Freight Planning Capacity Building Workshop
Proceedings
prepared for
Federal Highway Administration
prepared by
Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
100 CambridgePark Drive, Suite 400
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140
August 31, 2005
Table of Contents
Introduction and Background
Workshop Overview
FHWA/AASHTO Freight Partnership Conference
Overview
Keypoints
Summary Discussion
Best Practices Presentation: Incorporating Freight into Long-Range Plans
Overview
Keypoints
Summary Discussion
Best Practices Presentation: Engaging the Private Sector
Overview
Keypoints
Summary Discussion
Best Practices Presentation: Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools
Overview
Keypoints
Summary Discussion
Best Practices Presentation: Organizational Structure
Overview
Keypoints
Summary Discussion
Best Practices Presentation: Multijurisdictional Coordination
Overview
Keypoints
Summary Discussion
Key Issues and Next Steps in Addressing Freight within Transportation Planning Programs
Long Range Planning, Key Issues
Potential Next Steps
Engaging the Private Sector Freight Community, Key Issues
Potential Next Steps
Use of Data and Analytical Tools, Key Issues
Organizing to Facilitate Freight Planning, Key Issues
Potential Next Steps
Multi-Jurisdictional Planning, Key Issues
Potential Next Steps
List of Figures
Figure 1. Freight Planning Capacity Building
Introduction and Background
Both the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA, enacted 1991) and the Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21, enacted 1998) encouraged states and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to consider freight movements and issues during statewide and metropolitan transportation planning processes. Freight was included among the planning factors in TEA 21, which helped focus Federal, state, and MPO attention on freight issues. There is a growing awareness at the Federal, state, metropolitan, and local levels of the importance of freight transportation and a corresponding push to link transportation investment, especially freight transportation investment, to economic development. As a result, Federal transportation agencies, state DOTs, MPOs, and business leaders are recognizing that effective freight movement is important to economic competitiveness and to the overall health and efficiency of the transportation system.
In response to these and other influences, many states and MPOs have developed successful freight planning programs and activities, which take different forms. Many states and MPOs address freight issues generally as part of their long range planning efforts. Some take a more active approach by building statewide or metropolitan pictures of freight movement through the development of stand alone, integrated, multimodal freight plans. Still others have begun to develop analytical tools or freight data collection programs to develop freight performance measures or to help guide freight policy and transportation investment decisions.
While several states and MPOs have developed successful, continuous freight planning programs, there are still several common issues and obstacles that state DOT and MPO staff have had to address to more fully incorporate freight interests into their transportation planning programs. Although many planning agencies have made commendable efforts to overcome such obstacles through their own efforts, resources, data, organizational issues, and multimodal and multijurisdictional planning issues can often provide significant challenges. Both the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) have provided resources to state DOT and MPO freight planning practitioners to assist them in addressing many of these challenges. These efforts, which consist of training courses, workshops, guidebooks, and other resources, have effectively raised the profile of freight among state DOTs, MPOs, and other transportation planning agencies; provided practitioners with the resources and motivation to better incorporate freight into their transportation planning programs; emphasized the incorporation of freight issues into long range planning activities; highlighted the importance of engaging the private sector freight industry in the transportation planning process; and provided instruction on the identification and utilization of freight data and analytical tools to facilitate freight planning.
While these various training and capacity-building opportunities provide a critical piece of an overall freight professional development program, there is no substitute for peer-to-peer information exchange activities to take the general knowledge obtained from these training courses and workshops and put specific freight-related strategies and programs into practice. States and MPOs looking to develop and implement specific freight planning activities can benefit tremendously from understanding lessons learned and critical success factors from colleagues that have already undertaken similar endeavors. This Freight Planning Capacity Building Workshop provided an opportunity for veterans of freight planning to share critical lessons learned with those that may be new to freight planning.
Workshop Overview
This Freight Planning Capacity Building Workshop was co-sponsored by FHWA and AASHTO and had three specific objectives:
- Better understand the state of the practice in freight planning and identify successful freight planning practices, techniques, or activities that can be replicated by other states and MPOs;
- Describe issues and challenges faced by states and MPOs when addressing freight issues and therefore identify ways that FHWA, AASHTO, and state DOTs can encourage/facilitate freight planning activities; and
- Identify the key elements of a freight planning program and identify what states and MPOs need to do to get started.
The workshop was held in conjunction with the AASHTO 2005 Joint Standing Committee on Planning and Subcommittee on Systems Operations and Management Meeting on June 5 though June 9 in Overland Park, Kansas and was attended by 21 state DOT and MPO representatives. A complete list of participants and the meeting agenda is included in Appendix A.
In order to meet the workshop objectives and to provide structure to group discussions, the topic of freight planning was broken up into five elements. Freight professionals from around the country with expertise in these areas were invited to present "best practices" presentations on each topic. After each presentation, key discussion questions were offered as a starting point for dialogue. The five freight planning elements and associated discussion questions were as follows:
Incorporating Freight into Long-Range Plans. The long-range planning process lays the groundwork for how a state incorporates freight interests and issues into its planning program. Key discussion questions associated with this element included:
- What actions are necessary to fully integrate freight issues into a long-range plan? What does "fully integrate" mean?
- How can states and MPOs more effectively make the link between freight planning and project development, programming, and implementation?
Engaging the Private Sector Freight Community. The private sector freight community can provide the background and expertise necessary to guide a successful statewide or metropolitan freight planning program. Key discussion questions associated with this element included:
- What are effective strategies to engage the private sector and keep them engaged in the planning process?
- How can state DOTs support MPOs-particularly small/mid-sized MPOs in engaging the private sector?
Effective Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools. Freight data, analytical tools, and forecasting methods are important inputs to a statewide or metropolitan freight planning process. Key discussion questions associated with this element included:
- What are the strengths and limitations of existing data and how are they used by states and MPOs?
- What data are necessary to support statewide and metropolitan freight planning? Where are the gaps?
Organizing to Facilitate Freight Planning. The way in which freight planning is organized within state DOTs or MPOs can also affect the success of a statewide or metropolitan freight planning program. Key discussion questions associated with this element included:
- Does organizational structure really matter?
- Are there ways to more effectively organize DOTs and MPOs for freight planning without undergoing a full-fledged reorganization?
Multijurisdictional Coordination. Freight movements are increasingly regional, national, and global in nature, often crossing traditional jurisdictional boundaries. Successful freight planning programs require a high degree of coordination with state agencies, other levels of government, and other state DOTs or MPOs through cooperative planning activities or multijurisdictional coalitions. Key discussion questions associated with this element included:
- What can be done to facilitate cross-jurisdictional planning activities?
- What are the critical success factors for effective multijurisdictional coordination?
The following sections provide a summary of the presentations and discussions in each of these categories. The full suite of presentations (as presented) is provided in Appendix B. (Not available online.)
FHWA/AASHTO Freight Partnership Conference
Overview
To offer the group some background on recent activities and initiatives on freight planning, Tony Furst (of FHWA's Office of Freight Management and Operations) summarized the findings from the AASHTO/FHWA Freight Partnership Meeting held in Columbus, Ohio on April 25-27, 2005. The meeting was convened as part of an effort to discuss the concept of a state freight coordinator. Specifically, the attendees discussed the roles, skills, and resources that would be associated with that position and the related organizational and institutional issues that exist. In addition to the Columbus meeting where 37 states were represented, the effort included a survey and additional WebEx events. Representatives from state DOTs and FHWA division offices were included in the effort.
Key Points
General findings from the Columbus meeting include:
- An agreement among state DOT and FHWA division office representatives that there are a core set of skills needed to perform freight planning functions and advance freight-related transportation projects. Although the agencies had slightly different criteria, both agreed that freight industry knowledge is much more important than technical aptitude. Other important skills include advocacy, negotiation, and facilitation. There is an important distinction to be made between a freight coordinator (working at the ground level to bring people together) and a freight champion (someone with a higher position who can bring freight issues and needs to policy and decision-makers).
- FHWA division office and state DOT representatives differed on how important freight transportation is; DOTs ranked freight transportation and planning higher than their associated FHWA division offices ranked the importance of freight. State DOTs also feel that they have much greater capacity to deal with freight transportation needs in their states than do FHWA division offices.
- Freight councils could be important, but should be initiated on a regional and corridor-wide level. They could play a significant role in lobbying and in the coordination and funneling of necessary funds for multijurisdictional projects.
- Sixty-one percent of the FHWA division office respondents indicated that internal institutional barriers adversely affect freight initiatives. Identified internal institutional barriers include modal thinking and funding, competing agency goals, lack of resources or prioritization and a general lack of knowledge about freight planning.
- External barriers to freight planning and initiatives include modal funding, reluctance of private sector involvement, lack of data and data sharing, lack of communication, lack of a national vision and negative public perception.
- Participants at the meeting were in complete agreement about the fact that the number one priority should be to develop a National/U.S. DOT freight policy.
- Second and third priority steps included the establishment of a formal way for states to work together on regional and interregional projects, and for FHWA/U.S. DOT to identify flexibility within existing funding mechanisms.
The findings of the Columbus meeting were relevant to the workshop in the following ways:
- Thoughts about policies and practices (institutional barriers, resources) that need to change to further the goals of increased freight planning capacity.
- Illumination about the difference between state DOT and FHWA division office perspectives on the importance of freight and the capability to deal with it.
Summary of Discussion
Following this presentation, participants engaged in a conversation regarding statewide and metropolitan freight planning, its current role in the national context, and the skills required of an effective freight planner.
One participant pointed out that the "freight industry" is very difficult to identify and define. Instead, the freight community is made up of many different players with a range of personal interests. This makes it difficult to identify a group of players who can sit down and make a decision. More so than in other transportation industries, the private sector plays an integral role and needs to be included in decision-making activities. It is quite possible that the field and industry are even more complex than even the best freight professionals have realized.
A number of participants expressed an opinion that in addition to its complexity, freight as an issue has never gained prominence. Until it gets attention similar to that of the pedestrian and bicycle realm, it is unlikely that the field of freight planning will advance significantly.
Generally, participants agreed that an effective statewide freight coordinator needs to have strong communication, interpersonal, and analytical skills. An ideal candidate would also have industry knowledge and the ability to step back and look at the big picture. On a regular basis, a statewide freight coordinator must be able to work adroitly with politicians and private sector freight professionals while communicating the importance of freight to the public.
Best Practice Presentation: Incorporating Freight into Long-Range Plans
Overview
Suzann Rhodes, of the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), gave a presentation to the group about how her agency incorporated freight into their long-range plan (LRP). Their approach was to make freight more understandable to the general public by weaving the needs throughout the LRP and relating them to issues that people can identify with.
ODOT entered the LRP process with the perspective that freight transportation is integrally related to all transportation; effective freight planning cannot be completed separately. Therefore, freight planning is integrated throughout the LRP, and does not have a designated chapter. Recommendations pertaining to freight are listed among other related planning topics. This approach brings freight into the spotlight with all other types of transportation, and helps to show the public how freight is related to conditions they face in their lives on a daily basis. For example, Chapter 1 sets the stage by linking transportation to the economy, and effectively makes the case that if the transportation system can be more efficient, things will cost less. Throughout the demographic analyses, freight growth projections are always compared to passenger travel growth. By explaining that without rail, the State would have five million more trucks on the road, the general public can appreciate the importance and impact of a functional rail system. All established goals were translated into clear and simple performance measures that can be used to demonstrate accountability.
The LRP process and freight profile led to a number of important policy initiatives. For example, a truck density map analysis led to a change in tolling policy to encourage trucks to utilize roadways with additional capacity. The profile also revealed that air is the fastest growing freight mode in the state, which prompted the DOT to more actively work with airports. A need to improve freight access to ports was also identified through the process.
Key Points
- Freight issues and recommendations should be incorporated throughout a long-range plan; freight does not need to and should not be considered a stand-alone topic;
- Freight should be linked to the transportation network as a whole and the LRP can help to illuminate and promote multimodal transportation planning;
- Freight should be linked to the economy, and explained in the context of topics that the public can understand and relate to their daily lives; and
- The LRP should be used to make the case for freight planning.
Summary of Discussion
The presentation was followed by a discussion. Workshop participants were interested to hear more specifically about how ODOT had managed to "mainstream" freight planning, and introduce public involvement into the process. Ms. Rhodes responded that the freight profile has been instrumental in addressing needs on a local, regional, and even national level. It has helped to illuminate the fact that freight often moves through the state, but does not enter into the economy through sales or the creation of jobs. The DOT Director can take these conditions to the Federal government when appealing for funds. On a statewide level, the DOT has taken the position that the transportation network is not simply a highway system; investing in rail and removing chokepoints can relieve congestion on the highways and improve air quality and reduce maintenance costs, etc. On the local level, the stakeholder survey was instrumental in informing the DOT about the user's concerns, which were surprisingly consistent. This provided insightful information about how to focus resources, and how to engage the public in the process.
Workshop participants from other states and MPOs shared their experiences with freight planning integration. The common experience has been a strong realization about the significance of freight on the daily lives of residents and operations of the transportation network. Each agency stated the importance of communicating this connection to constituents. In Minnesota, the creation of a freight advisory committee provided a strong connection between top management and freight industry representatives. In addition, putting together a freight profile helped to educate DOT staff and therefore to push the agenda on the importance of freight planning. METROPLAN ORLANDO, a Florida MPO, created a freight committee to address concerns related to projected growth and deteriorating infrastructure. The realization that the movement of goods and the provision of services to residents was threatened moved the issue to the forefront. In Vermont, freight planning took hold when higher level officials recognized the importance to the economy. As in Ohio, explaining to people that access to fresh tomatoes in January is a direct result of the freight industry has been key to leveraging the needed support. A Vermont freight plan is now complete, and the next step will be to integrate it into the long-range plan.
Best Practice Presentation: Engaging the Private Sector
Overview
Gerald Rawling, Director of Operations for the Chicago Area Transportation Study (CATS), gave a presentation on the task of "Engaging" the Private Sector in freight planning activities. He began by stating that in the transportation world, freight typically sits behind personal transport and public transit in terms of importance to the general public. An additional challenge exists in finding the appropriate people to fill freight planning positions. Mr. Rawling presented the group with the diagram shown as Figure 1, underscoring the multidisciplinary nature of the field and the range of skills and experiences needed to successfully complete freight planning capacity building.
Figure 1. Planning Capacity Building
Where do They Teach This in School?
Around the outside of these disciplines sit marketing and market research; two key aspects in regards to successfully engaging the private sector.
The private sector can be considered analogous to the broader general public that should be involved in freight planning. Therefore, difficulty garnering private sector support can be generalized as difficulty in generating public interest and involvement. CATS spends $750,000 annually on public involvement initiatives, and only receives input from a few hundred people. Mr. Rawling argued that the best approach is to go out to the private sector and see what they are engaged in and what they are handling on a daily basis.
CATS has established the Intermodal Advisory Task Force (IATF). The mission of this group is:
- To identify, assess, and respond to issues and opportunities affecting intermodal transportation facilities and resources and the intermodal movement of goods;
- To pursue the spirit and the letter of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21), notably in the areas of data acquisition and management; the definition and promotion of freight projects; ensuring a regular intermodal component in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP); advocating a regular allocation of planning funds from the Unified Work Program (UWP) to freight-related research; managing/orchestrating relations with other freight advocacy groups in the region;
- To offer a regular forum for the exchange of information on intermodal industry business practices and developments and, similarly, information on developments in public sector planning and programming that impact the industry;
- To provide a mechanism for effective participation in the transportation planning process by agencies, businesses and persons involved in the freight intermodal transportation sector; and
- To provide input into the planning and programming process with respect to the intermodal movement of goods.
The IATF operates with an understanding that freight is an integral part of a robust economy and deserves a fair allocation of time and resources. Just because "freight doesn't vote" does not mean that it is not important. Finally, the group understands that "talk is not cheap, it's bloody expensive," allowing them to stay focused on the important issues.
CATS has found this to be an effective way of engaging the players, exchanging information, and creating a forum to communicate with the public. Through working together, the group has found that a successful task force should promote an atmosphere of scientific inquiry and put knowledge in play as often as possible. In addition, members have to feel comfortable speaking honestly and openly if anything is to be accomplished. The CATS staff offers the task force with their analysis as a place to start. From there, the task force has been successful at taking that analysis and generating innovative ideas and approaches to challenges. For instance, the IATF has embraced the notion of "pushing the envelope" through a work in progress called C4T (CREATE for Trucks). This initiative will ascertain if the procedural steps of the railroads' CREATE (Chicago Regional Environmental and Transportation Efficiency) program could be replicated for the trucking industry. Mr. Rawling further stated that the IATF has recognized the applicability of C4T since all states and MPOs will have some trucking issues, whereas not all will have rail, water, or intermodal issues. The IATF has found their website to be a useful tool for information sharing, and increasing the "buzz" about the topic. More information about the IATF can be found on the web site: www.catsiatf.com.
Mr. Rawling emphasized the importance of "knowing the business." Those in the private sector will respect public sector officials if they know that you have made an effort to take the time to learn about their issues, needs, and concerns. He also advocates for treating private sector representatives as a "board of directors." Working with them as the experts will create a dynamic where they will be interested in sharing their knowledge and experience. In addition, being transparent and objective can build trust, teamwork, and efficiencies. Pulling in a range of people with different perspectives and interests can be helpful. In the case of the IATF, it has established working relationships with local universities, including "teamingq on studies in advanced technologies and cargo-handling methods. Finally, a willingness to throw out new and non-traditional ideas is key to creating dialogue, brainstorming, and generating creative, thoughtful, and feasible alternatives.
Key Points
- Public sector officials need to go out to the private sector to show respect for their work, and to begin to develop an understanding of the issues;
- Private sector representatives should be relied on as experts and business partners;
- The use of task forces or freight committees can provide a good forum to instigate creative discussion, brainstorm innovative solutions, and create important partnerships;
- DOT and MPO staff should always be transparent and straightforward when working with the private sector; and
- DOT and MPO staff should engage in processes that hold meaning for stakeholders, and set achievable goals through these processes so that involved parties see the value they are getting.
Summary of Discussion
Participants had a number of questions and insightful comments regarding their own experience with engaging the private sector. Tony Furst observed that to succeed in accomplishing the five key points mentioned above is very labor-intensive. Gerald Rawling agreed, from experience.
Successful participation can often require more than simply inviting people to a meeting. As Mr. Rawling suggested, the best tactic may be to reach out to stakeholders, and meet them on their site to show interest in their issues. Another successful approach is to establish a formal process-oriented project (e.g., creating a freight plan) that stakeholders will view as relevant. At times, just creating a forum for private sector players to discuss common issues can be enough of an incentive; some states have found that these entities are not talking to each other on their own and welcome a formal opportunity to do so. Once the initial interest is shown, it is important to treat stakeholders as official business partners with something valuable to share. To establish a good working relationship, it can be effective to begin with the "low-hanging fruit" to accomplish something quickly that everyone can support. Perhaps most importantly, people should feel that the time they spend is well utilized. Offering some practical or technical assistance and guidance can be a good tool to allow private sector representatives to feel that they are getting something of value in exchange for participation. As a final thought, Leo Penne commented that, if the necessary public-private cooperation does not materialize the freight industry will be the eventual loser as the public sector will impose further limitations on conditions of freight service (e.g., times and places).
Best Practice Presentation: Use of Freight Data and Analytical Tools
Overview
Dennis Hooker, of METROPLAN ORLANDO, described the MPO's experience with the collection and use of freight data. Since the completion of the interstate, there has been a shift in the transportation industry from infrastructure building to system maintenance. Data collection and analysis is an integral piece to maintaining and utilizing the system efficiently. METROPLAN ORLANDO's freight data collection process began with the realization that the required data did not exist at the local level. Commodity flows are available on a more aggregate level, but often are not useful for looking specifically at local freight movement. Much of the existing freight data are incompatible, making it difficult or impossible to analyze. It is up to DOTs, MPOs, and other transportation agencies to find the resources to gather this data.
The MPO followed a process similar to that established for a statewide LRTP, and went through exercises to determine what data should be collected. METROPLAN ORLANDO currently has sufficient data to track commodity flows (and not just the movement of vehicles) on the local level. This data has given freight planners the tools to determine what goods are being delivered where and when. As a result, weigh stations have been set up strategically on the outskirts of the city to allow truck drivers to wait until congestion has subsided. In addition, mini-distribution centers have been established to accept large deliveries at night. During the day, smaller vehicles can make the deliveries throughout the central business district when people are there to receive the goods.
Key Points
- Sufficient freight data does not exist to understand local commodity flows and freight transportation patterns. DOTs and MPOs need to determine what data they need, and collect it; and
- DOTs and MPOs should use the collected data to make decisions that will help to manage demand and capacity.
Summary of Discussion
Due to time constraints, there was no specific discussion following this presentation.
Best Practice Presentation: Organizational Structure
Overview
Cecil Selness, Director of the Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations for the Minnesota Department of Transportation, addressed the topic of organizational structure for effective freight planning. He shared some general thoughts on organizational structure, in addition to speaking specifically about his experience and how Mn/DOT has organized effectively.
Mr. Selness compared an organization to a poker hand; no matter how you arrange the cards, if you don't have good cards (people) you will not have a winning hand. If you have strong cards you can arrange them to win. Good people properly organized can successfully relate and work together. Indeed, the interpersonal relationships among employees within an organization are more valuable than how those people are arranged on a chart, or where the "power" is allocated on paper. It is also important to remember that an organization needs to change, and one structure will not remain effective throughout all situations and when addressing all challenges. Mr. Selness also argued that while you can't win solely on the basis of good organization, you can lose if it is not properly executed.
Speaking specifically about Mn/DOT, Mr. Selness mentioned that the Commissioner of Transportation is also the Lieutenant Governor. In addition, she has firsthand knowledge of both business and freight. The six division directors of Mn/DOT serve as the board of directors for the organization. Top-level understanding and support of freight really helps the freight program be successful. The state agency approaches its work with the theory that transportation is much more than the DOT. Counties, cities, railroads, MPOs, transit operators, etc. all play a very important role. Each one brings a unique perspective to the table, and is important in a different way. By involving all of the players specifically in freight planning activities, Mn/DOT can honestly say that it is more than simply the DOT's plan and involves input from many groups.
Originally, freight and commercial vehicle operations (CVO) were housed in separate Offices. When the two offices were merged, there was some initial worry about combining a planning organization (office of freight) with a regulatory organization (CVO). However, it has worked out extremely well. Mr. Selness feels that if freight planning was housed within the general transportation section, the deep knowledge of the freight industry would be lost. The two groups have been able to share information and perspectives that make the most of the variety of skill sets now housed within one office.
The Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations oversees freight, rail, waterways, and motor carriers. All plans being done within Mn/DOT are performance based, including the recently completed freight plan. The freight landscape has many players, and combining these groups has helped to highlight the connection between freight planning and economic development. Research funding plays a key role in funding the freight planning effort. Mn/DOT has begun doing highway corridor studies to identify good freight projects for development. However, the agency still struggles with the issue of spending highway dollars on non-highway projects. Although Mn/DOT receives general, non-dedicated funds for rail and waterway programs, it is still difficult at times to figure out how to coordinate the funding streams.
Key Points
- How an organization functions is more important than how it is laid out on paper;
- "You can't win the game with organizational structure ... but an organizational structure that doesn't coordinate and focus efforts can lose it";
- An organization must be flexible enough to change as issues and the political climate shift;
- Interpersonal relationships are a key component of successful freight planning programs; and
- Organizational structure should allow for an inclusive and collaborative process that engages stakeholders on all levels.
Summary of Discussion
In response to participant questions, Mr. Selness pointed out that the purpose of good organization is to create an environment where progress can be made that benefits all players. Looking down the road 20 years, he would like to see agencies on local, regional, state, and multi-state levels addressing freight issues in a collaborative context where public and private entities can sit together and maintain integrity. If this is to be achieved, it will not come down to organization but instead will be based on funding and relations.
Best Practice Presentation: Multijurisdictional Coordination
Overview
John Powers, Intermodal Specialist from New Jersey Department of Transportation, gave a presentation on the topic of Multijurisdictional Coordination based on his experience and involvement with the Mid-Atlantic Railroad Operations Study (MAROps). This project has brought together five states (PA, NJ, MD, DE, and VA), three railroads (CSX, NS, and Amtrak), and the I 95 Corridor Coalition to identify chokepoints and challenges facing railroads in the Mid-Atlantic region. Each state has been working independently to address some of the challenges it is facing specifically, but the power of MAROps lies in the ability to look along the rail corridors and understand how issues and improvements in one state can drastically impact another state. When the problems are brought to one table, it is clear that many states are facing the same or related problems. The MAROps forum broke down many of the barriers that had existed previously among the states and the Class I railroads. Addressing the challenges together provides potential cost savings and offers new solutions through collaboration. The MAROps partnership provided this framework, which otherwise would not have existed. Along with a myriad of benefits, different agency cultures and disagreements about how efforts should be funded are the two main challenges that the MAROps team has faced.
Through statewide collaboration and discussion, it became apparent that there are a number of critical rail projects throughout the corridor that would offer substantial benefits to multiple stakeholders. During the course of Phase I, a cost/benefit analysis was completed that shows how investments could benefit the region as a whole. A plan was put together with a list of specific projects which, if completed, would benefit the region over the next 20 years. This plan would not expand the system, but instead simply improve the existing corridors. However, the cost and benefits have yet to be broken down by state or network portion. This piece will be completed during Phase II of MAROps.
Even if these benefits were identified and the involved parties agreed to fund the project at a level relevant to the expected return on investment, there is no current mechanism to pool funds from different sources and apply it to one project. Therefore, one of the most important outcomes of MAROps Phase I has been to identify the need for such a mechanism. An ideal entity would be a regional funding organization, able to float bonds and generate revenue with contracting authority to fund and manage regional infrastructure projects. In addition, the group would also be able to lobby competently on Capitol Hill.
Although both the I 95 Corridor Coalition and the Conference on Northeast Governors (CONEG) have been identified as logical players for this function, both agencies still have their limitations. While the I 95 Corridor Coalition can act as the funding mechanism, it is precluded from lobbying. CONEG has experience lobbying, but does not represent the specific players. However, now that this issue has been identified, progress is being made toward finding a solution.
Key Points
- Working multijurisdictionally can help to identify potential efficiencies and how benefits will accrue; and
- The current barrier to true multijurisdictional coordination is a mechanism that will allow regional funding and cost-sharing.
Summary of Discussion
Workshop participants discussed the fact that the lack of a funding mechanism is an example of the need for a national transportation policy. If transportation was thought of on a national level context, the existing barrier for how to fund regional projects would not be an issue. At the moment, there is nothing that prohibits transportation planning across state lines, but there is nothing that rewards or promotes it either. One participant pointed out that if Federal resources could be used for regional projects before they became state resources, the channeling of the funds would be less of an issue. Another participant argued that even if the money was allocated on the regional level, there would still be arguments about which regions were receiving funding, and how much. There are serious barriers to this sort of cross-state funding; states or regions will continue to say that there is not enough money to keeps things going internally, so they will not want to fund things in other states. Until there is a shift in how leadership approaches this, it will be challenging to change.
Key Issues and Next Steps in Addressing Freight within Transportation Planning Programs
The experiences shared during the course of this Freight Planning Capacity Building Workshop indicate that many states and MPOs have developed innovative approaches and techniques in conducting freight planning activities. Significant challenges still exist, though, and there are many ways by which freight issues could be more effectively mainstreamed within existing statewide and metropolitan transportation planning programs. The key issues and next steps presented in this section are based on the best practices presentations and ensuing discussion at the Workshop and are organized around the five elements of freight planning presented earlier. These next steps should not be considered hard-and-fast recommendations. Rather, they are designed to raise issues and approaches for consideration by AASHTO, FHWA, or other organizations, in developing programs, strategies, or initiatives designed to improve the ability of DOTs, MPOs, or other transportation planning staff to incorporate freight into the transportation planning processes.
Long-Range Planning
Key Issues
- States and MPOs unclear as to what constitutes a "freight planning program." Many states and MPOs have recognized that freight is a critical element of their transportation systems and can have significant mobility, safety, economic, and quality of life impacts. Fewer states and MPOs have a solid grasp on the specific elements of a freight planning program. Complicating matters is the fact that freight planning varies from region to region and is often related to the industry mix, transportation system, and economic development policies and efforts of individual areas. What is missing is specific guidance on the common, critical elements of a freight planning program and guidance as to how or to what extent states should consider freight interests when developing their transportation plans.
- Champions or advocates for freight planning within an organization sometimes do not exist and can be difficult to develop. A high-level champion or advocate can often be a driving force for freight planning within an organization. However, developing advocates for freight planning can be difficult, as freight planning is sometimes perceived as primarily benefiting the private sector freight community and many states and MPOs find it difficult to effectively quantify the potential public benefits of freight improvements. Exacerbating the problem is the fact that many states and MPOs are facing increased planning requirements with a limited number of staff resources.
- Public support for freight planning can be limited. Few members of the general public understand freight's link to economic competitiveness and quality of life. As a result, there can be limited support for freight planning at states and MPOs, particularly those that are not yet severely impacted by obvious freight-related issues, such as port and terminal congestion or grade crossing conflicts.
Potential Next Steps
- Define core freight planning requirements. Since understanding varies among states and MPOs about what specific elements constitute comprehensive freight planning program, the core requirements expected by the Federal government should be defined. NCHRP Project 8-47, the Guidebook for Freight Policy, Planning, and Programming, could be used as a starting point for this definition. Providing a clear set of expectations for statewide and metropolitan freight planning may facilitate freight planning efforts.
- Create a freight education initiative. Many DOT and MPO staff, DOT and MPO executives, and the general public have a limited understanding of how freight impacts statewide and regional mobility, economic competitiveness, and quality of life. The training and education resources of FHWA's Freight Professional Development (FPD) program have begun to bridge this gap, but have limited impact on the general public and statewide and regional decision-makers. This program could potentially be expanded to provide freight related education and outreach to these two key stakeholder groups.
- Support the creation of a national freight policy. A national freight policy could provide the framework for states and MPOs to better integrate freight issues into the planning processes by defining national goals and objectives for freight and describing how state DOTs and MPOs fit.
- Continue the collaboration among FHWA, AASHTO, and other groups. Collaboration among FHWA, AASHTO, the Association of MPOs (AMPO), and the National Association of Regional Councils (NARC) has been important in highlighting the importance of incorporating freight within statewide and metropolitan transportation planning programs.
Engaging the Private Sector Freight Community
Key Issues
- Mismatch in planning horizons. The public and private sector planning processes have vastly different timelines. The public sector thinks in terms of producing 10- and 20-year capital improvement plans while the private sector thinks in terms of a 12- to 18-month operating horizon.
- Difficulty engaging the private sector in the planning process. Further compounding efforts to engage the private sector freight community is the fact that the private sector often perceives the transportation planning process as overly cumbersome and bureaucratic, making it difficult to keep the potential stakeholders engaged in the process. In addition, potential private-sector participants often do not have the staff time or resources to fully commit themselves to the process, preventing them from realizing the potential long-term benefits of participation.
Potential Next Steps
- Conduct targeted outreach to the private sector freight community. Few private sector freight stakeholders have been provided a formal opportunity to learn about the transportation planning processes used by public sector agencies and how they can fit within those processes. The development of targeted outreach materials that explain the public sector transportation planning process as it relates to freight could provide an opportunity to more fully engage the private sector freight partners in the transportation planning process.
- Engage the private sector freight community through task forces. Task forces can provide an opportunity for freight stakeholders to share perspectives and collaborate. It is important that the public agencies create and open and transparent environment to facilitate the exchange of ideas. Providing private sector participants with the opportunity to share insights and perspectives through an "advisory" role can give them an incentive to participate. Action-oriented task forces can ensure that all participants will feel that their time is well spent.
Use of Data and Analytical Tools
Key Issues
- Limitations of affordable, disaggregate, commodity flow data. The limitations of publicly available commodity flow data continues to be a significant concern for states and MPOs. Publicly available data are often aggregated and reported for large areas while the purchase of these privately maintained data sets is often costly, and some states lack the funding and staffing resources to utilize them to their full potential.
Potential Next Steps
- Continue to develop data and analytical tools to support statewide and metropolitan freight planning activities. FHWA's FAF2 program is pursuing a three-pronged strategy to provide more effective data and tools to statewide and metropolitan freight planners. The program provides an important opportunity to improve the ability of states and MPOs to address freight in the planning process. The effort will include:
- An Origin-Destination Database of commodity flows among the 106 to 114 CFS regions plus major international gateways, benchmarked every 5-years;
- A Network Flow Database of commodity movements assigned to major transportation facilities, with forecasts and updates corresponding to the Origin-Destination Database; and
- Methods for using the FAF as a context for local issues through the Freight Model Improvement Program.
Organizing to Facilitate Freight Planning
Key Issues
- Modal organizational structures. Many state DOTs and MPOs are organized modally with one group responsible for highways, another for rail, often a third for ports and waterways. This can hinder cross-modal communication and leads to fragmented freight planning.
- Coordination of freight projects within an agency and with other agencies. Intermodal freight improvement projects typically are complex projects involving several agencies. Interlocking requirements governing coordination, permit approvals, hearings, etc., can significantly expand the time required to plan and implement projects and result in increased costs.
Potential Next Steps
- Review and analyze the new Federal surface transportation legislation. The Federal surface transportation legislation includes important programs that could directly improve the ability of states to conduct freight planning activities. A prime example is the state freight coordinator program, which require states to assign responsibility for coordinating freight planning activities to a single point of contact. The state freight coordinator could significantly improve the ability of states and MPOs to address cross-cutting freight issues and elevate the importance and attention paid to freight issues within an organization. States and MPOs should continue closely review the legislation to understand its potential impacts on freight planning.
- Develop methods and tools to quantify public benefits of freight improvement projects. Some states and metropolitan areas commit a large portion of their budgets to the maintenance and preservation of their current highways systems. There are limited resources for freight-specific improvement projects. Despite the link to economic development and jobs, some states and MPOs find it is difficult to justify spending money on non-highway projects, projects that are perceived to inordinately benefit the private sector freight community, or projects whose costs are local, but whose benefits accrue regionally or nationally. Development of methods to more accurately estimate the public benefits of freight improvement projects may result in more of these projects being supported and funded within a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) or State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).
Multijurisdictional Planning
Key Issues
- Limitations of multijurisdictional coalitions. Multijurisdictional coalitions are important forums for identifying regional issues and problems, though they find it difficult to actually implement improvement projects, as they often have little controlling authority to address the issues and concerns raised by coalition members or provide funding to projects that may address those concerns.
- Challenges associated with estimating costs and benefits of regional improvement projects and allocating those costs and benefits among regional entities. Freight movements are increasingly regional and national in scope, yet the planning and programming of potential freight improvement projects is often constrained by jurisdictional (state or metropolitan) boundaries. It is difficult to fully estimate the costs and benefits of regional freight improvement projects and, more importantly, to allocate those costs and benefits among individual jurisdictions within a region. This can hinder the ability and willingness for states and MPOs to participate in regional improvements.
Potential Next Steps
- Develop a regional approach to financing freight improvements. A regional approach to organizing and financing regional freight improvement projects ensures that adequate funds are available to meet the needs of large-scale projects and takes into account the distribution of costs and benefits. A regional approach should address transportation systems serving multi-state trade areas; involves states, MPOs, and the private sector freight community; provide a forum to identify needs, define improvements, describe benefits, set priorities for investment, organize multi-year programs, and evaluate results; provide a mechanism for financing the improvements; and provides a mechanism for recouping investments and sharing risks and benefits. Developing a regional approach to financing freight improvements provides an opportunity to address significant regional needs.
1 Challenges with Multi-State/Jurisdictional Transportation Issues, FHWA, May 2001.
Appendix A - Attendee List
Florida
David Lee
Statewide Planning and Policy Analysis
Florida Department of Transportation
605 Suwannee Street, MS 28
Tallahassee, FL 32399
(850) 414-4802
david.lee@dot.state.fl.us
Dennis Hooker
Manager of Technical Services
METROPLAN ORLANDO
One Landmark Center
315 East Robinson Street, Suite 355
Orlando, FL 32801
(407) 414-5235
dennish@metroplanorlando.com
Illinois
Kathy Ames
Office of Planning and Programming
Illinois Department of Transportation
2300 South Dirksen Parkway, Room 300
Springfield, IL 62764
(217) 782-6332
amesks@nt.dot.state.il.us
Gerald Rawling
Director of Operations Analysis
Chicago Area Transportation Study
300 West Adams Street, Second Floor
Chicago, IL 60600
(312) 793-3469
grawling@mail.catsmpo.com
Kentucky
Daryl Greer
Transportation Engineering Branch Manager
Kentucky Transportation Cabinet
200 Mero Street
Station W5-05-01
Frankfurt, KY 40622
(502) 564-7138
daryl.greer@ky.gov
Michigan
Larry Karnes
Freight Policy Specialist
Michigan Department of Transportation
Van Wagoner Building
425 W. Ottawa Street
P.O. Box 30050
Lansing, MI 48909
(517) 373-9058
karnesl@mdot.state.mi.us
Cecil Selness
Director, Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations
Minnesota Department of Transportation
395 John Ireland Boulevard
St. Paul, MN 55155
(651) 297-7860
cecil.selness@dot.state.mn.us
John Tompkins
Freight Planner
Minnesota Department of Transportation
395 John Ireland Boulevard
St. Paul, MN 55155
(651) 406-4808
john.tompkins@dot.state.mn.us
Jim Barton
Transportation Planner
Metropolitan Council
Mears Park Center
230 E 5th St.
St. Paul, MN 55101
(651) 291-0904
jim.barton@metc.state.mn.us
New Jersey
John Powers
Project Engineer
New Jersey Department of Transportation
1035 Parkway Avenue, CN 600
P.O. Box 600
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 530-6594
John.Powers@dot.state.nj.us
New York
Lou Adams
Civil Engineer
New York State Department of Transportation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12232
(518) 457-1716
ladams@gw.dot.state.ny.us
Ohio
Suzann Rhodes
Administrator, Office of Urban Corridor Planning
Ohio Department of Transportation
1980 West Broad Street
Columbus, OH 43223
(614) 644-7093
suzann.rhodes@dot.state.oh.us
David Dysard
Project Manager - Transportation Planning
Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments
300 Central Union Plaza
Toledo, OH 43697
(419) 241-9155
dysard@tmacog.org
Vermont
Barry Driscoll
Director of Policy and Planning
Vermont Agency of Transportation
State Administration Building
133 State Street
Montpelier, VT 05633
(802) 828-3441
barry.driscoll@state.vt.us
Virginia
Erik Johnson
Transportation Engineer
Virginia Department of Transportation
1401 East Broad Street
Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 371-0811
erik.johnson@vdot.virginia.gov
Additional Participants
Tony Furst
Office of Management and Operations
Federal Highway Administration
HOFM-1, Room 3401
400 Seventh Street, SW
Washington, DC 20590
(202) 366-2201
tony.furst@fhwa.dot.gov
Leo Penne
Intermodal and Industry Activities
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 624-5813
lpenne@aashto.org
Rob Ritter
Planning Capacity Building Team Leader
Federal Highway Administration
1634 I Street NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20590
(202) 493-2139
robert.ritter@fhwa.dot.gov
