|
Regional Freight Mobility Conference Proceedings
Click HERE>/A> for graphic. For information regarding the Regional Freight Mobility Conference, contact: Peter Beaulieu, Freight Mobility Program Manager Puget Sound Regional Council 1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500 - Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 464-7537 - FAX (206) 587-4825 For additional copies of these proceedings, contact: Information Center Puget Sound Regional Council 1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500 - Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 464-7532 - FAX (206) 587-4825 Puget Sound Regional Council PSRC Foreword On September 13, 1994,The Puget Sound Regional Council and its public/private Regional Freight Mobility Roundtable sponsored a conference addressing regional freight mobility in the central Puget Sound regional gateway. The Regional Council is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the four-county central Puget Sound region, including four counties and over fifty cities and towns' the gateway port cities of Seattle and Tacoma among them. Also included on the MPO Executive Board are the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and the Washington Transportation Commission (among the Conference panelists). Conference co-sponsors were the WSDOT, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Federal Maritime Administration. In 1991 new federal transportation legislation (the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, ISTEA, of 1991) dramatically reshaped the government support system for transportation infrastructure. Money would no longer flow solely to highways through state transportation agencies. After ISTEA, overall transportation planning and federal funding is to be cleared through MPOs like the Puget Sound Regional Council. That means rapid transit, commuter rail, and passenger bus systems are to be considered along with freight transportation. Put another way, the needs of commerce are examined alongside a range of other mobility programs. Both forum and format have been changed. Private parties and public agencies, both, are encouraged by this emerging partnership in mutual understanding and targeted actions in the central Puget Sound region. We should note, however, that ISTEA itself is simply catching up with broader events. In these proceedings, reference is made to a proposed National Transportation System (NTS), yet to be defined, but broader than the National Highway System focus dating back to passage of the Highway Act of 1956. Second, during the past 15 years, we have seen national deregulation of the trucking industry (1978), the airlines (1978), the railroads (1980) and shipping (1985). And third, while ISTEA moves toward federal funding flexibility, the era of ample subsidies is now behind us even as mobility demands increase. Federal involvement is supplying the framework, but is only a piece of a larger package. We in the Puget Sound region have taken a step toward becoming more broadly acquainted and toward working together. We are asking ourselves what freight mobility means to us in this context, and in terms of practical actions. These are important questions to our families and businesses, our neighborhoods and region, and our state and nation. These proceedings report part of a growing and ongoing regional partnership-the Regional Freight Mobility Conference. The federal co-sponsors have asked to make these regional proceedings widely available to MPOs and state agencies in other parts of the country. We are happy to do this. To assist this wide audience, we have added several notes in the text (in italics) to explain local references not likely to be understood outside of the region or Washington State. We are pleased with this step in what we intend as an ongoing partnership. In making these proceedings available to others, we hope to add to a growing list of local and regional initiatives from which we have also learned and taken encouragement. Dan O'Neal President, Tolan-O'Neal Transportation Logistics Chair, Regional Freight Mobility Roundtable 1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500 - Seattle, Washington 98104-1035 (206) 464-7090 - FAX 587-4825 Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Table of Contents Executive Summary 2 Introductory Remarks 4 Session I - Private Sector "Town Meeting 5 Session II - National Perspectives 15 Session n III - Strategies for our Pacific Rim Region 20 Session IV - Synthesis 25 Closing Remarks 29 Appendix 31 Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Executive Summary The Roundtable The Regional Freight Mobility Roundtable consists largely of shippers, carriers and third parties active within the central Puget Sound region. This includes shipping lines, railroads, truckers, and the Ports of Seattle,Tacoma and Everett which are the continental entry points for many large eastern markets. It also includes shippers and receivers (the buyers of transportation services) such as Boeing, Darigold and Safeway. The Roundtable was convened under the auspices of the Seattle Economic Development Council, working with similar councils in adjacent counties (and with Harvey Consultants, Inc.). It meets on a bimonthly basis to focus on issues and possible actions, in support of the new Regional Council freight mobility program. The Conference was an opportunity to test the resulting Action Package matrix with an enlarged roundtable. The matrix identifies four kinds of actions to address Roundtable identified issues in the region: (a) institutional, (b) operational., (c) infrastructure and, as part of this, (d) financing. The matrix serves in part to provide input for the multimodal Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) required under the federal Intermodal Surface transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991. In the Puget Sound region, the MTP (required of all MPOS) is linked under state planning legislation to a regional growth management strategy termed VISION 2020 and adopted in 1990. Coordinated local comprehensive plans are required under the state Growth Management Act (1990-1991). The Conference Format The nearly 160 registered Conference participants represented a diversity of transportation carriers, shippers, third party interests, and public sector policy makers and planners. Many of these also attended the national American Public Ports Association cooperatively scheduled to meet the previous day in Seattle. (This served as an outreach session for the USDOT for the possible National Transportation System (NTS)). Leading federal attendees presented symposium ideas at the Regional Freight Mobility Conference. The Conference program consisted of four plenary sessions comprised of a town meeting, followed by three panel presentations, with questions and answers among the panelists and attendees: - A regional town meeting The opening session was led by leaders from the private sector. (The following two sessions were introduced by public sector panelists.) Panelists from the freight industry were Burlington Northern Railroad, and United Parcel Service. Also on the panel, representing the port districts, was the Port of Seattle. - The federal context. Presentation on the National Transportation System were given as a setting for regional freight mobility efforts: by the WSDOT, the Maritime Administration, and the American Association of Port Authorities. (While the Conference focused on regional concerns, the opportunity was taken to consider both local and regional implications.) - State and regional cooperation. The State of Washington adopted freight mobility policies in December 1993, and is preparing a multimodal transportation plan for a range of facilities within the state. Panelists included a policy and staff member from the Regional Council and two members from the Washington Transportation Commission. - Synthesis. Interactive discussions among panelists and all participants followed each of the three earlier Conference sessions. The final session was an Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings opportunity for the public and private members to revisit earlier points and, together, to offer new questions and insights. The Roundtable Message The sessions lead to consideration by the enlarged group of participants, of a regional Action Package proposed by the Roundtable. The three principle messages of the Action Package are: - A collaborative and action-oriented focus. People from different public agencies and the private sector must get better acquainted. This 'technique' should be used at the beginning of problem definition and planning, rather than only later in strategy implementation. - Systemic and project level actions. The approach should work directly with shared performance expectations and then candid and courteous pinpointing of the issues, and the development of practical solutions. The issues appear to fall into four categories: institutional, operations, infrastructure (and as part of this, financing. - Information. While action oriented, the partnership also should be well informed. The context for identifying and understanding issues requires creative approaches to data assembly (e.g., relevant maps and numbers) and interpretation. The "relational data base", transferable to other regions, includes: the awaited national Commodities Flow Survey (1995), the national railroad waybill sample, state surveys and roadway tonnage classification data, a regional survey administered by the Roundtable, data derived from the County Business Patterns (in combination with Dun and Bradstreet locators), and forecasts of containerized cargo movements completed by the port districts within the region. The Regional Council is working with its consultant to fit these data sources to its computerized transportation modeling capability, and a recently added geographic information system. To simplify, the point is made in the Conference that the simple message of ISTEA is less to "rearrange the boxes" than it is to learn to "color outside of the lines". The Action Package is an effort to think creatively and in practical terms, and then to act effectively on specific regional freight mobility solutions. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Introductory Remarks: Secretary Sid Morrison, Washington State Department of Transportation Secretary Morrison introduced the conference as an opportunity for individuals from the private enterprises directly responsible for delivering products to meet fact-to-face with policy makers. He stressed that all of us must do a better job for freight mobility. The economic vitality of our Pacific Rim state is directly tied to movement of goods. The National Highway System (NHS) is now under consideration by Congress. But what is even more important is the multimodal National Transportation System (NTS) and its relationship to freight. Federal policy makers will be looking to Roundtables around the country for input to this process. The theme of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) is multimodal. Its weakness is where the modes come together. There is interest in moving to modes other than highway. We need collaboration and interest in partnerships among varied transportation players. Interest by the business community is most welcome. It is WSDOT's mission that Washington shall be second to none in the mobility of its people and products. This goal requires some reorganization. Formerly, WSDOT concentrated its attention on state-owned Facilities such as ferries and bridges. It has added to that, facilities for which the state has an "interest", such as those related to port access. Secretary Morrison outlined the day's proceedings as starting with a town meeting (Session 1), this to be followed by comments from federal, state and regional officials (Sessions II and III), with a final synthesis session (Session IV) bringing together the insights drawn from these private and (then) public panels. (In the following sessions, Sid Morrison and Dan O'Neal shared moderator responsibilities for this informal and interactive Conference.) Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Session I - Private Sector "Town Meeting" Moderator.- Dan O'Neal Tolan-O'Neal Transportation and Logistics; Chair, Freight Mobility Roundtable Dan O'Neal (Chair of the Interstate Commerce Commission during deregulation of the trucking industry in 1978) commented that prior to ISTEA there were narrowly defined funding sources. Each mode (e.g., transit, auto) had its own source of federal money, such as the Federal Highway Act (1956) for roads. Now federal funds are potentially more flexible, and there is no single source. In addition, freight and passenger modes of travel are being required to respond to community plans required under state law (the State Growth Management Act, 1990-1). In this region the responsibility for programming many types of transportation improvements falls to the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). As a result of the changes brought by ISTEA: - We in the freight industry will have to become closer to the community and understand more about planning, and - The reciprocal side to all of this is that elected officials will need to recognize the importance of the movement of goods and commodities and the role that freight plays in developing and maintaining a community. Part of what the PSRC has done is to collect data in order to better understand freight and goods movement in this community. It has also established a Roundtable of private sector firms which has generated very specific ideas (the "action packages referred to later in the Conference) for improvements for the flow of goods in and through this region. Panelist, Keith Christian, Acting Managing Director for the Marine Division, Port of Seattle Although ports are public agencies,they behave much like private organizations. They have large customers which must be served in a competitive environment, coast-to-coast or regionwide. A port has investments in expensive infrastructure lasting many decades and is served by the transportation network around it. Customers look for the best transportation system to serve them. The Ports of Seattle and Tacoma are a national asset. Together they rank second nationally in terms of the volume of container cargo. With a combined annual volume of two million TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent units); together they rank tenth in the world. Seventy five percent of all inbound cargo is destined for inland points. Ports are interested in the topic of freight mobility because the operation of the rail and highway transportation system supports and protects Port investments. The new federal legislation (ISTEA) places freight on a par with passenger transportation. Joint projects with other jurisdictions and organizations are being undertaken. For example, the Port of Seattle and American Presidential Lines (APL) are jointly funding an overpass of railroad tracks leading to container terminal planned for a new part of the Seattle waterfront. On-dock rail yards (for direct ship/rail transfer) will reduce the number of drayage trucks otherwise on the roads. The goal is the seamless movement of goods. The region and state should give more priority to these types of projects. ISTEA also has fostered more planning coordination among ports in the region. ISTEA also gave voice to the ports through its commissioners sitting on PSRC's Executive Board and its (advisory) Transportation Policy Boards. Ports, acting through the Washington Public Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Ports Association, and WSDOT regularly conduct studies of transportation needs every five years. A model source of detailed information is their 1991 Washington Ports and Transportation System Study. While recognizing its greater role in planning, the Port of Seattle sees specific constraints to improving freight mobility: * Funding: While other modes have guaranteed and designated funding sources under ISTEA, there are no similar arrangements for freight mobility. The absence of dedicated funds, and regional project scoring criteria heavily biased against freight projects, are barriers to improvements. * Physical and Institutional Constraints: Regional project ranking criteria, used in allocating federal funds, are weak with regard to freight needs. The Port is making large capital investments. One is a $250 million expansion for APL (to be paid back by APL over time). This is a large risk because the Port is depending g on the surface transportation system over a long period of time. Productivity gains of infrastructure investments are beginning to level out. The major remaining obstacles to intermodal efficiency arc landside access barriers and coordination inefficiencies. These include congestion on access routes between port terminals and near dock intermodal yards, congestion on connections to the interstate highway system, and the coordination of landside and seaside operations (e.g.hours of operation), particularly as these affect rail. * Conflicting statutes: One institutional constraint in ISTEA is that it discourages funding of road projects which would expand the capacity for single occupant vehicles (SOVs). While this policy may be effective for working toward air quality and energy conservation goals, increasing congestion levels without increases in capacity will result in trouble for road freight mobility. Truckers must use SOV lanes. They do not have alternatives such as high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. Higher transport costs, longer transit times, and lower reliability jeopardize just-in-time delivery methods. Suggested solutions to enhance truck mobility: - Designate exclusive facilities for trucks, such as access ramps, freight only vehicles lanes on regional highways, and local truck access routes. - Provide FOV (freight only vehicle) lanes, and truck access to existing HOV lanes during off-peak periods. - Build rail grade separations to increase truck mobility and train operating speeds in congested corridors such as in the area south of the Kingdom (a domed stadium located in an industrial area south of the Seattle business area, and the intersection of Interstates 5 and 90, and the Seattle station for AMTRAK). Rail access issues and constraints include: - On-dock rail yards elevate the significance of rail freight mobility to one of national economic significance. Critical line segments should be included in the National Transportation System for preservation and for expansion. - Expansion of marine-rail operations and on-dock facilities require new and improved connections with mainlines. Double track access to the new part of the Seattle harbor is needed. More rail traffic on at-grade arterials brings conflict with city traffic. - North-south and east-west mainline capacity is directly tied to the Port's future ability to handle greater volumes. One option is to reopen Stampede Pass (a BN east-west rail line closed in 1983, following market adjustments ushered in by rail deregulation under the Staggers Act of 1980). There is concern over commuter and passenger rail expansion at the cost of reduced rail freight capacity. Seamless movements require better coordination and communication between sea lines and rail systems. Ports need to work to make that better Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings In conclusion, ports have a number of concerns over truck and rail access to their terminals. These issues should be considered in developing the National Transportation System, the Statewide Multimodal and the Metropolitan Transportation Plans. These plans should outline a simple process for adding or revising the linkages between port facilities and the rail and regional high-way system. Plans should be flexible enough to respond to the Port's physical expansion, to institutional changes, and to technological innovation. The planning process should be a flexible system. Panelist, Dave Hatzenbuhler, Assistant Vice President, Corporate Development, Burlington Northern (BN) The American rail freight structure is a complex network of large and small independent private companies. It is national in scope and an integral part of the North American transportation network; a part of the logistics pipeline. Over the past 15 years, the industry has seen a rationalization. Short lines or small operations have combined with the larger ones or, in some cases, ceased operations. Dave developed four overall points: Private companies: As private companies, railroads are responsible for their own expensive capital investments. Class I railroads in 1993 generated $29 billion in revenue and reinvested $4.5 billion (the Class I railroads operating in the region are BN and Union Pacific). Assets owned by the American rail system total in excess of $60 billion. Companies operate 124,000 miles of rail network in the United States and employs 192,000 people. This network is divided into sectored private ownerships. To maintain this system, $2.8 billion in 1993 went for maintenance and improvement of the railbed. Companies invested another $1.4 billion in locomotives and rail cars. American railroads are a critical element of the international trade network. They provide for the efficient movement of coal and grain as well as for containers in double-stack rail cars. In 1993 the BN generated $530 million in revenue from coal and $140 million from grain. A market item: The railroad structure is an extensive complex arrangement of connections, interchanges and partnerships that provide national shipping opportunities. Through their relationships railroads can link virtually any routing. There has been a fundamental change in the industry during the last 15 years resulting from deregulation under the Staggers Act (1980). Railroads have become market driven and sensitive to customer needs. It has not been easy to become efficient. Being market sensitive and operating efficiently have brought rationalization. We have focused on corridors and growth while shedding track mileage. A lot a track is no longer in operation. Railroads could not afford to operate light density low margin branch lines. In some cases, short line operations began to serve specific customers. Efficiency: Railroads have been able now to focus capital in more efficient and more profitable lines important to the national transportation network. This has created an opportunity to grow. By January 1994, American railroads began to face capacity issues. Not just for track, but in other components: equipment (locomotives and rail cars) and qualified labor. Rationalization resulted in train crew reductions and many employees leaving the industry. Pinch points: Critical pinch points create significant problems to efficiencies. Most pinch points are in urban areas, at port-rail interlinks or getting through urban areas. As an old industry (similar to the ports), the railroads' infrastructure and facilities were located and built long ago for an older technology and before congested urban development and urban encroachment. But equipment and the urban environment have evolved. Railroad cars are now segmented units, over 300 feet long, carrying double stacked containers from all over the world. Road crossings were originally built at either end of rail yards. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Today urban development surrounds them and there is friction between the public and railroad operations concerning the volume of traffic at grade crossings as well as noise. Railroads do not have the money or political ability to correct these problems. It is helpful to visualize the example of a pipeline or hose to describe the rail-port connection. The fire hose analogy shows a four inch fire hose coming in from the inland rail network, a four inch fire hose coming in from ocean going vessels and a one inch garden hose connects the two through the urban area and the ports. Only so much can be put through the smaller hose. How do you expand that small hose? The social, environmental, and ecological problems associated with dealing with grade separations in urban corridors, plus the large number of communities and interest group that are involved, puts the issue beyond the point where railroads can handle it alone. The costs are too great. Private investment issues: Railroads recognize problems caused by rail operations to urban communities, but operations are the business they are in, 24 hour a day and 365 days a year. The railroads view the inland network as their responsibility and have invested in it heavily. They can be the best judge of where capital investment needs to go. The Pacific Northwest is an anchor to the Burlington Northern (BN) system, but this is a 22,000 mile system and BN mdt put all its capital investment here. These are difficult decisions for prioritization. For example, the two heaviest gross ton miles in the world are located in Nebraska. How are we to deal with the urban conflict issues? Pacific Northwest ports are essential for access to international trade. The costs of improvement are prohibitive to the railroads alone. There is an important role for private/public partnerships, especially for addressing urban pinch point issues. The PSRC and similar groups in Washington offer the best opportunity for facilitating all of the voting agendas, and dealing with the significant issues of growth, impacts of mass transit, ability for efficiently moving freight by rail, and pulling together other agendas to come to a final resolution of what the future will look like. It can pull diverse groups together. The National Transportation System (NTS) offers an opportunity to facilitate growth and to foster better relations with communities. The caution that the rail industry has to ISTEA or other funding mechanisms is that railroads are leery that any direct funding to them might begin the process of (federal) re-regulation. The industry is leery of the conditions that may be attached to funding. It wishes to remain private and responsible for its business. But this caution does not preclude finding ways with public or quasi public organizations to address issues of capacity, efficiency and growth opportunities. We are seeking a win-win approach. Dan O'Neal, Moderator, concluded that many transportation problems are local in urban areas but have large national impacts. Panelist, Bill Knox, Public Affairs Manager, United Parcel Service United Parcel Service (UPS) is the largest transportation network in the world. It is an intermodal company employing 313,000 persons worldwide to deliver 12 million packages a day serving 185 countries. Freight needs must be identified early in the planning process. UPS concern over ISTEA has been that lots of planning is being done for the freight industry by planners who do not have any direct experience in the freight industry. As a customer of transportation services, UPS is working with planners to protect what they have developed over the years by reacting to infrastructure needs. In many cases, UPS has been unaware of the problems of which planners speak. UPS moves 2,500 trailers a day by rail. Any package traveling in excess of 500 miles on the ground is going by rail. Overnight air service operates the largest fleet of freight dedicated aircraft in the nation. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings UPS's concerns deal with urban delivery and land use problems. Downtown high-rises are looked at as a vertical city. We are concerned that there may be only one loading dock for that city, and an inadequate one. Curbside management or lack of it is important. Congestion is another problem. System wide, if each driver is delayed for five minutes a day, it costs UPS a total of $40 million/year. Delay is a large problem for UPS. Freight mobility in ISTEA affords us an opportunity to discuss a number of transportation directions and needs. ISTEA provides a new vision. Freight movers, transit operators, local and state planners, and shippers are a few of the interest groups and stakeholders included in ISTEA. Coupled with Clean Air Act Amendments, we are beginning to approach a new way of transportation planning that recognizes that the well being of our country is linked to our ability to move people and freight. Our efficient, innovative, and low cost transportation systems enable our country's companies to compete in the global marketplace. We must continue to pursue the promise of increased efficiency, coordination in planning, selection of projects, and maximizing existing capacity with a sense of reality. Barriers remain to the realization of the promise of ISTEA. Progress in eliminating barriers varies from state to state. The delivery of raw materials and components to manufacturing locations for just-in-time production, moving products to warehouses and shipping finished goods to their markets quickly and efficiently, are powerful economic processes worthy of expansion and enhance- ment. Suggestions for doing this: - Identify freight problems in the planning process and treat them with the importance of passenger movement. - Make investments to maintain the existing infrastructure. - Build on existing intermodal partnerships enabling use of the transportation system to its fullest potential. - Build the infrastructure to support the growing needs of telecommunications and logistics management. - Establish performance measures and criteria for all aspects of the transportation network (public transit as well as private commute trip reduction) and explore all opportunities for efficiency gains now that regulations have been lifted. - Explore private alternatives (e.g., jitney service) to complement existing public transit operations. - Address congestion not only for its high cost to business but for air quality and other environmental concerns. Traffic demand management (TDM) products have resulted in only very marginal improvements to air quality. These programs must carry performance criteria and targets that must be met, or the regulation should be subject to automatic sunsetting. - Perhaps, work stoppages that affect transit operations should be considered as an equity violation under ISTEA, as these also affect the related air quality standards behind the ISTEA legislation. - Subject all projects receiving federal dollars to performance goals and measures regardless of mode. So many of these projects are not living up to the potential for improvement. Explore reasons for failure. ISTEA holds nothing sacred or beyond review. - Planning can actually be an obstacle to participation. Provide for greater stakeholder input into the decision making process. The planning process can be a hurdle that prevents many people from being involved. Difficult rules, lengthy studies, and slow decision making are some of the culprits. The ultimate success of transportation systems management depends on partnerships between government and industry, among the various transportation providers, among nations, and the stakeholders. We must seek transportation system solutions, not specific mode based Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings solutions. Intermodal systems management can overcome the obstacles to the efficient movement of people and freight. We must provide for the movement into, through, and within regions and improve the transfer between modes. Intermodalism is the door to the future, and planning partnerships will be the key. Questions and Comments by Panelists and Conference Participants 1. Comment: There are six management systems required under ISTEA, including Congestion Management Systems (CMS). The - speaker requests the participation of panel members on CMS programs which address issues such as linking air quality and land use. 2. Question: Are there any studies of NAFTA (North Atlantic Free Trade Alliance) impact on the Puget Sound Region? Bill Knox. The Center for the New West and the Volpe Institute have done some studies of the overall impact of NAFTA on transportation. Paul Chilcote (Port of Tacoma): A study in Portland (Oregon) found positive benefits on the economy. The amount of growth in local companies was viewed as very bullish. Connections to the Puget Sound region are unclear. Sid Morrison: WSDOT is involved with the neighboring states of California and Oregon and is looking for involvement from British Columbia (B.C.) for looking at the 1-5 corridor. Other north-south corridors in the country are teaming up to look at the through passage of goods. 3. Question: Has just-in-time inventory turned our transportation system into the warehouses of the 1990's? (Sid Morrison) Dave Hatzenbuhler: Yes and no. A lot more inventory is in-transit in transportation vehicles. But customers demand a schedule be associated with the delivery of that product. In the former sense of warehousing, freight is not sitting around for a week or two or three. There is more planning and fulfillment of requirements. Bill Knox: Yes with time-sensitive materials. Flooring costs are too high. Efficiency calls for minimizing flooring and warehousing. For small businesses especially, UPS is the pipeline for their product. The question for planners is that as we build new infrastructure, what provisions are being made for logistics management? Better information will allow for reductions in travel by the more efficient use of information. Benefits of logistics management include reduced vehicle miles traveled (VMTs), improved air quality, and quicker delivery. Keith Christian: Shippers and shipping lines want to move boxes through the ports as quickly as possible. The Port is not acting as a warehouse. The amount of time from when an import box arrives at the port to when it leaves the port has been reduced. More goods are moving though facilities than ever before. A counter example is a large toy manufacturer using more warehousing in order to match up production and delivery schedules throughout the year. Dan O'Neal: While there is demand to keep goods moving, many warehouses serve as short term collection points for all kinds of commodities that arc shipped long distances in volume and then distributed locally or regionally. Shippers look for the cheapest form of transportation, and if that involves a warehouse, then it will be used. The movement of goods is not becoming the warehouse for all industries. Yet, automobile manufacturers now use railroads as part of the assembly line. The decision is dependent on the industry and on the costs. 4. Question: (a) Is taxation a barrier and is it inequitable? (b) What do you think of forming a Puget Sound Port Authority to end competition among local ports? (c) What is your opinion concerning the Regional Transportation Authorities Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings (RTA's) upcoming decision on three alternatives for a high capacity transit system? (The RTA options for regional high capacity transit differ on the mix, location, timing and costs of service alternatives, a funding referendum is planned for early 1995.) Bill Knox: Taxes are not a barrier to conducting business, but do pose an equity issue. just between Oregon and Washington there are very different taxation systems for the trucking industry. In general, UPS feels that fees should be used for the purpose of their collection, highway use. It supports efforts to reduce congestion with tax dollars. There is no taxing uniformity across the country. It is a way and cost of doing business. Taxes are not a barrier to movement, rather they pose an equity issue. Keith Christian: There are many opinions on the issue of a unified Seattle -Tacoma port authority. The negative position is that the region needs the level of competition between the ports to provide the facilities and services that will attract or keep the business in this region. Portland and British Columbia are getting more into the container business, but this region is better located than Portland and has better rail service than B.C. The other side is that as one economic entity, a unified port, could compete successfully for container business. It could be more financially self-supporting and grow a cargo base above current levels. As a personal opinion, a unified port could compete successfully in container business and do a better job of expansion investment. It could improve dealings with large customers and expand a customer base. Puget Sound has the advantages of rail service and ocean access over its competition. A unified port could charge more than in the current competitive situation. Dave Hatzenbuhler: There are real opportunities, either as a unitary system or a partnership of some sort. This region is viewed as a single load center, like Los Angeles and Long Beach. Buyers of port services like having the two ports in competition. Concerning the RTA and passenger rail service, the Burlington Northern has been a supporter of mass transit proposals for the Seattle-Tacoma area, but has significant issues and concerns over the implementation of passenger rail service on BN track or that of adjoining Union Pacific. I talked about the pinch points in the urban area. Adding 50 commuter trains a day without significantly addressing the capacity requirements of those trains will have a detrimental effect on moving freight effectively into and out of the Seattle-Tacoma area unless an investment program accompanies the institution of commuter service. The density of operations would reduce the hours per day that freight can be moved. Even at Chicago, where we have four parallel tracks, the commuter service reduces freight activity from 24 hours a day, to 19 hours. We must anticipate impacts in advance in order to accommodate freight operations. Can it be done? Yes, but it has to be done right. It can be done if improvements are made. UP and BN are competing for the passenger service but the final arrangement has yet to be resolved. Bill Knox: UPS uses primarily surface streets. It is concerned over the traffic impact and truck delays caused by increased rail traffic on at-grade crossings. Transit use often decreases, at least as a share of total travel. For RTA improvements to have an impact, aggressive market incentives are needed to reduce SOVs (single occupancy vehicles). Keith Christian: Freight mobility capacity needs to increase. Dan O'Neal: To summarize, anything that relieves congestion is something freight will favor. There need to be assurances that there will not be increased conflicts between truck and rail movements and that these considerations be part of the RTA program. 5. Question: What is the importance of Stampede Pass to the region and to moving freight out of the region? (Sid Morrison) Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Dave Hatzenbuhler: BN working with WSDOT is looking at the viability of opening Stampede Pass. (Stampede Pass is an east-west route over the Cascade Mountains, closed in 1983.) The decision is up in the air since a cost-benefit analysis of this and other options is underway. It provides an opportunity to split freight traffic along the corridor at Auburn (south of Seattle) and send a portion over the pass and not have it operate through the King Street Station area (an AMTRAK station immediately south of the Seattle business district and a portal for a rail tunnel under the Seattle, central business district). This option has significant implications for freight flow and capacity. Other freight flow issues to make that happen include a reorganization of facilities. 6. Comment: There is an opportunity for education and cooperative partnerships, and to take advantage of an information/decision-making infrastructure already in place. Participants may be aware of the professionals and public officials meeting monthly all over the state in MPOs and RTPOs (Regional Transportation Planning Organizations are enabled under the state Growth Management Act, and generally double as the MPOs under the federal ISTEA.) developing regional transportation plans. There are seats available on the boards and technical committees of these organizations. We must encourage the private sector to get involved with planners and local officials and take advantage of the opportunity to share information and make the process work as it was intended. 7. Question: By the removal of economic regulations, have the systemic barriers to freight movement efficiency been removed, or are there some remaining? Can regional planning address the remaining issues? More specifically, are economists right that a remaining barrier is the incorrect pricing of personal travel? Dave Hatzenbuhler: Deregulation from the perspective of the rail industry has been a positive step allowing greater competition. There is no systemic barrier to competition. The rail industry builds and maintains its own network. Bill Knox: Yes, there are existing barriers, but their identification is not dear. One example may be demand management programs that, at best, are test products. The modeling and actual results in California of these programs have been very poor. Take for example commute trip reduction (CTR) requirements; the air quality payoff for CTR is only one percent in California. The investments have not paid off to date. The costs and benefits of programs have not been weighed and adequately considered. Keith Christian: Systemic barriers the port sees in providing facilities necessary for making the system work better are in the processes of building and development caused by environmental and land use regulatory delays. We will meet requirements as long as we know what they are. John Ficker, Roundtable member, commented from the floor that firms buy what customers buy. He suggested that congestion pricing is not the only creative funding option, and that, within a complex market, it would affect supply chains far back into the production and delivery system. 8. Comment: Manufacturers must respond to customers needs. Conference participants are urged to get involved to provide the practical side of transportation demand instead of just the theoretical. Policy makers should involve manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers and retailers to understand the impact of their decisions. 9. Question: Intrastate truck deregulation is upon us (as part of the aviation re-authorization bill, signed on August 26, 1994). What will be the impact of this change? (Sid Morrison) Bill Knox: Intrastate regulation was expensive. Rates, routes and services are now regulated by the market. The marketplace will be the regulator, as it should be. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings The impact of deregulation will be ultimately better service to the public at a higher level of efficiency as exhibited by interstate deregulation. UPS has worked successfully in states that are regulated and others that are much less so. Dan O'Neal: Looking at it from and using the interstate experience, deregulation has increased the ability of truckers and railroads to respond to the marketplace and to customers, and has created a greater capacity for competition which has allowed us to compete globally. There will be winners and losers. Those truckers with experience in a deregulated climate and/or those truckers which have been more responsive to customers will do better than those that have not. The buyers of services will do much better 10. Question: Can the panelists identify projects relying on new technologies and define their roles in advanced technology, such as in data collection and monitoring? Bill Knox: UPS is a major consumer of technology. The goal is more efficient delivery. This has led to the use of hand-held package data collection with cellular link-up and vehicle tracking. UPS is also working on a new computer dispatching system. There are several other information applications as well. Keith Christian: The Port of Seattle along with Port of Tacoma has tried to encourage information systems for data exchange between their customers, customs, the Port and other parties involved in trade. Tenants, which arc shipping lines, are responsible for the technology of running terminals. They have made improvements that arc more significant than the cranes and other physical facilities. Dave Hatzenbuhler: The rail industry has and continues to go through a technological revolution. Most significant is the acquisition of AC (alternating current) powered locomotives with more pulling power, greater efficiency, and a cleaner burn, Information systems have been developed for each railroad's own internal use. They are not usually compatible with those of customers and other partners such as truckers. Now there is an initiative, initiative service management, to improve communications among parties. Another information technology application is positive train separation (PTS), a pilot program in the Northwest. It provides extremely accurate train location (within a few meters). The result will be an increase in capacity. Bill Knox. Another innovation is a new double-stack rail car capable of carrying four 28-foot containers on one conventional rail car. 11. Question: Aviation is usually included in discussions of intermodal transportation. In Washington State, 95 percent of the air freight generated comes out of the Puget Sound region. Is there a problem in air freight in this region? Should it be included in this discussion? The state should address this issue, because it is not just a local problem. Bill Knox: Air freight is time sensitive and involves an intermodal move by truck. King Cushman, PSRC: Air transportation is not part of the ISTEA planning process although all surface transportation modes have been integrated under ISTEA, and must consider access to airports. The MPO does not program funds for aviation. It may be the time for Congress to bring aviation into the ISTEA package. 12. Question: This question is about demand management. What are the constraints on moving freight either by truck or rail, in off-peak evening and night hours? (Maggi Fimia, King County Council) Bill Knox: For most industries this is not feasible. In California this proposal was studied and it was shown that trucks make up only 3 percent of total traffic. Costs to change delivery times would be extremely high. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Dan O'Neal: Customers demand service during normal working hours although many truckers would prefer to operate during less congested periods. The transportation sector cannot control these decisions. In today's competitive environment, carriers must be sensitive to customer needs. 13. Question: Funding increases are needed. Yet a gas tax increase-such as even a 10 cent/gallon sales tax on gas-is not very likely. What does the panel think of proposals for transportation funding, given the huge problems? Dave Hatzenbuhler: Rail mass transit is very expensive to build, equip and operate. Generally speaking, some government funding is needed. Bill Knox: Traditional funding mechanisms are not enough. The gas tax can go just so far and other options need to be explored. Gas tax revenues will be declining. For example, Oregon is using a transit utility tax. 14. Question: Are there more environmentally friendly transportation technologies that should be used such as natural gas and electrification? Bill Knox: UPS was experimenting with innovative vehicles but they have been recalled due to safety concerns. UPS supports incentives for using alternative fuels and is using compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles in this country and liquid natural gas (LNG) ones in Canada. The technology does not apply to the larger 18-wheel tractor-trailers. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Session II - National Perspectives Keynote Address: Michael Huerta, Associate Deputy Secretary and Director, Office of Intermodalism, USDOT The federal Department of transportation (DOT) congratulates the PSRC and others for convening this working partnership with the freight community. It is a model to be followed by other parts of the country. DOT's views on freight transportation under ISTEA and how freight will be considered in the future are the topics of this address. Americans place a high value on mobility. Personal mobility includes travel to work as well as a significant leisure market. In a 1989 study, "Taking a Ride" was one of the most frequently cited recreational activities. One sixth of household expenditures go towards travel. Freight mobility includes moving materials to processing and goods to world markets. There is an estimated three trillion ton-miles of activity each year -or 11,000 pounds per person. We move huge quantities, on-time and door-to-door. Americans are consuming more products each year and manufacturers and distributors are reducing inventories. Intermodal trips are increasing. It has become infeasible or inefficient to rely on one mode for the entire trip. Combining modes allows shippers to take advantage of each during different segments of a commodity's trip. Legal and regulatory constraints that blocked intermodal trips have been removed. The 1980's brought major changes to the freight industry. The Staggers Act, the Motor Carrier Act and the 1984 Shipping Act changed the domestic and international transportation markets. Published rates were abolished. Carriers could now ship door-to-door with a single bill of lading. In the Northwest the changes in freight flows from Pacific Rim countries to the Eastern United States are evident. Before, cargo moved through the Panama Canal. This was a slow method of travel, but it worked. By the 1970's, there was movement across the new "land bridge". This method was faster but handling costs were higher. The technological changes, low-slung rail cars allowing double-stacked containers, changed the economics of transcontinental transport. Between 1986 and 1992, the number of U.S./Asia loaded containers traveling through the Panama Canal grew 20 percent (from 552,000 units to 661,000 units), or three percent per year. During the same period there was a 120 percent increase (from 880,000 units to two million units), or a 15 percent annual increase, in double-stack traffic across the rail land bridge. Shippers selected intermodal over the Panama Canal. The changing pattern is also evident in port traffic statistics. In 1980, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ), was the largest American container port. By 1986 it was overtaken by the Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach. Between 1990 and 1993, PANYNJ experienced flat growth white Los Angeles/ Long Beach grew 11 percent. Today, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are each on their own larger than PANYNJ. By 1993, collectively the ports of the Puget Sound region ranked second in the nation behind those in Southern California. All of this is due to reduced regulations. To stay competitive, the region must anticipate future changes in freight. Advantages to strive for are: (1) seamless intermodal travel with quick and minimal handling; (2) close proximity to transportation modes; and (3) closely coordinated paperwork. The benefits of intermodal travel must overcome its handling and time delay costs. ISTEA offers a partial solution to freight problems by giving greater flexibility to decision makers and giving Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings freight a place at the table. Because ISTEA does not explicitly permit funding of rail improvements we need to explore how to make rail programs feasible and qualified for funding. Benefits of such programs may accrue beyond the region to the state or the nation. The Department of Transportation's Commodity Flow Survey will be complete in 1995, the first since 1977. It will show flows through the transportation system. The National Transportation System (NTS) provides a planning framework for a national transportation network dealing with the current system to foreseen needs. White papers describing the NTS concept and criteria are available from the DOT. The Department is interested in hearing the ideas of the audience. What the next ISTEA (to be reauthorized in 1997) will be is not yet clear, but the DOT wants input from the freight industry. Problems in the current legislation are being identified and the DOT is striving to work together with industry to find solutions. Moderator: John Horsley Deputy Assistant Secretary Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs, US DOT The DOT is co-sponsoring this conference with the WSDOT and the PSRC and the Roundtable for three reasons: the persistence of Dan O'Neal for convening this meeting; the recognized leadership of WSDOT and PSRC in conducting technical studies and collaborating with the freight industry on policy boards; and, from the series of meetings on ISTEA last year, there rose the need to elevate the priority and the perception of freight mobility's importance to the economy. Citizen perception of how goods, even as common as groceries, get to the shelf in the supermarket is evidence that they do not understand the chain of events leading to efficient cost reductive freight delivery that make our groceries affordable. For ample, in Boston, community opposition lead to the removal from the proposed National Highway System of a three-mile link between the interstate highway system and the Port of Boston. The DOT heard the concerns of a BN representative in Chicago. Now that freight is included at the decision making table, will anyone listen to the issues and concerns of the freight community? It is good to be included, but little or no funding is flowing from ISTEA to make freight-related improvements. Panelist, Joan Yim, Deputy Administrator, Maritime Administration The proposed National Highway System unveiled by Secretary Pena demonstrates a new intermodal team approach at the federal level. The mainland system links to the international waterborne commerce network. Over 1.9 billion metric tons of domestic and foreign products are carried through all types of waterborne commerce including coastal commerce, inland waterborne commerce, and deep water. Several comments can be made about this mornings session: - The need for education. A regional freight council and other forums as has been formed here can serve as a model around the country. The MPOs have a great role to play in this area. The Maritime Administration can supply educational materials on the role of waterborne commerce in intermodalism. - Technology development. The maritime industry has been at the forefront of developing the technology that allowed intermodalism to begin: development of containers and couplings to carry double-stack rail cars. The Maritime Administration has doubled it research and development funds. - The need for port development plans and their linkage to Metropolitan Planning Organization plans. Needed Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings are better communications and ties.to community planning efforts. - Environmental regulations. The Maritime Administration will be establishing a new division to deal with the environment. The Secretary's strategic plan calls for us (a) to not overlook the impacts of projects on the environment, and (b) to consider the impacts of proposals in planning future development in various modes. Transportation plans should consider impacts on the environment before the approval process in order to avoid delays late in the process. - Lack of union representatives at the conference. Outreach meetings such as this should include representatives of labor unions. Maritime labor unions are important to supporting the U.S. flag merchant marine and to the flow of freight at ports. (Unions are included on the Roundtable, but while scheduled, were later unable to attend as a Conference panelist.) There is much to be gained from community based planning and these types of meetings and dialogue. Panelist, Eric Stromberg, President, The American Association of Ports Authorities The Association recognizes the role of the USDOT in outreach meetings such as the one yesterday (the Conference was scheduled back-to-back with an NTS outreach session with the association, on September 12 in Seattle). Secretary Pena has been a strong leader in transportation from the port perspective. The port community is very pleased to become more visible, as exemplified by Michael Huerta in the Office of Intermodalism and the responsibilities of that office. Work has begun on the portfolio of programs to be the responsibility of that Office. The NTS is still out of focus and the ports are not sure what will be included. The process of creating a NTS has created national- local tension. This is an important forum in building consensus. The ports and the freight community have not done a good job of bringing together everybody who has a stake in the outcome of an efficient transportation system. Ports tend to talk to themselves; shippers and labor are critical players to add to the process. The process should be dynamic not static. A mechanism needs to be in place to respond to changes in international markets, changes in technology, and changes in national, regional and local demands for transportation services. The Association is a hemispheric organization with members from all regions of the Americas. Most of its work is focused in Washington D.C. because U. S. public ports represent the largest block of members. Like other ports, Washington State's 70 public port authorities are creatures of local incentives, needs and priorities since there is no national system. Ports are set up to accommodate whatever is carved out for them by the state or city in which they arc located. Generally under the umbrella of transportation facilities, responsibilities can include a broad array of functions. Moving cargo through the port platform as quickly as possible is a fundamental responsibility but others may include world trade centers, public access parks, salmon ranching, ferry systems and tunnels. Dry water ports in Washington State take advantage of the role of ports as economic engines. Ports were on the periphery of highway bills for many years. Before ISTEA so many of the things that affected port efficiency were beyond its control. Waterside channels needing dredging were one constraint. On the landside, there was increasing traffic congestion outside the port gate. Port investments could be potentially wasted. Port efficiency is not defined by how fast you can move a box over the side of a ship. It is more accurately reflected by the time it takes to move from oceangoing vessels, in and out of ports, and onto a rail or highway system to inland destinations. ISTEA has the right language: It is the policy of the United States to develop a National Intermodal Transportation System that is economically Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings efficient and environmentally sound, provides the foundation for the Nation to to compete in the global economy, and will move people and goods in an energy efficient manner (ISTEA, Sec. 2). But beyond the policy statement it favors the institutions already in place, i.e. highways, that understand how transportation infrastructure is prioritized and funded. The ports do not think the promise of ISTEA has been fulfilled. The pipeline is the best metaphor for defining priorities. Public dollars and investments should go to the pinch-points, i.e., the two inch pipeline in a system of 14 inch pipelines representing ocean vessels and transcontinental rail and highways. Today the two inch pipeline is urban landside access to our nation's ports. For many years there has been a lack of recognition of port problems. At the federal level, for example, modal administrators were not communicating or coordinating. Port efficiency relies on intermodal connections which were not being addressed. The Office of Intermodalism is to address issues of importance to ports. From the port perspective, these are the tasks that need to be accomplished: - Implement a NTS that recognizes the needs of freight. - Freight considerations must be pulled into the local decision- making process. Are MPOs set up to handle all the new responsibilities of ISTEA including freight issues? Ports need to be more involved in the MPO process. - Adequate data are in scarce supply and must be generated to understand the benefits of freight projects and investments. - Broadcast the importance of freight transportation. The Intermodal Commission established under ISTEA has had many outreach meetings. Its recommendations fall into some general common sense categories: - There needs to be an integrated transportation system. The holes in the current system are the connectors, and that is true for passengers and freight. - Funding needs to be addressed with innovative approaches and there needs to more adequate infrastructure investment. - The structure of government needs to be examined at all levels to ensure that barriers to intermodal movement can be removed and that decisions can be more coherent and coordinated. Copies of the Intermodal Commission report Toward a National Intermodal Transportation System will soon be available, and presented to Congress on September 29,1994. (Anne Aylward Executive Director for the Commission was on the agenda for the Conference, but was unable to attend due to the drafting requirements of the Commission's recommendations.) Panelist, Frank Kruesi, Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy Office of the Secretary USDOT This presentation describes what the USDOT is trying to do with the development of a NTS and how it relates to ISTEA and the next ISTEA. The development of the NTS is part of a larger transportation policy. Many of the USDOT's current administrators are based in local and state government and understand the need for practical and useful programs and regulations. Goal Number One of Secretary Pena is to de America together in an effective intermodal transportation system. The NTS is to achieve that mission. The NHS is the first part of that effort. Congress has before it legislation to designate 160,000 miles of road that carry the major share of the country's freight and passengers as the NHS. A much larger task will be the development of a NTS. Initial thoughts on draft criteria for the NTS have been published in the Federal Register and the USDOT is going out to gather Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings information, advice, opinions and criticisms by users of the transportation system. The USDOT is also trying to better understand how all the different elements do or need to tie together. Today's large manufacturers, such as The Boeing Company (a member of the Roundtable), rely on parts from all over the world and on all modes to get to those parts to factories for assembly. This supply system can require the development of specialized containers, specialized rail lines and unique transport methods. At Boeing, this is one example of how transportation systems need to work together to allow for a plane. to.. be manufactured. Decision makers must be able to understand local needs. How can the federal Government be of assistance? Staffs of the different modal administrations have begun to work together at the federal level to understand common problems and how linkages are vital to the flow of goods and people. The first iteration of NTS should be completed by September 1995. The following step will be getting the USDOT and the nation to think about the next ISTEA The current one has as a broad goal including intermodalism. Has this promise been fulfilled? Three years is too short a time frame to determine the answer to that. Major advances have been made: - People are now talking about intermodalism as something that matters and that is vital for the economy. How we make the needs of ports and shippers count remains a difficult task and this component could be part of the next ISTEA. - There has been an important shift downward in planning decisions to MPOS. This shift requires everyone involved to understand the MPO process. It requires ports and others to think through planning questions within the context of the needs of the region. It requires a sustained dialogue requiring lots of work among all stakeholders. There are some matters where the MPO process determining what is important at the regional scale does not get to the question of which elements are of national significance. We must begin to address how these will be identified and what happens to them. Freight movers can help the policy makers think this through. Which lines, facilities and connections matter? How are they analyzed? How do we understand them? What is the national responsibility? How are they developed? Once the NTS elements are identified, how is this communicated back to the local and regional level? How is the development of these elements funded? These are difficult questions to answer. An important issue surrounding transportation investment decisions is the environment. Environmental review will be of critical importance as requirements of federal law. The example of Los Angeles demonstrates the role of state and federal responsibilities for implementation plans to reduce air quality problems. Envi- ronmental issues cannot be ignored. The NTS is our mechanism for taking environmental needs and mandates into effect. Every business, port, and government agency is seeking more return on its investments. The USDOT put out a call for financing proposals that would be structured around creative financing. It received over sixty proposals from across the country that included public/private partnerships, different mixes of federal funds, and more innovative techniques. Many involved intermodal projects. ISTEA has started something profound. It requires transportation modes to recognize that they are not isolated. It requires us to understand our needs and how they relate to the broader transportation needs of a community, a region, a state, the nation and the world. We seek a system that is more efficient, cheaper, safer and more environmentally conscious. ISTEA has provided the impetus for this change in thinking. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Session III - Strategies for our Pacific Rim Region: WSDOT/Regional Council/participants Panelist, Connie Niva, Washington State Transportation Commission The Washington State Transportation Commission consists of seven citizens serving staggered six year terms. Democratic and Republican parties are equally represented. The Commission serves as the "board of directors" for the WSDOT (Ms. Niva also sits on the Executive Board of the PSRC). The Commission establishes statewide policies and ensures that the WSDOT carries them out. The future has changed for decision-making. It is becoming increasingly difficult to build consensus. Public participation and environmental reviews complicate the process. Even after reaching program decisions, funding and the physical space must be found. The State Transportation Policy Plan process promotes developing policies and action strategies to achieve a balanced multimodal transportation system. The Plan is used to establish program direction and funding for the Department of transportation and other state agencies. Freight mobility is one of three areas of policy and recommended strategies included in the 1994 report to the Legislature. Transportation goals supporting economic opportunity are to 1) provide access that is safe, reliable, affordable and convenient to industrial, commercial and intermodal sites for people, goods and services; 2) support domestic and international trade; 3) support Washington's business and industry and 4) reduce the impacts of congestion on freight mobility. Action strategies have been developed in four areas: planning coordination for freight transportation; freight transportation information needs, improving access for freight, and moving freight in containers. A draft of the Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan has been recently published. It is based on the policies and strategies identified in the Policy Plan. The State Systems Plan is also well underway in some detail. The parts that are state-owned include highways, ferries and small airports are the areas the state actually has control over. This part is of utmost importance because all of us, including businesses, rely on that system working well. The Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan for state-owned facilities includes (a) service objectives describing the essential services the system should provide, (b) deficiencies in meeting these objectives, and (c) proposed "fixes" have been identified around the state. The state's regional DOT offices are now meeting with regional planning organizations, such as the PSRC, to negotiate the final proposed solutions and the affordability of those approaches that will appear in the state's first 20 Year Plan. The Transportation Financing Policy Plan (TRANS2000). Future financing will be tight to accomplish all the proposals. The Commission has set a priority on highway maintenance, preservation and safety improvements (also the highest priority under ISTEA). These arc all investments that will help freight mobility. Also in the Plan are projects to support economic initiatives; improvements such as upgrading state highways on the freight and goods transportation Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings system to have all weather surfaces capable of handling legal loads year round. In this Plan it is envisioned that there would be four- lane limited access highways on routes where transport result in over 10 million tons of goods a year. This is called the T-1 system. Some of the overpasses on the Interstate system do not have adequate clearances. The Plan calls for these structures to be modified sometime over the 20 year horizon. It would be a mistake to stop with highways (a hierarchy of lesser ton routes is also proposed). The WTC is branching out into the "State interest" system which includes other modes that the state does not own but which are equally important for the seamless transport of freight through this state. It also needs to take a look at international freight mobility tied to trade by supporting negotiations that cut border crossing delays. The Commission and Department arc aggressively pursuing passenger train service. The ridership is very good on the train service between Seattle and Portland, a good indication for the future. Essential rail capacity to handle future freight mobility needs also has to be addressed. Marine ports rely on critical connections to inland rail systems. Distributed at this conference is the draft Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan. This draft includes all modes. At this time the WTC does not have all the answers as to how to handle all the needs. The Plan analyzes and articulates the state's interest in all of the modes redefining service objectives. The audience is encouraged to review and respond to the enclosed survey. How do we transition from a 20 year plan to an action agenda? This is the current challenge facing the 'WTC. Sorting revenue available in the short term and determining how much more is needed to achieve the transportation system that we want in the future is the mission of an effort called Trans 2000. Aubrey Davis will talk about this. WSDOT staff and commissioners are here today to work in partnership with you. Panelist, Aubrey Davis, Chair, Washington State Transportation Commission The challenge for the State Transportation Commission, the Legislature and the Governor is how to turn these plans into reality recognizing the limitation of our financial system. - forecasts: A basic part of our transportation problem is the growth in Washington's population. In the last 25 years the state has grown by 1.9 million people. That is over a 50 percent increase from 1970 levels. The state's transportation infrastructure has not kept up. The congestion experienced today in people and goods movement underscores that fact. The U.S. Census predicts a statewide growth of 2.7 million people during the next quarter century. There will be 8 million people living in Washington in 2020 instead of today's 5.3 million. Half of these newcomers will move into the state and half are natural increases from the current population base. The challenge is how to develop and manage a transportation system to handle the transportation needs of this expanding population. - Financing overview: If we were to meet level-of-service standards set at modest levels on the state owned system (highways, ferries and small airports), it would require an expenditure during the next twenty years of $27 billion. This estimate is based on route by route analyses and work with regional planning organizations. Approximately $ 1 0 billion is available from current resources. Of the state's 23 cent gas tax, about one-half or 11 cents goes to state needs, and 11 cents goes to cities and counties, and I cent to the state ferry system. (The ferry system in Puget Sound is the largest ferry system in the United States.) - Priorities: The Transportation Commission has established its list of priorities. Maintenance, preservation, safety programs to protect the facilities that we have use up all the monies from existing sources. There isn't anything left over for new capacity Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings projects. In addition, the System Plan presupposes two things happen: 1) the state Growth Management Act works (the GAM involves growth boundaries and, hopefully fully reduced public spending for infrastructure and 2) the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) happens (in the Central Puget Sound region, proposed rail service to be funded through a regional referendum in spying of 1995, could reduce the alternative need for even more additional state highway lanes.) Historically additional cents have been added to the gas tax to meet funding needs. The Commission and the System Plan recognize that the day has past where the gas tax and the projects it can fund can solve our transportation problems. Road needs are enormous: HOVs (high occupancy vehicle lanes) and farm-to-market roads which need firming up for carrying heavier loads are real needs but we must cover all of these costs. We cannot replicate projects of the past, such as building another 1-5. We have got to find new ways for people to travel. The Commission is going to the public and asking them about the problems. A series of meetings was held in June throughout the state. These were very well attended. This fall, meetings will be held asking the public how to pay for improvements. A local/regional needs assessment with cities and counties has been included. The Multimodal Transportation Plan is out for discussion now. A Transportation Financing Policy Plan (TRANS 2000) has been underway for a year. In November a proposed biennial budget goes to the Legislature and the Governor. The WTC has developed a menu of needs matched to available revenue sources, including potential tax increases. The state gas tax is flat, meaning it does not increase along with the economy. If the state gas tax had increased with the economy it would be 36 cents/ gallon instead of the current 23 cents. If adjusted to reflect increases in gas mileage, it would be 49 cents today. Should the tax be indexed in the future? At the next round of public meetings, the WTC is asking which items of expense we ought to incur and what taxes should be levied to pay for them. Total expenses must equal total revenues. Should we support the development of high speed intercity rail? Should we support local high capacity regional transit? Should we improve freight rail? How should these programs be paid for? The WTC is going to the people to ask their opinions on needs and taxes and will be guided by what they hear. Panelist, Martha Choe, Vice-Chair, Regional Council Transportation Policy Board For this region when we talk about transportation we are really talking about trade, since our state is one of the most trade dependent states (The largest share of this trade- roughly 60 percent-is Boeing aircraft, involving both a national/ international transport network with some 20,000 suppliers, and an intraregional network among the several Boeing facilities in the central Puget Sound region. In addition, the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma combined surpass New York and New Jersey in total traffic and are second only to Los Angeles and Long Beach in North America.) Trade opportunities translate into jobs and economic growth for our region. To provide some background information, the PSRC is a governmental agency representing the four counties of King, Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap, and 73 cites in which reside nearly 3 million people and 1.5 million jobs. The PSRC is a cooperative venue composed of representatives of counties, cities, transit agencies, ports, the state DOT, in addition to the private sector. The PSRC also serves as the MPO and is therefore required to meet certain state and federal requirements in planning land use and transportation. The PSRC has recently focused on Vision 2020, a "blueprint' to guide the integration of regional transportation and development with a set of regional policies and a transportation plan. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Vision 2020 advocates a clear separation of urban and rural areas; preserving rural areas and protecting open spaces in urban areas. One of its goals is to achieve an improved urban form by focusing development in centers, concentrated areas of residential and commercial use. The transportation system is critical to connecting the centers. Through incentives the plan encourages reduced reliance on single occupancy vehicles by providing alternatives. The Metropolitan Transportation Plan or MTP is the transportation element of vision 2020. The are many requirements being met by the MTP: ISTEA - federal planning and funding, CAAA- federal and state Clean Air Act Amendments, GMA- the state Growth Management Act requiring comprehensive and regionally coordinated plans linking transportation and land use development (etc.), and HCT- high capacity regional transit planning (the responsibility of the RTA, referred to above). A draft MTP will be released for public and agency review and comment in December. The MTP goes before the full General Assembly generally consisting of all local elected official in the region) for adoption in March 1995. The MTP is all encompassing and challenging.The most difficult challenge of the MTP process is financing. Anything in the MTP must be consistent with the timing, sources and phasing of the financing plan. Non-motorized transportation for the first time has a place at the table along with high occupancy vehicle projects and the RTA. Freight and goods are also part of the MTP Required is a balance among freight and passenger rail operations, highway users, pedestrians and cyclists, all the while considering air quality standards. Marine ferry operations need connections to public transportation and pedestrian facilities. Congestion pricing must address issues of geography, tax base, and social equities. Right now we have more questions than answers. We are fortunate in this area to have collaboration and coordination among the players in regional transportation and land use. Panelist, Peter Beaulieu, Freight Mobility Program Manager, Puget Sound Regional Council The final panelist was asked by moderator O'Neal to cast his remarks as a lead-in to the final Synthesis session. He opened by noting that discussions here today have covered the industry, federal, state and regional points of view. From these we can pull together three very simple points of common interest. The first is that as transportation policy makers and planners we are being asked to think in a new transportation language, and that is "freight". It is a different mode with its own characteristics and information requirements than those commonly addressed by transportation planning of the past. Instead of land use we are talking about economic structure within and outside of the region. Instead of passengers going through the system during the peak periods we are talking about logistics systems linking industries and delivery systems for just-in-time deliveries. Instead of passenger infrastructure we are talking about freight infrastructure. Both are intermodal but operate differently. Instead of auto traffic flow, we are talking about trucks, rail and air and how they are tied together. We are talking about satisfying a slightly different set of performance measures: reliability, time, cost and safety. How many transportation models for personal mobility give sufficient attention to the so-called nonrecurring incidents that-by some estimates account for nearly half of all delay? This is the most important performance objective of freight mobility: reliability. Second, if we think in terms of freight transportation planning, then we are talking about systems-and systems that operate at different scales-rather than projects. Mr. Beaulieu displayed a series of overheads showing the railroad network at the national scale, at the state scale, and then at the regional scale (an anchor Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings segment of the BN system, recalling Dave Hatzenbuhler's comments). As a second example, a hierarchy of proposed truck freight routes within the region has been geo-coded onto the geographic information system (GIS) used by PSRC. This type of information can be used to compare freight needs to the congestion points are in the highway system (e.g., as indicated by high volume-to-capacity ratios). Within the region, the highway and rail systems were displayed on one GIS map, together with deep ports and air cargo airports (see figure in the Appendix). The rail system runs through and out of the region. The scale for thinking and planning for freight runs from the highway intersection level, to the regional level and on to the national level. Pinch points can occur anywhere in the system. This approach is very different from that previously undertaken. Freight is a layered system with overlapping modes: roads, rail, intermodal ports, airports and deep water facilities and operations. - third, rather than a plan, we have an Action Package. The Freight and Goods Mobility Roundtable, chaired by Dan O'Neal has been working on identifying issues. They are not all infrastructure. Some are institutional, operational, and financial. From the problems identified we have worked into the possible solutions and these are identified in the Action Package for this region. (See the Appendix for a brief executive summary, and a matrix display. This serves as an index to a cross-referenced text and supporting inventory of concrete issues or problems.) Examples of the freight mobility problems identified by the Roundtable include: (a) operational difficulties with port access in the area around the Kingdom; (b) the larger and related mixed- rail corridor and its (multimodal) relation to commuter rail; (c) highway corridor gridlock as solutions to one freeway corridor relocate congestion onto another (a complexity not to be overlooked in Major Investment Studies required under ISTEA guidelines); (d) including freight within the priorities of the MPO regional funding program; and more broadly, the need to fit both environmental and freight mobility features into the same compact region, for example, with regard to specific truck routes and neighborhoods. Proposed solutions in the (distributed) Action Package address each area of concern and may be the responsibility of the state, the region, local government or the private sector. Recommendations at the state and regional levels include: (a) specific grade separated crossings, (b) funding packages for rail planning (with planning funded, possibly, from the same state source now used exclusively for High Capacity Transit planning; (c) continued partnership with the freight community in planning, and (d) the continued collection of data about freight. At the local level, suggested action items include such items as (e) jointly preparing Design Guidelines to influence the development of activity centers from a freight and delivery point of view (and, for example, to be reflected in the Pavement Management System required of state DOTS, under ISTEA). The challenge of ISTEA is to look even beyond the rearranged and now mingled federal funding categories and programs under ISTEA. We need to think, together, first of the concrete issues in our area, and then of practical and systemic actions. These actions depend upon, and can lead to, a world of new partnerships for both planning and implementation. Federal or public funding is only a wedge in a larger package. Can the different parties, centered on well-selected issues, collaborate in strategies that combine our different interests and responsibilities? The region is an intersection rather than a boundary. Can we "color outside of the lines"? We would like to hear the views of Conference attendees-- this expanded Roundtable--on the proposed regional Action Package. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Session IV - Synthesis Questions and Comments Panelists and Conference Participants 1. Comment: The Freight and Goods Roundtable in the central Puget Sound region has been working extremely well. The idea should be applied throughout the country. Paul Roberts, Transmode Inc., Regional Council Consultant.Having done some work in Columbus, Ohio it is interesting to note that people in Columbus are more concerned about freight movement in Seattle than people are here. They rely on the efficient operation of the inland rail system and its connection to deep water vessels. How can the federal government help make the case that the access corridors to the Port of Seattle are of national significance and that improvements to these corridors should be addressed in the NTS? Shouldn't there should be money available to help on problems that are of importance to the country as a whole? Michael Huerta: We do not have a definitive answer for that. About Columbus, their freight transportation planning effort ("the Inland Gateway") began in the private sector. They are looking at their competitiveness as a distribution center and the ability of their transportation system to handle the expected rates of growth for that region of the country. They are concerned about costs incurred by companies in Ohio stemming from transportation delays on the west coast. New information is being generated about the costs of transportation problems. In the post-ISTEA era the question of decision making roles is still being sorted out. The federal governments interest should be limited to things genuinely in the national interest, although that determination is not fully agreed upon. - On one hand, the interest could extend to corridors of trade that are moving freight between major trading regions of the world and the interior of the country, thereby responding to market demand and flows. Under this scenario, the government would be less concerned about specific facilities. Alternatively, the federal government should be concerned about urban congestion since that is the principle problem relating to goods movement. - In meeting with MPOs at the national level it was suggested that the movement of people and things between and within metropolitan areas was of primary importance and that states boundaries were artificial. - States had a different point of view. They see a role in balancing the many interests of urban, rural, recreational and other users. Some suggest going beyond states to groups of states forming regions in the country, i.e.. the Northwest. The roles need to be sorted out before specifics are worked out. ISTEA established a very clear relationship between planning and transportation decision making by creating a framework for regional and state transportation planning considerate of local priorities. The NTS is trying to extend that framework on planning and priorities to the national level to get a sense of national priorities. If federal funds become available for mitigating local problems of national significance, it should not be a way to allow jurisdictions to go around the regional and state planning and priority framework. However ISTEA is all about eliminating earmarking. A national fund would work against that flexibility. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Sid Morrison: The NHS Plan submitted by the State of Washington was worked through with MPOs and Regional transportation Planning Organizations (RTPOs). There is extensive cooperation between the state and regions here in Washington. 2. Comment: By mingling the urban transportation system with the interstate highway system we created the urban congestion problems that we have today. Regional connectors that went through the cities bogged down in urban congestion. If the systems were separate we would have less problems today. What can we learn from this? Sid Morrison: The freeways did bypass communities in rural America. However in places like Seattle the freeway couldn't get by without going through the urban center. Today we have the problems that result from being unable, due to geographic reasons, to build an interstate bypass around Seattle. Interstate-405 runs into water and is only half a beltway; SR-18 is a quarter of a beltway. In some smaller urban areas, the interstate highway has become the Main Street USA. Martha Choe: We need to look at opportunities for private-public economic development partnerships for transportation modes other than highways e.g. rail. 3. Comment: Tom Harvey Harvey Consultants, Inc., Regional Council Consultant. We need to develop ways for people to work together Who Ought to be a part of the team for implementing the actions in the freight package of improvements? For example, when do we bring in EPA? We should be asking how all of the parties might effectively sit down together and institutionalize the new relationships. 4. Question: With the expansion of American President Lines in Seattle, it took a long time for the BN and the UP railroads to get together to allow the UP to come in over the BN tracks to accommodate the project. In the tacoma area they have a problem going through each other's yard. All over the nation, competitive railroads have a hard time working together to solve these problems. Michael Huerta: Across the country there are many example of conflicts between railroads and between modes of transportation. As transportation planners we are always looking for the most efficient solution. But the rail freight system deals with private companies having significant concerns about competitiveness, ' i.e., with their ability to have comparable advantage over the other players. Win-win solutions arc needed to solve these problems. Where there has been success in resolving these types of conflict is where all the parties in the dispute. see the expansion of the regional market pie for freight movements rather than simply holding on to their share of a stagnant market. We need to recognize that many players in the transportation system consider other factors beside the efficiency of the total system. Sid Morrison: The RTA and the WSDOT are working with both the UP and BN since both hold vital elements essential to the future. They have become very interested in forming partnership since the legislature gave the WSDOT a vested interest (a reference to recent legislation defining state interest in transportation elements broader than the state-owned system) in railroad issues. Upgrading of rails would benefit passenger and freight movements. It takes a long time and some money to get rail carriers to cooperate. 5. Question: In moving people, why do we not talk about using the median in our freeways for a monorail system (a two-mile segment linking downtown Seattle to the 1962 World's Fair site)? Can we think about using a slot-car system in the distant future? Martha Choe: The monorail has captured the imagination of many people. The highly popular monorail is being looked at as a possible circulator in downtown Seattle. But as an investment, you must look at the capacity you get for the money. The RTA is looking at many technological alternatives and their associated costs. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings 6. Question: We get back to the issue of taxes. How many people are actually willing to vote for more taxes to support the programs that people want funded? Sid Morrison: (Recalling his early years selling apples in the Yakima Valley):The product needs "to look the price". The WSDOT is encouraged that voters in Oregon approved (by a vote of 70 percent) an increase in property taxes to pay for an extension of the MAX system. Martha Choe: People want to know what they get for the money, is it worth it and what are the choices? Transportation is not the only important program needing funding. The RTA recently conducted a poll and found that an overwhelming majority of the public ranked crime as the number one priority and transportation as number two. There is strong support to pay a four tenths percent sales tax equivalent and for including rail as part of the solution. Michael Huerta: Voters want value for their tax dollars. In California, the tax initiatives that often survive are for transportation improvements. The pattern across the country is similar. Over the long run, initiatives for earmarked funds (a new pattern, following Proposition 13) can become a cumbersome form of government. We need to look at the broader question of building confidence in the transportation decision making process to reflect the wishes of the people. 7. Question: Speaking as a representative of a shipping line, I suggest that costs of delays are picked up by the carriers rather than shippers. Carriers are willing to pay for delay recovery but we are looking for creative 'ways of capturing costs. Michael Huerta: Shippers are paying through the rates set by the carriers. In Southern CaliforniA Alameda corridor there is an interesting example of capturing intermodal costs to build a solution. Rail users of the Alameda corridor agreed to pay user fees comparable to the costs of delay which can be used to leverage debt to pay for a large portion of a project to eliminate drayage costs. They need to ensure maximum leverage from the arrangement. Sid Morrison: We need to convince people of the true costs of delay and only then would we be able to use a part of those costs to solve the problem. Truckers should supply the Commission with documentation of the costs of delay. The trend is that we now spend less as a percentage of total taxes to support the automobile and more on the average cost of an automobile. Does this mean we want to be comfortable in our cars while we are delayed in traffic? 8. Comment: The draft MTP financing plan includes congestion pricing. We are proposing the use of some public funds to get systems or projects underway and then reliance on user fees to pay for the consumption of services and the remainder of some improvements. In this way we hope to balance out the estimated spread between demand and revenues over the next 25 years. (King Cushman, Director of Transportation Planning; Regional Council) Martha Choe: There are many questions that need to be answered about pricing. What part does social equity play in these decisions? What are the impacts of diversion of traffic-perhaps 50 percent-off of priced facilities onto local streets? Impacts on land use? To what extent should transit be subsidized? These ques- tions need to be dealt with at the local level. Sid Morrison: We need a change in the culture. Washington has not had toll highways. Some progress is being made through the states public-private partnership program. (Under Substitute House Bill 1006, passed in 1993, privatization proposal were solicited and of these, six were selected for further negotiation) One selected project would include development of an electronic system for the collection of tolls to be used to sell surplus space in HOV lanes to pay for more HOV lanes. It is a first step to change the culture. Philosophically how much should automobile users pay so others do not have to use their automobiles? What happens when alternative fuels are used and the taxation structure relies on a gasoline tax? Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Michael Huerta: The Transportation Research Board and others have studied the question of congestion pricing and the studies show that it is the one transportation demand mechanism that works. However, it is the one for which there is the least public support. There is a cultural change that needs to take place. At the federal level there was a call for congestion management demonstrations but only one qualified proposal was received. It is on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge for peak hour pricing as a way for managing flow. It will be tried and the results will be watched closely. 9. Question: Today we have heard that ISTEA has made some promises that have not been kept. Can ISTEA do everything for everybody or should phase 11 concentrate on a key competitive national interest like freight mobility? (Sid Morrison) Michael Huerta: It should be recognized that we will be thinking about reauthorizing the entire surface transportation program at the federal level. From the workshops here and around the country we have learned that ISTEA, in terms of how it deals with planning and policy making, is a step in the right direction. There are things that need to be dealt with and one of these is freight mobility. How do we better understand the nations needs, and is it necessary to restructure the program to deal with specific needs associated with the movement of freight? There arc questions about how, or do you, dedicate federal funds for railroad infrastructure, facilities held largely in the private sector. How do you consider trade-offs among different modes? These are some of the questions being dealt with by the NTS. We need to anticipate future developments, where we are and where we are going. 10. Question: How can we improve our effectiveness as advocates of freight? (Tom Harvey) Michael Huerix Many people do not understand how the freight system works. Develop more understanding by transportation decision makers. - Put it in the context of how freight relates to the local, regional and national economics. Decision makers are sensitive to an issue such as the creation or retention of jobs. - Make certain that your case is valid and a truthful assessment of your situation in order to get serious consideration. Sid Morrison: - Do not fall back into your fragmented interests as either shippers, or carriers, or even truckers or railroads. Talk to each other. Collectively identify what is in the common interest of the freight community, still given that it is a competitive industry. Martha Choe: - Educate the public and decision makers, and respect the public decision making process which is quite different from that of the private sector It is slower, complex, open and more time consuming. We can use the freight communities assistance in finding ways of becoming partners. Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Closing Remarks: Dan O'Neal, Chair, Regional Freight Mobility Roundtable I would like to thank especially those who most directly helped to make this event possible: all of you present, our distinguished visiting speakers, the panelists, the Regional Council and Pete Beaulieu who organized the Conference, and our consultants: Tom Harvey (HCI, Inc.), Paul Roberts (Transmode Consultants, Inc.) and Ellen Porter (Porter and Associates). We have received some good advice from all of you and our panelists and speakers. We need better understanding on the part of the freight community as to what is going on in the public policy side and the issues to be dealt with by public decision makers. And, from the other side, the freight community needs to continue to educate and advise public decision makers about what is going on in our businesses. This Conference - a regional dialogue between these parties-has made strides in this common direction. 29 Regional Freight Mobility Conference - Proceedings Appendix 31 REGIONAL FREIGHT MOBILITY ACTION PACKAGES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY For the first time, explicit consideration of the movement of freight is being included in the MTP. This is required by ISTEA. Its inclusion recognizes the critical value of freight transportation to the regional, state, and national economies and to the creation of jobs. Freight transportation is an integral part of the logistics system of every firm. It provides for the flow of materials from suppliers to manufacturers and for the distribution of goods from manufacturers to wholesalers, retailers, and consumers. Lower transportation costs reduce the cost of manufacturing and distributing goods and contribute to economic growth and the creation of jobs. Exhibit 1 locates freight transportation decision-making within the broader metropolitan transportation planning system. Exhibit 2 is an abbreviated display of the freight mobility action packages which are cross referenced to, and discussed in, the full report. Also included is a large scale multimodal map of the Puget Sound region (note: pending the designation of a freight roadway system, the map simply shows major roadways). This helps to ground multimodal thinking, and the matrix elements, to specific locations within the region. Multiple Geographical Scales The metropolitan freight transportation system operates simultaneously at local, regional, state, national, and international levels. Central Puget Sound is an important gateway on the Pacific Rim. Automobiles, cellular telephones, apples, oranges, clothing, and hundreds of other items move through the region's seaports and airports and over its streets, highways, and railroads. The performance of the region's transportation system is important to the citizens and businesses of Columbus, Ohio and Hong Kong as well as to those of Tacoma and Seattle. Over two million sea-going containers (twenty-foot-equivalent units) move through the region each year. Developing Action Strategies Action is needed to maintain and improve the freight transportation system. The economic competitiveness of central Puget Sound and its clients throughout the world depends on these actions. The value of the various actions must be measured in terms that are meaningful to the many affected logistics systems. Transportation costs, transit time and order-cycle time, schedule reliability, and safety comprise a comprehensive set of criteria that measure the relevant impacts of alternative proposed actions and estimate their values. i The Regional Freight Mobility Roundtable--including shippers, carriers, and related third parties of the central Puget Sound region--has developed a list of timely and essential actions (Recommendations: Regional Freight Mobility Action Strategy, September 6, 1994). These recommendations are included in the draft MTP because of their expected results in terms of the four performance criteria (noted above). In the list which follows, each action is described in terms of (1) who should do it, (2) what is to be done, (3) timing, and (4) resource requirements. The actions are organized into four categories or action packages--institutional, operational, infrastructure, and financial. Institutional actions pertain to changes in the working relationships among agencies, firms, labor unions, and other entities making up the transportation industry in the region. Operational actions involve changes in the way the regional freight transportation system operates. Infrastructure actions result in changes in the physical facilities constituting the regional transportation system. Financial actions are those taken to fund one or more actions of the other three packages. Institutional PSRC--TO reflect economic development impacts, include freight criteria (e.g., nonencroachment of rail corridors) as part of the plan review guidelines to be applied under the Growth Management Act, pursuant to SHB 1928, by June of 1995. (Fold into current Regional Council budget tasks). PSRC--During FY 1995, modify the TIP process to give "equivalent consideration" (State Policy Plan), to improved freight movement and thus to the pursuit of the economic strategy and air quality goals of the region. Assure that subarea studies needed to identify, assess, and rank freight projects are completed and are part of the major investment studies required by ISTEA. (Fold into current budget tasks, and address through FY 1995 budget process, respectively.) PSRC--Include within the FY 1995-6 annual work program: (1) identification and analysis of ma or investments and (2) subarea studies to improve port and airport access as well as to improve freight flows through other subareas such as the Kent Valley, Redmond, and Everett areas (e.g., a needed grade crossing study at the Port of Everett). PSRC--Continue to work with the Regional Freight Mobility Roundtable. Roundtable involvement in the MTP, the TIP, the state IMS and CMS processes are essential. (PSRC involvement estimated at $30,000.) PSRC--Work with the WSDOT to complete and maintain the freight mobility relational data base and information system, as part of the IMS, that can be used to identify and assess the value of alternative proposed actions. This data effort will serve three improvements: regional economic analysis, transportation modeling, and direct policy and issue analysis. ii Operational WSDOT-- Develop and, implement a one-stop permit system for oversize loads (recommended in the draft "Weight Restrictions and Road Closures" report (WSDOT, 1994)). The one-stop system used by the state of Oregon should continue to be examined for possible guidance. (One-half person-year.) WSDOT--Work with the PSRC and the Ports of Seattle, Tacoma and Everett to consider the placement of weight stations within the ports properties. This would help reduce overweight truck loads (and resulting road maintenance costs) and would help shippers with their new accountability under the Safe Container Act of 1992. It would also be possible to increase the speed and reliability of freight movement on the highways by reducing the backup at existing weigh stations. (Weight station cost may be in the range: one million dollars.) WSDOT--Protect freight mobility from lane policies, intended to restrict future single occupancy vehicle lanes. For example, consider selective freight access to High Occupancy Vehicle lanes during non-peak periods, especially if future HOV lanes are converted from current general purpose lanes (used by autos and trucks). Ports--Convene and work with labor unions, stevedoring and drayage firms, and shipping lines to extend gate hours at terminals (e.g., the noon period). This would better enable trucks to avoid peak commute periods on the highway (e.g., after 3:30 p.m.) and could enable additional night (off-peak) rail shipments on the mainline tracks. (Port involvement estimated at one-half person-year, extended over two years.) Infrastructure WSDOT--With the PSRC and local governments, designate and periodically review the roadway portion of the regional freight and goods transportation system (FGTS), and to clearly define the significance of this designation (design standards, special incident management capabilities, improved signage, etc.) (Currently underway). Advance key projects through an efficient review and programming (STIP/TIP) process (e.g., truck access to the Port of Tacoma via completion of SR-167 and SR-18.) PSRC--With WSDOT, secure state high capacity transit (HCT) funds to convene stakeholders to outline a mutually acceptable strategy for the mixed rail corridor between Seattle and Tacoma addressing: (1) long-term mixed facility and operational options and actions (beyond 2000), (2) safety concerns, and (3) economic implications, and (4) the relationship to near-term grade separations (e.g., possibly three near the Port of Tacoma, two in the Kent Valley, four in Seattle, and possibly one at the Port of Everett). The scope should also consider the possible use of Stampede Pass as a freight bypass, and lessons from other areas (a rail line from downtown to west suburban Chicago, the TriCounty System between Palm Beach and Miami, Florida, and the San Diego north line). iii PSRC--Lead the preparation of a Design Manual and Guidelines for freight transportation facilities, to be reflected in the state Pavement Management System required under ISTEA. Planning and engineering standards for highways, streets, intersections, turning lanes and pavement thickness (to reduce weight damage), freight docks, curbside parking and restrictions, and various control measures should be addressed. Guidelines for freight overlay zones (e.g., freight only lanes) and interjurisdictional concerns (traffic light timing) should be included. This work is related to the designation of the FGTS roadway element. (Estimated cost: $50,000) PSRC--Convene truck, bicycle, and pedestrian interests to jointly address the synchronization and optimization of pedestrian-friendly/highway movement systems at intersections (e.g., pedestrian movement and left turn backups), especially for periods of peak use in dense areas. (Cost est.: $20,000.) PSRC--For selected project areas, convene WSDOT, cities, counties, shippers, carriers, and private financial institutions, to develop mutually acceptable strategies combining the independent (and now complementary) actions of the parties affected. An example problem suited to this kind of collaboration is the provision of highway grade separations in the mixed-rail corridor between Seattle and Tacoma. WSDOT--Consider PSRC use of HCT funds to develop strategic placement of highway grade separations for the proposed Seattle-Tacoma mixed commuter and freight rail corridor. Ports--Develop and improve on-dock rail capacity, and in addition, help foster growing railroad cooperation as part of a mutually acceptable public-private strategy to improve intermodal freight mobility within and through the region. Looking to the Future The above action packages are the steps identified by the Roundtable to begin to address freight mobility as an integrated system which is interrelated with more established planning for personal mobility. This is a new regional and state responsibility under federal legislation. The economic health of the region depends to a considerable degree on how well this responsibility is fulfilled in our Pacific Rim gateway, especially given the continuing liberalization of trade policies worldwide. Among the listed actions, are two that are central to a viable and continuing freight mobility program in the state and region. These are: (1) Continued support and cooperation with the Freight Mobility Roundtable, and (2) Completion and maintenance of the freight mobility relational data base and information system. (An initial report has been completed: Analysis of Freight Movements in,the Puget Sound Region, Transmode Consultants, Inc., October 1994). iv Click HERE>/A> for graphic. v. Click HERE>/A> for graphic. vi. Click HERE>/A> for graphic. vii. Click HERE>/A> for graphic. viii. Click HERE>/A> for graphic. ix. Click HERE>/A> for graphic. x.
