Good afternoon or good morning to those of you to the West. Welcome to the Talking Freight Seminar Series. My name is Jennifer Symoun and I will moderate today's seminar. Today's topic is Integrating Freight in Project Selection. Please be advised that today's seminar is being recorded. Today we'll have four presenters, Libby Ogard of Prime Focus, Richard Martinko of the University of Toledo, and Steve Devine and Katherine Trapani of the Rhode Island DOT.
Prime Focus LLC was established in 2001 as a freight transportation consulting firm specializing in economic analysis, freight transportation research, freight policy issues and transportation facility feasibility studies and public outreach.
Libby Ogard is actively involved in the Transportation Research Forum, Transportation Research Board, Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals and National Industrial Transportation League.Ms. Ogard has spent 17 years in the railroad industry with Burlington Northern Railroad and Conrail.
and -- general manager for retail division responsible for target, family dollar, Walgreen's and other accounts, received BA from Michigan state.
Rich -- 30 years experience as engineer and manager.
Presently served as director of University of Toledo's -- one of 60 designated by the federal Department of Transportation nationwide, having held positions in manufacturing construction and -- sectors.
Rick served as assistant director for the Ohio Department of Transportation.
Earned BS in -- professional engineer in Ohio since 1978.
Katherine -- Rhode Island state planning for seven years, originally from the state of Maine. Bachelor of -- from and -- from Rhode Island.
Prior to statewide planning, the -- and economic development for seven years.
Chief of intermodal planning, Department of Transportation, since 2003. The intermodal planning section is responsible for all D.O.T.'s nonhighway programs, project, commuter rail and enhancement, bicycle
and -- project manager on the rail, South of providence. As project manager of phase two on the commuter rail study, investigating other -- in
Began at Rhode Island -- now I want to go over logistical details prior to the seminar. Will last 90 minutes, 60 for speakers and the final 30 for Question and Answer.
If you think of a question you can type it into the small text box in the chat area on the right side of your screen. Make sure you are typing in the small thin text box, not the large white area.
Presenter will answer questions during presentation, I will start the Question and Answer session with the questions typed into the chat box. The operator will give instructions on how to ask questions over the phone.
If you think of a question after the seminar you can send to the presenters directly or the freight planning listserv. A great forum for the distribution of information and a place to pose questions,
to find out what other subscribers have learned in the area of freight planning.
Provided on the slide on your screen.
The session is being recorded, a file containing the audio and visual section will be posted within the next two weeks. We encourage you to tell us who have not be budget been able to attend the session.
Presentations will be available online.
I will notice attendees of the availability of a record, PowerPoints and transcript of the seminar.
Today's topic is Integrating Freight in project -- beginning with -- if you have questions, type them into the chat box and they will be answered what last 30 minutes of the seminar.
With that, I will bring up your presentation, and you can get started.
Thank you very much for inviting me today, I am glad we have so many people on the line from a participation perspective.
The project we were assigned is grating freight into the planning process. We were very aware that freight planning processes vary significantly by place, region, size, and the overall comelyness of a general area.
As we think about the complexity of our nation, the fact that ports may have a very different planning process than maybe inland or rural areas,
places where there's a lot of urban congestion that might be a very different planning challenge than someplace very rural and might struggle with even modal access types of issues.
We went through the process, interviewed many different folks, identified through pretty extensive extense investigation how planning process changed based on region, place and size,
and how the projects are identified through various different processes. We also looked at the project selection process, the use of tools, performance measures and different funding partnership strategies, advocacy and outreach efforts.
We identified the key choices with this, went through the needs identification process, identified seven different key freight elements in the planning process. What we will do is, in the next several slides,
go through the points in more detail. The first is a technical lead. One of the things we identified in had this process is the fact that a freight champion is exceptionally helpful.
We also identified that many -- there's a freight planning process continuum associated with many of the planning efforts.
So while you might start a freight planning process with simply a single individual, as the maturity process increases and as you go down the freight planning process path, many times, when you evolve into a more holistic process,
the role of that freight champion will change. So in some of the interviews we identified a freight champion might be an individual go-to person, or a resource person that might be available to anybody within the MPO or region
or might be available to anybody within the state D.O.T. That person often had to be a generalist and had to be fairly familiar with a broad variety of issues, but in some respects,
as that person gained not only the identification of being the freight expert on staff, they also evolved into being more of a generalist and more available for folks that had questions about economic development,
impact of transportation on economic development as well as specific engineering details, things like geometry, turning radius, stop light, transportation flows.
In some respects those people's roles evolved into more of an entrepreneurial role, trying to look at choke points, congestion points, places where we might be able to look at different innovation,
ways we might be able to look at things different in other words to help alieve choke points
Knowing where the freight nodes are, knowing what drives congestion, whether you are dealing with an international trade problem or domestic trade problem are issues where information might get "stuck" in the planning process.
Some of the examples we looked at, how do we help people gain a first-hand understanding of exactly where some of the choke points and critical cog jest yon issues are arising.
One area we found which was particularly instructive was Delaware valley regional planning commission, actually instituted a problem where they called it freight for a day.
They got several volunteers across different organization to go look at specific freight nodes and freight choke points.
That firsthand observation helped a number of people throughout different planning responsibilities within the different agencies understand exactly how this system was performing,
and how to potentially come up with methods to stream line freight and freight movement within a specific geography. The other thing we studied, at this process most of the processes are a bottom-up process.
A lot of the information has to start at the lowest common level and then work its way up through the freight planning process to incorporate freight more into a programmatic system.
The key elements to understanding regional freight is what is the economic structure. Are you in a production point, distribution point, where does your location fit with respect to, the trade infrastructure,
and are you at an end point of railroad, mid-point of railroad, inland port location or a point where many modes or many lanes or corridors come together.
What's the freight infrastructure there? Are you currently at capacity?
Is there opportunity to expand capacity?
What are the different types of commodity and vehicle flows that might impact your region?
Things like are you dealing with surges of bulk materials, grain during a harvesting period. Are you looking at retail which might have stronger flows during the holiday season?
How are organization and public policy issues impacting your freight planning at that level. The next element we looked at was linking freight to traditional planning.
One of the things that came to the top of that right away is that freight is a contact sport. Everything that we think we know is changing at a pretty fast rate
and we really need to take a proactive position in trying to understand what the freight trends are and how those challenges and changes might effect your specific region.
For example, today we are looking at diesel fuel in the range of $5 a gallon, how might that impact the number of truck trips and distribution activity in your region.
As we nationally go from three to five distribution centers for large customers we are looking at expanding to six to 12 distribution centers to recognize fuel costs have increased so much.
If that happens, how does that impact your region? These are questions we ask the different constituents to help us with in the interview. So, if we look at the most successful examples,
the linkages came from trying to understand what the freight strategy is, particularly with respect to your region and how you fit in a national program with respect to freight and freight movement.
Then highlighting freight projects within TIPS, and identifying the freight corridors and facilities driving the activity within the region. The guide book provides help
and guidance on how to effectively integrate the freight within the existing process, and we've come up with several strategies to look at that.
Freight data is often the achilles heel in any one of these type projects.
Much of this data is viewed as proprietary, particularly at the private sector level; yet, it is incredibly important to be able to identify what the impact is of the specific transportation improvement project,
not only for the local economy, but to help justify the cost of the project. I think that the private sector, at least what we identified in the interviews is beginning to realize that this is a full contact sport,
and that in other in order to help improve on an overall level there needs to be collaboration and some partnership. One of the things we saw is that bean companies, if you can develop trust, a good relationship,
particularly with the local freight stakeholders in the region, more 2457B than happy to share issues they struggle with, specifically if there's help to come to a positive resolution in this area.
I think we are making strides North Carolina area. I think this is one of the area that's probably is going to represent the slowest level of improvement we see, identifying gaps,
understanding how we might be able to put together specific infrastructure fixes, for example, being able to time signals, being able to put in left hand turn lanes, being able to help speed freight
or show private sector exactly how a transportation improvement might impact their freight volume and velocity. It goes a long way to helping bring the private sector to the table
and helping them share data with a specific project in mind.
From an outreach perspective, that was probably one of the most difficult and probably the most interesting piece, how do you get the private sector to become interested in understanding and working together with not only the state,
but the MPO, in identifying transportation improvement programs. One group was very innovative and put together an open call for freight projects, getting the message out to trade associations,
the private sector within the region through chamber of Chamber of Commerce efforts, and trying to actively engage the private sector to come up with ideas for freight projects.
Many of the MPOs and state planners have begun to start the process in a slow way, doing on-site interviews with specific private sector freight stakeholders within the region
or within the key areas where they know there are significant transportation activities.
I think one of the biggest difficulties we identified here is that -- and this is old news for most of you -- but most of the private sector is looking for relatively short-term improvements,
is looking at a planning horizon of roughly five years, whereas the public sector is looking at long-range projects that might take 10 to 20 years to implement. One example might be the Detroit intermodal freight facility,
in the planning process well over 10 years. It's been a project on the books, a very long time in coming. It's been very hard, across the board for state MPOs, and state D.O.T.
s to keep the private sector engaged on many of these projects that have such a long duration.
I think the identification of milestones and being able to show progress along the line during these larger projects is another very helpful approach to achieving effective outreach and be able to gets the private sector to participate.
One example we identified in the interview process was the red zone approach. This was in a very large community, urban area, probably a better way to capsulize this.
Several of the key freight stakeholders that had significant transportation interests basically had the direct telephone contact to a specific member within the MPO, so when they started running into transportation issues, difficult Is,
difficulties, they would give them a call to get that on the radar screen. That may not be the best for long-range planning, but at least it was a method of connecting the private sector with a planner to help identify,
target where specific choke points at different times of the day were happening.
Multijurisdictional approaches are very important too.
Another area we identified was it was often hard to quantify benefits, particularly over a long corridor. When we think about the nature of freight, freight does not usually originate and terminate in the same local region,
but has certain metrics associated with each mode. What originates or terminates or passes through a specific jurisdiction or community, may have a significant impact on the local traffic flow, as well as congestion
and overall highway performance in that region.
So to understand where the freight is going to, coming from, and where these choke points and other bottlenecks are occurring, and helping understand, quantifying the benefits, very critical in order to be able to implement a project.
There are a number of freight training and education opportunities.
On this slide we listed several.
The most important part is to recognize any profile or guide book put together needs to recognize there's a lot of existing information available today in the form of case studies, as well as AASHTO and the -- program,
as well as a number of different case studies available, resources available through the TRB committees that might have specific relationship to either freight or specific regions.
One of the things that was identified as a very good tool or mechanism to not only engage the private sector, but to heighten the awareness of freight and planning, was the availability of workshops. Several workshops,
at least in different regions have been held to try to help educate and provide a face for the freight transportation problems that are being experienced in the specific region.
Some of these workshops actually had agendas that had working groups, break-out sessions where they brought not only the public sector, but the private sector and MPO agencies, other local,
regional planners together to try to bring some quick-hit improvements or opportunities to gain some relief for some of the problems they saw local lie.
Advocacy is the last element we will talk about in terms of the seven key elements for freight planning and integrating into the transition plan. One thing that is very difficult, we recognized through the process,
freight is often considered as a private sector problem. While we see it in terms of on the highway, it's often hard to identify where the freight is originating, where it's going to,
why it happens to be at a certain given place at a certain time.
again, advocating freight and being able to articulate the benefits of freight transportation improvement projects, need to be able to be communicated at the highest level of the organization to create champions
and advocates within the state D.O.T.s, the MPOs, to help highlight and articulate the importance of the project. One of the interviews I was specifically involved with, was the Chicago area,
and one of the key elements that they identified for being able to get the Chicago create project through was the advocacy and leadership of their top officials that were very committed to the process,
recognizing the process is still underway and these processes often take a very long time to come to fruition, being able to have a champion, a leader that helps keep the constituents engaged
and helps deliver the message not only to those associated with funding the project, but those in the process of developing the project, is very important and critical.
For more information on the guide book and process, we have put together the links to the website. If you have questions I would be happy to answer them at the end.
I should also mention the guide book is available for download and -- in the bottom right hand corner of your screen. Thank you, Libby.
We will move to Richard M, University of Toledo.
Go ahead whether you are ready.
It's my pleasure to be with you, thank you for taking time to participate with us here today. I would like to talk about a particular case study that I am aware of in Ohio, we have struggled with at the D.O.T.,
plus now worked with at the university. I would like to frame the original argument about why freight is so important to Ohio, within a 300-mile radius, Ohio has -- percent of the population, manufacturing capacity,
and the Canadian population. It's really the 35th largest state geographically, rather small state, but as you can see, it has a very robust transportation network as far as interstates, truck traffic,
really 13% by value of all freight traveling in the United States touches Ohio's transportation system. So freight and freight planning for Ohio is very important.
There's a conflict, however, between maintaining the existing, and expansion of freight opportunities. Pretty clear when you look at indicators as to Ohio's economy, as the gross state product of Ohio grows,
it pretty much tracks along the same slope as truck EMT, probably true for a number of you in your states also.
Ohio recognized that and revised their macro corridor program to include route that's relieve freight congestion and routes that had high freight growths.
Selection-wise, here's typical examples of how Ohio does project selection. They have a transportation review advisory committee, called TRAC, being revised underwent the rethe new administration, it evaluates under a criteria,
put into a formula.
There's a TRAC counsel made up of business people, community leaders from around the state s. 70% of the scoring is done through transportation and safety, 33 economic development, and extra points for local or private participation,
and modal impacts, anything that is involved in urban revitalization.
Projects are scored, ranked, and then funded accordingly. If a project is worthy, but funding is not available because it doesn't score high enough, it drops down to what's called a tier two level,
that's the process Ohio uses to determine major projects.
The freight projects typically that are going on right now, there's a grade separation program that the governor put in place, I think it was at the $10 million, 10-year program, presently 30 grade separation projects involved.
A Wilmington bypass involving a major freight company.
Route 24 runs from Indiana I understand to -- fort Wayne, trucks on a two-lane road, that project is being done, about a $110 million project. The -- river valley, the one I was to focus on as a real world example,
some of the struggles O DOT has, the Rickenbacker intermodal -- a complete project, huge, about 175-acre intermodal yard, probably about 68 to 70 million-dollars for that yard.
The key element ODOT struggled with, not that it wasn't worthy or Val it, but who pays, and does anybody care where the money comes from. From the potential's point of view, I am not sure. I wanted to throw the issues out there,
not aid advocating any one point of view, but we have the good, bad and ugly, what the D.O.T. struggled with in this tipping point decision.
Every TRAC project has a sponsor, this was the Columbus regional airport authority, [indiscernible] was a partner.
Existing intermodal facility was overcapacity, and future predictions obviously show that 140,000 -- interest a need of -- by 2015 will make the present facility grossly undercapacity brands is in Columbus,
some major economic drivers that are located in Columbus. This intermodal yard was extremely important to economics for Ohio. It's also part of Norfolk and southern's heartland corridor, and I will show you a map there.
If I could click on the green, starts at the port of Virginia, moves East, tunnels that require major rehabilitation. Off to Columbus, and to Chicago. Now, that shaves off a considerable, 1031-miles to 1264,
the way the existing route moves toward Harrisburg, so there was a specific savings for Norfolk and southern. The Rickenbacker logistics part is there in the yellow box.
It's really an integrated logistics park, will be built in stages.
The orange is intermodal terminal, 375-acres, a campus, cargo, North for business development, and a rail campus. As you can see in the bullet items, it's really noshing folk Norfolk
and southern's -- 15,000 acres for project development, where most of the money is made in the ancillary things developed nearby, in the negotiate of 100 to 140 jobs.
You start developing ancillary businesses for the parts the intermodal facility carries, you get distributors, warehouses, there's a real leveraging of effect there.
The way out of the intermodal yards, track, storage area. What's important with this slide, this is Norfolk and southern's business revenue mix. As you can see, intermodalism is very close to the largest share of their revenues.
The reason I pull that slice out is it factors into what decision the D.O.T. makes based on what level of participation the railroad puts into the project.
Rickenbacker port authority in their application for this asked for 50 million-dollars.
The railroad is only going to match $10 million, which is why I showed that slice of 21%, huge percentage of the revenue, but they were only matching $10 million of the project, and asking for $50 million from the D.O.T.
They is cited benefits normally associated with the congestion mitigation, reduced congestion and economic development. Unfortunately, to build on what Libby was talking about as far as data,
there wasn't a lot of data put forth to support those benefits, nor was this run through the TIP process or MPO.
It was a project the port authority at the airport and the railroad wanted to get through the D.O.T.
Now, the good, obviously the economic benefits of this project, as it was laid out, proposed, you can read them. Major shipping cost savings, truck miles reduction, significant reduction of emissions,
and over the next 30 years of operation there's a claim of 9500 direct jobs, 10, 90 indirect, additional square footage, construction, machinery, equipment. A lot of economic benefits, as I said earlier,
associated with an intermodal yard.
How good are these numbers?
How clearly developed are they?
How supportive was the data? It was rather -- I think it was a black box. These were the numbers presented, not sure how clear it was these actual benefits will take place.
The bad part was, as far as OD.O.T.'s initial response, you are asking for 75% of public funds for a private beneficiary.
How can ODOT, without real hard data determine the real need of Norfolk and Southern, especially when you claim this is one of the highly profitable for your business. If it's not,
why should the public pay for highway funds to be diverted to one company, not a publicly-shared project.
Transportation benefits, they are there, but they are probably not the primary benefit of the project. Obviously economic development is great. We support that, especially here at the intermodal institute, but the D.O.T.,
struggling with infrastructure funds, how to allocate money, those were the decisions they were trying to make to reach the tipping point about that project.
If the D.O.T. sets a precedent, how does it respond to other private companies that ask for the same thing.
As I said, the immediate job creation was only about 140 jobs, the rest is projected into the future.
As as far as points for other financial contribution, this was the D.O.T., money asked for through the TRAC process and a $10 million match with NS.
Not a lot of local involvement.
The question is what's the highest use for potential dollars, the D.O.T.
trying to maintain infrastructure, this is an example of a situation in Columbus where at the I-70 and 71, 27 crashes annually, systems interchange no where near able to be completely funded,
and here we have a opportunity cost of $49 million that could be diverted to other uses that are semiprivate. They struggled with that, decision.
. What happened was the port authority changed funding, just fund the connector road that gets to the airport, and OD.O.T. did approve that, programmed an $8.2 million improvement to the infrastructure that would move towards the airport.
Now, the ugly was where's the rest of the money come from?
What happened was there was a March for earmarks. I don't know how many D.O.T.s felt, I I know Ohio felt the source of funding keeps getting bled off by earmarks. Ohio has such a robust transportation system,
the formulas used to determine the money Ohio gets from the primary funding source, Ohio usually gets a pretty fair share, but if you keep bleeding the primary source for earmarks, the source stays the same, you get a smaller
and smaller amount of money. The earmark issues are ones a lot of D.O.T.s struggle with, but eventually through SAFETEA-LU the project got a $3.4 million earmark,
and the key policy questions I am bringing up here for the group to consider is what are the public transportation benefits of a private project? Is economic development a valid purpose for federal aid funding?
Potential investment in a rail intermodal facility, is that a superior opportunity to known existing alternative transportation investments, especially with the infrastructure problem that most D.O.T.s are having.
The benefits, again, transportation benefits, a shift from truck traffic to intermodal traffic.
The reduction in DMT road maintenance costs, there should be some. Should be a benefit for safety, and should be an air quality benefit. Without any data, crank a few numbers, the DMT would be reduced in Frank Lynn county,
the county Columbus is in -- [indiscernible] the annual DMT truck travel in Franklin county is 438 million-miles. That was a reduction of less than 1%, .2%.
On the down side, an intermodal facility may increase --DMT over -- areas, not acclimated there may be a not-in-my-backyard uprising.
The maintenance costs were too small to measure.
Here's the environmental piece of this puzzle the D.O.T. put together as far as VOC, NOCs, and fine particulate emission, you look at regional emissions versus reduction, those again were fractions of 1 percent of reduction.
The claimed air quality benefits were relatively small. So, the ugly issues again still remain, the title 23 earmarks don't fit well for -- the air quality benefits minimal, DMT, open to debate. As I said before,
there was little data to really make a hard decision, and it wasn't in the long-range transportation improvement plan or MPO's plan, so that was an issue.
Now the contracting and maintenance, what I mean by that, what OD.O.T.
meant, this project was funded by an earmark, but the railroad was going to manage and construct the project. The typical D.O.T.
oversight with change orders, investigation, things in section 646 the D.O.T.s have to comply with were really non-existent for this project.
The railroad was going to construct the project.
That, I think, needs to be looked at in the long run as far as where and how D.O.T.s and governmental entities participate in these public/private partnerships. There needs to be a new, I think, new approach.
We have to get the railroads involved to get the public some answers, provide data, participate in long range planning process for the D.O.T. and MPO, and there may be acknowledged public contracting constraints
and oversight to make sure there's value for the money.
We need to encourage more private beneficiaries, get some better public use. Some of the people were talking earlier about other things such as grade separations, traffic lights, those are all great things to do, the MPO process,
we want to get local funding involved.
Let's identify the public benefits a little better, and the private sector investment needs to be beefed up.
So where are we? In the sunset of this new intermodal fronter, right now there are few regulations that fit the frontier, we need a flexible sheriff to bring law and order, railroads, the FHWA all have to compromise, bend.
The new regulation has to reflect the new condition and the way of life on this frontier. That concludes what I wanted to bring to the table, and the questions that I wanted to put out there.
I am not taking any stances as to the right answer, but those are the question that's I think need to be answered.
Thank you, rich, I encourage anybody to post questions to Rich or any others in the chat area, we will get to those after the presentation.
Katherine and -- of Rhode Island statewide planning. You can go ahead when you are ready.
Katherine: Good afternoon everyone.
Before I get started I have a technical question for Jennifer if I have slide animation, do I click the mouse or arrow?
Continue clicking on the arrows, that should bring the animation up.
I want to talk about the planning process, then I will turn it over to Steve Devine, he will talk about a extraordinary project in Rhode Island. I know what you are thinking, Rhode Island is such a puny state,
this land mass shows not even all of New York, New England, and there we are.
A thousand square miles, we are painfully aware of our small size, used often as a yardstick to show the size of forest fires, glacier and -- our small size allows us to have a unique and efficient planning process.
Within the Department of Administration, the single statewide MPO, state planning counsel, our MPO board has no elected officials, fairly week. All cities and towns are required to have comprehensive plans,
and those are reviewed for consistency with the state guide plan, 28 different elements.
The cornerstone of our transportation process is our transportation advisory committee, called the TAC, we meet monthly in the evening, 26 members, members of the public, nongovernment organization,
and freight advocates include the construction industry, trucking association and economic development.
I would like to talk a little about our tip, and this process works when we actually have money, room in the TIP for new projects, not the case in the development of our 2009 tip. In the past we reach out, cast a wide net
and ask cities and towns for their project proposals, state agencies, members of the public, and also transportation providers.
The criteria to evaluate the projects, there are six here. It's a 120-point scale, each worth 20 points, score on mobility, cost-effectiveness, environmental impact, economic impact, consistency with state and local plans, and safety,
security and technology.
Each of these criteria have six to eight sub-criteria.
I will spare you the excruciating detail on that. If there's a negative impact in any one of these projects can get a negative impact.
Split up into regional subcommittees and they are the ones who score the projects.
The way the criteria is set up, it works for all modes, the more typical projects are highway projects that come from city and towns, this also has worked for a bike path project, proposed by a member of the public
and a rail project proposed by the local freight rail, Providence and -- one was for several million dollars, the other for a few 100,000, they did get the less expensive one.
Our long-range planning effort that we did in 2004 had a very intense focus group process, and I have two of our six focus groups listed here. The freight and North East corridor group we were able to get FedEx, Amtrak,
paragraph Providence and -- to participate, and discussed capacity on the North East corridor.
The second focus group, Homeland Security and emergency preparedness.
We got our emergency management people involved, as well as the state police, trucking association, Coast Guard, ITS community and bridge and turnpike authority.
We talked about such issues as HAZMAT and bridge clearances. I think we were successful in getting good participation, because we only asked for a commitment of three meetings from each of these people.
Another effort that we finished in 2006 was the freight planning needs assessment.
Realizing what our staff and budget limitations are, what can and should we be doing as part of our freight planning program.
These activities we listed are ongoing and we have areas we would like to improve, and do better on. That last bullet, we have a designated point of contact, Walter Slough cum is member of the -- and freight coordinator.
Before I finish, I would like to let you know the documents I talked about are on our website.
The TIP will be replaced with the new versions. But I will now hand off to Steve to talk about a project borne out of the elect riff cages of the North East corridor.
Thank you. As Katherine mentioned, this project, locally known as freight rail improvement plan, was quite a challenge to Rhode Island D.O.T., primarily a highway
and bridge infrastructure department at the time when this started in the mid-90s. It presented quite a challenge in terms of dealing with essentially a railroad project, which we did not have all that much experience in.
We have learned a lots over the years on such issues as track design, construction, being on the Amtrak North East corridor, indemnification, liability issues,
which I will say continue to haunt us as we continue to expand commuter rail on the corridor, and other operational issues. This graphic isn't the best quality, trying to give you the lay of the land,
this is the Providence metropolitan area, the freight rail improvement project is a 22-mile area extending from the Boston switch, central falls, Rhode Island, at the Massachusetts line, moving South to the Providence, downtown,
working South by TF Green airport in Warwick, and extending down to Davisville, an industrial park, major employer and traffic generator in the state of Rhode Island.
The project itself included 12-miles of brand-new track along Amtrak's main line. In Rhode Island, for those of you unfamiliar with the North East corridor, this is their main line from Boston to Washington D.C., it is electrified,
can travel up to 150 mph, in the bottom of the graphic, you see the North East corridor, that is one of the rare places it is tangent track, straight.
They travel up to 150 mph through the state.
Integrating higher and wider freight presented a challenge in mixing with the 150 mph Amtrak trains, in addition to our own commuter rail trains we have planned for South of Providence.
The project included five miles of upgraded track North of providence, to the Massachusetts line, separate freight track we upgraded to today's standards.
The project is a middle five miles where we share track with Amtrak on their main lines because of historical and other environmental issues we were not able to provide a separate track through the East Greenwich area,
many trees were cut in order to accommodate the freight trains.
Funding for the project was a mixture.
Primarily FRA 50/50 funding for track rehabilitation, mostly on the track that already did exist North of Providence to the Massachusetts line. It was 50 FRA and 50% state matching funds,
the voters of Rhode Island overwhelmingly approved in a bond referendum. We used considerable federal highway funds for the planning, environmental impact statement, design, and a lot of bridge clearance work,
whether it was rehabbing a bridge, raising, undercutting, through the use of federal highway funds. Again, state matching funds were provided for the 50% and 20% federal highway.
We used a unique funding mechanism, through the Garvey process where we are essentially up-fronting federal funds in order to advance critical major projects in the state.
This was considered a critical project due to its economic importance, in keeping freight rail competitive, which gets into my next slide.
You see photos on the left-hand side, the electrifying cages -- we have continuous welded rail, concrete ties, coincidentally made it very attractive for other types of rail service, particularly commuter rail service,
I will get into in a second.
This provided operational flexibility for the freights. It's separating them from Amtrak's high-speed rail, and when high-speed rail was introduced through the northeast corridor, levels of service increased dramatically,
now 34 trips per day up and down the corridor, expected to increase to 52 over the next 10 years, I believe.
There's a definite need for this project and again, as I mentioned, it provided us at D.O.T. an opportunity to look at benefits for commuter rail.
I think long term we are looking at this as the start of, first segment of ultimately expansion of the corridor, from Boston to New York, Connecticut, could be the first section of a third track.
There's an MPTA, Massachusetts transportation authority. We have talked to them about commuter rail service, about an hour train ride. The photo you see is a train passing by the state House in Providence.
The graphic on the right is the new planned train station and consolidated rental car facility planned for TF Green airport, on the far right. Facility on the left connected by a sky walk, and moving sidewalks.
That's a major component to our transportation, providing transportation to an ever-increasingly congested corridor.
In conclusion, the freight track provided extensive flexibility, not only for freight, there was obvious passenger benefits to the project, which we, Rhode Island D.O.T. specifically, since we paid for 100% of it,
total of $200 million project, we intend on taking advantage of, and as -- one of the biggest markets down there at West David'sville -- the auto carriers, the park continues to grow,
significantly increasing car carriers that would have been on trucks, being hauled on the highway system are now being hauled by freight rail along this track, the northeast corridor to points West through Massachusetts. So,
it's been a very successful project for us and one that we look to continue expansion in the future.
I think that concludes our presentation, Katherine and I would be happy to answer questions you have as we conclude the Webinar. Thank you.
Thank you very much. I hope everybody enjoyed this presentation, as well as the other two. Right now I only see one question typed in, actually two, and some discussion about data collection.
The first question, but please feel free to continue to type in questions, and then we will open the phone lines.
The first question, for Libby, the question is -- sent privately, not sure if you saw it, what do you mean by freight implementation strategies?
Libby: I guess the way we defined it in the project is how do you take a freight project, ipt great it into either the the TIP or -- get it programmed into a freight project. So, how do we take a freight idea or concept or project,
and move it from a visioning stage through the funding, plan, execution, design phase, build. That's what how I would help define that.
Okay, thank you. The next question, I will put out to all presenters, any of you doing this, have experience that would add freight survey to the data collection process for the traveled demand forecast model for urban areas?
I know there have been discussions in the chat about that, wanted to put that out to the presenters, to see if you have experience in this area.
Rhode Island does not have any experience in that.
Yeah, this is Rich, University of Toledo. One of the key issues in developing an intermodal site, when we work with the railroads, they want a commodity flow study, looking, what they tell us, in a 50-mile radius of the area,
they want to know by zip code the commodities moving in, moving identity, developers that may move in to use an intermodal site, develop a distribution warehouse,
that information is really hard to get we find our researchers have to make phone calls to the private shippers to get that information because, really, that's proprietary to them. It's hard to get a good commodity flow study.
We are doing one right now, hope to have it done in January, want to use it as a marketing tool for our strategy geography to attract, maybe NS or Canadian national to put another intermodal yard in it this area.
That's the experience here at the university, and we are trying to develop a detailed commodity flow study for our area in Toledo.
Thank you. We have another question, Rich, I believe for you. Is the track investment policy part of the TIP process for all projects or freight-related only?
It's for all major projects, defined as capacity improvement or major improvement, has to be approved by the TRAC.
There's a project sponsor many times the MPO is the project sponsor, developing a list of priority projects, and typically their number one project will be something they go down, make a presentation on, in front of TRAC,
as well as the scoring. Although, for example, the Toledo region, may be the number one priority for the Toledo region, but when all the projects come in, scored, it's possible the project in a certain region, because of funding
and priorities, may not get funded the first year.
All major projects go through TRAC, not just freight.
Question for Steve, how hard was it to get Amtrak to share track with freight, and --
I could spend a couple hours on that.
In the northeast corridor, Amtrak owns the majority of the -- between Boston and Washington.
When they run -- being my understanding, they run outside the northeast corridor, they run on predominantly freight-owned track.
A lot of what's required from those freights when Amtrak runs on their corridors, Amtrak requires from others who run on the northeast corridor, which they pretty much own. It's been a long, difficult situation,
and I want -- I think on the technical side, the plan side, the design side, we have a great relationship with Amtrak, both for that project and the our project for commuter rail South of Providence.
It's more when you get into the other issues, I mentioned liability and indemnification, when you run on Amtrak's lines you pay an access fee for maintenance and -- of the track. Trying to do the best we can, not being a railroad,
predominantly railroad department.
So it definitely has had challenges but I am happy to report on the commuter rail end we are close to an agreement with Amtrak.
Following up with that, question, a related question, is Amtrak power provided through overhead -- or third rails, and would that interfere with freight car clearances.
How does this compare to what is used for commuter rail in Rhode Island?
It is overhead, their electrification -- high and wide freight requires a clearance of 22 feet something inches, the wires are below that. So that really drove the whole concept of this freight project. The Providence and -- railroad,
has operating rights on the northeast corridor.
There were plans for a major expansion of the -- there was inherently a conflict on the corridor. To get Arnold Arnold that was around that was to create the third track
and -- [indiscernible] I am trying to look at the follow-up question. The commuter rail is a diesel operated rail system, a push-pull, it is not electrified -- has no plans to go electric at this point,
while they are encouraged by Amtrak to switch to electric to increase their acceleration ability. As more traps use the corridor, the commuter rail needs to pick up its acceleration, but it is not in their budget
and we have no plans for electric. We will use MBTA commuter service, their existing diesel equipment.
Thank you. We have another question, for all presenters, what recommendations would you make for the next federal transportation authorization -- Libby?
One of the most interesting surveys I did was with a large MPO whose greatest frustration was there was no dedicated freight funding pot of money for freight projects. It seemed very difficult to go through a specialized freight plan,
stand-alone freight plan, if you will, if there was no dedicated funding source at the end of the process in other words in order to apply or develop projects to be realized.
I think that that's probably one of the most significant needs out there. The second one is a standardization of performance measures. As we look at the trend that we are all seeing moving toward public/private partnerships,
the ability to be able to look at a project, quantify the economic benefits and costs, each of the stakeholders, benefits from it, across multi-jurisdictional corridor.
You can look at similar metrics for the entire project.
Rich, moving to you.
I will build on what Libby said.
In my opinion the reason there isn't a stand-alone pot of freight money, because the railroads are a private entity, therein lies the problem. What we need to do is have a national rail policy,
not unlike the national transportation policy, where the rails get -- I don't want to use the word regulated, but there needs to be recognition of the standard of performance, how the national policy for rail to get integrated.
Each railroad operates as its own entity as far as standards, metrics. The performance measure issue, I will take that a step back, instead of with freight, in Ohio we had what's called OPIs, organizational performance indices.
They grade, score, how the maintenance is -- and freight projects are dependent on how much money you have to spend to maintain your operation.
80% of your transportation budget typically goes to maintaining existing infrastructure.
If you can keep that infrastructure in good shape, because the decline of infrastructure is like exponential curve.
Once it gets over the hump it degrades exponentially.
How you maintain greatly effects the amount of money you have for other projects. Freight, major new capacity, all of that stuff.
There needs to be an organizational performance index standard somewhat recognized across the states. That's what I would advocate.
Okay, thank you.
This is Katherine. Off the top of my head, I I think everyone agrees we need more money, I don't need to say that. But we need a mechanism for a regional rail authority, especially in the northeast, small states, New England
and New York would be a good start, but asking the mid-Atlantic would be something I would look at adding.
Anything you want to add, Steve?
Steve: No, just being involved in Amtrak's northeast corridor master plan process going on now, hearing a lot of options, alternatives for what happens to Amtrak or high speed rail on the North East coming out of Washington,
I 100% agree with Katherine. We do need to be together, at least as the northeast states through the corridor.
This corridor is really so essential, vital to moving goods and people in this heavily urbanized and populated area. It's an asset and needs to be protected
and if ultimately long-term Amtrak is not the proper mechanism for its continued upkeep, then something else needs to be done, and I think that's some kind of consortium or authority of the states up here.
Thank you. Next question, I will put this out to all presenters, are you aware of any resources for freight village planning? Any one of you who might be aware can just jump in.
This is rich. I will say the only thing I am aware of this, I've seen some freight village planning, but really haven't coupled through in detail, that's all I am aware of.
There's stuff out there, not intimate with it.
Thank you. Anybody else?
We are not aware of that concept here in Rhode Island.
I guess I would reply that this seems to be more or less the purview of a lot of these large developers, potential REAPs that are out there. Part of what it comes down to, the message for this group, this program,
we need to be very mindful of land use planning, as well as how we are zoning areas and where the freight is moving to next.
One of the things we have seen in Chicago in the last five to seven years, the suburbanization of freight, a certain drag on productivity, in order to get to the scale,
size they need to be to achieve productivity goals need to be in the suburb an environment, not only because of size, they can get in, out, predictably, reliably.
With the change in fuel prices the jury is a little bit out of how far you can be out in suburbia before you start paying for that benefit in increased fuel to make deliveries I think we are on the cusp of significant changes.
I would see the play from state D.O.T., and MPO, to look at land use policy, zoning, how that impacts great development, how attractive you would be to any of these large developers,
recognizing the key component they are all looking for is access, and where the nodes of not only rail, air, highway come together, but how does this access, lead to their overall performance.
To build on that, this is Rich, the zoning issue, land use is a difficult issue to struggle with.
You have a chance at it in an urban area where you have a planning commission, MPO involved.
In Ohio, with a lot of farm land, outreach areas, you have township trustees, and I make no judgment against them, but their job is a farmer, in charge of zoning, planning in a township, not part of an MPO,
sometimes the decisions that get made about land use and zoning are made because of lack of information and expertise.
I guess I would challenge the D.O .T.s, MPOs and places like the University of Toledo to help educate, inform and work with all the people in charge of land use and zoning.
It's a critical aspect of it. I don't know whether others have struggled with that, but I see that here in the Midwest.
Thank you. We don't have anything else typed in, but have a few minutes, we can see if there are questions on the phone, Amy can you give instructions?
We will begin the Question and Answer session, if you would like to ask a question, press star 1. Withdraw your request, press star 2. One moment for the first question.
While waiting, I am going back to something the University of Toledo said, talk more with respect to --'s question about the freight village planning. It comes back to understanding freight and freight flows in your region,
to understand if you are in a good place to justify or be able to be successful in establishing a freight village. Part of that is to really understand what is the freight village's function within the local region economy?
So who are the primary drivers, primary consumers, are you in a production region, distribution region? How will that freight village function to support that underlying economy?
To be sure that the types of industries and types of businesses located in that freight village have a link and connection to the regional economy so it builds, adds continued value to that area. That's one of the, I think,
hardest things to look at. Say how would trade flows change if we put this freight village in place, and how could we use the freight village to not only create jobs, but attract more and different types of jobs to the region?
We have no questions from the phone lines.
Before we close out, let me check with the presenters, were there any questions sent directly to you I might have missed?
Nothing here for University of Toledo.
Nothing in Rhode Island.
I think, then, we will go ahead and close out today, since there are no more questions Before I close out I want to give brief mention to the peer-to-peer program, the slide on the screen now,
this program puts public sector freight professionals in touch with expert says in s in the field, the program is available to public entities, date DOTs and MPOs. To learn more, please visit the freight peer-to-peer website
or give a call, send an e-mail. If you are interested in serving and believe you have technical expertise to share, give a call, accepted an e-mail as well.
With that, I would like to thank all four presenters for a great seminar, great presentations and good questions. Thank you, everybody for attending, the recording will be available within the next few weeks.
The next seminar is August 20, on rising fuel prices and the effects of energy prices on global trade patterns. If you haven't done so already I encourage you to visit the talking website. We will close out for today, thank everybody,
and have a great rest of the day.
This concludes today's call, thank you for your participation.