GOODS MOVEMENT IN CALIFORNIA: A CALTRANS PERSPECTIVE.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
March 2012 Ports and Cities Conference Newcastle Dorte Ekelund, Executive Director Major Cities Unit Department of Infrastructure and Transport
Advertisements

PLANNING HORIZONS PLANNING HORIZONS March 12, 2002 GOODS MOVEMENT.
Public Workshop Welcome -to the -. What is the ?
Wade E. Kline, AICP Community Development Planner.
Public Listening Session Long-Range Transportation Plan for the State of Connecticut ( )
Infrastructure Planning and Funding MID-REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS MID-REGION METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION MARCH 19, 2015 NAIOP-NEW MEXICO CHAPTER.
Freight in the Southeast Conference Bob Romig State Transportation Development Administrator Florida Department of Transportation February 9, 2011 Florida’s.
1 GOODS MOVEMENT IN CALIFORNIA. 2 California is facing a significant transportation infrastructure shortfall. California is using innovative approaches.
Gabe Rousseau Federal Highway Administration Office of Human Environment.
CALTRANS’ TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT & OPERATIONS CTP 2040 PAC 1 Kris Kuhl Assistant Division Chief, Division of Traffic Operations 4/15/2014 CREATING.
I-95 Corridor Coalition December 14, 2001 I-95 Corridor Coalition Mid-Atlantic Rail Operations Study — An Integrated Strategy to Eliminate Choke Points.
Florida’s Future Transportation Corridors Florida’s Future Transportation Corridors Presented to: Florida Redevelopment Association Presented by: Bob Romig.
1 How to Succeed in Statewide and MPO Transportation Planning.
CALIFORNIA FREIGHT ISSUES: Senior Forum Palm Springs, CA October 29-31, 2007 Michele Fell-Casale Senior Transportation Planner Office of Goods Movement.
Operations / ITS Provisions in SAFETEA-LU What’s in There and What’s Not Jeff Lindley Operations / ITS Discipline Meeting August 16, 2005.
Designated by US DOT Publication of Draft PFN for Comments - Spring 2013 Initial Designation of the PFN – Fall 2013 National Freight Network Primary Freight.
California Freight Advisory Committee May 14, 2014.
The Planning Perspective Presented by Joel Eisenfeld – KFH Group.
Planning for One Transportation System – Marine Highways Kevin Schoeben Deputy Director Office of Planning and Programming Illinois Department of Transportation.
Transport Policy as an Enabling Framework for Green Growth in South Africa Ngwako Makaepea Department of Transport 18 May 2010.
I n t e g r a t I n g C S S Practitioner Module 3 Module 3: CSS and Livability In Area Wide Planning.
MISSION, GOALS & OBJECTIVES SOUTH FLORIDA REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (SFRTA) MISSION, GOALS & OBJECTIVES.
1 SAFETEA: Transportation System Management, Operations and ITS Jeffrey F. Paniati Associate Administrator, Office of Operations Federal Highway Administration.
U.S Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Federal Transit Administration MAP-21 Moving Ahead with Progress in the 21 st Century Linking.
Overview of NIPP 2013: Partnering for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience October 2013 DRAFT.
Creating a New Vision for Kentucky’s Youth Kentucky Youth Policy Assessment How can we Improve Services for Kentucky’s Youth? September 2005.
FY 2012 President’s Budget Released February 14, 2011.
Freight Bottleneck Study Update to the Intermodal, Freight, and Safety Subcommittee of the Regional Transportation Council September 12, 2002 North Central.
Mid Wales LTP Stakeholder Workshop 3 rd October Presentation by Ann Elias and Janice Hughes.
Freight Issues in the Report of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission Transportation for Tomorrow.
National Multimodal Freight Trends/Issues/Forecasts/ Policy Implications.
KEY PROVISIONS OF THE DRIVE* ACT H.R. 22, as passed by the Senate on July 30, 2015 *Developing a Reliable and Innovative Vision for the Economy Thomas.
Manage by Measure: Just Do It AASHTO SCOPM Annual Meeting October 23, 2009 Steve Simmons TxDOT Deputy Executive Director.
California’s Strategic Growth Plan Ken De Crescenzo Federal Liaison California Department of Transportation.
Freight Council Webinar February 21, 2006 Anthony T. Furst Director, FHWA Office of Freight Management and Operations The Framework for National Freight.
1 Context Sensitive Design CE 453 Highway Design Iowa State University Howard R. Green Company.
Statewide Strategies for Coordinating Regional Transportation and Land Use Planning Katie Benouar, Senior Transportation Planner Office of Regional and.
ITS Standards Program Strategic Plan Summary June 16, 2009 Blake Christie Principal Engineer, Noblis for Steve Sill Project Manager, ITS Standards Program.
Engaging State DOT’s Engaging State DOT’s 2008 ITS America State Chapters Council Annual Meeting and State Chapters Strengthening Workshop Bernie Arseneau,
Technology and the National Freight Action Agenda U.S. Department of Transportation Richard M. Biter Deputy Director US DOT, Office of Intermodalism November.
Projects of National and Regional Significance Program.
Freight Project Financing Challenges, Questions and Options presented by Michael P. Huerta Cambridge Systematics, Inc. April 30, 2001.
SAFETEA-LU Operations, ITS, and Freight Provisions Jeffrey F. Paniati Office of Operations Federal Highway Administration U.S. Department of Transportation.
SAFETEA-LU System Management and Operations Key Provisions Jeff Lindley Office of Operations Federal Highway Administration U.S. Department of Transportation.
Southern California Association of Governments Freight Transportation: Emerging Issues for Southern California Alan Bowser Goods Movement PlanningWorkshop.
Environmental Justice: Context Sensitive Planning Grant Program California Department of Transportation Division of Transportation Planning Office of Community.
1 Status of AC Input from Last Meeting. 2 Overview  Input received on Strategic Planning Elements (Mission, Vision, Guiding Principles) & the 7 Key Content.
Freight-21: A National Strategic Freight Mobility Program & Trust Fund Coalition for America’s Gateways and Trade Corridors.
PROJECT OVERVIEW FHWA Talking Freight Seminar December 15, 2004 Dilara Rodriguez Project Manager, CALTRANS National I-10 Freight Corridor Study.
The Kern Regional Transportation Plan A Vision and Guidebook for Kern County in 2025.
SAFETEA-LU System Management and Operations Provisions Jeff Lindley Director of the Office of Transportation Management Office of Operations Federal Highway.
2013 SCOWT WASHINGTON MEETING/ WASHINGTON, DC 20 JUNE2013 AASHTO Waterborne Freight Bottom Line Report Chris Smith Intermodal Policy and Program Manager.
Regional Mobility Plan I. Introduction This process for creating a regional mobility plan is designed for geographic areas with a small to medium sized.
Restructuring of the Finnish Infrastructure Administration Draft
Unit 2 DEVELOPMENT OF THE LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN (LRTP) LCTCC Educational Program.
DRAFT INNER MELBOURNE ACTION PLAN Presented by Elissa McElroy IMAP Executive Officer January 2016.
GOODS MOVEMENT COLLABORATIVE AND GOODS MOVEMENT PLAN 1 Goods Movement Collaborative and Goods Movement Plan Final Plan Alameda County Transportation Commission.
ADVANCED TRANSPORTATION AND CONGESTION MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGIES DEPLOYMENT (ATCMTD) PROGRAM 1 Bob Arnold, Director Office of Transportation Management,
Presented by Maryland Department of Transportation Office of Planning and Capital Programming Funding Prioritization Process Chapter 725 January 2016.
Planning Commission Ian Macek May 26, 2016 Freight Master Plan.
1.  Transportation Vision  Near-term Recommendations  Ongoing Work / Next Steps 2.
Oregon State Rail Plan Update
Chelan County Transportation Element Update
FAST Act Overview $305 billion 5 year bill – FY ‘16 – FY ’20
Office of Transportation Planning Modal Planning Update
SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION & ECONOMIC EXPANSION
Draft Transportation Element September 6, 2017
Oregon Transportation Plan
Transportation Task Force Mission and Vision
MODULE 11: Creating a TSMO Program Plan
Presentation transcript:

GOODS MOVEMENT IN CALIFORNIA: A CALTRANS PERSPECTIVE

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ACADEMY January 2006 RICHARD NORDAHL CHIEF OFFICE OF GOODS MOVEMENT DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

OVERVIEW Federal and State Legislative Requirements/Directions Governor’s Strategic Growth Plan GMAP – GM Outside the Box Planner Roles and Partnerships

FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, in its preamble, calls upon the States to, “…develop a National Intermodal Transportation System that serves the mobility needs of people and freight.” Federally mandated state transportation planning and funding statutes (Title 23, United States Code, Section 135) requires the states to:

FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS Increase the accessibility and mobility options available to people and freight; Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between modes throughout the state, for people and freight; and Provide transportation users and providers, such as freight shippers and carriers, reasonable opportunity to provide input regarding state plans and funding programs.

DRAFT NATIONAL FREIGHT POLICY Newest effort is being led by the USDOT Office of the Secretary. It is just now being shared as a discussion draft, and will be discussed actively at the Transportation Research Board Meeting in January. Vision: The United States domestic freight transportation system will perform efficiently and reliably, supporting the availability of goods and the nation’s economic growth without jeopardizing environmental health. Overarching Strategies – Communicate benefits and challenges, and improve system performance through collaborative actions.

STATE LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS The “…goal of the State is to provide adequate, safe, and efficient transportation facilities and services for the movement of people and goods at a reasonable cost.” (Government Code 14000c) “A comprehensive multimodal transportation planning process should be established which involves all levels of government and the private sector in a cooperative process to develop coordinated transportation plans.” (GC 14000d)

STATE LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS “The powers and duties of the Department shall include coordinating and assisting, upon request of various public and private transportation entities, in strengthening their development and operation of a balanced, integrated, mass transportation, highway, aviation, maritime, railroad, and other transportation facilities and services in support of statewide and regional goals.” (GC 14030b).

GOVERNOR’S STRATEGIC GROWTH PLAN This is an overall $107 billion proposal for transportation, including $12 billion in transportation bonds. Significantly, 1/3 ($4 billion) of the bond proceeds is for trade infrastructure and impact mitigation. Part of the question then becomes what other percentage of available funds will be committed to goods movement. It builds significantly off the Goods Movement Action Plan.

Goods Movement Action Plan – Outside the Box As fractured of a process as it is, the GMAP is an attempt to do a systematic review of the goods movement needs and impacts of the State- transportation, environmental, technology, economic, financial, public safety & security. This is not just a highway exercise. For example, rail issues, needs, and improvements are being explicitly considered. There is an explicit recognition that there are significant, substantial & adverse environmental, community, and public health impacts of goods movement that must be addressed.

Goods Movement Action Plan – Outside the Box There is growing understanding that there must be simultaneous and continuous investments in infrastructure improvements and environmental mitigation (work in progress). The response must be joint. It must build on a partnership of all parties. It requires public and private investments and actions. It must be based on faith, equity, and trust. It must bring about a demonstrateable change in system performance and quality of life.

GM ROLE CATEGORIES Partnerships Planning (and Policy) Programming (Funding) Project Development Operations/Maintenance Communication/Education Performance Measurement Research

PARTNERSHIPS Principle: Build partnerships and understandings with the public and private sector, including other infrastructure providers, carriers, and shippers and receivers on issues and solutions. Principle: All interactions are to proceed based on collaborative, business-to-business relationships. Such relationships are to be based on accountability, of the State to operate efficiently, keep its promises, and seek innovative solutions to new and old problems.

PARTNERSHIPS Legislative – Congressional Delegation, State Legislators Federal Government – U.S. DOT (FHWA, FTA, FRA, Maritime Administration), U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security State Agencies – California Transportation Commission, Business, Transportation & Housing Agency (BTH), Environmental Protection Agency/Air Resources Board, California Highway Patrol

PARTNERSHIPS Regional and Local Governments – Metropolitan Planning Organizations (e.g., SCAG), County Transportation Commissions (e.g., LACMTA, SANBAG), local cities, counties and planning agencies Private Industry – Carriers (shipping lines, railroads, trucking firms), terminal operators, shippers, receivers, interest groups General public – Includes environmental, community based organizations and advocacy groups and individual citizens.

PLANNING Principle: Build the program of action based on overall policy, desired outcomes, system analysis, project evaluation and selection, and performance measurement. Principle: The planning approach must be flexible, that is a balancing of federal, state, regional and local objectives and individual needs. No one size fits all. Planning must also be done in a cooperative, inclusive and open fashion, involving all interested freight interests, public and private. It must be continuing, and it must be comprehensive.

DISTRICT PLANNING PROGRAM ELEMENTS Develop/enhance goods movement stakeholder partnerships and dialogues – infrastructure providers, users, and impacted communities. Develop goods movement system studies/analyses, including the identification of: Goods movement transportation network, including major generators/receivers; Performance of that network (i.e., including design, operational, safety, maintenance, access and capacity deficiencies and other issues);

DISTRICT PLANNING PROGRAM ELEMENTS Factors/variables that are driving system performance changes (e.g, international trade growth, truck/rail industry changes, goods movement land-use development); System deficiencies; and Improvement alternatives, including project evaluation and selection. Develop goods movement improvement project lists, priorities, and PIDS.

DISTRICT PLANNING PROGRAM ELEMENTS Advocate study and project programming in OWPs, RTPs, RTIPs/FTIPs, the ITIP, and the SHOPP. Work with local planning agencies to consider goods movement requirements. Monitor land-use and system changes that may impact system performance. Expand goods movement data resources, information and expertise.

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT Principle: To determine how the system is performing, to guide decision-makers and analysts in recommending appropriate action. Performance outcomes and measures are being identified by BTH and the Department under the Transportation System Performance Measures project. Nine performance outcome/measure areas have been identified. They are Mobility/Reliability/ Accessibility; Productivity; System Preservation; Safety; Environmental Quality; Coordinated Transportation and Land Use; Economic Development; Return On Investment; and Equity.

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT Eight freight performance measures have been identified. They are: Travel time – interregional; Travel time – intraregional; Travel time reliability – Percent on-time performance; Travel time reliability – Variance in travel times, interregional and intraregional trips; Modal facilities inventory; Truck volumes by axle/percent of corridor capacity; Total emissions and rates (by ton-mile) – statewide, regional air basin; and Percent increase in goods movement over baseline.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS Greater recognition of goods movement planning as separate, distinct, planning subject and discipline. Expanded multimodal policy, planning and funding commitment focus. More creative funding partnerships and arrangements.

CONCLUSIONS A legislative and policy foundation exists for goods movement planning. A comprehensive planning effort is vital to responding to goods movement issues. Partnerships, both informational and financial, will become even more important keys to our success in resolving the problems before us. Our performance will be measured by how well we set the context and tell our story, and how well the system actually performs.