Breakout Session Summary

Recap of Breakout Session Goals/Objectives

Identify/Begin development of workable approaches that can help assist States/MPOs with continuous effort to further integrate freight interests and considerations in the transportation planning process

– Examine current transportation planning process– Improve understanding of current transportation planning process– Assess ability of planning process to respond to freight issues– Identify opportunities for improvements that will enhance freight planning– Define changes necessary to make opportunities work

OUTCOME: Provide resource for addressing freight issues in TEA-21 Re-authorization process

Process Overview

6 Groups of 8-10 participants each Multiple perspectives represented in each group

– State, MPO, Federal, Private Sector– Planners/Engineers/Business/Administrators

Two Sessions Ensured Comprehensive Approach:– AM: Intense brainstorming in 11 areas of the Transportation Planning

Process Strengths and weaknesses of existing process were identified More than 200 Opportunities were identified and prioritized

– PM: Participants challenged to identify workable action steps for the top 12 opportunities

Active discussions in each group

Common Themes

Need to think in terms of “freight” and “passenger” transportation versus modes

Need to establish Freight-Specific Performance Measures Need to expand Public Involvement for Freight Issues Need to expand Freight Education/Awareness Need to improve Analytic Models/Tools and Data Access

Summary of Strengths and Weaknessesin Existing Planning Process

Goals and Objectives

Strengths:– Can help set national vision– Some similarities in goals/objectives (ex. Safety, maintenance, etc.)– Increasingly objectives must be tied to specific performance measures– Broad freight perspective/National recognition/flexibility good

Weaknesses:– “Freight” perspective not sufficiently addressed in process– Expectations for goals/objectives at national level are unclear (ie., relationship

of MPO/state planning and goals to national role in freight planning)– Emphasis on Passenger versus Freight in Goal Setting– Mode thinking—not holistic, “systems-based”– Too vague—Not specific enough generally to be meaningful– Global nature of freight difficult to deal with at local level

Organization

Strengths:– Significant freight champions among stakeholders– Intermodal Advisory Task Force good– Federal support for regional approach (MPOs)

Weaknesses:– Lack of centralized structure/ strategies in focusing freight planning – Regional view may not cross state line– New constituencies have trouble gaining entry to process– Wide variation in MPO and State DOT technical abilities– Organizations are ill prepared to deal with competing issues

(Trucking/rail)– Lack of coordination among MPOs and between Gov’t levels

Public Involvement

Strengths:– Process is well-established– Opportunities explicitly exist

Weaknesses:– Insufficient resources– Lack of participation by trucking/rail– Lack of understanding of role of freight leads to inability to ID proper

players.– Don’t educate public on freight benefits at present– Imbalance in representation at meetings (vocal NIMBYs)– Opportunities not sufficiently embraced by freight– Typically messy

Data

Strengths:– Data is available (commodity survey, REEBIE, etc.)

Weaknesses:– Collected but not effectively utilized– Lack of awareness of what’s available– Not timely– Stratified by mode/Not linked to economic development data– Lack of trust in data collection resulting in duplication of

effort/redundancy– Intermodal data not available

Technical Tools

Strengths:– Good forecasting tools for engineering/population data– Limits of existing tools are understood– Cost/Benefit models do exist

Weaknesses:– Validity/Credibility issues: Inconsistent levels of faith in tool outputs– Models are cumbersome– Data is flawed (lack of statistics)– Turnover in modeler skillsets high– Tools tend to be mode specific: Lack of integrated toolsets (intermodal

models) for integrated planning– Lack of freight forecasting tool– Lack of flexible/quick analysis tools

Identify Needs/Deficiencies

Strengths:– process is well-established– Good congestion management tools– Planning horizon for freight shorter than for passenger

Weaknesses:– Lack of resources to conduct freight needs analysis – Process sometimes too technical for decision-makers– Needs tend to focus on passenger versus freight– Corridor-specific needs identification critical but requires resources– Private sector not adequately consulted– Lack of consensus In dealing with private freight infrastructure in public

process– Freight issues hard to quantify

Develop/Evaluate Alternatives

Strengths:– Some MPOs are trying to think intermodally

Weaknesses:– Freight perspective not institutionalized—States/MPOs driven by

mode specific funding– Systems perspective lacking– “Passenger” and “Freight” perspectives missing

Develop Long Range Plans

Strengths:– Long-term Horizon good—Takes at least 15 years to get major

investments approved. Weaknesses:

– Too Long-Term– Financial constraints are limitation to vision– Don’t include private sector perspectives– Incompatible timeframes between private/public sector– Not enough “What-If” questions– Prioritization not done enough– Changing political landscape presents challenges

Develop TIPs

Strengths:– Private sector will participate here– Required to report on previous year– Programs that help locals find money– Flexibility in CMAQ funding

Weaknesses:– Some MPOs overprogram to detriment of program– Insufficient application of objective performance-based criteria– Spreading limited funds across too many programs

Summary of Opportunities to Improve Planning Process

Opportunities with External Influences

Goals/Objectives:– Expand goals discussion to private sector– Educate freight (shippers and carriers)

Organization:– Involve other USDOT agencies more actively in freight planning

(beyond FHWA/FTA)– Increase focus in MPO and State DOTs for acknowledging and

dealing with freight– Consider wide scope (ie corridors “trade routes”)– Improve regional coordination among State DOTs and MPOs

Public Involvement:– Planners/Officials should attend trade association meetings

Opportunities with External Influences (Cont.)

Data:– Create Freight Data Architecture

Establish consistent set of freight data available to all levels (local, state, Fed)– Develop best practices for using, analyzing and presenting what is relevant to

decision makers– USDOT should coordinate strategy for data/decision needs and obtaining data– Assure intermodal/freight perspective

Technical Tools:– Tools should cross state borders– Need experts to develop improved models for freight

Develop state of the art commodity flow models– Awareness of focus on trade versus mode—”Need vs. Means”– Link Models/Develop integrated tools

Financial Plan:– Develop plans/projects that co-mingle funds

Planning-Based Process Opportunities

Identify/Analyze Issues/Deficiencies (Current/Future):– Identify cross-modal issues– Identify benefits of public sector investment in private facilities– Implement regional approach/multi-jurisdictional approach to analysis– Integration of trucks, intermodal transportation to play a major role– Learn to manage private/public sector time criticalities

Develop/Evaluate Alternatives:– Prioritize Freight—Fund movement of people and commodities rather

than modes– Develop tool to get freight perspective into alternative mix– Improve evaluation tools for all modes

Planning-Based Process Opportunities (Cont.)

Prepare/Adopt Long Range Plan:– Create vision with no time limits – Implement more holistic approach to goals/objectives in pla

Adopt a systems-based approach

Prepare/Adopt TIP:– Develop separate programming process – Involve private sector more—Show benefits of public investments to

private interests Ask private sector what could bring them to the table—Develop

Public/Private Comprehensive plan– Benchmark MPOs that consider freight in the TIP

Next Steps

Develop summary of with recommendations from this workshop that you’ve provided.

Actions that require legislative action will be forwarded to Washington through USDOT.

Future workshops will continue this discussion to further develop more complex ideas.

THANK YOU!!!