design trips (as part of a supply chain) at the low- est cost or to meet other desired goals—such as fast transit time. Given their detailed understanding of the costs, timing, and other variables of freight movement, logisticians can provide a clear perspective on the importance of certain corridors or proposed im- provements in the context of their supply chain. However, many past outreach efforts have failed to engage logisticians, in part because of the highly proprietary nature of their intelligence about the transportation system. After all, logisticians gain a competi- tive advantage with this knowledge and can be reluctant to share information. Motor Carriers Highway capacity planning efforts should engage motor carriers, not just because they represent a portion of the traffic on the highway, but because of the institutional knowledge and experience of drivers, dispatchers, and other company representatives acquired through years or decades of driving on the study corridor. More than auto- mobile drivers—who can relate problems on a specific section of highway with which they have daily familiarity vis-à-vis their commutes or other journeys—the trucking industry understands the relative severity and longevity of problems on the highway network and how congestion or bottlenecks on one portion of the highway can nega- tively affect a larger portion of the corridor. This experience enables them to provide valuable input on the potential infrastructure investments (where, what, how much) to alleviate bottlenecks and system impediments and improve freight velocity. Railroads The trucking industry is the single largest customer of U.S. freight-rail industry. The relation ship between trucking and rail has become more interdependent and synergistic with the advent and proliferation of containerized shipping methods, particularly over the past two decades. International and dedicated domestic shipping containers pro- vide a high level of modal flexibility. The rail industry currently is undergoing dramatic changes to keep pace with the growth of intermodal demand. Major intermodal yards

28 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS have transformed railroad intermodal networks into hub-and-spoke systems. The multi modal nature of today’s freight railroads means that planners should involve rail carriers in highway capacity planning because they have the ability to make concurrent or future investments on parallel corridors that may affect highway demand. Industrial Real Estate Developers Industrial real estate developers and property managers build and operate facilities which support goods movement. Their assets include warehouse, distribution, trans- fer, and fulfillment buildings. For this group, the relationship between sites (built and proposed) and the transportation system is the most important aspect of the highway capacity process. Truck, rail, port, and airport access and proximity are key variables in the site selection process. As such, they have a vested interest in the highway plan- ning process. Chambers of Commerce and Other Business Organizations Chambers of commerce and other business organizations (e.g., forestry associations, manufacturer associations, and agriculture associations) are often interested in freight transportation projects as a means of sustaining business in a region or improving competitiveness. Chambers of commerce are typically local or municipal in scale but may cover broader regions (e.g., regional boards of trade), or the nation (e.g., the U.S. Chamber of Commerce). Freight-related national business organizations often focus on federal policy (e.g., American Trucking Associations, American Associations of Railroads). In every state capital business associations represent their constituents on issues related to freight and transportation; these organizations include state trucking associations, agricul- tural associations, safety groups, and highway engineering groups. These groups are often sophisticated in their understanding of transportation policies, operations, and Insight from the Case Studies Role of the Columbus, Ohio, Chamber in the Planning for I-70 For many years, the MPO and Chamber of Commerce had overlapping freight advisory roles. Both groups struggled to keep stakeholders engaged in freight-beneficial projects. The MPO also experienced staff turnover and shifting regional priorities. The current itera- tion of the Columbus Region Logistics Council has been active since 2008 and includes four specific committees: the infrastructure, workforce, technology, and business envi- ronment committees. The Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC) is most heavily involved with the infrastructure committee. Committee meetings are run by the Chamber, with planning and feedback provided by the MPO. The current organizational framework enables MORPC to become more directly involved in industry collaboration. Through the council, MORPC was able to better gain access for advocacy efforts, validate regional transportation needs, and explore funding opportunities. The region’s freight- planning efforts and the partnership between MORPC and the Chamber have helped create a specific success at the Rickenbacker Intermodal terminal and have expanded activities throughout the region, attracting new business and contributing to the health of the regional economy.

29 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS the impacts of certain projects, including freight. Often the business organizations will collaborate with individual members (e.g., BCO) to take an official position on a proposed improvement. Traditionally, these groups have been active stakeholders in the highway planning process and should be encouraged to participate in the future. Economic Development Agencies Economic development organizations assist governments in sustaining and increasing economic activity. These agencies are involved in the freight-planning process in many jurisdictions because of the connection between transportation mobility (and invest- ment) and economic performance. Agencies also work closely with companies that are expanding, launching, or relocating. As such, economic developers are attuned to the transportation needs of these firms and frequently work with their transportation agency partners to assist in the development of highway access to new buildings, sites, or factories. Economic development agencies are valuable not only for their under- standing of the way in which highway capacity investments benefit businesses, but these agencies can also serve as gatekeepers to freight-dependent firms and constitu- ents that may be interested in the planning process. Ports and Airports If the plan or project is located in an area with an active seaport, inland port, or airport, efforts should be made to engage the port authority and its MTO or the airport author- ity. The operations, marketing, and strategy staff associated with the port or airport can provide unique insight into the needs of their users. Ports and airports are often some of the greatest generators of truck and rail traffic in a region and should be consulted on local freight projects, corridor projects, and other studies. Insight from the Case Studies Involvement of the Ports in the I-710 Project A growing recognition of deficiencies on a major truck corridor, Interstate 710 (I-710) connecting the San Pedro Bay ports in Southern California to markets outside the region, led the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority and several other project part- ners to conduct a detailed major corridor study (MCS) in 2005. The purpose was to explore the implementation of improvements, including the potential for dedicated truck lanes. On completion of the MCS, the agency partnership elected to develop an EIR/EIS to comply with state and federal environmental statutes to move the project forward. The organizations involved in both the MCS planning effort and the ongoing envi- ron mental review included the San Pedro Bay ports (Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach), the Gateway Cities Council of Governments (consisting of nearly 30 cities in southern Los Angeles County adjacent to the I-710 corridor), Caltrans, and California State University Long Beach (through its METRANS program). The EIR/EIS outreach built on historical participation in corridor planning on I-710 by many regional stakeholders, each with a particular interest in the potential benefits from improving the corridor. The ports and other stakeholders were primarily interested in truck-related issues (including congestion, air quality, safety, and access). As a result, the scope of study was better defined, and it also fostered a constructive dialogue between the ports and the local community.

30 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS Local Governments Local governments should be an integral part of the discussion about highway capacity improvements. Local governments often control truck route regulations, land use, and other factors affecting local goods movement. Local governments are becoming in- creasingly interested in the connections between freight transportation and freight- dependent land uses. Transportation Agencies While transportation agencies are responsible for leading the highway capacity pro- cess, they are also stakeholders in the process. To ensure that freight is integrated during the highway capacity process, the agency should make sure that its freight staff remains involved in the project, even if the project is being led by another office or divi- sion. In some cases, offices or divisions of the DOT, MPO, or other agency have much to offer to the freight-planning process, including the ability to integrate operations, safety, or other special topics. Other Freight Stakeholders A variety of other groups or individuals may be interested in freight-planning outcomes and may want to collaborate. Depending on the scope of the project, environmental, air quality, community groups, or private individuals may wish to be engaged in the process. As a rule of thumb, agencies should invite all the groups who are typically engaged in transportation planning, corridor studies, programming, or NEPA activities to be en- gaged in freight. Because many projects contain a freight element but are not necessarily freight focused, these groups and individuals may already be at the table; it may simply be a matter of making sure they understand the freight dimensions of the plan or project. WHEN IS IT BEST TO ENGAGE FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS? To determine which projects should have a freight outreach element and the level of engagement from each type of freight stakeholder, a series of questions should be asked. The questions should be customized for the project or plan and existing condi- tions. The responses will help the agency tailor its outreach strategies and properly allocate resources for freight engagement. Should the Agency Engage Freight Stakeholders in the Plan or Study? To determine whether the planning agency should engage freight stakeholders (the why?), the following sample questions can be asked: • For projects: Is the project or program located on a major freight corridor (e.g., access to a port of entry, major interstate)? • For plans: Is the project an independent freight study?

31 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS Who Should the Agency Engage? To determine which freight stakeholders (the who) the planning agency should engage, the following questions can be asked: • Are there key BCOs or motor carriers that operate in proximity to this highway project? • Will the plan or project affect other stakeholders, including those located outside the study area but which use the infrastructure? • For how many and what types of stakeholder engagement do the project’s scope and resources allow? How Should the Agency Engage Freight Stakeholders? To determine the where, when, and how, the following questions can be asked: • Does a current freight-planning program or organized freight-stakeholder group exist? • What are the best ways to engage this group? – Through a freight advisory committee (e.g., Delaware Valley Regional Plan- ning Commission Philadelphia Goods Movement Task Force) or another study advisory group; – Through other means, such as interviews; or – Through existing stakeholder contacts (e.g., if some or all of the stakeholders have existing relationships with a partner agency such as the economic develop- ment authority). • What are the agency’s resources for freight outreach? How many meetings, sur- veys, and so on will (a) meet the needs of the project and (b) match agency re- sources (e.g., staff, travel/outreach budget, consultants)? Insight from the Case Studies Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) Philadelphia Case Study According to DVRPC staff, freight stakeholders in the DVRPC area prefer to be engaged early and often. Members are informed and aware of upcoming topics and high-interest issues and are generally prepared to offer feedback at meetings. DVRPC uses a quar- terly freight stakeholder’s meeting (Goods Movement Task Force) to engage the freight community through periodic presentations on regional freight-oriented topics and the development of priority project lists for the long-range planning process. One particular approach that DVRPC employs to engage stakeholders is to use their insight on solutions to a larger issue (such as traffic problems on Interstate 95) and develop a tangible out- come (such as a letter of support for a potential solution) that formalizes the engagement. This allows the group to build confidence and provide a useful contribution to the pro- cess, rather than just to “check a box.” Getting freight projects into regional plans help DVRPC members build confidence about their contributions to freight-planning efforts.

32 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS What Outcomes Should the Engagement Yield? • What are the expected outcomes from the engagement activities (e.g., better under- standing of regional/statewide logistics trends, list of projects that are beneficial for freight stakeholders, increased industry support)? • Does the agency have specific outreach needs and desired information from certain stakeholder groups? – Public- versus private-sector stakeholder outreach needs; – Intra-agency groups; – Different outreach methods for different groups; and – High-level planning versus local operational considerations. WHAT ARE THE METHODS TO ENGAGE FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS? Transportation agencies can employ a wide range of strategies to engage the freight stakeholder community. Engagement activities can be conducted through a freight ad- visory committee (see steps in the How to Establish a Freight Advisory Committee box) through creation of a project-specific ad hoc grouping based on specific project needs, or through other methods. How to Establish a Freight Advisory Committee or Prepare a Stakeholder Outreach List in Five Easy Steps 1. Research any previous studies that engaged the freight community and note any contacts with industry groups, trucking associations, railroads, or other freight-dependent organizations. 2. Identify preferences for size and scale of the group and how much you intend to use members. 3. Contact the state trucking association and regional chamber of commerce to request contacts from organi- zations in the region who might have members willing to participate in the planning action. (Note: In most areas, freight stakeholders have been engaged in one capacity or another, such as for a bridge or other large project.) MPOs can contact local jurisdictions to connect with additional stakeholders. 4. Prepare a list of potential advisory committee members with full contact information and vet the stakeholder list with either the MPO, local jurisdictions, or a partner organization (such as a chamber of commerce or regional or statewide economic development organization). This advisory group can be institutionalized or ad hoc and should consist of a large or small range of stakeholders. Some stakeholders, such as larger organizations with greater re- sources (e.g., Class I railroads), may have ongoing involvement; other organizations (such as small BCOs or motor carriers) may wish to be included only in mass media outreach material (e-mail blasts, meeting announcements, surveys) that will allow them the opportunity to provide feedback on specific issues that apply to them. 5. Gauge stakeholder interest in participating in the project. Try to find an angle to explain the benefits from their participation (e.g., funding for improvements to truck routes, improved access to a warehouse).

33 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS In passive outreach efforts, agencies disseminate information to a large group of people with varying degrees of interest in the final outcome. However, the results of this outreach may or may not provide any specific or usable feedback. Common outreach methods include the following: • Establish freight advisory committees. • Convene freight stakeholder meetings, in which the agency makes a presentation on the plan, project, or program, including details on the project, such as study area, time frame for completion, known effects on the community, and expected result. • Hold workshops at which public agencies assemble stakeholders to work through some issues using visual displays of information and formal and informal facilita- tion techniques to elicit comment and ultimately reach consensus. • Disseminate project materials, including newsletters, by mail or e-mail with a re- quest for comment. • Regularly update websites to keep stakeholders informed and provide a repository of documents and other resources. • Conduct interviews with stakeholders, both in-person and by telephone or, de- pending on the stakeholder, through online survey tools. These activities comprise both passive and active outreach methods. Active out- reach efforts generally entail a request for specific feedback or some kind of vetting process, whereas passive outreach is generally intended to disseminate information and engage a large group of people at the same time. Depending on the type and complexity of the project or the level of controversy, several different methods could be employed to engage stakeholders. Specific approaches to each of these methods are detailed. Freight Advisory Committee For the agency to maintain freight contacts and build trust, it is helpful to have a permanent group of private-sector representatives and key freight stakeholders avail- able to advise and interact with the MPO or DOT. Committee members can rotate out as needed, but a core group should remain for some period of time for the sake of continuity and to maintain institutional knowledge. The committee should meet as regularly as makes sense, provide advice, and report to a high-level person such as a DOT director or state transportation commission. Committees such as these can pro- vide ongoing technical input on formal local, regional, or state transportation plans; vet ideas and potential solutions; compel public officials to consider the multimodal transportation system beyond local jurisdictional boundaries; recognize issues from a macro view rather than a project-to-project perspective; and help ensure the public agency adequately addresses the concerns of the freight community.

34 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS Freight Stakeholder Meetings Freight stakeholder meetings can take a number of forms but typically include at least the following components: (1) information on the plan or project provided by the agency and (2) an opportunity for stakeholders to comment. Often the agency starts the meeting with a presentation or speaker. In some cases, the agency uses an open- house format with poster boards to disseminate information. Agency staff, who may sometimes be supported by consultants, are present to answer questions, engage at- tendees in discussion, and record notes and comments from stakeholders. For exam- ple, the Commonwealth of Virginia recently hosted a freight open house with poster boards and comment card stations where attendees could sit down and record their observations on the development of a statewide freight plan. Workshops A workshop is a type of freight stakeholder meeting; it is typically lengthier (sometimes a half day or a full day) than a traditional outreach meeting and requires attendees to participate in a series of interactive activities. Workshops are helpful if agencies want to collaboratively engage freight stakeholders to make decisions (e.g., voting, consensus-building exercises). Workshop attendees can also validate findings, strate- gies, and goals of the planning effort. Workshops work best if they are by invitation so as to bring together a balanced mix of perspectives. Expectations for the workshop should be spelled out. Agencies might require RSVPs and provide a meal if the meeting spans several hours. Focus Groups Focus groups are professionally facilitated meetings, often run by a market research firm. Focus groups are designed to conduct an in-depth assessment of the perceptions, priorities, and insights of freight stakeholders. Focus groups work best in a small- group format. Finding the right stakeholder mix is essential for the focus group to yield usable information. For example, if competing firms are involved in the meeting, they may not reveal much information. Project Materials Project materials include documents, plans, newsletters, and other materials meant to inform and engage stakeholders. Transportation agencies have significant expertise in developing effective documents and tools for outreach to the general public. Brevity is the most important characteristic of project materials—for example, graphics, maps, tables, and a format that lends itself to quick absorption. Study Websites Study websites are necessary to distribute project materials, to keep stakeholders informed. There is no particular formula for making a freight-oriented study website successful. The same principles that apply to other project materials should be fol- lowed (e.g., brevity, clarity, and organization to make the experience efficient). Web- sites must be updated regularly to remain effective.

35 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS Interviews Planners may be more successful in collecting information and feedback to inform the decision-making process by conducting in-person visits. These visits (or interviews) help build the agency’s credibility and foster relationship building. Telephone inter- views can also be effective. Regardless of which method is used, interviews provide an opportunity for a two-way conversation. In the absence of other stakeholders (e.g., at a group meeting), business participants often feel more comfortable describing their operations and challenges. Interviewees appreciate the opportunity to review the docu- ment in draft form, especially if the agency develops an interview summary. HOW TO INCREASE THE EFFICACY OF FREIGHT STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH Freight stakeholder outreach is often an example of the concept of planting seeds and harvesting later. Unlike public outreach, which can yield immediate feedback and quick results, freight engagement can require an extended period of concentrated effort before participants—especially private firms—determine that participation will be mutually beneficial. Successful freight outreach efforts often exhibit the following characteristics: • Develops custom outreach approaches. Public-sector agencies and project spon- sors and staff must be creative when attempting to engage freight stakeholders and employ various methods, sometimes ones that differ from those used to engage private citizens and other types of stakeholders. For example, public forums and open houses are not always well attended by the freight community. Methods that work best for freight stakeholders include formal working group meetings, technical advisory committees, interviews and requests for input via phone and in- person meetings, presentations in the field, and listening sessions. • Sets reasonable expectations. Agencies should also manage their expectations and not be too ambitious when attempting to engage freight stakeholders. Some ef- forts, despite careful planning and footwork may not capture broad input from the freight stakeholder community. Agencies should be prepared for that possibility and expect to step back and evaluate how the program can become more success- ful in the future. • Leverages freight advisory committee members. One or more members of the freight advisory committee could be recruited to participate on official planning committees and offer valuable input during the planning cycle. These participants can act as project ambassadors to advocate for the project with their colleagues. • Recognizes the importance of timing. There is a perception within the private- sector freight community that often they are invited to become involved too late in the planning process to have real influence on the outcome; and at times the most appropriate individuals are not targeted for participation regardless of the timing. These factors lead to a lack of compelling incentive for private industry stake- holders to get heavily involved in freight transportation discussions with DOT and

36 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS MPO planners. BCOs and motor carriers are mostly interested in participation during the project selection and alternatives analysis phase of the planning pro- cess, but especially before the settlement and allocation of funds. Once the NEPA process has begun, there is less flexibility in determining project outcomes, and resources for projects have generally already been allocated. • Recognizes differences in planning horizons. Successful engagement takes into account the disparity among public and private stakeholders’ operational time frames and priorities. Public-sector horizons might be 20 or 30 years, while private-sector planning is typically short term (1 to 5 years). This disconnect can lead to differences in expectations and outcomes for public and private partners and can hamper participation (during busy cycles). For instance, late summer and fall are very busy periods for many shippers to prepare for the holiday season. This is not always the best time to engage stakeholders. • Uses freight stakeholders to identify and prioritize needs. Carriers, shippers, and other stakeholders know the system very well and have the ability to assist in identifying general areas of congestion and bottlenecks. They are not necessarily helpful in pinpointing specific problems. However, they are good at vetting needs/ deficiencies and proposed solutions based on a thorough data-based analysis. This vetting helps agencies prioritize investments. • Engages the freight community early. Early involvement from the freight com- munity is essential to address the project’s purpose and needs, and to develop an evaluation framework and performance measures to ensure the designs developed meet the purpose and needs. Paying attention to freight stakeholder input at the be- ginning and throughout the planning process will demonstrate to them that policy makers value their input and want them to be engaged, which will make freight stake holders more willing to dedicate their time to participating in the future. • Includes freight in nonfreight projects and plans. Issues arise when key freight stakeholders are not invited to participate in the long-range transportation plan- ning process in cases in which the project purpose is not clearly defined for freight. Regular meetings of freight advisory committees provide a means of overcoming this problem by providing a forum for both BCOs and motor carriers to discuss ongoing priorities. Including these advisory committees in public-sector meetings ensures a more comprehensive private-sector involvement. Examples of public- sector advisory groups include the Marine Transportation System National Ad- visory Council (MTSNAC), Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), Regional Freight Mobility Roundtable, and Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commis- sion (DVRPC) Goods Movement Task Force. The case studies for the PSRC and DVRPC describe their best practices in more detail. • Takes advantage of NHI and other training resources. Agency staff can become more effective at fostering collaboration with the private sector by participating in training programs (e.g., NHI 139003: Advanced Freight Planning). This also applies to top government officials who are sometimes not engaged or supportive of freight- planning efforts, likely because of their lack of knowledge about freight matters. It

37 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS is important for top officials to be advocates of projects that will benefit the freight community, and educating them one-on-one may be the most effective method. Add- ing a component that details what motor carriers and BCOs do and the role they play in the freight transportation system can further broaden the under standing of industry needs. Arranging on-site learning for policy makers offers a more complete understanding of freight operations and needs. It is critical for policy makers to interact and learn from system users so they can make better decisions. Addition- ally, teaching DOT and MPO planners the appropriate questions to ask of industry stakeholders is critical to the assimilation of freight-planning knowledge into the planning process. Using operations as an example, planners need to know that in- dustry logistics decisions are generally short term (not necessarily day to day, but frequently monthly or annually) and that freight routing decisions can change very quickly in response to trends and changing conditions; conveying this information to planners can be critical to expanding the effectiveness of highway projects that serve a freight need. • Informs and educates public officials and the public. To reach agreement on potential project designs, it is important to educate the public, government officials, and other stakeholders about how supply chains function and the connections among trade, freight mobility, and a vibrant economy. Freight stakeholders can be instrumental in providing technical information in this endeavor. • Uses freight stakeholders to inform highway design. Freight stakeholders are knowledgeable about such things as truck turning radii, moving over-dimensional cargo, and behavioral issues like truck acceleration and the impact of the steepness of a particular grade. Therefore, establishing an official freight working group (or technical committee) to be involved in addressing day-to-day operations and tech- nical issues, such as potential conceptual designs, can be vital to the project’s prog- ress and enable project designers to deliver better designs and solutions. • Collects and integrates critical information from the private sector. Freight stake- holders can be reluctant to offer candid comments and proprietary business pro- files, strategies, and data to public-sector representatives during official surveys or interviews, knowing their information will be included in a report, which will Insight from the Case Studies Baltimore Metropolitan Council Case Study The Baltimore Metropolitan Council’s (BMC) Freight Movement Task Force (FMTF) in- cludes representatives of the Class I railroads (both Norfolk Southern and CSXT railroads), key regional BCOs (including McCormick Spices), the Maryland Motor Truck Association (MMTA), and representatives from local jurisdictions. The railroads originally became in- volved through the development of rail access plans during the past decade and have remained consistently engaged. Other stakeholder involvement has centered on provid- ing insight and feedback to origin–destination (O–D) surveys, routing, and measuring volumes of truck traffic on highway facilities for specific studies.

38 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS become part of the public domain. Under these circumstances it is unreasonable to expect businesses to provide information that they feel might undermine their competitive position. Yet, there are critical pieces of information on how stake- holders use the system that are vitally important in improving agency efforts to integrate freight into the capacity planning process. One way to potentially gain powerful insights into freight stakeholder perspectives and needs is to deploy staff with knowledge of the freight industry. This is not to say that government agen- cies will have no success in engaging freight stakeholders, but their staff or rep- resentatives must be knowledgeable about goods movement and supply chains to be more credible with the private sector. Staff with freight knowledge will instill stake holders with confidence in the agency and will have a higher likelihood of prompting helpful responses during interviews and meetings. They may be able to potentially gain access to proprietary data that would inform the planning process. And they may offer assurances that the proprietary data collected will be kept confidential. • Continually seeks fresh perspective. Effective freight outreach efforts should attempt to continually engage new or different stakeholders to provide fresh per- spectives. The insights provided by firms and organizations who have not previ- ously been engaged—or have not been asked for their views on a specific project— can improve an agency’s ability to make decisions and can reenergize existing stakeholders. Sometimes their input will be novel; in other instances it will validate existing views or data analysis. The stakeholder renewal process should reduce agency dependency on individuals or companies who consistently participate in the process or who the government calls upon on a regular basis. To renew the stakeholder pool, agencies should reach out through networking and proactive reconnaissance with partners (e.g., economic development agencies) and by work- ing with trade associations to engage their members. This should include a mix of small and large firms and shippers with diverse goods movement needs. • Keeps stakeholders informed. Keeping freight stakeholders informed about criti- cal issues, design changes, decision points, and key milestones during the planning process is critical to keeping them involved. Throughout this process, planners should be respectful of freight stakeholders’ time by not overloading them with extraneous information or constantly soliciting general input. Let them focus on critical and technical issues and decisions. • Recognizes the linkage between transportation and economic vitality. When a freight stakeholder testifies at a public meeting or provides input on the project, he/she actually represents numerous jobs, not only himself or herself. Freight stake- holders are sometimes concerned that a few vocal individuals, speaking only for themselves or a few others, can drown out the input and opinions of the business community, thereby causing potential harm to economic vitality. Freight stake- holders can provide important background information and a clear understanding of the issues and technicalities and, therefore, should be heard. Freight stake holders agree that citizens should be afforded equal access to the planning process, but the

39 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS project decision making should depend on the quality and relevance of the informa- tion contributed. • Articulates benefits of participation. It is important to codify the message of “what is in it for me” to provide to freight stakeholders before soliciting their input and support. They will be much more likely to engage, as well as be more forthcoming with information if they see direct value and personal or company benefit as a result of their involvement. Too often, freight stakeholders are asked to be involved in meetings and discussions on freight issues at which public agency staff and/or their consultants do not properly express how stakeholders can benefit from involvement. • Recognizes that responses may be stronger for projects than for plans. Freight stakeholders are generally more interested in discussing real projects once fund- ing has already been secured and there is a strong likelihood that the projects will be completed. While engagement may be practical and substantive during earlier planning phases or conceptual project development, many freight stake- holders may be more responsive when discussing projects that will likely affect their near-term operations. For example, when soliciting feedback about projects from motor carriers, planners should clearly focus on the target area. An effective effort will take this into account. Summary of Effective Methods Identifying how different types of stakeholders respond to various levels of engagement is critical to effective communication and feedback. Table 4.1 shows which outreach method may be the most effective by freight stakeholder type. Effective is defined as the ability of the activity to motivate a response or participation in the activity. The table is divided into two major sections: Focused Outreach on the left and Ongoing Dialogue on the right. Under each of these headings are listed some (but not all) the potential strategies to engage freight stakeholders in the collaborative decision-making process. Cells with open circles indicate a general interest by the stakeholder in partici- pating. Solid circles indicate a high likelihood of success in effective collaboration with freight stakeholder. Empty cells indicate that the particular outreach method is likely to yield little useful information if employed for that kind of stakeholder. The application of this table might differ widely by jurisdiction, depending on the mix of stakeholders, the project/plan in question, and other variables. The following are constants: • Public or quasipublic agencies are inclined to participate in most types of engage- ment methods. • Telephone interviews—and to a lesser extent in-person meetings—are generally effective across most stakeholder types. • Participation in events or committees—when the individual has been personally invited and the event is clearly defined—is often strong.

40 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS The Toolkit section of Chapter 6 provides additional depth on several outreach topics. WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS FOR PUBLIC-SECTOR AGENCIES FROM IMPROVED FREIGHT OUTREACH? Effective collaboration with freight stakeholders can prove beneficial to public-sector agencies in the following ways: 1. The public-sector agency will find more success in maintaining and enhancing the multimodal transportation system to meet the needs of freight stakeholders. 2. Highway projects with the most relevance and positive impact on freight stake- holders will be more appropriately ranked and prioritized. 3. Freight stakeholders can put forward alternative system solutions and technical in- put; all potential solutions will be more effectively vetted, pointing to the solution that has the best cost/value ratio and that will most positively affect the movement of freight. TABLE 4.1. MOST EFFECTIVE OUTREACH METHODS FOR KEY FREIGHT STAKEHOLDERS Key Freight Stakeholders Focused Outreach Ongoing Dialogue Freight Meetings Workshops or Focus Groups Telephone and In- Person Interviews Surveys (e.g., online) Freight Committee One-on-One Meetings BCOs      Logisticians    Motor carriers      Railroads       Commercial real estate      Chambers of commerce and business groups       Economic development agencies       Port authorities and marine terminal operators       Local governments       Transportation agencies       Other stakeholders      Note:  = high likelihood of success in effective collaboration with freight stakeholder,  = general interest by the stakeholder in participating, and empty cells = likely to yield little useful information if employed for that type of stakeholder.

41 INTEGRATING FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE HIGHWAY PLANNING PROCESS 4. Cooperation among the freight community, other types of stakeholders, and public-sector agencies will be enhanced, and project opposition will be minimized. 5. Local, regional, and state economic vitality and retention of existing and attrac- tion of new businesses can be directly attributable to transportation infrastructure projects and public policies that reduce congestion and enable speed-to-market for products. Freight stakeholder contributions to the collaborative decision-making process for highway capacity additions can not only enhance the advocacy for the project but provide a breadth and depth to the project evaluation process. Freight stakeholders are unique in their connection to the regional and statewide economies and can expound the importance of market-based considerations in the planning process.

Next: 5 DECISION POINTS »
Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2) Capacity Project S2-C15-RW-2: Integrating Freight Considerations into the Highway Capacity Planning Process: Practitioner’s Guide provides examples of how state departments of transportation and metropolitan planning organizations might improve the quality of their interactions with the freight community.

The guide synthesizes best practices of collaborative, market-based highway-freight planning. The guide may be used in conjunction with the final report.

  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!