state freight and rail plan - massdot.state.ma.us · intermodal rail transfers ... passenger rail...

State Freight and Rail Plan

Draft Findings and RecommendationsCentral Regional Meeting

Massachusetts Department of Transportation

April 1, 2010

Commonwealth of MassachusettsCommonwealth of Massachusetts

Freight &Freight &Rail PlanRail Plan

Freight & Rail Plan – Key Components

• Multi-modal Freight Plan and standalone Rail Plan• Evaluation of existing conditions and trends

– Heavy inbound & through-traffic for all modes– Light-weight, smaller volume outbound– Highway dominant freight mode – low rail share – Land use and policy issues

• Analysis of future conditions• Evaluation of issues and opportunities• Recommendations

– Infrastructure improvements and state freight policy

EXISTING FREIGHT NETWORK AND FORECAST


U.S. Highway Congestion Increasing• High volume freight truck

routes to increase 230% from 2002 to 2035

Sources: Federal Highway Administration, Office of Freight Management and Operations, Freight Analysis Framework, version 2.2, 2007; National Transportation Policy and Revenue Commission

• US needs $225 billion per year in transportation for state of good repair –spending less than 40% of that


U.S. Rail Corridors and Congestion

Source: Federal Highway Administration, Office of Freight Management and Operations, Freight Analysis Framework, version 2.2, 2007

• Rail volumes expected to increase 88% from 2002 to 2035 – 1.7 billion tons to 3.2 billion tons

• AAR estimates $148 Billion capacity investments needed to meet future demand


• Highway– Aging, congested infrastructure

and few access points into Massachusetts from other New England states

• Rail– Freight has to travel through

Albany to move from the New York City region

– Passenger connections are important and need improvement

• Marine– Port of Boston serves local market– Opportunities for growth but faces

competitive challenges

Regional Context - New England Issues

Daily Long-Haul Traffic, 2002. Source: U.S. Department of Transportation,Federal Highway Administration, Office of Freight Management and Operations, Freight Analysis Framework, version 2.2, 2007


Port of Boston and Northeast Port Container Traffic

Source: American Association of Port Authorities

• Port of Boston serves 30% of New England’s waterborne freight – up 10% from 8 years ago

• 75-90% of port cargo has a destination within 100 miles

• Top bulk commodities: petroleum, LNG, salt, scrap metal

• Top container commodities: fish, furniture, beer & wine, papers, autos


Massachusetts Highway Network


Massachusetts Freight Rail Network


Massachusetts Passenger Rail Network


Massachusetts Multi-Modal Freight Network


Rail Carloads vs Massachusetts GSP• GSP increased 61%, Rail 24% from 1991-2007• GSP increased 11%, Rail decreased 5% from 2002-2007


• Freight Volumes projected to increase by 70% by 2030• Each mode to grow with trucks increasing mode share

Massachusetts Freight Volumes Projected to Increase


Expansion of Large-Scale Distribution Activity Beyond Boston Metro Area


Central Region Distribution Activity


Logan Airport Air Freight Facilities

Source: MassPort

The value of air cargo exports at Logan Airport increased by 107% from 1997 to 2007

INFRASTRUCTURE CONDITIONS AND NEEDS


Multi-Modal Freight Infrastructure is Aging

Braga Bridge,Fall River

Merrimack River Bridge


• 286k: 286,000 lbs rail car capacity becoming industry standard vs current 263,000 lbs

• Double-Stack:Vertical rail line clearance for two intermodal containers with a clearance of 20’8”

Infrastructure Constraints Defined


• Last Mile Truck Access – Trucks provide the last connection between multiple modes

and the final destination such as airports, seaports and intermodal rail transfers

• Designated Truck Routes• Over weight permitting

• Harbor Depth – Increasing harbor depths will allow larger ships to enter the

port as well as reduce existing vessel delays due to the wait for tidal levels to be sufficient

Infrastructure Constraints Defined (cont’d)

MODAL SHIPPING PATTERNS AND

DIVERSION


Modal Variation in Shipping PatternsTruck – 239 million tons Rail – 18 million tons

Source: Global Insight TRANSEARCH 2008 Release

In‐bound, 48%

Out‐bound, 14%Internal,

0.3%

Through, 38%

In‐bound, 37%

Out‐bound, 13%

Internal, 32%

Through, 18%


Example of Modal Shipping VariationSecondary Traffic movements are mostly local, almost all by truck

Paper products move longer distances, often through-trips by truck or rail

Shipments from the New York, NY Region


• Rail costs are approximately 50% lower than truck and water 75% lower than truck

• 1.9 to 5.5 times greater fuel efficiency for rail• Fewer greenhouse gases per ton of freight moved• Congestion relief of less truck VMT growth• Reduced highway pavement maintenance costs

Benefits of Modal Shifts from Truck to Rail and Marine Shipping

“Comparative Evaluation of Rail and Truck Fuel Efficiency on Competitive Corridors”, Federal Railroad Administration, November 19, 2009


• Rail and marine more competitive on long-distance goods movement

• Significant reduction in MA businesses shipping heavy bulk loads that benefit from rail

• Large distribution markets in NJ, NY, PA, etc.• Infrastructure constraints such as:

– Weight on rail (286k)– Vertical clearances (double-stack) for rail corridors– Port and navigational channel depth– Landside access and intermodal connections

Limitations of Modal Shifts


Passenger Rail Annual Ridership: 1997 –2008 in thousands

Old Colony

Attleboro to Providence, Weekday service

Newburyport

Worcester

Attleboro to Providence, Weekend service

Greenbush

Fare increaseFare

increase

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Downeaster

Acela


Most Passenger Rail is Shared Use with Freight

• Capacity, operations, and liability challenges• Can work well together – Downeaster/Pan Am/MBTA


New England High Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Vision

• Downeaster improvements

• Knowledge Corridor / Conn River Line

• Capitol Corridor to Nashua, Manchester and Concord, NH

• South Coast Rail• Inland Route Boston-

Springfield

FREIGHT INVESTMENT SCENARIOS: EVALUATION

OF 5 OPTIONS


Freight Investment Scenarios

• Facilitating anticipated growth in goods movement

• Balancing and diversifying the multi-modal freight system

• Reducing congestion and environmental impacts

• Enhancing economic development opportunities


Types of Projects Considered

• Weight on Rail• Double-Stack• Port Dredging• Intermodal/Transload

and Port Facilities• Highway Capacity

– Highway Corridor Improvements / Lane Additions

– Truck Access to Ports and Intermodal (“last mile”)

Types of Benefits Measured

• Economic Benefits– Shipper Cost Savings;

Truck Congestion Benefits; Freight Logistics Benefits; Near and Long Term Jobs

• Transportation– Auto Congestion

Benefits; Reduced Accidents; Reduced Highway Maintenance

• Environmental– Reduced Greenhouse

Gases; Reduced Emissions


No-Build (Baseline) Scenario


Truck Mode Optimization Investment Scenario• Objective: Examine highway capacity expansions for

major freight truck corridors in MA


Truck Mode Optimization Cost-Benefit Analysis Summary

$5,082$4,900

$182

• Economic Benefits: – Cost Savings: $1,040 million– Near-Term 4,700 jobs– Long-Term 4,300 jobs

• Transportation: – $4,236 million

• Environmental: – Greenhouse Gas Emissions:

CO2 1,005,480 ton increase– Emissions increase $194 million

• Benefit-Cost Ratio: 1.0


Northern Tier Investment Scenario

• Objective: Improve the East-West rail connections from New York through Ayer to Maine– 286k upgrade on connections to Maine, Worcester and Springfield– Full double-stack capability on Patriot Corridor– Supporting investments to intermodal facilities in Ayer


Northern Tier Cost-Benefit Analysis Summary

$348

$93

$255

• Economic Benefits:– Cost Savings: $319 million– Near-Term 150 jobs– Long-Term 100 jobs

• Transportation: – $27 million

• Environmental:– Greenhouse Gas Emissions

CO2: 3,494 ton reduction– Emissions reduction $2

million



Southeastern MA Multi-Modal Scenario• Objective: Improve marine, rail, roadway, and freight

distribution system in Southeastern Massachusetts

– Improved seaport facilities in New Bedford and Fall River

– South Coast Rail 286k improvements to Fall River and New Bedford

– Improved truck access to ports

– Port dredging of New Bedford to allow larger ships and short-sea-shipping

Multi-Use Facility at State Pier

North Terminal Expansion

Restructure Rte 6 Bridge, Truck Access at Rte 18 & Channel Deepening


Southeastern MA Cost-Benefit Analysis Summary

$135

$185

($50)

• Economic Benefits: – Cost Savings $110 million– Near-Term 340 jobs– Long-Term 50 jobs

• Transportation:– $25 million

• Environmental: – Greenhouse Gas Emissions

CO2: 1,298 ton reduction– Emissions reduction $780,000



Central and Western MA Freight Scenario• Objective: Improve connections on north-south rail corridors

and improve truck access to intermodal and aviation facilities– 286k improvements on north-south rail corridors– Second generation double-stack on north-south corridors

286kDouble Stack


Central and Western MA Cost-Benefit Analysis Summary

$212

$69

$143

• Economic Benefits: – Cost Savings $158 million– Near-Term 105 jobs– Long-Term 75 jobs

• Transportation: – $53 million

• Environmental:– Greenhouse Gas Emissions

CO2: 2,187 ton reduction– Emissions reduction $817,000



Boston Area Freight Distribution Scenario• Objective: Facilitate goods movement distribution through

landside and water connections in Boston


Boston Area Freight Distribution Cost-Benefit Analysis Summary

$415

$290

$126

• Economic Benefits:– Cost Savings $359 million– Near-Term 190 jobs– Long-Term 85 jobs

• Transportation:– $54 million

• Environmental: – Greenhouse Gas Emissions

CO2: 4,053 ton reduction– Emissions reduction $3 million



Benefit-Cost Ratio and Total Cost by Investment Scenario


Benefit-Cost Ratio and Total Cost by Investment Scenario – Excluding Truck Mode Optimization


Assessment of Modal Shift to Rail

• Rail mode share in 2007 = 6.45%– US Average = 12%– Projected to drop to 6.13% by 2035

• Northern Tier or Central/Western investment scenarios needed to maintain rail share– 5% increase in overall rail volumes

• All investment scenarios increase rail volumes by 14% and increase rail mode share to 7.1%

• CSX Transaction – Double-stack on highest volume corridor


Freight Projects with Strongest Return on Investment (ROI)


Policy Issues• Land Use Development

– Identifying, preserving and facilitating freight-intensive uses in Massachusetts

• Funding and Financing– Freight considerations in prioritization of projects– Public benefits justify participation in public-private

partnerships– Industrial Rail Access Program (IRAP)

• Regulatory Environment– Truck routes, regional multi-modal planning, etc.

• Passenger Rail– Reverse commute, operations, TOD / Smart Growth

State Freight and Rail Plan

April 1, 2010

Commonwealth of MassachusettsCommonwealth of Massachusetts

Massachusetts Department of TransportationMassachusetts Department of Transportation

Thank youQuestions and Discussionwww.mass.gov/massdot/freightandrailplan


Actions to Address Land Use Development Policy Issues

• Freight-intensive land use policy– Include freight-intensive uses in 43D Priority Sites

and Growth District Initiative• Statewide inventory of strategic sites

– Partner with EOHED, MassEcon, MassDevelopment– Large and medium parcels with multi-modal access

• Industrial incentive areas to preserve freight land uses– Modeled after Agricultural Incentive Areas

• Pre-review of freight-intensive development under MEPA


Actions to Address Funding & Financing Policy Issues

• Greater consideration of freight in transportation funding decisions

• Increased use of public-private partnerships for strategic multi-modal investments– Public participation in funding private freight facilities

based on anticipated public benefits• Industrial Rail Access Program (IRAP)

– Matching funding and low-interest loans for economic development opportunities

• Continue to pursue Federal funding opportunities such as TIGER and HSIPR


Actions to Address Regulatory Policy Issues

• MassDOT to actively manage all truck routing– Heavy haul routes – Web-based system for truckers and local

communities– Streamlined permitting– Coordination of hazardous materials routing

• Engage in regional multi-modal planning and investments such as I-95 Corridor Coalition

• Pro-active truck parking / rest area program


Actions to Address Passenger Rail Policy Issues

• Increase MBTA rail ridership by improving operations and service of existing system

• Promote reverse commute and jobs access– Integrate with Gateway Cities / EOHED initiatives

• Enhance transit-oriented development / sustainable development at train stations– Livable Communities initiative by EPA, HUD and US

DOT – planning and implementation funding– Expand recommendations from South Coast Rail

Economic Development and Land Use Plan

state freight and rail plan - massdot.state.ma.us · intermodal rail transfers ... passenger rail...

Documents