s47_regional prioritization of freight networks_ltc2013

7/29/2019 S47_Regional Prioritization of Freight Networks_LTC2013

1/28

Bruce Lambert

REGIONALPRIORITIZATION

OF FREIGHT

NETWORKS


2/28


3/28

IS THE REAL QUESTION THE WHY?


4/28

THE JOB CREATION /LOGISTICS

MESSAGE


5/28

htt : www.wired.com ma azine 2011 05 ff obsi85

COMPLEX INTESTATE CONNECTIONS


6/28

KY TOP 200 FIRMS - INTERMODALFACILITIES

YellowTop 200 FirmGreen Intermodal Facility


7/28

WHAT IS A FREIGHT CORRIDOR

Multijurisdictional network

Multimodal options may exist

Significant traffic generators or traffic volume

Must consider both nodes and networks

Integration of supply chain considerations(operations)

Economic integration into a regional framework


8/28

EXAMPLE - CORRIDOR A-C

A CB

b

Choice - Mode, Route, Operational Patterns, Risk,System Preservation, Pricing, Safety, Environment,Security, National Defense,

project


9/28

OR IS THE REAL QUESTION HOW DOESTHIS CHANGE WHAT I AM DOING

TODAY?Internal View

Freight Mobility

Land Use Multimodal terminals

and Interchanges

Traffic flows

Geometrics, etc. Access

External View

Enhances ability to moveraw materials to finished

goods Competitive intermodal

MAY attract new, value-added businesses

Position regional

businesses to participateand react to globalfreight trends

Improve competitiveness


10/28

FEDERAL PERSPECTIVE ON CORRIDORS


11/28

U.S. FREIGHT CORRIDORS


12/28

MAP-21 FREIGHT PROVISIONS

National Freight Policy

Establishment of a National Freight Network

Critical Rural Freight Corridors

National Freight Strategic Plan

Cost Sharing Formulas

Freight Transportation Conditions and Performance


13/28

NATIONAL FREIGHT NETWORK

Primary freight network

Designated within one year

Based on inventory of freight volume

27,000 centerline miles, existing roadways 3,000 additional miles possible

Redesignation every 10 years

Other portions of the Interstate System

Critical rural freight corridors.

13


14/28


15/28

MAP-21 AND FREIGHT PROVISIONS

State freight plans

Freight Advisory Groups

Performance Measures

Analytical Approach


16/28

WHERE ARE WE GOING?

Project vs. System Driven

Communicating Value

Analytical Orientation

Still not multimodal - silos exist


17/28

FREIGHT PLANNING WILL BE MORE IMPORTANT


18/28

PLANNING FOR FREIGHT- TODAY

ThroughFreight

Within State

To-FromState

Mostly TrucksTend to be heavierproductsRural-urban flowsUrban-urban flows

More modalbalanceLargest

trading

partners areneighborsNeed to movealong corridors

All ModesAll cargosDiscretionaryrouting


19/28

WHERE IS IT GOING? BY DESTINATION

Intra -State

Trade, 25

Regional

35%

Non Regional

Trade

14%

Nafta

7%

Other Intl

10%

Other

17%


20/28

DOES UNDERSTANDING THE BIGPICTURE MATTER?

Will imports/exports go up or down in 10 years?

Where will people live in ten years?

Where will the state see more truck traffic?

What if we go to heavier/longer trucks?

What if the State attracts more manufacturing?

Truck parking issues?

What is my neighbor doing?

What will this change and where?


21/28

EXAMPLES OF REGIONAL THINKING

I-10 Corridor

LATTS I+II

I-70

I-5 Coalition

Border Crossing Coalitions

I-95

I-81

Heartland Intermodal Corridor

Appalachian Regional Commission DRA, Related Regional Groups doing freight studies

Marine Highway, Truck Division, modal studies


22/28


23/28


24/28

STATES CAN PARTNER TO IDENTIFYSTRATEGIC NEEDS

A way to share information on system use andtraffic

Supply chains, regional trends, performance measures

A mechanism to work with regional agencies Common message generates common actions

An input into State planning

Data and economics

Freight Advisory Group agreement

Improved access to data and models

A benchmark for collaborating federal requests

Need to agree on parameters going forward


25/28

MISSISSIPPIS

MAINMULTIMODALCORRIDORS


26/28

COMPARISON OF FREIGHTDEPENDENCY:

US, SOUTHEAST, LOUISIANA (2011)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

US Average Southeast Average Louisiana

Sha

reBasedonEst

imated

IndustryClusters,NIACSCode

Consuming Producing


27/28

FINAL THOUGHTS?

Louisiana benefits From previous investment

Connections to markets

The lack of systems approach

May result in congestion

Add costs to users

Will Refocusing on freight help the StateGrow?

Partnering can strengthen case Federal role is evolving


28/28

Bruce Lambert

Executive Director

Institute for Trade andTransportation Studies

540-455-9882

[email protected]

28

Visit ittsresearch.org for:NewsletterState StatisticsReports and Presentations

s47_regional prioritization of freight networks_ltc2013

Documents