HomeMy Public PortalAbout03 March 23, 2009 Plans and Programs86711
RECORDS
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
TIME: 1:30 p.m.
DATE: Monday, March 23, 2009
LOCATION: BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside
* * * COMMITTEE MEMBERS * * *
Bob Botts, Chair / Don Robinson, City of Banning
Karen Spiegel, Vice Chair / Steve Nolan, City of Corona
Robin Lowe / Eric McBride, City of Hemet
Patrick Mullany / Larry Spicer, City of Indian Wells
Glenn Miller / Ben Godfrey, City of Indio
Jesse Molina / Bonnie Flickinger, City of Moreno Valley
Frank Hall / Malcolm Miller, City of Norco
Dick Kelly / Cindy Finerty, City of Palm Desert
Steve Pougnet / Ginny Foat, City of Palm Springs
Daryl Busch / Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris
James Potts / Jim Ayres, City of San Jacinto
Scott Farnam / Bridgette Moore, City of Wildomar
Bob Buster, County of Riverside, District I
Roy Wilson, County of Riverside, District IV
Marion Ashley, County of Riverside, District V
*** STAFF ***
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director
* * * AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY * * *
State Transportation Improvement Program
Regional Transportation Improvement Program
New Corridors
Intermodal Programs (Transit, Rail, Rideshare)
Air Quality and Clean Fuels
Regional Agencies, Regional Planning
Intelligent Transportation System Planning and Programs
Congestion Management Program
Comments are welcomed by the Committee. If you wish to provide comments to the Committee, please
complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board.
11.36.15
"
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
P L A N S A N D P R O G R A M S C O M M I T T E E
w w w . r c t c . o r g
A G E N D A *
* A c t i o n s m a y b e t a k e n o n a n y i t e m l i s t e d o n t h e a g e n d a
1 : 3 0 p . m .
M o n d a y , M a r c h 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
B O A R D R O O M
C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C e n t e r
4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t r e e t , F i r s t F l o o r , R i v e r s i d e
I n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e B r o w n A c t a n d G o v e r n m e n t C o d e S e c t i o n 5 4 9 5 7 . 5 , a g e n d a
m a t e r i a l s d i s t r i b u t e d 7 2 h o u r s p r i o r t o t h e m e e t i n g , w h i c h a r e p u b l i c r e c o r d s r e l a t i n g t o
o p e n s e s s i o n a g e n d a i t e m s , w i l l b e a v a i l a b l e f o r i n s p e c t i o n b y m e m b e r s o f t h e p u b l i c p r i o r
t o t h e m e e t i n g a t t h e C o m m i s s i o n o f f i c e , 4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t r e e t , T h i r d F l o o r , R i v e r s i d e , C A ,
a n d o n t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s w e b s i t e , w w w . r c t c . o r g .
I n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e A m e r i c a n s w i t h D i s a b i l i t i e s A c t a n d G o v e r n m e n t C o d e S e c t i o n
5 4 9 5 4 . 2 , i f y o u n e e d s p e c i a l a s s i s t a n c e t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n a C o m m i t t e e m e e t i n g , p l e a s e
c o n t a c t t h e C l e r k o f t h e B o a r d a t ( 9 5 1 ) 7 8 7 - 7 1 4 1 . N o t i f i c a t i o n o f a t l e a s t 4 8 h o u r s p r i o r t o
m e e t i n g t i m e w i l l a s s i s t s t a f f i n a s s u r i n g t h a t r e a s o n a b l e a r r a n g e m e n t s c a n b e m a d e t o
p r o v i d e a c c e s s i b i l i t y a t t h e m e e t i n g .
1 . C A L L T O O R D E R
2 . P L E D G E O F A L L E G I A N C E
3 . R O L L C A L L
4 . P U B L I C C O M M E N T S - E a c h i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r i s l i m i t e d t o s p e a k t h r e e ( 3 )
c o n t i n u o u s m i n u t e s o r l e s s . T h e C o m m i t t e e m a y , e i t h e r a t t h e d i r e c t i o n o f
t h e C h a i r o r b y m a j o r i t y v o t e o f t h e C o m m i t t e e , w a i v e t h i s t h r e e ( 3 ) m i n u t e
t i m e l i m i t a t i o n . D e p e n d i n g o n t h e n u m b e r o f i t e m s o n t h e A g e n d a a n d t h e
n u m b e r o f s p e a k e r s , t h e C h a i r m a y , a t h i s / h e r d i s c r e t i o n , r e d u c e t h e t i m e o f
e a c h s p e a k e r t o t w o ( 2 ) c o n t i n u o u s m i n u t e s . A l s o , t h e C o m m i t t e e m a y
t e r m i n a t e p u b l i c c o m m e n t s i f s u c h c o m m e n t s b e c o m e r e p e t i t i o u s . S p e a k e r s
m a y n o t y i e l d t h e i r t i m e t o o t h e r s w i t h o u t t h e c o n s e n t o f t h e C h a i r . A n y
w r i t t e n d o c u m e n t s t o b e d i s t r i b u t e d o r p r e s e n t e d t o t h e C o m m i t t e e s h a l l b e
s u b m i t t e d t o t h e C l e r k o f t h e B o a r d . T h i s p o l i c y a p p l i e s t o P u b l i c C o m m e n t s
a n d c o m m e n t s o n A g e n d a I t e m s .
Plans and Programs Committee Agenda
March 23, 2009
Page 2
Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss matters
raised during public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on
the agenda. Board members may refer such matters to staff for factual
information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration.
5. - APPROVAL OF MINUTES — February 23, 2009
6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee may add an item to the Agenda
after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the
item and that the item came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to
the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires
2/3 vote of the Committee. if there are less than 2/3 of the Committee
members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote.
Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.)
7. CONSENT CALENDAR — All matters on the Consent Calendar will be
approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate
action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be
placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
•
8. AMENDMENT WITH ENGINEERING RESOURCES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA •
FOR DESIGN OF A LA SIERRA STATION PARKING LOT EXPANSION
Page 1
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 02-33-029, Amendment No. 7 with
Engineering Resources of Southern California in the amount of
$12,362 to perform station design services for a total not -to -exceed
agreement amount of $909,603;
2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission;
3) Approve a budget adjustment to increase preliminary engineering
expenditures by $108,254; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
"
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e A g e n d a
M a r c h 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
P a g e 3
9 .
C O M M U T E R R A I L P R O G R A M U P D A T E
O v e r v i e w
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) R e c e i v e a n d f i l e a n u p d a t e o n t h e C o m m u t e r R a i l P r o g r a m ; a n d
2 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
P a g e 8
1 0 . A M E R I C A N R E C O V E R Y A N D R E I N V E S T M E N T A C T F O R M U L A 5 3 0 7 / 5 3 1 1
T R A N S I T F U N D I N G A L L O C A T I O N A N D D I S T R I B U T I O N
O v e r v i e w
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
P a g e 1 6
1 ) A p p r o v e t h e p r o j e c t l i s t r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r t h e A m e r i c a n R e c o v e r y
a n d R e i n v e s t m e n t A c t ( A R R A ) f o r m u l a 5 3 0 7 f u n d i n g a l l o c a t i o n f o r
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y t r a n s i t p r o j e c t s ;
2 ) A p p r o v e a m e n d m e n t o f t h e F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n s
( S R T P ) f o r t h e c i t y o f C o r o n a , c i t y o f R i v e r s i d e ,
C o m m i s s i o n / M e t r o l i n k , R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y a n d S u n L i n e T r a n s i t
A g e n c y t o r e f l e c t t h e i n c l u s i o n o f t h e A R R A p r o j e c t s ; a n d
3 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
1 1 . P R O P O S I T I O N 1 B F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 C A L I F O R N I A T R A N S I T S E C U R I T Y
G R A N T P R O G R A M C A L I F O R N I A T R A N S I T A S S I S T A N C E F U N D A N D
S U P P O R T I N G R E S O L U T I O N
P a g e 2 0
O v e r v i e w
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) A d o p t R e s o l u t i o n N o . 0 9 - 0 0 5 , " R e s o l u t i o n o f t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n A p p r o v i n g t h e A l l o c a t i o n o f F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9
P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B - 6 1 6 1 - 0 0 0 2 C a l i f o r n i a T r a n s i t S e c u r i t y G r a n t P r o g r a m
C a l i f o r n i a T r a n s i t A s s i s t a n c e F u n d s ( C T S G P - C T A F ) P o p u l a t i o n F u n d s " ;
2 ) A l l o c a t e t h e C T S G P - C T A F d i s c r e t i o n a r y f u n d s t o t a l i n g $ 1 , 5 5 3 , 8 2 2 f o r
t h e l e a d p r o j e c t s p o n s o r s p e r A t t a c h m e n t 1 ; a n d
3 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
Plans and Programs Committee Agenda
March 23, 2009
Page 4
12. RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY CAPITAL PROJECT REPROGRAMMING
Page 26
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) request to reprogram
federal and local funds remaining on completed and yet -to -be started
capital projects from FY 2004/05 — 2007/08 grant years to cover
immediate FY 2008/09 capital needs originally programmed primarily
with State Transit Assistance (STA) funds;
2) Approve the $783,382 excess and unassigned STA funds resulting
from the reprogramming structure be retained by RTA to be utilized
for other capital projects that will be identified in later years;
3) Amend RTA's FY 2008/09 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect
these changes; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
13. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ANALYSIS AND COMMUNITY OUTREACH
STUDY
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
Page 29 •
1) This item is for the Committee to receive and provide input on the
Environmental Justice (EJ) draft toolkit entitled Hea/thy Communities
and Healthy Economies - A Toolkit for Goods Movement; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
14. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA
15. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT
Overview
This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report
on attended and upcoming meetings/conferences and issues related to
Commission activities.
•
Plans and Programs Committee Agenda
March 23, 2009
Page 5
• 16. ADJOURNMENT
The next Plans and Programs Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at
1:30 p.m., Monday, April 27, 2009, Board Chambers, First Floor,
County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside.
•
Absent
County of Riverside, District I J7i 0
County of Riverside, District
County of Riverside, District
City, of. Banning
City of Corona
Heme
City of Indian Wells
City afnklidio
City of Moreno Valley
City ofNorco
City of Palm Desert
City of Palm Springs
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE
ROLL CALL
March 23, 2009
Present
City of Perris
City of San :Jacinto
City of Wildomar
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
PLANS AND PROGRAMS SIGN -IN SHEET
MARCH 23, 2009
NAME
AGENCY
E MAIL ADDRESS
fipAV3polL,
away?, 444�
4W,re,eitos.0,%
••\;..,-,..\4.,V.,.�`,L;v t-.
1� @e,
G�sNfr--) fv\Avx
C, ..._, nc. .
sp y
.,..,o,,z
c
C��
;
-
..p .
N A R i ofAC A- K Ai Lz \/
p\ v r`7zr, 0. c ,,,,-,�
e .'v, PC :e
SA -ea c JFt c r no r V
C? C 1\'CO
LI
-_,
(--<
/
/n ) / 402/144g J/aWfi��IM
"logce
COP7I
f'J" /17.- riQ� / w
fr-:41/4/,-7Viefz.[
,--rile_ s sf Moc.✓N4--
NoRe:rUU1/A-L GE
1,53EM ceNcv4L- ate
"
A G E N D A I T E M 5
M I N U T E S
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
P L A N S A N D P R O G R A M S C O M M I T T E E
M o n d a y , F e b r u a r y 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
M I N U T E S
1 . C A L L T O O R D E R
T h e m e e t i n g o f t h e P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e w a s c a l l e d t o o r d e r b y
C h a i r P r o T e m D i c k K e l l y a t 1 : 3 6 p . m . , i n t h e B o a r d R o o m a t t h e C o u n t y o f
R i v e r s i d e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C e n t e r , 4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t r e e t , F i r s t F l o o r , R i v e r s i d e ,
C a l i f o r n i a , 9 2 5 0 1 .
2 . P L E D G E O F A L L E G I A N C E
A t t h i s t i m e , C o m m i s s i o n e r B o b B u s t e r l e d t h e P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s
C o m m i t t e e i n a f l a g s a l u t e .
3 . R O L L C A L L
M e m b e r s / A l t e r n a t e s P r e s e n t
M a r i o n A s h l e y
B o b B o t t s
D a r y l B u s c h
B o b B u s t e r
F r a n k H a l l
D i c k K e l l y
R o b i n L o w e
G l e n n M i l l e r
J e s s e M o l i n a
P a t r i c k M u l l a n y
K a r e n S p i e g e l
R o y W i l s o n
4 . P U B L I C C O M M E N T S
M e m b e r s A b s e n t
S c o t t F a r n a m
S t e v e P o u g n e t
T h e r e w e r e n o r e q u e s t s t o s p e a k f r o m t h e p u b l i c .
RCTC Plans and Programs Committee Minutes
February 23, 2009
Page 2
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 27, 2008
M/S/C (Busch/) to approve the minutes of October 27, 2008, as
submitted.
Abstain: Miller, Potts, Spiegel
6. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
At this time, Chair Pro Tem Kelly opened nominations for the slate of
officers.
Commissioner Robin Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Patrick Mullany,
nominated Commissioner Bob Botts for the Chair position. No other
nominations were received. Chair Pro Tem Kelly closed the nominations.
Commissioner Botts was unanimously elected as the Plans and Programs
Committee's Chair.
At this time, Commissioner Botts assumed the Chair.
Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Buster, nominated
Commissioner Karen Spiegel for the Vice Chair position. No other
nominations were received. Chair Botts closed the nominations.
Commissioner Spiegel was unanimously elected as the Plans and Programs
Committee's Vice Chair.
7. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS
There was a revision to Agenda Item 10, Attachment 2.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be
approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate
action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be
placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
M/S/C (Lowe/Spiegel) to approve the following Consent Calendar
items:
8A. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE
1► Receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail
Program; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
•
•
RCTC Plans and Programs Committee Minutes
February 23, 2009
Page 3
• 9.
•
OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENT STUDY FOR THE ORTEGA HIGHWAY/
STATE ROUTE 74
Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director, presented the operational
improvement study for the Ortega Highway/State Route 74.
In response to Chair Botts' concern regarding major safety and increased
capacity issues, Cathy Bechtel replied that Caltrans has strict guidelines for
safety improvements. This study provides an overview of the existing
conditions and makes recommendations for projects that will improve
intercounty mobility. Additionally, there are no short term plans for
increased capacity at this time.
M/S/C to receive and file the Operational Improvement Study for the
Ortega Highway/State Route 74.
10. SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN BUDGET AND REVENUE ESTIMATE
Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director, provided an overview of the
preliminary SRTP budget.
At Commissioner Lowe's request, Robert Yates explained the restrictions on
the carryover balances.
In response to Commissioner Spiegel's request, Robert Yates clarified that
the continuing resolution occurs on an annual basis as part of the Short
Range Transit Plan process.
Anne Mayer, Executive Director, noted that staff is being conservative with
the revenue estimates related to transit services. Staff will notify the transit
operators as updates are received.
M/S/C to receive and file the preliminary revenue estimate for the
Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) budget process.
11. LOCAL MATCH CONTRIBUTION FOR SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION
PROJECT APPLICATION TO THE MOBILE SOURCE REDUCTION REVIEW
COMMITTEE CALL FOR PROJECTS
Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director, presented a request from the cities
of Corona, Moreno Valley, and Riverside for a joint project application local
match contribution for a signal synchronization project.
RCTC Plans and Programs Committee Minutes
February 23, 2009
Page 4
M/S/C (Busch/Lowe) to approve a contribution in the amount of
$50,000 of 1989 Measure A Commuter .Assistance reserves for a
joint project application by the cities of Corona, Moreno Valley, and
Riverside for signal synchronization.
12. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR
No items were pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
13. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT
13A. Anne Mayer announced:
• There is a special reception aboard the Union Pacific Heritage Fleet on
Monday, March 2, 2009; and
• There will be a second Perris Valley Line public hearing on Thursday,
February 26, 2009 at 6:00 p.m.
14. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Plans and Programs
Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 2:03 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
juuQ i ck_a_v\ow-.-
Jennifer Harmon
Clerk of the Board
•
•
AGENDA ITEM 8
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
D A T E :
M a r c h 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
S h e l d o n P e t e r s o n , R a i l M a n a g e r
M a r k M a s s m a n , B e c h t e l P r o j e c t M a n a g e r
B i l l B i e h l , B e c h t e l P r o j e c t C o o r d i n a t o r
T H R O U G H :
R o b e r t Y a t e s , M u l t i m o d a l S e r v i c e s D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
A m e n d m e n t w i t h E n g i n e e r i n g R e s o u r c e s o f S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a f o r
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) A p p r o v e A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 2 - 3 3 - 0 2 9 , A m e n d m e n t N o . 7 w i t h E n g i n e e r i n g
R e s o u r c e s o f S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a i n t h e a m o u n t o f $ 1 2 , 3 6 2 t o p e r f o r m
s t a t i o n d e s i g n s e r v i c e s f o r a t o t a l n o t - t o - e x c e e d a g r e e m e n t a m o u n t o f
$ 9 0 9 , 6 0 3 ;
2 �% A u t h o r i z e t h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r , p u r s u a n t t o l e g a l c o u n s e l r e v i e w , t o
e x e c u t e t h e a g r e e m e n t o n b e h a l f o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ;
3 ) A p p r o v e a b u d g e t a d j u s t m e n t t o i n c r e a s e p r e l i m i n a r y e n g i n e e r i n g
e x p e n d i t u r e s b y $ 1 0 8 , 2 5 4 ; a n d
4 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
P r o j e c t I n f o r m a t i o n
T h e C o m m i s s i o n o w n s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4 . 6 a c r e s o f u n d e v e l o p e d p r o p e r t y n e x t t o
t h e L a S i e r r a M e t r o l i n k s t a t i o n . T h e r e i s a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o e x p a n d t h e p a r k i n g
f a c i l i t y o n t h i s v a c a n t p r o p e r t y a n d d r a m a t i c a l l y i m p r o v e t h e m u l t i m o d a l b e n e f i t s o f
t h e s t a t i o n . T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e P r o g r a m h a s i d e n t i f i e d a
s i g n i f i c a n t n e e d f o r a d e d i c a t e d p a r k a n d r i d e f a c i l i t y f o r c a r p o o l s a n d v a n p o o l s i n
R i v e r s i d e a l o n g S t a t e R o u t e - 9 1 . T h i s e x p a n d e d f a c i l i t y w o u l d a l s o s u p p o r t a
t r a n s f e r l o c a t i o n f o r t h e O r a n g e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A u t h o r i t y / R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t
A g e n c y ( O C T A / R T A ) C o m m u t e r R o u t e t o O r a n g e C o u n t y . T h e p r o p o s a l i s t o
e x p a n d t h e s t a t i o n p a r k i n g f a c i l i t y a n d a d d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 5 0 0 p a r k i n g s p a c e s . I n
a d d i t i o n , a n e w s t r e e t e n t r a n c e w i l l b e p r o v i d e d a l o n g I n d i a n a A v e n u e a n d t h e
f a c i l i t y w i l l h a v e d e d i c a t e d b u s s t o p s a n d p a s s e n g e r l o a d i n g a r e a . I n i t i a l
c o n s t r u c t i o n e s t i m a t e s f o r t h e p a r k i n g e x p a n s i o n a r e a t $ 2 m i l l i o n . F u n d i n g f o r t h e
A g e n d a I t e m 8
1
construction is proposed as Proposition 1 B Public Transportation Modernization,
Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) and Commuter
Assistance 1989 Measure A funds.
To initiate this project, staff will require the amendment of an agreement with
Engineering Resources of Southern California (ERSC) to prepare the Plans,
Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) for the construction of the La Sierra Metrolink
station parking expansion. This team is uniquely qualified to perform this work
since it has been involved in previous parking lot expansions at La Sierra and
Downtown Riverside.
Engineering Resources Contract History
In November 2001, the Commission entered into Agreement No. 02-33-029 with
ERSC to provide engineering and design services for the Downtown Riverside and
La Sierra Metrolink stations. The original not -to -exceed amount of the agreement
was $196,295. Over the years, the agreement has been amended six times by the
Commission. Although Amendment 4 for design of a temporary parking lot at the
Downtown Riverside station was approved by the Commission in an amount of
$52,638, the amendment itself was never executed. However, the agreement
increase was picked -up in Amendment 5, which was also approved by the
Commission and carried forward for a current not -to exceed total contract value of
$897,241.
Under Amendment No. 7, ERSC will prepare the PS&E for the construction of the
new La Sierra Metrolink station parking lot expansion. The ERSC proposal is
attached to this report. The engineering scope of services is estimated at
$108,254, which will exceed the currently adjusted contract balance by $12,362.
Staff recommends that the Commission approve Amendment No. 7 to add the
La Sierra Parking Lot expansion engineering scope and $12,362 to this agreement.
This will increase the total not -to -exceed amount of this agreement to $909,603.
Staff intends for this to be the final modification of this contract and will solicit
Statements of Qualifications for future work. The funding to cover the PS&E for
this project will come from Measure A Commuter Assistance funds.
Agenda Item 8
•
•
2
"
"
"
F i n a n c i a l I n f o r m a t i o n
I n F i s c a l Y e a r B u d g e t :
N o
Y e a r :
F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9
A m o u n t :
$ 1 0 8 , 2 5 4
S o u r c e o f F u n d s :
M e a s u r e A
B u d g e t A d j u s t m e n t :
Y e s
G L A N o . :
2 2 1 3 3 8 1 1 0 1 P 3 8 0 9 $ 1 0 8 , 2 5 4
2 2 6 4 1 9 7 0 0 2 P 3 8 0 9 $ 1 0 8 , 2 5 4 T r a n s f e r f r o m C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e t o R a i l C a p i t a l
2 2 1 3 3 5 4 0 0 1 P 3 8 0 9 $ 1 0 8 , 2 5 4 T r a n s f e r t o R a i l C a p i t a l f r o m C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e
F i s c a l P r o c e d u r e s A p p r o v e d :
\ ; ; 0 1 - a o r
D a t e :
3 / 1 3 / 0 9
A t t a c h m e n t : A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 2 - 3 3 - 0 2 9 - 0 7
A g e n d a I t e m 8
3
"
"
"
A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 2 - 3 3 - 0 2 9 - 0 7
A M E N D M E N T N O . 7
T O
A G R E E M E N T N o . 0 2 - 3 3 - 0 2 9
F O R P R E L I M I N A R Y E N G I N E E R I N G A N D E N V I R O N M E N T A L S E R V I C E S
W I T H E N G I N E E R I N G R E S O U R C E S O F S O U T H E R N C A L I F O R N I A , I N C .
1 . P A R T I E S A N D D A T E
T h i s A m e n d m e n t N o . 7 t o t h e A g r e e m e n t f o r p r e l i m i n a r y e n g i n e e r i n g a n d
e n v i r o n m e n t a l s e r v i c e s i s m a d e a n d e n t e r e d i n t o a s o f t h i s d a y o f
2 0 0 8 , b y a n d b e t w e e n t h e R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
( " C o m m i s s i o n " ) a n d E N G I N E E R I N G R E S O U R S E S O F S O U T H E R N C A L I F O R N I A , I N C .
( " C o n s u l t a n t " ) . B o t h C o m m i s s i o n a n d C o n s u l t a n t m a y a l s o b e r e f e r r e d t o i n d i v i d u a l l y
a s " P a r t y " a n d c o l l e c t i v e l y a s " P a r t i e s . "
2 . R E C I T A L S
2 . 1 T h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d t h e C o n s u l t a n t h a v e e n t e r e d i n t o a n A g r e e m e n t
d a t e d N o v e m b e r 1 4 , 2 0 0 1 ( A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 2 - 3 3 - 0 2 9 ) f o r t h e p u r p o s e
o f p r o v i d i n g p r e l i m i n a r y e n g i n e e r i n g a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l s e r v i c e s ( t h e
" M a s t e r A g r e e m e n t " ) .
2 . 2 O n o r a b o u t J u l y 1 0 , 2 0 0 2 , t h e P a r t i e s e n t e r e d i n t o A m e n d m e n t N o . 1
( A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 3 - 3 3 - 0 0 3 ) t o a m e n d t h e M a s t e r A g r e e m e n t t o p r o v i d e
f o r t h e f i n a l P S & E d e s i g n f o r P h a s e I I o f t h e e x p a n s i o n o f t h e e x i s t i n g
R i v e r s i d e - L a S i e r r a M e t r o l i n k s t a t i o n a n d o t h e r m i s c e l l a n e o u s s e r v i c e s
i n c l u d i n g p r e p a r i n g a n d / o r p e r f o r m i n g s o l a r p a n e l f i n a l d e s i g n , A L T A
S u r v e y , B i o l o g i c a l S u r v e y a n d R C C I m p o r t B o r r o w P l a n .
2 . 3 O n o r a b o u t N o v e m b e r 2 6 , 2 0 0 2 , t h e P a r t i e s e n t e r e d i n t o A m e n d m e n t
N o . 2 ( A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 3 - 3 3 - 0 2 0 ) t o a m e n d t h e M a s t e r A g r e e m e n t t o
p r o v i d e f o r a d d i t i o n a l f i n a l d e s i g n s e r v i c e s , t o r e i m b u r s e t h e c o s t f o r
r e q u i r e d C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e P e r m i t F e e s , a n d t o p r o v i d e D e s i g n
C o n s t r u c t i o n S u p p o r t S e r v i c e s f o r P h a s e I a n d P h a s e I I e x p a n s i o n o f t h e
R i v e r s i d e - L a S i e r r a P a r k i n g L o t a n d f o r t h e e x p a n s i o n o f t h e D o w n t o w n
R i v e r s i d e S t a t i o n P a r k i n g L o t .
E n g i n e e r i n g R e s o u r c e s - A m e n d m e n t N o . 7 P a g e 1
4
2.4 On or about October 22, 2003, the Parties entered into Amendment No.
3 (Agreement No. RO-03-33-062) to amend the Master Agreement to
provide preliminary design and environmental services, including
preliminary site expansion design and property acquisition assistance, for
a new parking lot on the east side of the Riverside -Downtown Metrolink
Station.
2.5 On or about November 12, 2003, the Commision authorized the Parties
to enter into Amendment No. 4 (Agreement No. 04-33-038) to amend
the Master Agreement to provide for final design and construction
support services, including project management, development of
preliminary plans and estimates, completion of final plans for upgrade and
bid support services, for the conversion of the westerly temporary
Riverside -Downtown Metrolink Station main parking area to a permanent
facility. The authorized amount was Fifty two thousand, six hundred
thirty eight dollars ($52,638). Amendment 4 was not executed.
2.6 On or about August 26, 2005, the Parties entered into Amendment No. 5
(Agreement No. 06-33-504) to amend the Master Agreement to provide
final design and construction support services for the new Riverside-
Downtown Metrolink Station East Side Parking Lot.
2.7 On or about August 11, 2008, the Parties entered into Amendment No. 6
(Agreement No. 02-33-029) to amend the Master Agreement to provide for the
completion of engineering as -built drawings and preparation of design and
specifications for walkways and parking lots surfaces, as assigned, for the
Riverside -Downtown and La Sierra Metrolink Stations consistent with the Master
Agreement
2.8 The parties now desire to amend the Master Agreement to provide for
final design and construction support services, including project
management, development of preliminary plans and estimates and
completion of final plans for the conversion of the RCTC property
adjacent to the La Sierra Metrolink Station main parking area to a
permanent parking facility consistent with the Master Agreement, as
heretofore amended.
3. TERMS
3.1 The term of the Master Agreement is hereby extended for an additional
term (the "First Extended Term") until December 31, 2009, unless earlier
terminated as provided in the Master Agreement.
Engineering Resources - Amendment No. 7 Page 2
•
•
5
"
"
"
T h e S c o p e o f W o r k f o r t h e A g r e e m e n t s h a l l b e a m e n d e d t o i n c l u d e
S e r v i c e s , a s t h a t t e r m i s d e f i n e d i n S e c t i o n 3 . 1 o f t h e A g r e e m e n t , t o
p r o v i d e f o r f i n a l d e s i g n a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n s u p p o r t s e r v i c e s , i n c l u d i n g
p r o j e c t m a n a g e m e n t , d e v e l o p m e n t o f p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n s a n d e s t i m a t e s ,
c o m p l e t i o n o f f i n a l p l a n s f o r c o n v e r s i o n o f t h e R C T C p r o p e r t y a d j a c e n t
t o t h e L a S i e r r a M e t r o l i n k S t a t i o n m a i n p a r k i n g a r e a t o a p e r m a n e n t
p a r k i n g f a c i l i t y S e r v i c e s t o b e p r o v i d e d p u r s u a n t t o t h i s A m e n d m e n t
i n c l u d e , b u t a r e n o t l i m i t e d t o , p r o j e c t m a n a g e m e n t a n d p r e p a r a t i o n o f
c o n s t r u c t i o n d r a w i n g s a n d p r o j e c t s p e c i f i c a t i o n s .
3 . 2 T h e s e r v i c e s d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s A m e n d m e n t s h a l l b e c o m p e n s a t e d i n t h e
s a m e m a n n e r a s s e t f o r t h i n t h e A g r e e m e n t a n d s h a l l n o t e x c e e d a b a s e
v a l u e o f O n e H u n d r e d E i g h t T h o u s a n d , T w o H u n d r e d F i f t y F o u r D o l l a r s
( $ 1 0 8 , 2 5 4 ) . T h e c u r r e n t a u t h o r i z e d t o t a l c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r t h i s
A g r e e m e n t i s E i g h t H u n d r e d N i n e t y S e v e n T h o u s a n d T w o H u n d r e d F o r t y
O n e D o l l a r s ( $ 8 9 7 , 2 4 1 ) . H o w e v e r , A m e n d m e n t N u m b e r 4 w a s n o t
e x e c u t e d ( i n t h e a m o u n t o f F i f t y T w o T h o u s a n d S i x H u n d r e d T h i r t y E i g h t
D o l l a r s ( $ 5 2 , 6 3 8 ) ) . A s s u c h , t h e c u r r e n t a u t h o r i z e d t o t a l c o m p e n s a t i o n
s h o u l d b e E i g h t H u n d r e d F o r t y F o u r T h o u s a n d S i x H u n d r e d T h r e e D o l l a r s
( $ 8 4 4 , 6 0 3 ) a f t e r a d j u s t m e n t f o r A m e n d m e n t N o . 4 . T h e m a x i m u m
c o m p e n s a t i o n p r o v i d e d u n d e r t h e M a s t e r A g r e e m e n t , a s h e r e t o f o r e
a m e n d e d , i s c h a n g e d b y t h i s A m e n d m e n t i n t h e a m o u n t o f S i x t y F i v e
T h o u s a n d D o l l a r s ( $ 6 5 , 0 0 0 ) . T h e t o t a l c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r t h e A g r e e m e n t ,
a s a m e n d e d b y A m e n d m e n t N o . 1 , A m e n d m e n t N o . 2 , A m e n d m e n t N o .
3 , A m e n d m e n t N o . 4 ( n o t e x e c u t e d ) , A m e n d m e n t N o . 5 , A m e n d m e n t
N o . 6 a n d t h i s A m e n d m e n t N o . 7 s h a l l n o t e x c e e d N i n e H u n d r e d N i n e
T h o u s a n d S i x H u n d r e d T h r e e D o l l a r s ( $ 9 0 9 , 6 0 3 ) .
3 . 3 E x c e p t a s a m e n d e d b y t h i s A m e n d m e n t , a l l p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e M a s t e r
A g r e e m e n t , a s p r e v i o u s l y a m e n d e d b y A m e n d m e n t N o . 1 , A m e n d m e n t
N o . 2 , A m e n d m e n t N o . 3 , A m e n d m e n t N o . 4 ( n o t e x e c u t e d ) , A m e n d m e n t
N o . 5 a n d A m e n d m e n t 6 , i n c l u d i n g w i t h o u t l i m i t a t i o n t h e i n d e m n i t y a n d
i n s u r a n c e p r o v i s i o n s , s h a l l r e m a i n i n f u l l f o r c e a n d e f f e c t a n d s h a l l g o v e r n
t h e a c t i o n s o f t h e p a r t i e s u n d e r t h i s A m e n d m e n t .
E n g i n e e r i n g R e s o u r c e s - A m e n d m e n t N o . 7 P a g e 3
6
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed the Agreement on the
date first herein above written.
SIGNATURE PAGE
TO
AGREEMENT NO. 02-33-029-07
RIVERSIDE COUNTY ENGINEERING RESOURCES OF
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, INC.
By:
Anne Mayer, Executive Director Signature
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Best Best & Krieger LLP
General Counsel
Name
Title
Engineering Resources - Amendment No. 7 Page 4
•
•
7
illMAIZAA AA) loom*
I Seltflid Illrld 011101/110 .1.17/1 014113411Vd
AA ,AAAA0
NOISNVdn 101 ONI>I8Vd NOISSININI00 N01.1V180dSNVEll
NOILVIS )1N11-10&12V1 V112015 V1 301S21.3AIN AiNnoo 301S2i3AIEI
z ' s3"°", WRF,'2'agr,3711,113,,t3
EINFIO A71131SSAA AO
A
SaLON N01.1.0111113N00
sd018 133HM
tbamtcs).Jsa-rti* 2""m°4°""
"-an k..in*.r*..6 1971111000_
''''4""'""'"' 0111611111IN1
M--
806i .A.inr
wv
1)10
Le mama
clAf
IA AMAX)
AMAIAA
•
• ,-1....1,•••••••••:..••••••...,.••• •
. •
1.. . ••••• ••:•••••••••••••••:••••••1••...•
z) mou
rIANAJAV
/ /
/ / \ /
/ / \ /
AGENDA ITEM 9
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
March 23, 2009
TO:
Plans and Programs Committee
FROM:
Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst
Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager
THROUGH:
Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director
SUBJECT:
Commuter Rail Program Update
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Inland Empire -Orange County Weekend Service Performance
2000 —
1600 —
1200 —
800 —
400 —
0
Q3 FY 08/09
IEOC Weekend Passenger Trips
ism Last Year
— 0 -•Current Year
)�• • ��•OA� ��0��
gN 1' ^�' rIeN'F
Daily passenger trips on the year-round Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC) Metrolink
weekend service have continued to grow into the third quarter, providing 41,302
passenger trips quarter to date. This is an increase of over 22.87% over the 33,615
trips provided at this point last year, attributed to increased gasoline prices and
continued promotion. The success of this service is due in large part to the
coordinated marketing efforts among the Commission, Orange County Transportation
Authority, and San Bernardino Associated Governments. Most all responsibilities for
marketing of the service have transitioned to Metrolink, including revised seat drops,
branding, and consolidation of the various weekend services under a single
promotional umbrella.
Agenda Item 9
8
Riverside Line
6,000
5,600
w
a
5,200
H
c 4,800
4,400
4,000
Passenger Trips
Riverside Line
CO
<<Q) � PQ` �a�� °`�o� .so Des 44 G`�� °,00 Apo a o9 m
P � o )' Fro
Month
Daily weekday passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside Line for the month of February
averaged 5,111, a decrease of 255, 5 % less than the month of January. Compared
to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily increase of 103 passenger trips.
This is nearly 2% more than a year ago.
On Time Performance (95% Goal)
Riverside Line
100
R 90
m 85
L. 80
a
a 75
70
00 00 o4i Ao Ao 00 ow ow oo Ao A$ Ao
Leo der Pig � �Jc �J\ PJA �09 O61 �64 peg' lac k
Month
February on -time performance averaged 95% inbound (4% less than January) and
91 % outbound (6% less than January). There were nine delays greater than five
minutes during the month of February. The following are primary causes:
Signals/Track/MOW
Dispatching
Mechanical
Operations
Agenda Item 9
9
"
"
I n l a n d E m p i r e - O r a n g e C o u n t y L i n e
P a s s e n g e r T r i p s
I n l a n d E m p i r e O r a n g e C o u n t y L i n e
6 , 0 0 0
5 , 6 0 0
N
' 5 , 2 0 0
F
O 4 , 8 0 0
4 , 4 0 0
4 , 0 0 0
( 5 % o ` t b A h 5 p o b p �� o C A A C b 5 � b o ��
( 0 ' 4 P f ? 4 < b ) J �� ) J ` P E A g 0 4 O � �� \ - 4 ) 4 p o � ) Q c ( < 0
M o n t h
D a i l y w e e k d a y p a s s e n g e r t r i p s o n M e t r o l i n k ' s I E O C L i n e f o r t h e m o n t h o f F e b r u a r y
a v e r a g e d 4 , 4 2 2 , a n i n c r e a s e o f 1 7 , n o c h a n g e f r o m t h e m o n t h o f J a n u a r y . C o m p a r e d
t o o n e y e a r p r i o r , t h e l i n e a v e r a g e d a n o v e r a l l d a i l y d e c r e a s e o f 3 9 9 p a s s e n g e r t r i p s .
T h i s i s n e a r l y 8 � % l e s s t h a n a y e a r a g o .
1 0 0
m 9 5
c o 9 0
m 8 5
U 8 0
a o
a . 7 5
7 0
O n T i m e P e r f o r m a n c e ( 9 5 % G o a l )
I n l a n d E m p i r e O r a n g e C o u n t y L i n e
��C b o C b o q 3 A ` - A �� A �� o b c � ) 6 7 ) A � ) A � ' o � '
F 0 ' . 4 e , P Q �� 0 . \ ) ���� ) J * p p g 0 Q O 6 k ��6 4 p 0 c , ) 0 t ` F 0 ��
M o n t h
F e b r u a r y o n - t i m e p e r f o r m a n c e a v e r a g e d 9 5 % i n b o u n d ( 1 % m o r e t h a n J a n u a r y ) a n d
9 4 % o u t b o u n d 1 1 % l e s s t h a n J a n u a r y ) . T h e r e w e r e n i n e d e l a y s g r e a t e r t h a n f i v e
m i n u t e s d u r i n g t h e m o n t h o f F e b r u a r y . T h e f o l l o w i n g a r e p r i m a r y c a u s e s :
A g e n d a I t e m 9
S i g n a l s / T r a c k / M O W
D i s p a t c h i n g
M e c h a n i c a l
O p e r a t i o n s
1 0
91 Line
2,800
2,600
°- 2,400
H
c 2,200
2,000
1,800
Passenger Trips
91 Line
E
d' d' 00 pb Aw Ao 00 00 oO A'b Ao 09
�`�� PQ� �a� �Jr �J\ QJ°' god Oc' pm'c' �`ac �e�
Month
Daily weekday passenger trips on Metrolink's 91 Line for the month of February
averaged 2,275, a decrease of 15, 1 % less than the month of January. Compared to
one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily decrease of 120 passenger trips.
This is nearly 5% less than a year ago.
On Time Performance (95% Goal)
91 Line
100
d 95 .�„.�o /111 '` ll
o 90
y 85
80
a 75
70
o`� ,zp 5p 633
PJ� coo 0 �- � p�G �`tfr
Month
February on -time performance averaged 98% inbound (3% more than January) and
96% outbound (1 % less than January). There were nine delays greater than five
minutes during the month of February. The following are primary causes:
Signals/Track/MOW
Dispatching
Mechanical
Operations
Agenda Item 9
•
•
11
"
"
"
C o n n e c t i n g T r a n s i t S e r v i c e P e r f o r m a n c e
T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s r o l e f a c i l i t a t i n g i n t e r c o n n e c t i v i t y b e t w e e n M e t r o l i n k a n d c o n n e c t i n g
t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s i s e s s e n t i a l t o o n g o i n g s y s t e m v i a b i l i t y . S u c h s e r v i c e s a d d r e s s t h e
n e e d s o f t r a n s i t d e p e n d e n t r i d e r s a s w e l l a s h e l p m i t i g a t e c o n g e s t i o n a n d t h e
n e c e s s i t y f o r e x p e n s i v e p a r k i n g c a p a c i t y a t t h e C o m m i s s i o n s t a t i o n s . T h e
C o m m i s s i o n i s w o r k i n g t o i m p r o v e t h e e f f i c i e n c y a n d e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t r a n s i t
c o n n e c t i o n s .
I n o r d e r t o m e e t t h e s e r e q u i r e m e n t s , t h e C o m m i s s i o n h a s w o r k e d w i t h M e t r o l i n k a n d
l o c a l t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s t o o f f e r c o n n e c t i n g s e r v i c e s t o a n d f r o m R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
M e t r o l i n k s t a t i o n s a t n o c o s t f o r t h o s e w i t h v a l i d M e t r o l i n k t i c k e t s . W i t h i n R i v e r s i d e
C o u n t y , s e r v i c e s i n c l u d e f r e e t r a n s f e r s t o r o u t e s o p e r a t e d b y R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
( R T A ) , R T A ' s C o m m u t e r L i n k s e r v i c e a n d C o r o n a C r u i s e r . T h e f o l l o w i n g g r a p h s s h o w
t o t a l m o n t h l y M e t r o l i n k t r a n s f e r p a s s e n g e r t r i p s o n e a c h o f t h e t h r e e s e r v i c e s .
P a s s e n g e r T r i p s
R T A F i x e d R o u t e
3 , 5 0 0
3 , 0 0 0
2 , 5 0 0
2 , 0 0 0
1 , 5 0 0
1 , 0 0 0
0 S ' 0 0 0 9 ) 0 0 4 o c A 0 0 0 �� o � j c P '
e c e o 4 8 ' P Q t A s a ��J �� ��J �� P J �� c " 0 o �� ��o ' ' O �� ��a c �� f e d
M o n t h
M o n t h l y M e t r o l i n k t r a n s f e r t r i p s o n R T A ' s c o n n e c t i n g f i x e d r o u t e s ( 1 , 3 , 1 5 , 1 6 , 2 1 ,
2 9 , a n d 3 8 ) t o t a l e d 2 , 2 4 0 f o r t h e m o n t h o f F e b r u a r y , a d e c r e a s e o f 2 6 0 t r i p s , a n d -
1 0 . 4 0 % l e s s t h a n t h e m o n t h o f J a n u a r y . M o n t h l y t r i p s d e c r e a s e d b y 1 9 3 o r - 7 . 9 3 %
o v e r t h e y e a r .
A g e n d a I t e m 9
1 2
10,000
9,000
a 8,000
'C
F- 7,000
w
8,000
5,000
4,000
0' 0) 00 o0
4*. PQ` 40 1
Passenger Trips
RTA Commuter Link
05 0 0 0 0 0 PJ�o �z�o o4`�g' o�p 3a�o@moo°'
Month
Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on RTA's Commuter Link routes (202, 204, 206,
208, and 210) totaled 5,777 for the month of February, a decrease of 497 trips, and
7.92% less than the month of January. Monthly trips have decreased by 773 or
11.80% over the year.
700
600
a 500
.
F- 400
300
200
100
N.9 o' ,JcAo
Passenger Trips
Corona Cruiser
,J�oO oho§ ob c� o�oo 0
P Gig O
Month
Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on the Corona Cruiser totaled 644 for the month of
February, an increase of 40, +6.62% from the month of January. Monthly trips have
decreased by 31 or -4.59% over the year.
Attachments:
1) Metrolink Average Weekday Passenger Trips
2) Metrolink Schedule Adherence Summary - Weekday Service
Agenda Item 9
•
•
13
4°m9 e°19,AiimW WeelGel WPM OW
%0
%9-
%8-
%b
%Z
9'09
%b
%8-
%Z
80 qasn 60 qaA
a6ueyo %
%Z-
%V
%0
%£-
%9-
%Z-
%0
%Z-
%0
60 uer sn 60 9GA
a6uey0 %
%Z-
E4£'£4
9LZ'Z
ZZb'4
654'L
41.4`9
£8L
494`£4
£OL'9
66Z'17
609ad
%£
886`£4
06Z'Z
904717
98£'L
99E'9
96/
884'£4
49Z'9
LO£'b
60 uer
%8-
491'Z4
04Z'Z
MI,
9L6'9
404'9
4£L
L84'Z4
Z9L`9
9ZZ'17
80 aao
%0
4£4'94
ZOS'Z
L1.117
081'L
L04'9
66L
L9L'E4
OZO'L
Z94'b
80AoN
%Z-
999'94
944'Z
6Z0`S
L79'1
ZZS'S
S6L
L91'El
SLL'L
9/Z17
80 PO
%4
Z8E'L4
Z94'Z
494'9
L98'L
Z4£'9
86L
Z98`£4
LZ9'L
09Z'17
SO daS
%Z-
444`L4
£04`Z
£64'9
b59`L
L££'S
89L
8£9'£4
LL9'L
1.1.5'17
80boy
%4
BSZ`84
ltVZ
484'9
4E0`8
949'9
908
41.1'£4
Z176'L
999'17
801nf
%9
OE6'L4
LO4'Z
ZZ£`S
998`1.
949'9
46L
Z46'El
ZbL'L
L8£'4
80 unf
%4
£4614
89Z`Z
OL617
llL'L
68£'9
99L
££5t4
LSZ'L
694'17
80LeW
%4
1.61'44
69E'Z
800`9
£9VL
944'5
LLL
99Z'£l
££8'9
1.4Z'17
80ichi
%£
064'44
00VZ
1786'b
£6L'L
094'9
09L
966`Z4
SLL'9
££Z'b
80MN
%0^
84£'E4
96£'Z
29'4
9L8'9
900`9
64L
bZ9'Z4
L99.9
81217
809aA
.�`_�
to
..,
�'% k
cNFa
e, .
�J�C�^�if
pY'1
yi
�y
,t'M
t}
F....:, CJEE
.p�;i". ^`e?i
y., r
i . e'y
`kTMr)
1 �l
M1i�
Yti.
.^,V �i;a
:+.. i1 \3 C h t
.�`i'il i°l lo- tM
i
fW �-, JL` �'N
WA {j �' r
}rt.{��i mAR,��
h l
f �ef)i'i
--,rtJ
�-�
t. i
yy
a^�FM1.m?. i K, i��,.
,fit W i`.. l
'A.L�i�J,-lro�J
- N
.:H k'
�.
f Ytp
t; n �'�ti r`.S�'C"uy,�'i
! ��f ... V�.41 +. y�
YJT, `F.'f t.j�'t
�.�.t iSy
S"'},. Iw,r
;�° '� .S ,yyy biC
..
j(
4.�.{JJ"J
.e.+. x*
J
T ^S-, y
t_ �.`u
,5�.0 .+"dam
�� `F
JT
S 1
R?.y7 c.a
�y Xr
w
d, �... Y
r'y .�...,�s
" p{y�y,+y0w'w
if,;_,
'''9vtl n.;f
'St
v. r.`
t1V
daYAn �.'t Y�
}j� .]�
'.a1 ti..
i
... .. }...........
w{ _
`J,
. ...
amsnrav AVC1110H - MOamm H1NOW N3311l1H1
Sd12112130N3SSVd Avam33M 30VIGAV mnoa13W
•
•
McNoWC1.1O
%£6
°A %96 !%£6 %OOL
%06 %Le
wo!;e!noleo awp-uo ay; u! papn!ou!;ou aye su!en paruub •uopeu!wa; Jo;uiod;e awp-uo alarm Law l! 10 paiep!suoo aye supp mammal
•sAe!ap apienapai Jo' apew uaaq aney s;uaw;snipe oN
%96 %00 L
°%176 %96 !%6L %1.6
%Le %L8
swell
papa )feed
so coed
awll palnpa4os Jo seLouSAL S ultelm po!aad lead
%£6
%£6
%46
%96 %96
%46
%96
%£6
%S6
°%L6 %96
%96 %66
%96 %96
%49 %99
%26 %E6
60 Qad
%b6
%96
%46
%96 7096
%1.6
%96
%be
%46
°%96 %86
%96 %66
%96 %be
%99 %SS
%96 %Z6
80 uef
%46
%96
%48
%96 %S6
%L6
%96
%46
%b6
%98 %96
%86 %66
%96 %46
%99 °%S9
%66 %96
90090
%46
°%E6
%96
%99 %L6
%L6
%Z6
%L6
%Z6
%96 %66
%96 %L6
%SS %96
%SS %46
%98 %96
90 ^oN
%96
%96
%96
%L6 %Le
%Z6
%98
%96
%le
%66 %96
%L6 %OOL
%L6 %L6
%06 %S6
%96 %96
80 PO
°%46
%46
%96
%/.6 %66
9/0Z6
%86
%b6
%SS
°%86 %66
%96 °%L6
%be %96
%99 %99
%96 %E6
SO des
°%96
°Mt
%96
%Z6 %96
1/4£6
%96
°%96
%SO
%S6 %96
%66 %66
%96 %96
%89 %99
°%L6 %96
90 6ny
°%96
%96
%S6
%96 %46
%L6
%46
%96
%46
%96 %96
%96 %96
%96 %96
%l6 %£6
%96 %L6
ao Inf
%96
%96
%96
9696 %S6
%46
%96
%L6
%46
%96 %96
%66 %OOL
%176 %96
%06 %Z6
°%L6 %86
80 unf
%96
%96
°%96
°%be %96
%96
%96
%Z6
°%be
°%66 %96
%OOL %COL
%96 %86
%L6 %Z6
°%L6 %96
aoAm
%96
%96
%L6
°%L6 %L6
%46
%96
%£6
%96
%Z6 °%BB
%66 %86
%LB %86
%£6 °%E6
%88 %OOl
90 Jdtl
°%LB
%LB
%96
%66 %66
°%Z8
°%16
%L6
%LB
%86 °%96
%96 %66
4686 %86
%96 %£6
%96 %96
BO Jell
%L6
%L6
%L6
%96 %96
%96
°%86
°%96
%£6
%96 °%96
%66 %OOL
%96 %96
%96 %L6
%OOL %66
90 clad
.'.::..
;:=::
x.�.:eY F::. n..
:.`aV
....
'N4t
.'
..., �iYrX.•t.}.mI.f.
._
J fW'..
J
... .
,.
:1
4
+,qgM =Fp�
a, tf
!7,1 kyS 1....�iJx.X,4 ": �- y"x
Pgg : ?.414?*Pa.TS:
• s . , ... k -f�Cyy
i50:iiai*:IL�
..(
uro.0P OK
py�.t1.41r.XYd
-C •,'.:
< .'. :
•
SHINOIN £L 1saLvi
elull pempe4o5;o swum 8 u143lM Buln! W sule.Ll;o eequeoied
331A213S At/amaaM - Aavuouns 33N32131-101► 3ina3HaS mNl"1omim
•
•
alppdn
Hell aainunuop
'q•d•ua l•b (sdols imm •H•d•W) paads uaaisi(s a6eaany
(%L+) 983'917 (oea-io0) saapiH Nunoalan AepiaaM a6aaany poi
zE Aupunsipemied0 sup' afiaaany
9t7 i(epanies/paimad0 sup' a6aaany
6.17 1- Aup ieemperend0 suiall_ a6aaany
Z 1-9 samW ainoa
99 eoinaas ui suoReis
L sainoH jo aagwnN
'1661 ui pa woo (MOS) AlPoipny RI] ieuoi6al eponeD uaaglnoS
aims of Jou depq
WO7SUleljyUllallAW
nylley leuolSatl eIWoNIe) Waxryno5
(Seagn$) nun andlnd m234V —
0ey lOn) auk
(Rey Iti6n) au4l une)9 onnel
(KY «OM awi anln aneVl —
*mins) auil pay mla4V .w...-.
n laW. 1 pale(adp
10(p1110)Z Ilea F=..o
AlUO iaucns'wed leAlwy xtx
fV7 uMra Uti7c0 • nofair j . apeoave
auk 16 •••••••
aun inuno) a6Ue10-andW 3 punpn
awn puno.) a6uen) rwrW
lIPllOktiY1 041 aplilaNy s
ann OUlpleUIN UPS
aun iGunoO emluaA
suopelS Wlof Ovb1 Z KY ;I eJIWy/Aullceah
LOOZ't lagwalda5 aropeij 3
kerugad ui apuewmpad au LL-u0 %E6•
800Z kerugad WOJJ °seam! %Z•
Merugad ui sdP4 T T'T'S•
Liwon
,a0 0� o° a5 ca C �S �� ad yS� )>
6° 65 m° c§S e°� era �°� ��J w°� o°' e°' e°�
Wow
\pC�� O),
eya Q
60 0 00 00 0 0 0 � 00 00 00 00 00
OL 9 � , - 000'17
S8 (D 009'4 =,
—� OS66 - _- _" OOZ'9 v
OOl m - --_-- 009'S w
000'9
aull aplsJanla
(Ie00 %96) aauewmped awll u0
aun aplsaanw
sdulia6uessed
3ueuaa0iaad apisaania
kenagad ui apuew.iojaad api-u0 %L6•
800Z kenagad aseanap %s•
kenagad ui sdpl. sLZ'Z•
yWOW
o° t°� O°a o° cb° w° e° o° e° w° �� m° m°
9L
S8
06
.A.1111111111--
- 00l
eun l6
(Ie00 %96) aouewwo}gad awll u0
gluing
ae› ,sQ,C 4,6 co? <,() �05 Ica \°c �rC FQS� as yS� a?i
0 0 °° 0° d5 e 0° e° e° 45 eV ci5 43
4 008'
000'8
002'2
■-- 00b'2
__ 009'8
008 2
°tin 1.6
sdpi JaBuassed
0
H
a
N
Aierugad ui aDuaLuopad quail-u0 %S6•
800Z klenagad way asaanap %8•
Aienagad ui sdpi. zzt/o)
Lnua W
e° eC ,P6 �`' �`{J °Do`' . A ��C ��C Fed 1� c`\ e
65 6eo °- e° e e° e° is 45 eis
OL
SL
oe
Se
S O6
S6
oot
eun Alunop eBueip andw3 puelui
(pop ok46) aouewio;gad awil up
4wow
A°� �C °� c°a �°� A°�' Fic'a �cC �cC hw� �'d �eS� Qa�
FP oV e� e� c e° e° e� e° e� e° oo °°
000'b
OOb'b
00e'b
00VS
009'9
000'9
elm Munop a6ueip ei!dw3 puelui
sdpi ie6uassed
03ueuaa04a0d auri 3031
ssauaaeme paseanui pue siJoija leuonowa d o4 pa4ngia44y•
aeaA Ise! iuiod siu4 wag aseanui 0/0L87Z+0
60/80 Ad 8b ui sal4 Z0£'Ttb•
'6 2 4
e)) ��m ��b 4�� •e• Quo 42S
oo� ooa 66a 6�0 �ocS �� 6�� CS
JEaA }UaJJf1'°
1E9J, ISE1
0
00V
009
00ZI
0091
000E
sdn aa6uessed pualaaM 3031
60/80 Ad CO
031naag puwleeNt 3031
800Z /Caenagad aapun %6S17•
kiprugad ui sdpi H7g•
800Z keruciad aapun %OT T T •
keruga j ui sdp4 LLL'S•
800Z Aierugad aapun %86'L•
AJerugad ui sdP1 Of7Z1Z•
41uo yy
6� 05 05 0 000 0 0�\ 00 0 0—. o° e°
001
00a
00£
OOb 1
009 m
009
OOL
Jeslru3 euoio3
sdpi Ja6uassed
4wopy
?°� S0C ° °� ,PO din C'8a 6S' b�3, Aga 41, a°�
4, es 0,s is 4 45 os e° 45 m° 0 Cg
000'b
000'9
000'9
000'L
000'8
000'6
000'0l
11.111 JOVILLItuo'J V11i
sdul aa6uassed
41uoW
'› FP 6�0S 04P �tl1o2 e°�° a�a6 m��� m��cc m�Jcc GPF e° 0 0Q0�
Ibua6y psuwal apisaam
emoa pexuvili
sdp11061.13MM
000' 1
... 009' l as
000'a
009'Z a
000'£ N
oo9'£
zsNolis3no
"
A G E N D A I T E M 1 0
i
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
D A T E :
M a r c h 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
R o b e r t Y a t e s , M u l t i m o d a l S e r v i c e s D i r e c t o r
T H R O U G H :
J o h n S t a n d i f o r d , D e p u t y E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
A m e r i c a n R e c o v e r y a n d R e i n v e s t m e n t A c t F o r m u l a
T r a n s i t F u n d i n g A l l o c a t i o n a n d D i s t r i b u t i o n
5 3 0 7 / 5 3 1 1
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) A p p r o v e t h e p r o j e c t l i s t r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r t h e A m e r i c a n R e c o v e r y a n d
R e i n v e s t m e n t A c t ( A R R A ) f o r m u l a 5 3 0 7 f u n d i n g a l l o c a t i o n f o r R i v e r s i d e
C o u n t y t r a n s i t p r o j e c t s ;
2 ) A p p r o v e a m e n d m e n t o f t h e F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n s ( S R T P )
f o r t h e c i t y o f C o r o n a , c i t y o f R i v e r s i d e , C o m m i s s i o n / M e t r o l i n k , R i v e r s i d e
T r a n s i t A g e n c y a n d S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y t o r e f l e c t t h e i n c l u s i o n o f t h e
A R R A p r o j e c t s ; a n d
3 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
D I S C U S S I O N :
A s t h e R e g i o n a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n n i n g A g e n c y ( R T P A ) f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y , t h e
C o m m i s s i o n i s d e s i g n a t e d a s t h e a u t h o r i z i n g a g e n c y t o m a k e f u n d i n g a n d
p r o g r a m m i n g d e c i s i o n s f o r A R R A f u n d s . A R R A h a s m a n y f u n d i n g c a t e g o r i e s a n d
t h e t r a n s i t f o r m u l a 5 3 0 7 / 5 3 1 1 f u n d s p r o v i d e d u n d e r A R R A a r e t h e s u b j e c t o f t h i s
r e p o r t .
A R R A C a p i t a l T r a n s i t A s s i s t a n c e P r o g r a m ( C T A P ) f u n d i n g f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
t o t a l s $ 3 0 , 6 4 7 , 3 1 9 . T h e s e A R R A C T A P f u n d s a l l o w 1 8 0 d a y s t o g e t t h e p r o j e c t s
o b l i g a t e d a n d g r a n t s a w a r d e d . A R R A t r a n s i t f u n d s a r e s u b j e c t t o r e d i s t r i b u t i o n i f
5 0 % o f t h e f u n d s a r e n o t a w a r d e d b y t h e S e p t e m b e r 1 , 2 0 0 9 d e a d l i n e . T h e
r e m a i n i n g 5 0 % m u s t b e o b l i g a t e d n o l a t e r t h a n M a r c h 5 , 2 0 1 0 . I f f u n d s a r e n o t
f u l l y o b l i g a t e d b y t h e M a r c h 5 , 2 0 1 0 d e a d l i n e , i t w i l l b e s u b j e c t t o r e d i s t r i b u t i o n .
A t t a c h m e n t 1 r e p r e s e n t s A R R A f o r m u l a a l l o c a t i o n s b y u r b a n i z e d a r e a ( U Z A ) f o r t h e
u r b a n i z e d z o n e 5 3 0 7 f u n d s a n d b y a p p o r t i o n m e n t a r e a ( R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y ) f o r t h e
r u r a l 5 3 1 1 f u n d s . I t s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t t h e s e f o r m u l a s a r e f o r c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s
o n l y a n d d o n o t a l l o w f o r t h e i n c l u s i o n o f t r a n s i t o p e r a t i o n s .
A g e n d a I t e m 1 0
1 6
For clarification, while the Commission can approve projects and allow for the
allocation of the 5307 ARRA funds directly to its operator partners, the 5311 rural
funds are under the administration of Caltrans, via a project application process.
Accordingly, the recommended project list contained in Attachment 2 is for the
urbanized 5307 fund only.
Applications for the 5311 funds are due to Caltrans on April 17, 2009. Staff will
continue to work with the Commission's operator partners on the application and
grant approval process for the 5311 funds and will provide an update on the
distribution and identify the projects at a later date.
Staff has reviewed numerous projects that were submitted by the Commission's
operator partners over the course of the past two weeks. Attachment 2 represents
the list of recommended projects by operator and the distribution of funds
recommended for those projects. Staff in developing this recommendation, has
relied on historical precedent in the determination of the funding apportionment
amongst the operators. The apportionments contained herein closely match those
previously made for 5307 funds using revenue miles, passenger miles, and
operating costs as the evaluation criteria.
As previously mentioned, ARRA funds are subject to stringent obligation
requirements. Staff will continue to work with the Commission's operator partners
in structuring the approved projects in Transportation Electronic Award and
Management System, which will ensure the timely obligation and result in Riverside
County making full use of all ARRA funds allocated. Each operator shall also
submit to the Commission for staff approval, a revised SRTP (table 4) so that these
funds are formally reflected in the budgetary process for the current fiscal year.
Attachments:
1) ARRA 5307 and 5311 Funding Allocation Summary
2) ARRA 5307 Recommended Project List by Operator
Agenda Item 10
17
"
A R R A 5 3 0 7 a n d 5 3 1 1 F u n d i n g A l l o c a t i o n
A T T A C H M E N T 1
C a p i t a l T r a n s i t A s s i s t a n c e P r o g r a m F e d e r a l S t i m u l u s F u n d i n g f o r S e c 5 3 0 7 & 5 3 1 1
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y : A R R A - F e d e r a l R e g i s t e r 3 / 5 / 0 9
F u n d S o u r c e
U r b a n i z e d A r e a
P o p u l a t i o n
A r e a
A R R A F Y 0 9
A p p o r t i o n m e n t
F T A 5 3 0 7
1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 o r m o r e
R i v e r s i d e "
$ 1 9 , 3 6 1 , 0 4 8
B u s ( 6 2 . 7 3 1 3 % )
$ 1 2 , 1 4 5 , 4 3 6
R a i l ( 3 7 . 2 6 8 7 % )
$ 7 , 2 1 5 , 6 1 2
2 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 9 9 9 , 9 9 9
I n d i o - C a t h e d r a l - P a l m S p r i n g s
$ 4 , 7 1 4 , 3 9 1
M u r r i e t a / T e m e c u l a
$ 4 , 0 6 6 , 8 2 9
5 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 9 9 , 9 9 9
H e m e t
$ 2 , 5 0 5 , 0 5 1
T o t a l 5 3 0 7
$ 3 0 , 6 4 7 , 3 1 9
T A 5 3 1 1
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
T o t a l
$ 1 , 1 8 1 , 9 7 4
7
W e s t e m C o . ( R T A )
6 1 . 7 0 %
$ 7 2 9 , 2 7 8
C o a c h e l l a ( S u n L i n e )
3 8 . 3 0 %
$ 4 5 2 , 6 9 6
' N o t e : 2 0 0 9 F T A 5 3 0 7 R I V / S A N U Z A A R R A T o t a l A p p o r t i o n m e n t = $ 3 6 , 4 1 5 , 5 4 3 . R i v e r s i d e = $ 1 9 , 3 6 1 , 0 4 8
R i v / S b d n o % s p l i t b a s e d o n F Y 0 9 I n t e r - C o u n t y A p p o r t i o n m e n t : 5 3 . 1 7 % ( R i v e r s i d e ) ; 4 6 . 6 4 % ( S a n - B d n o ) ; . 1 9 % ( I A )
F Y 2 0 0 9 5 3 0 7 A R R A A p p o r t i o n m e n t b y M o d e
M o d e
A r e a
A g e n c v / O p e r a t o r
R A I L
W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e
R C T C - R a i l
$ 7 , 2 1 5 , 6 1 2
B U S
W e s t e m R i v e r s i d e
R T A / C o r o n a / R i v e r s i d e
$ 1 8 , 7 1 7 , 3 1 6
C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y
S u n L i n e
$ 4 , 7 1 4 , 3 9 1
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T O T A L
$ 3 0 , 6 4 7 , 3 1 9
1 8
"
"
"
A T T A C H M E N T 2
A R R A 5 3 0 7 S t a f f R e c o m m e n d e d P r o j e c t L i s t b y O p e r a t o r
C i t y o f C o r o n a
$ 3 6 0 , 0 0 0 P u r c h a s e o f ( 4 ) p a r a t r a n s i t T y p e 1 1 C N G v e h i c l e s .
$ 2 4 0 , 0 0 0 B u s s t o p a m e n i t i e s
$ 6 0 0 , 0 0 0 T o t a l A R R A f u n d s r e c o m m e n d e d f o r C i t y o f C o r o n a
C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e
$ 5 6 0 , 0 0 0 P u r c h a s e o f a n e w f a r e b o x s y s t e m .
$ 1 4 0 , 0 0 0 E q u i p m e n t t o s u p p o r t t h e C N G m a i n t e n a n c e f a c i l i t y o p e r a t i o n
$ 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 T o t a l A R R A f u n d s r e c o m m e n d e d f o r C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e
R C T C / M e t r o l i n k
S t a f f r e c o m m e n d s t h a t t h e C o m m i s s i o n d i r e c t R C T C ' s s h a r e o f A R R A 5 3 0 7 r a i l
f u n d s t o M e t r o l i n k t o f u r t h e r f u n d e x p a n d e d s a f e t y e f f o r t s . T h e s e a r e p r o j e c t s
i d e n t i f i e d b y M e t r o l i n k t h a t w i l l m e e t t h e o b l i g a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s o f A R R A a n d c a n
b e d e l i v e r e d w i t h i n t h e r e q u i r e d t i m e f r a m e s .
$ 4 , 7 8 5 , 6 1 2
$ 1 , 6 7 0 , 0 0 0
$ 7 6 0 , 0 0 0
$ 7 , 2 1 5 , 6 1 2
P o s i t i v e T r a i n C o n t r o l ( P T C ) .
R e h a b i l i t a t i o n a n d m a i n t e n a n c e o f s i g n a l a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n
s y s t e m .
S e c u r i t y u p g r a d e s .
T o t a l A R R A f u n d s r e c o m m e n d e d f o r R C T C / M e t r o l i n k
R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
$ 8 , 6 3 9 , 1 9 2
$ 1 , 8 7 1 , 7 3 2
$ 5 , 6 1 2 , 1 2 3
$ 1 , 1 0 7 , 0 9 6
$ 1 8 7 , 1 7 3
$ 1 7 , 4 1 7 , 3 1 6
P r e v e n t i v e M a i n t e n a n c e
A D A O p e r a t i n g A s s i s t a n c e
C a p i t a l C o s t o f C o n t r a c t i n g
C O P D e b t S e r v i c e
T r a n s i t E n h a n c e m e n t s
T o t a l A R R A f u n d s r e c o m m e n d e d f o r R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
$ 3 , 2 5 0 , 0 0 0
$ 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
$ 9 6 4 , 3 9 1
$ 4 , 7 1 4 , 3 9 1
M a i n t e n a n c e B u i l d i n g E x p a n s i o n
B u s s t o p s h e l t e r s
I n t e l l i g e n t T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S y s t e m s p r o j e c t i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
T o t a l A R R A f u n d s r e c o m m e n d e d f o r S u n L i n e
1 9
AGENDA ITEM 11
•
"
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
D A T E :
M a r c h 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
M a r t h a D u r b i n , S t a f f A n a l y s t
F i n a C l e m e n t e , T r a n s i t M a n a g e r
T H R O U G H :
R o b e r t Y a t e s , M u l t i m o d a l S e r v i c e s D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B F i s c a l Y e a r 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 C a l i f o r n i a T r a n s i t S e c u r i t y
G r a n t P r o g r a m C a l i f o r n i a T r a n s i t A s s i s t a n c e F u n d a n d S u p p o r t i n g
R e s o l u t i o n
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) A d o p t R e s o l u t i o n N o . 0 9 - 0 0 5 , " R e s o l u t i o n o f t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n A p p r o v i n g t h e A l l o c a t i o n o f F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9
P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B - 6 1 6 1 - 0 0 0 2 C a l i f o r n i a T r a n s i t S e c u r i t y G r a n t P r o g r a m
C a l i f o r n i a T r a n s i t A s s i s t a n c e F u n d s ( C T S G P - C T A F ) P o p u l a t i o n F u n d s " ;
2 ) A l l o c a t e t h e C T S G P - C T A F d i s c r e t i o n a r y f u n d s t o t a l i n g $ 1 , 5 5 3 , 8 2 2 f o r t h e
l e a d p r o j e c t s p o n s o r s p e r A t t a c h m e n t 1 ; a n d
3 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
T h e H i g h w a y S a f e t y , T r a f f i c R e d u c t i o n , A i r Q u a l i t y , a n d P o r t S e c u r i t y B o n d A c t o f
2 0 0 6 , a p p r o v e d b y t h e v o t e r s a s P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B i n N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 6 , i n c l u d e s a
p r o g r a m o f f u n d i n g i n t h e a m o u n t o f $ 1 b i l l i o n t o b e d e p o s i t e d i n t h e T r a n s i t
S y s t e m S a f e t y , S e c u r i t y , a n d D i s a s t e r R e s p o n s e A c c o u n t ( T S S S D R A ) . T h e
F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 a p p r o p r i a t i o n i n t h e B u d g e t A c t o f 2 0 0 8 i n c l u d e s $ 6 0 m i l l i o n f o r t h e
T S S S D R A . S i x t y p e r c e n t o f t h o s e f u n d s a r e b e i n g m a d e a v a i l a b l e f o r e l i g i b l e
t r a n s i t s y s t e m s a f e t y a n d s e c u r i t y p r o j e c t s u n d e r t h e C T S G P - C T A F .
T h e C T A F i s a d m i n i s t e r e d b y t h e G o v e r n o r ' s O f f i c e o f H o m e l a n d S e c u r i t y ( O H S ) .
O f t h e s e f u n d s , f i f t y p e r c e n t s h a l l b e a l l o c a t e d b y t h e S t a t e C o n t r o l l e r t o e l i g i b l e
t r a n s i t a g e n c i e s u s i n g t h e f o r m u l a i n S e c t i o n 9 9 3 1 4 o f t h e P u b l i c U t i l i t i e s C o d e
( o p e r a t o r a l l o c a t i o n ) , a n d f i f t y p e r c e n t s h a l l b e a l l o c a t e d b y t h e S t a t e C o n t r o l l e r t o
r e g i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a g e n c i e s s u c h a s t h e C o m m i s s i o n u s i n g t h e f o r m u l a i n
S e c t i o n 9 9 3 1 3 o f t h e P u b l i c U t i l i t i e s C o d e ( p o p u l a t i o n a l l o c a t i o n ) , s u b j e c t t o t h e
p r o v i s i o n s g o v e r n i n g f u n d s a l l o c a t e d u n d e r t h o s e s e c t i o n s .
A g e n d a I t e m 1 1
2 0
For the current fiscal year, the Commission expects to receive $1,553,822 in
population funds per Section 99313. The Commission is responsible for calculating
eligible amounts for each project sponsor under its authority. The transit agencies
within Riverside County will receive the CTAF non -discretionary operator funds
totaling $231,221, as identified in Attachment 2, directly from the State Controller
per Section 99314.
These funds are designated to be used for transit capital projects that provide
increased protection against a security or safety threat including, but not limited to,
the following:
• Construction or renovation projects that enhance security of public transit
stations or other transit facilities;
• Explosive devise mitigation and remediation equipment;
• Chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear explosives search, rescue or
response equipment;
• Interoperable communications equipment;
• Physical security enhancement equipment;
• Installation of fencing, barriers, etc. to improve security at transit stations or
other transit facilities;
• Capital expenditures to increase the capacity of transit operators to develop
disaster response transportation systems that can move people, equipment,
etc. in the aftermath of a disaster; or
• Other security related projects approved by the Office of Homeland Security.
Funds will be allocated directly to the project sponsors upon receipt of Commission
approval. Project sponsors have three years to complete all eligible projects.
The OHS is requiring a resolution from the Commission regarding population funds
per Section 99313. This resolution is needed in order to successfully complete the
grant submittal process. Attachment 1 is Resolution No. 09-005 to approve and
authorize the project sponsors to apply for the CTSGP-CTAF population funds
through the OHS.
Financial Impact
Since the funds are directly allocated to the project sponsor, the only Commission
financial impact is for the allocation of funds to the Commuter Rail Program in
Riverside County, estimated at $347,600, which is comprised of $263,580 of
population funds per Section 99313 and $84,020 of operator funds per Section
99314. These funds have been included in the FY 2009/10 Commission budget.
Agenda Item 11
•
•
21
"
"
"
F i n a n c i a l I n f o r m a t i o n
I n F i s c a l Y e a r B u d g e t :
N / A
Y e a r :
F Y 2 0 0 9 / 1 0 +
A m o u n t :
$ 3 4 7 , 6 0 0
S o u r c e o f F u n d s :
P r o p 1 B C T S G P - C T A F P o p u l a t i o n
F u n d s
B u d g e t A d u s t m e n t :
N / A
G L A N o . :
2 2 1 3 3 4 1 5 1 0 P r o p 1 B
F i s c a l P r o c e d u r e s A p p r o v e d :
\ 1 0 . 1 t u n
D a t e :
3 / 1 3 / 0 9
A t t a c h m e n t s :
1 ) R e c o m m e n d e d P r o p 1 B - S e c u r i t y F u n d D i s t r i b u t i o n B y O p e r a t o r
2 ) D r a f t R e s o l u t i o n o f A p p r o v a l a n d A u t h o r i z a t i o n
A g e n d a I t e m 1 1
2 2
"
"
A T T A C H M E N T 1
R E S O L U T I O N N O . 0 9 - 0 0 5
R E S O L U T I O N O F T H E
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
A P P R O V I N G T H E A L L O C A T I O N O F F Y 0 8 - 0 9 P R O P O S I T I O N 1 B - 6 1 6 1 - 0 0 0 2
C A L I F O R N I A T R A N S I T S E C U R I T Y G R A N T P R O G R A M -
C A L I F O R N I A T R A N S I T A S S I S T A N C E F U N D S P O P U L A T I O N F U N D S
W H E R E A S , t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n ( R C T C ) i s t h e
d e s i g n a t e d r e g i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n n i n g a g e n c y f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y , a n d i s
t h e r e f o r e , e l i g i b l e t o r e c e i v e a n d a l l o c a t e f u n d s u n d e r G o v e r n m e n t C o d e
8 8 7 9 . 5 8 ( a ) ( 2 ) b a s e d u p o n p o p u l a t i o n ; a n d
W H E R E A S , R C T C h a s b e e n i d e n t i f i e d a s t h e r e c i p i e n t o f P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B
C T S G P - C T A F P o p u l a t i o n F u n d s i n t h e a m o u n t o f $ 1 , 5 5 3 , 8 2 2 ; a n d
W H E R E A S , R C T C a p p r o v e s t h e a l l o c a t i o n o f t h e P o p u l a t i o n F u n d s t o e i g h t
l o c a l t r a n s i t a g e n c i e s f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f e n h a n c i n g s a f e t y a n d s e c u r i t y o n p u b l i c
t r a n s i t s y s t e m s t h r o u g h o u t R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y ;
N O W , T H E R E F O R E I T B E R E S O L V E D , t h a t t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n h e r e b y f i n d s t h a t :
R C T C a p p r o v e s t h e a l l o c a t i o n o f $ 1 , 5 5 3 , 8 2 2 i n P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B C T S G P - C T A F
P o p u l a t i o n F u n d s t o t h e f o l l o w i n g e n t i t i e s a n d f o l l o w i n g a m o u n t s :
W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
" C i t y o f B a n n i n g $ 4 8 , 8 1 8
" C i t y o f B e a u m o n t $ 2 7 , 7 8 3
" C i t y o f C o r o n a $ 3 2 , 4 2 3
" C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e $ 2 7 , 6 7 3
" R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y $ 7 9 7 , 8 1 3
" R C T C C o m m u t e r R a i l $ 2 6 3 , 5 8 0
C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y -
" S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y $ 3 3 1 , 8 0 0
P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y
" P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y T r a n s i t A g e n c y $ 2 3 , 9 3 2
2 3
"
A P P R O V E D A N D A D O P T E D t h i s 8 t h d a y o f A p r i l 2 0 0 9 .
R o b e r t E . M a g e e , C h a i r
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n
A T T E S T :
J e n n i f e r H a r m o n , C l e r k o f t h e B o a r d
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n
"
2 4
0GTle16E; 4R/2008
ReVlsed: 5/20/08
•
ATTACHMENT 2
FY 2008/09 Prop 1B (6161-0002) Funding Allocation
Governor's Office of Homeland Security
FY 2008/09 Transit Security Grant Program / California Transit Assistance Fund (CTSGP-CTAF)
Prop 18 - Transit Security
Application Submitted: January 21, 2009
•
Printed: 9/17200e 11:04 AM
Western
Riverside
Western
Riverside
(Actual
Coachella
Valley
Coachella ; ':
Valley (Actual
Palo Verde
Valley
P5) Yerd,e
Valley ';
(Actual.";
Total
(Available)
Total (Amount
Applied for)
(Available)
Applied for)
(Available)
Applied for)
(Available)
, Applied for)
Bus Services: 78%
Rail Services: 22%
1,198,090
1,198,090
934,510 934,510
263,580 263,580
48,818
27,783
32,423
27,673
797,81.3
City of Banning
City of Beaumont
City of Corona
City of Riverside
Riverside Transit Agency
48,818
27,783
32,423
27,673
797,813
158,475
City of Banning
City of Beaumont
City of Corona
City of Riverside
Riverside Transit Agency
RCTC's Commuter Rail
1,182
717
2,577
2,327
67,652
84,020
1,356,565
158,475
1,1821
717
2,577
21327`.
67,652
84,020
1,356,565;
331,800
71,808
403,608
800
71.508:,
4Q3608=%
23,932
938
24,870
932i
24,870
1,553,822
231,221
1,785,043
1,553,822
231,221
1,785,043
Population Source: California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit (1/1/07)
Area Population
Western 1,566, 504 77.11 %
Coachella Valley 433,830 21.35%
Palo Verde Valley 31,291 1.54%
11.M0.Attach 2. Prop 18. Security Funding Allocation by Appodionmeni Area2.sts Available&Actual Request
25
AGENDA ITEM 12
"
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
D A T E :
M a r c h 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
F i n a C l e m e n t e , T r a n s i t M a n a g e r
T H R O U G H :
R o b e r t Y a t e s , M u l t i m o d a l S e r v i c e s D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y C a p i t a l P r o j e c t R e p r o g r a m m i n g
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) A p p r o v e R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y ' s ( R T A ) r e q u e s t t o r e p r o g r a m f e d e r a l a n d
l o c a l f u n d s r e m a i n i n g o n c o m p l e t e d a n d y e t - t o - b e s t a r t e d c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s
f r o m F Y 2 0 0 4 / 0 5 2 0 0 7 / 0 8 g r a n t y e a r s t o c o v e r i m m e d i a t e F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9
c a p i t a l n e e d s o r i g i n a l l y p r o g r a m m e d p r i m a r i l y w i t h S t a t e T r a n s i t A s s i s t a n c e
( S T A ) f u n d s ;
2 ) A p p r o v e t h e $ 7 8 3 , 3 8 2 e x c e s s a n d u n a s s i g n e d S T A f u n d s r e s u l t i n g f r o m t h e
r e p r o g r a m m i n g s t r u c t u r e b e r e t a i n e d b y R T A t o b e u t i l i z e d f o r o t h e r c a p i t a l
p r o j e c t s t h a t w i l l b e i d e n t i f i e d i n l a t e r y e a r s ;
3 ) A m e n d R T A ' s F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n ( S R T P ) t o r e f l e c t t h e s e
c h a n g e s ; a n d
4 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
A t t h e J u l y 9 , 2 0 0 8 C o m m i s s i o n m e e t i n g , t h e F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 o p e r a t i n g a n d c a p i t a l
f u n d i n g a l l o c a t i o n f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s w e r e a p p r o v e d . F o r i t s
c a p i t a l b u d g e t f o r F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 w a s h e a v i l y f u n d e d w i t h S T A c o m p a r e d t o p r i o r
y e a r s . T h e a g e n c y ' s c a p i t a l b u d g e t i s h i s t o r i c a l l y f u n d e d p r i m a r i l y w i t h F e d e r a l
5 3 0 7 f u n d s u t i l i z i n g S T A o r L o c a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d ( L T F ) f u n d s a s l o c a l m a t c h ,
b u t d u e t o d e c l i n i n g L T F f o r o p e r a t i o n a l n e e d s , i t s o p e r a t i n g b u d g e t w a s s u p p l a n t e d
w i t h F e d e r a l 5 3 0 7 f u n d s , w h i c h i s t y p i c a l l y u s e d f o r c a p i t a l f u n d i n g . W i t h t h i s
y e a r ' s f u n d i n g c o n s t r a i n t s , R T A ' s F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 c a p i t a l b u d g e t w a s r e d u c e d t o
m i n i m a l l e v e l s a n d h e a v i l y f u n d e d w i t h S T A .
A f t e r t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s a p p r o v a l o f F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 f u n d i n g , t h e s t a t e ' s f i n a n c i a l c r i s i s
w o r s e n e d . I n O c t o b e r 2 0 0 8 , R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y ' s S T A f u n d a l l o c a t i o n w a s r e d u c e d
b y 5 7 % a n d c o n s e q u e n t l y , i n M a r c h 2 0 0 9 , t h e S T A a l l o c a t i o n w a s a g a i n r e d u c e d
b y o n e h a l f o f t h e O c t o b e r f u n d i n g l e v e l s . T o a l l e v i a t e t h i s s i g n i f i c a n t s h o r t f a l l i n
S T A , R T A s t a f f p r e p a r e d a c a p i t a l r e s t r u c t u r i n g p l a n t h a t r e a l l o c a t e s f u n d i n g f r o m
s e v e r a l e x i s t i n g p r o j e c t s a n d s o u r c e s f r o m p r i o r y e a r s t o e n s u r e t h a t c r i t i c a l c a p i t a l
n e e d s c u r r e n t l y p r o g r a m m e d i n F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 a r e m e t . T h e a t t a c h m e n t d e t a i l s
R T A ' s p r o p o s e d r e p r o g r a m m i n g p l a n .
A g e n d a I t e m 1 2
2 6
A shift of $6,114,997 of existing funds from several RTA projects that have been
completed or soon -to -be started projects from FYs 2005 - 08 grant years will be
used to cover $5,331,613 of FY 2009 capital needs that were originally funded
heavily with STA funds. The reprogramming plan yielded a balance of $783,382
of excess and unassigned STA monies, and RTA is requesting that this amount be
retained by the agency to cover other capital projects planned for later years.
Unfortunately, in the wake of the recent state budget agreement, the provision for
STA funding was completely eliminated for public transit operators; however, the
carryover or excess funds are still retained and can be made available to RTA for
this purpose.
Commission staff is in support of RTA's request to reprogram the funds and
recommends approval of its capital modification plan contingent upon FTA's
approval to reprogram the federal portion of the funding.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
Yes
Year:
FY 2008/09
Amount:
$783,400 (STA only)
Source of Funds:
Transportation Development Act
LTF & STA - Western County;
Section 5307 and Prop 1 B funds
Budget Adjustment:
Yes
GLA No.:
241-62-86102 P2201 ($783,400)
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\141,azduvite.Date:
3/13/09
Attachment: RTA Capital Project Restructure Summary Table
•
Agenda Item 12
27
"
"
"
R I V E R S I D E T R A N S I T A G E N C Y
F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 C O V E R A G E O F S T A S H O R T F A L L
C A P I T A L P R O J E C T R E S T R U C T U R E S U M M A R Y
M a r c h 1 3 , 2 0 0 9
R e p r o g r a m m i n g F u n d i n g S o u r c e ( F R O M )
G r a n t
P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n Y e a r F e d e r a l S t a t e L T F M V S e t t l e m e n t P r o p 1 B T U M F T o t a l
R e v e n u e V e h i c l e s F Y 0 7 - 0 8 $ 6 , 9 1 1 $ 9 3 9 , 9 7 5 2 , 8 9 1 , 0 5 8 $ 3 , 8 3 7 , 9 4 4
R e v e n u e V e h i c l e E q u i p m e n t F Y 0 7 - 0 8 7 9 , 2 1 9 7 9 , 2 1 9
N o n - R e v e n u e V e h i c l e s F Y 0 5 - 0 6 3 , 5 6 2 9 4 9 4 , 5 1 1
B u s S t o p A m e n i t i e s F Y 0 4 - 0 8 3 1 5 , 4 6 7 9 4 , 7 0 9 4 1 0 , 1 7 6
F a r e R e v e n u e C o l l e c t i o n E q u i p m e n t F Y 0 6 0 7 5 2 9 , 4 5 0 1 3 2 , 3 6 2 6 6 1 , 8 1 2
B R T T r a n s i t E n h a n c e m e n t s F Y 0 5 - 0 6 1 3 4 , 6 0 0 3 2 5 , 4 0 0 8 7 , 2 5 0 5 4 7 , 2 5 0
M a i n t e n a n c e F Y 0 7 - 0 8 1 5 , 0 6 7 3 , 7 6 8 1 8 , 8 3 4
C o m m u n i c a t i o n s & I n f o S y s t e m s F Y 0 7 - 0 8 5 1 , 9 9 3 1 2 , 8 8 3 1 1 6 6 4 , 9 9 2
G e n e r a l & A d m i n i s t r a t i v e F Y 0 5 - 0 6 4 7 8 0 7 1 7 7 1 , 0 3 1
A D A / D A R P r o j e c t s F Y 0 5 - 0 6 4 8 9 2 2 8 4 8 9 , 2 2 8
T o t a l $ 1 , 0 5 3 , 5 3 5 $ 1 , 5 9 2 , 6 8 4 $ 8 8 , 4 9 2 $ 4 8 9 , 2 2 8 $ 2 , 8 9 1 , 0 5 8 $ $ 6 , 1 1 4 , 9 9 7
R e p r o g r a m m e d F u n d i n g ( T O )
G r a n t
P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n Y e a r F e d e r a l S t a t e L T F - M V S e t t l e m e n t P r o p 1 B T U M F T o t a l
R e v e n u e V e h i c l e s F Y 0 8 - 0 9 $ 4 7 $ 2 7 , 6 0 3 $ 2 2 , 7 1 8 $ 2 , 8 9 1 , 0 5 8 $ 2 , 9 4 1 , 4 2 5
C O P D e b i S e r v i c e F Y 0 8 - 0 9 4 0 6 , 4 7 1 4 0 6 , 4 7 1
N o n - R e v e n u e V e h i c l e s F Y 0 8 - 0 9 4 , 5 1 1 6 , 2 6 4 1 0 , 7 7 5
T r o l l e y R e f u r b i s h F Y 0 8 - 0 9 1 7 0 , 6 2 0 1 1 1 , 4 2 6 2 2 , 9 5 4 3 0 5 , 0 0 0
M a i n t e n a n c e S p a r e P a d s F Y 0 8 - 0 9 6 3 4 , 2 3 5 1 6 3 , 2 3 4 5 , 2 5 0 4 2 8 . 2 9 4 1 , 2 3 1 , 0 1 3
C a p i t a l i z e d T i r e L e a s e F Y 0 8 - 0 9 1 8 7 , 2 2 9 4 9 , 7 4 0 3 8 , 2 1 7 2 7 5 , 1 8 6
M a i n t e n a n c e F Y 0 8 - 0 9 9 , 4 1 1 2 2 , 6 2 6 5 3 , 9 0 7 8 5 , 9 4 4
C o m m u n i c a t i o n s & I n f o S y s t e m s F Y 0 8 - 0 9 5 1 , 9 9 3 2 3 , 6 9 1 1 1 6 7 5 , 8 0 0
T o t a l $ 1 , 0 5 3 , 5 3 5 $ 8 0 9 , 3 0 2 $ 8 8 , 4 9 2 $ 4 8 9 , 2 2 8 $ 2 , 8 9 1 , 0 5 8 $ - $ 5 , 3 3 1 , 6 1 5
U n a s s i g n e d F u n d s ( F Y 0 8 S T A ) $ 7 8 3 , 3 8 2
N o t e : A m o u n t s a r e s u b j e c t t o r o u n d i n g d i f f e r e n c e s
2 8
AGENDA ITEM 13
"
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
D A T E :
M a r c h 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
T a n y a L o v e , G o o d s M o v e m e n t M a n a g e r
T H R O U G H :
J o h n S t a n d i f o r d , D e p u t y E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
E n v i r o n m e n t a l J u s t i c e A n a l y s i s a n d C o m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h S t u d y
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
1 ) T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o r e c e i v e a n d p r o v i d e i n p u t o n t h e
E n v i r o n m e n t a l J u s t i c e ( E J ) d r a f t t o o l k i t e n t i t l e d H e a l t h y C o m m u n i t i e s a n d
H e a l t h y E c o n o m i e s - A T o o l k i t f o r G o o d s M o v e m e n t ; a n d
2 ) F o r w a r d t o C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
I n J a n u a r y 2 0 0 7 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n e n t e r e d i n t o a n a g r e e m e n t w i t h C a ! t r a n s f o r
$ 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 i n g r a n t f u n d s f r o m t h e E J C o n t e x t - S e n s i t i v e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n n i n g
G r a n t p r o g r a m t o s u p p l e m e n t t h e w o r k o f t h e M u l t i - C o u n t y G o o d s M o v e m e n t
A c t i o n P l a n ( M C G M A P ) . I n a d d i t i o n t o c o m m i t t i n g $ 6 , 0 0 0 i n l o c a l f u n d s , t h e
C o m m i s s i o n e n t e r e d i n t o f u n d i n g a g r e e m e n t s w i t h t h e L o s A n g e l e s C o u n t y
M e t r o p o l i t a n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A u t h o r i t y ( M e t r o ) , O r a n g e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
A u t h o r i t y ( O C T A ) , a n d S a n B e r n a r d i n o A s s o c i a t e d G o v e r n m e n t s ( S A N B A G ) f o r t h e
l o c a l f u n d i n g m a t c h o f $ 2 4 , 0 0 0 i n s u p p o r t o f t h e E J g r a n t ( $ 6 , 0 0 0 f r o m e a c h
a g e n c y ) . S i n c e t h a t t i m e , O C T A o p t e d o u t o f t h e E J c o m m u n i t y o u t r e a c h s t u d y
a n d a s a r e s u l t , t h e C o m m i s s i o n p r o v i d e d a n a d d i t i o n a l $ 2 , 0 0 0 i n L o c a l
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d ( L T F ) f u n d s t o p a y i t s p r o p o r t i o n a t e s h a r e o f t h e $ 2 4 , 0 0 0
m a t c h r e q u i r e m e n t . M e t r o a n d S A N B A G a l s o p r o v i d e d a d d i t i o n a l m a t c h f u n d i n g o f
$ 2 , 0 0 0 . T h r o u g h a c o m p e t i t i v e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , t h e C o m m i s s i o n r e t a i n e d t h e
c o n s u l t i n g f i r m o f M o o r e l a c o f a n o G o l t s m a n , I n c . W I G ) t o c o n d u c t t h e
t h r e e - c o u n t y e n v i r o n m e n t a l j u s t i c e s t u d y . C o n s u l t a n t s t a f f w i l l p r o v i d e a n
o v e r v i e w o f t h e s t u d y a t t h e C o m m i t t e e m e e t i n g . T h e p u r p o s e o f t h e s t u d y w a s
t o :
" E x p a n d t h e r e g i o n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f g o o d s m o v e m e n t i m p a c t s o n
c o m m u n i t i e s o f c o n c e r n ; a n d
" I d e n t i f y s t r a t e g i e s f o r t h e r e g i o n , a n d c a s e s t u d y c o m m u n i t i e s , t o a d d r e s s
t h e s e i m p a c t s a n d m a i n t a i n o r e n h a n c e q u a l i t y - o f - l i f e , a l l w h i l e s u p p o r t i n g
t h e e x p a n s i o n o f g o o d s m o v e m e n t .
A g e n d a I t e m 1 3
2 9
The toolkit was designed to focus solely on goods movement related issues and
was not designed to discourage the development of alternative commute strategies
and/or other congestion reduction strategies such as commuter or light rail..
The Healthy Communities and Healthy Economies — A Toolkit for Goods Movement
is attached. The toolkit is currently in draft format as at the time of writing this
staff report, the document was being reviewed by both technical advisory
committee (TAC) and community feedback group (CFG) members. Once input is
received from the Plans and Programs Committee as well as the TAC and CFG,
comments will be incorporated into the final document and made available at the
April 8 Commission meeting.
Impacts of Goods Movement
As the nation's two largest ports, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach
handled $221 billion in imports and $35 billion in exports in 2005. Despite the late
2008 downturn in the economy, the amount of goods shipped is expected to triple
by 2030. Participants in the EJ study recognize that the region's goods movement
system has both positive and negative effects. It influences the area's local
economy, environment, and quality of life. It is also an economic driver for the
region, creating jobs and money for the local economy. However, activities from
goods movement can negatively impact local communities, creating air pollution,
noise, traffic and blight. There are also health risks associated with goods
movement particularly among low-income and minority populations.
Study Approach
The EJ study integrated technical analysis from developed transportation plans
such as the MCGMAP and best practices and solutions for environmental justice
issues. This effort was coordinated with a broad -based community outreach
approach involving technical staff from the railroads, ports and warehousing
industry together with representatives of EJ communities. The TAC, consisting of
industry staff and community representatives, as well as CFG members from each
of the participating counties, guided the study team in developing the toolkit. A
total of four communities participated in the EJ study:
County Geographic Area
Los Angeles South Gate
Riverside Mira Loma and Coachella Valley
San Bernardino South Colton
A series of CFG meetings were held to solicit feedback from areas most impacted
by goods movement. Representatives from the impacted communities, local city
and county planning departments, public works departments and staff from various
Agenda Item 13
30
"
"
"
i n d u s t r i e s a t t e n d e d t h e T A C a n d c o m m u n i t y m e e t i n g s . W h e n e v e r p o s s i b l e ,
f e e d b a c k p r o v i d e d o n l o c a l i s s u e s a n d i m p a c t s r e l a t e d t o g o o d s m o v e m e n t
a c t i v i t i e s w e r e i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o t h e t o o l k i t .
T o p r o v i d e a b a l a n c e d a n d f a i r p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e t o o l k i t a c k n o w l e d g e s t h e m a j o r
c o n t r i b u t i o n s t h a t t h e l o g i s t i c s i n d u s t r y c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e e c o n o m y . I n f o r m a t i o n
g l e a n e d f r o m t h e T A C a n d C F G s w e r e i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o t h e H e a l t h y C o m m u n i t i e s
a n d H e a l t h y E c o n o m i e s : A T o o l k i t f o r G o o d s M o v e m e n t . W h i l e t h e f o c u s o f t h e
s t u d y w a s o n E J c o m m u n i t i e s , t h e p r i n c i p l e s a n d p r a c t i c e s d e v e l o p e d t h r o u g h t h e
s t u d y c a n b e a p p l i e d t o a n y c o m m u n i t y t h a t i s p o t e n t i a l l y i m p a c t e d b y t h e
m o v e m e n t o f f r e i g h t .
W h y W a s T h e T o o l k i t D e v e l o p e d ?
T h e t o o l k i t w a s d e v e l o p e d t o p r o v i d e p o t e n t i a l s t r a t e g i e s t o a s s i s t c o m m u n i t y
m e m b e r s a s w e l l a s p u b l i c a n d p r i v a t e a g e n c i e s i n r e s o l v i n g g o o d s m o v e m e n t -
r e l a t e d p r o b l e m s . I t p r o v i d e s a s t a r t i n g p o i n t a n d s o u r c e o f i d e a s f o r h o w S o u t h e r n
C a l i f o r n i a ' s g o o d s m o v e m e n t s y s t e m a n d t h e c o m m u n i t i e s t h a t e x p e r i e n c e t h e
n e g a t i v e i m p a c t s c a n c o - e x i s t . T h e t o o l k i t i s n o t a p o l i c y d o c u m e n t a n d d o e s n o t
o f f e r a s e t o f r e q u i r e m e n t s o r m i n i m u m s t a n d a r d s t o a d d r e s s i m p a c t s . W h i l e m a n y
c o m m u n i t i e s m a y e x p e r i e n c e s i m i l a r i m p a c t s e a c h s e t t i n g w i l l h a v e a u n i q u e
c o m b i n a t i o n o f c o n d i t i o n s a n d p e o p l e i n v o l v e d ; t h e t o o l k i t p r o v i d e s a n o p p o r t u n i t y
t o c r e a t e t a i l o r e d s o l u t i o n s t o f i t e a c h s i t u a t i o n .
H o w W i l l T h e T o o l k i t B e U t i l i z e d ?
T h e t o o l k i t i s a s t a r t i n g p o i n t f o r a d d r e s s i n g s p e c i f i c g o o d s m o v e m e n t r e l a t e d
p r o j e c t s . D e p e n d i n g o n t h e i n f o r m a t i o n n e e d e d , t h e t o o l k i t o f f e r s :
" B a s i c i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t h o w t h e g o o d s m o v e m e n t s y s t e m w o r k s ;
" I t s b e n e f i t s t o c o m m u n i t i e s a n d t h e r e g i o n ;
" I t s i m p a c t s o n c o m m u n i t i e s a n d t h e r e g i o n ;
" T h e r o l e s o f o r g a n i z a t i o n s t h a t r e g u l a t e s t h e g o o d s m o v e m e n t s y s t e m a n d
o p e r a t i o n s ; a n d
" E x p e r i e n c e s f r o m c o m m u n i t i e s t h a t h a v e b e e n a f f e c t e d b y g o o d s m o v e m e n t
r e l a t e d i s s u e s .
T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l u s e t h e t o o l k i t a t t h e M a y 2 8 , 2 0 0 9 w o r k s h o p e n t i t l e d
A d v a n c i n g G o o d s M o v e m e n t t h r o u g h t h e I n l a n d E m p i r e . T h e w o r k s h o p i s c u r r e n t l y
b e i n g d e v e l o p e d i n p a r t n e r s h i p w i t h t h e S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a A s s o c i a t i o n o f
G o v e r n m e n t s a n d t h e W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e C o u n c i l o f G o v e r n m e n t s . T h e f o c u s o f t h e
w o r k s h o p w i l l b e t o p r o v i d e a n o v e r v i e w o f t h e l a t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t s i n t h e g o o d s
m o v e m e n t s y s t e m i n S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a , w i t h a s p e c i a l e m p h a s i s o n t h e I n l a n d
E m p i r e ' s r o l e , o p p o r t u n i t i e s a n d i m p a c t s . I t ' s a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t w o r k s h o p a t t e n d e e s
w i l l c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e d i a l o g u e a b o u t h o w t h e I n l a n d E m p i r e s h o u l d p o s i t i o n i t s e l f t o
A g e n d a I t e m 1 3
3 1
ensure that the area benefits from goods movement developments and initiatives.
Congressman Ken Calvert will serve as the keynote speaker providing perspective
from the federal level about the effect of future transportation bills on local goods
movement.
Additionally, the toolkit can be used as a source of information at the state and
federal level to further demonstrate the Commission's efforts in partnering with
local jurisdictions and communities related to goods movement issues.
Attachment: Healthy Communities and Healthy Economies — A Toolkit for Goods
Movement (Draft)
Agenda Item 13
•
•
32
a T o o l k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r a f T m a r C h 2 0 0 9 | 2 - 1
Goods movement is an important
part of the economy of southern California.
the industry includes wholesale trade,
warehousing, and freight transportation.
the industry provides merchandise to the
region’s shoppers and jobs to the region’s
workers. the industry also provides a number
of entry-level jobs with above-average pay.
the region’s unique location and transporta-
tion infrastructure attract a massive amount
of goods movement operations to the area.
Goods movement generates an estimated
$170 billion economic benefit annually to
southern California.3
Benefits of Goods Move M e nt to
the Re G i onal e c ono M y
the goods movement industry is one of
the most important employers in southern California. Goods movement
provides more than 10% of the jobs in the six-county southern California
region.4 the goods movement sector is the fourth largest employer in
the region, after the manufacturing (1st), retail (2nd), and health care (3rd)
industries (see Figure 2-1 next page).Goods movement is also a strong
source of job growth for the region. the number of jobs in the goods
economic impacts of
goods movement
chapter two
2 - 2 | h e a l T h y C o m m u n i T i e s a n d h e a l T h y e C o n o m i e s
movement industry grew by 18% in the region during 1998-2006. the number
of total jobs in the region grew by 14% during this period. Goods movement
has grown independent of southern California population growth patterns.5
the current national economic downturn may hamper the growth of the goods
movement industry. However, the industry is expected to continue to grow in
southern California in the longer term.
chapter two
fi gure 2-1 e m ploymen T by indus Try, six-Co un T y sou T h ern C alifornia r e gion (2006)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
manufacturingretail tradehealth caregoods movementhotels/restaurantsfinance/insurance/real estateadmin/support/waste mgm’tprofessional/scientific/techconstructionotherinformationeducationarts & recreationmgm’t of companies/enterprisesother transportationutilitiesprimary industriesSource: County Business Patterns 2006. Excludes government and self-employed. Excludes some data points forreasons of confidentiality.
a T o o l k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r a f T m a r C h 2 0 0 9 | 2 - 3
economic impact of goods movement
Workers in the goods movement industry spend their earnings within
southern California. Goods movement operations buy goods and services
from other regional businesses. these purchases stimulate the economy and
indirectly support other employment in the region. through this cycle of rein-
vestment, each job in the goods movement industry supports two new jobs in
the regional economy.6
southern California’s economy sees $1,375 billion in economic activity annu-
ally.When the indirect impact of the goods movement industry is considered,
the industry is responsible for $170 billion in economic activity,7 or morethan
12% of all economic activity in the region.8
development and expansion of goods movement facilities can bring eco-
nomic benefits to local governments and communities, too. Building of new
goods movement facilities creates construction jobs. Warehouses and other
commercial developments bring property taxes to local government coffers –
both secured property taxes (for the land and buildings) and unsecured prop-
erty taxes (for equipment on site). Because these facilities often create little
new demand for city services, they can result in a net fiscal benefit to for local
governments. these revenues can be applied to services and infrastructure
that support the entire community such as public safety, libraries, parks and
recreation, and many other important aspects that make communities healthy
and desirable places to live.
Jo B s in Goods Move M e nt
Goods movement operations employ nearly 700,000 people in the six-county
region. approximately 66% of these jobs are in wholesale trade businesses,
9% are in truck transportation and another 9% are in transportation services.
Jobs in goods movement range from entry-level to white-collar manage-
rial positions. Goods movement operations depend heavily on two types of
jobs: 1) transportation and material moving occupations, and 2) office and
administrative support occupations. the goods movement industry also
employs salespeople, business and financial experts, maintenance and repair
technicians, managers, and computer technicians (see Figure 2-2 on following
page).
many goods movement jobs pay better than the average job. in the southern
California, employees in goods movement make an average of $54,000 annu-
ally, $6,000 higher than the average annual pay. note that this average salary
includes airline pilots, who are high-skilled employees who earn a higher wage
each job in the goods
movement industry
supports two more jobs in
the regional economy.
chapter two
2 - 4 | h e a l T h y C o m m u n i T i e s a n d h e a l T h y e C o n o m i e s
Table 2-1 e mploymen T in goods movemen T in T h e six-C o un T y
region (2006)
Business Type Employees
Wholesale trade 464,000
Truck transportation 62,000
Support services for transportation 62,000
General warehousing and storage 42,000
Non-local couriers 36,000
Air transportation 23,000
Water transportation 3,000
Rail transportation <3,000*
Total 692,000
source: County business patterns 2006
* There is conflicting data on the size of the rail transportation industry in the six-county region.
employment in the rail industry is estimated to be equal to or less than employment in water
transportation.
f i gure 2-2 California g o ods m o vemen T i n dus T r ies:
o CC u paT i ons e m ployed (2006)
Source: California Industry-Occupational Matrix 2006-2016, CA EDD
business/financial
operations
4%installation/
maintenance/repair
4%
transportation/
material moving
34%
management
7%
office/admin
support
29%
production
2%
computer/math
2%
sales/related
occupations
16%
other
2%
economic impact of goods movement
a T o o l k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r a f T m a r C h 2 0 0 9 | 2 - 5
than most other goods movement jobs. But some other types of goods move-
ment jobs also pay more than the average. Wholesalers, the primary employer
in the industry, pay their employees an average of $10,000 more per year than
the regional average (see Figure 2-3).
f i gure 2-3 average a n nual pay for e m ployee, s i x-Coun T y r e gion (2007)
0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000
Source: Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, CA EDD (2007)
Note: These figures do not account for the number of hours worked by employees, but reflect the average amount paid to each person employed. Therefore, an
industry with a high proportion of part- time employees will show lower annual average pay.
air transportation
wholesale trade
support activities for
transportation
all goods movement
water transportation
couriers
truck transportation
warehousing/storage
rail transportation
$53,834
average for all
industries ($48,000)
chapter two
2 - 6 | h e a l T h y C o m m u n i T i e s a n d h e a l T h y e C o n o m i e s
many of the jobs available within the industry are entry-level jobs, suitable for
workers with little to no higher education or training. in California, 75% of jobs
in the goods movement industry require workers to have only short-term or
moderate-term on-the-job training (see Figure 2-4 below). Unskilled workers
can gain entry into the labor force with starting pay above minimum wage and
benefits packages. Goods movement jobs allow workers to develop new skills
and increase their income as they gain experience.10
Case s T u dy
m i ra l o ma
The Mira Loma community
hosts a major railyard and
warehouse facilities, which are
significant parts of the region’s
goods movement system. Yet
Community Feedback Group
members describe challenges
by local residents in securing
permanent, stable positions
at these facilities, finding
that temporary, lower-paying
positions are more commonly
available for unskilled workers.
f i gure 2-4 m i nimum Training l evel for g o ods m o vemen T
Jobs in California (2006)
Source: California Industry-Occupational Matrix 2006-2016, CA EDD
associate degree
1%
bachelor’s degree
7%long-term on-the-
job-training
1%
moderate-term on-
the-job-training
36%
work experience
7%
post-secondary
vocational educaton
2%
short-term on-
the-job-training
39%
work experience, plus
a bachelor’s or higher
6%
master’s degree
less than 1%
economic impact of goods movement
a T o o l k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r a f T m a r C h 2 0 0 9 | 2 - 7
d i st R i B u tion of e c ono M i c
i M pacts
the economic benefits of goods
movement are not necessarily distrib-
uted equally across the cities and resi-
dents of southern California. Goods
movement jobs tend to be clustered
near the ports of Los angeles and
Long Beach, and near key highway
and rail interchange points, including
san Bernardino and riverside coun-
ties. Like many other industries, those
holding jobs at goods movement
facilities often do not live in the com-
munities where they work. thus, some
communities may bear the brunt of
goods movement environmental
impacts without experiencing the economic benefits of well-paying jobs. By
working in partnership with companies providing goods movement services,
communities can help to ensure that local residents are made aware of and
considered for new jobs in these businesses.
Truck rou T e s in T h e region make up
an ex Tensive road neT work.
in Los a n geLes co un Ty aLo ne, T r uck
rouT es inc L u de 892 mi L e s of
highways and 21,000 mi L e s of L o caL
sT r ee T s. This neT work provides
cri Tica L access T o T h e region’s
porT s , airporTs, and rai Lyards.
in addi T i on, inT ers TaT e s Li nk T h e
region T o ou T side des T inaT i ons.
a T o o L k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r a f T m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 3 - 1
Trucks carry more goods Than any
other mode in the region. on-road trucks
include tractor-trailer combination trucks and
single-unit trucks. These trucks are used for
urban pick-up and delivery, waste hauling,
and construction. carB defines “heavy-duty
trucks” as trucks with a gross vehicle weight
rating (gVWr) of more than 8,500 pounds.
This 8,500 pound threshold is roughly the
difference between trucks used for personal
travel (e.g., 4-tire pick-ups and suVs) and
trucks used for commercial purposes (4-tire
or 6-tire trucks).
Truck transportation moves goods door-to-
door between shippers and receivers and
transfers goods between ports and distribu-
tion centers. heavy-duty trucks transport
freight in one of three ways.
1. Local transport carries freight on highways and streets from its origin—
ports, railyards, and distribution centers—to a destination within the
six-county region.
2. Long haul trucking primarily uses the interstate highway system to take
goods to destinations outside the region.
3. Intermodal drayage service moves freight in short trips between ports,
railyards, and distribution centers.
Truck routes in the region make up an extensive road network. In Los
angeles county alone, truck routes include 892 miles of highways and
truck routes
chapter three
Throughout Sections 3 – 7
of this Toolkit, potential
strategies listed in bold are
described in more detail in
Section 8.
chapter three
3 - 2 | h e a L T h y c o m m u n i T i e s a n d h e a L T h y e c o n o m i e s
710 Long Beach, Jct. Rte. 91, Artesia Freeway 222,000 38,584 17% 19.3
605 Santa Fe Springs, Jct. Rte. 5, Santa Ana 268,000 37,842 14% 16.5
710 Lynwood, Jct. Rte. 105, Glenn Anderson Freeway 234,000 37,417 16% 17.4
605 Whittier, Jct. Rte. 72, Whittier Boulevard 258,000 36,430 14% 15.9
710 South Gate, Firestone Boulevard Interchange 213,000 36,210 17% 16.8
91 Long Beach, Jct. Rte. 710, Long Beach Freeway 251,000 35,190 14% 16.2
91 Bellflower, Jct. Rte. 19, Lakewood Boulevard 236,000 33,087 14% 15.2
605 Norwalk, Jct. Rte. 105, Glenn Anderson Freeway 300,000 30,810 10% 13.2
710 Long Beach, Del Amo Boulevard Interchange 183,000 28,896 16% 14.9
605 Santa Fe Springs, Telegraph Road Interchange 253,000 28,842 11% 11.2
Source: Caltrans 2006 Truck Traffic (available online at http://traffic-counts.dot.ca.gov/); Emissions estimated by ICF using EMFAC 2007.
21,000 miles of local streets. This network provides critical access to the
region’s ports, airports, and railyards. In addition, interstates link the region to
outside destinations.
Local highways within the region carry some of the highest truck volumes in
the country. Trucks logged 22.4 million miles within the region in the year 2000.
Truck traffic is concentrated on major routes connecting population centers,
ports, border crossings, and other major hubs of activity.11
Tables 3-1 through 3-3 show the distribution of port-related truck trips on free-
ways. I-710 is the primary corridor for port-specific traffic, with nearly 40,000
truck trips on an average weekday. a significant share of truck traffic is related
directly to activity at the ports of Los angeles and Long Beach.
Tab L e 3-1 L os a n ge L es c o unTy h ighway s e gmen Ts wi T h h i ghes T Truck vo L u me, 2006
Highway Segment Location Total Daily
Traffic Volume
Daily
Truck Volume % Trucks
PM2.5
Emissions
per Mile
(kg / day)
truck routes
a T o o L k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r a f T m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 3 - 3
60 Jct. Rte. 15 158,000 24,806 16%9.1
10 Jefferson Street/Indio Boulevard 68,000 22,984 34% 13.1
10 Jct. Rte. 62 North 87,000 22,794 26% 11.3
10 East Ramsey Street 121,000 22,143 18% 12.0
10 Indian Avenue 88,000 20,768 24% 11.8
10 Jct. Rte. 111 89,000 19,491 22%9.1
10 Banning, Sunset Avenue 135,000 19,305 14%8.3
10 Beaumont, Jct. Rte. 79 South 133,000 19,285 15%7.9
215 Jct. Rte. 60 East 170,000 18,530 11%7.2
15 Jct. Rte. 60 223,000 18,286 8%6.8
Source: Caltrans 2006 Truck Traffic (available online at http://traffic-counts.dot.ca.gov/); Emissions estimated by ICF using EMFAC 2007.
Tab L e 3-2 r i verside c o unTy h ighway se gmen T s wi T h h i ghes T Truck v oL u me, 2006
Highway Segment Location Total Daily
Traffic Volume
Daily
Truck Volume % Trucks
PM2.5
Emissions
per Mile
(kg / day)
chapter three
3 - 4 | h e a L T h y c o m m u n i T i e s a n d h e a L T h y e c o n o m i e s
Air Qu A l ity
air Quality impacts
heavy-duty trucks are responsible for approximately 40% of the small par-
ticles (particulate matter or Pm) coming from diesel engines and other goods
movement-related sources in southern california.12
The amount of truck emissions depends heavily on the size of truck. For
example, the heaviest trucks produce particulate matter emissions at a rate
more than three times the rate of smaller diesel trucks. Table 3-4 shows aver-
age emission by truck size for heavy-duty diesel trucks in 2010.
arB maintains tools for calculating emissions from freight trucks in california.
The emFac model provides emissions factors that describe emissions from
trucks per vehicle-mile of travel. Total truck emissions can be calculated by mul-
tiplying the appropriate emission factor (see Table 3-4) and the total truck-miles
traveled. more information about emFac can be found at arB’s website.13
60 ontario, Jct. rte. 83 227,000 27,785 12% 13.1
60 central avenue 226,000 27,662 12% 13.0
60 Los angeles/san Bernardino county Line 225,000 27,540 12% 13.0
60 grove avenue 222,000 27,173 12% 12.8
10 colton, Jct. rte. 215 239,000 26,290 11% 9.3
10 mountain View avenue 202,000 24,846 12% 9.1
10 ontario, Jct. rte. 15 240,000 24,552 10% 11.5
10 etiwanda avenue 226,000 23,128 10% 10.8
10 Fontana, cherry avenue 226,000 23,128 10% 10.8
15 Jct. rte. 215 160,000 22,064 14% 10.4
Source: Caltrans 2006 Truck Traffic (available online at http://traffic-counts.dot.ca.gov/); Emissions estimated by ICF using EMFAC 2007.
Tab Le 3-3 sa n b e rnardino co un T y hi ghway s e gmen T s wiTh h ighes T Truck v o L u me, 2006
Highway Segment Location Total Daily
Traffic Volume
Daily
Truck Volume % Trucks
PM2.5
Emissions
per Mile
(kg / day)
truck routes
a T o o L k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r a f T m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 3 - 5
ROG 0.13 0.18 0.19 1.37
NOx 5.14 6.40 9.04 16.36
PM2.5 0.03 0.04 0.21 0.70
*Calculated from ARB’s EMFAC model
TabL e 3-4 e mission fa c T o rs in g r ams per m i L e , 2010*
Pollutant
Light Heavy-
Duty Diesel 1
(8500-10000 lbs
GVWR)
Light Heavy-
Duty Diesel 2
(10001-14000
lbs GVWR)
Medium Heavy-
Duty Diesel
(14001-33000 lbs
GVWR)
Heavy Heavy-
Duty Diesel
(33,000+ lbs
GVWR)
Truck emissions are expected to decrease in future years with the implemen-
tation of stringent new emission standards. u.s. environmental Protection
agency (ePa) emission standards will encourage the reduction of emissions
from new trucks, while arB in-use standards will reduce emissions from trucks
currently on the road. due to the more stringent ePa standards, total truck
emissions are expected to decline by approximately 60% between 2010 and
2020, and 25% from 2020 to 2030. The benefits of the new emission standards
will compensate for added emissions from the growth in truck miles traveled
(VmT) from 2010 to 2030. Figure 3-1 shows projected Pm2.5 emissions from
heavy-duty trucks in the south coast air Basin. Pm2.5 is a category of tiny
particles (particles less than 2.5 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter).
f i gure 3-1 b a seL i ne h e avy-d u T y Truck p m 2 .5 e m issions in T h e
s o u T h c o as T ai r b asin
Source: 2007 Air Quality Management Plan, South Coast Air Quality Management District
Note: Baseline does not reflect proposed CARB standards for in-use trucks or the Ports’ proposed Clean
Truck Program
0.0
1.0
2.0
2010 2020 2030
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0 Light Heavy Duty
Medium Heavy Duty
Heavy Heavy Duty
chapter three
3 - 6 | h e a L T h y c o m m u n i T i e s a n d h e a L T h y e c o n o m i e s
air quality studies show that vehicle traffic, including truck traffic, directly
affects air pollution. more traffic generates higher concentrations of traffic-
related pollution. research reveals that living close to freeways and high traffic
roads can have serious impact on health, including cancer and asthma. studies
report connections between living close to high traffic roadways and a variety
of health effects. non-cancer health effects include respiratory symptoms,
asthma exacerbations, and decreased lung function in children.
key study findings include:
• Asthma and bronchitis symptoms in Southern California schoolchildren
were associated with nearness to high traffic roads.14
• Increased occurrence of asthma in Southern California children was associ-
ated with nearness to freeways.15
• Increased asthma hospitalizations were associated with living within 650
feet of heavy traffic and heavy truck volume.16
• An increase in medical visits among San Diego was seen in children living
within 550 feet of heavy traffic.17
• Reduced lung function in children is linked with traffic density, especially trucks,
within 1,000 feet, and is strongly linked with traffic density within 300 feet.18
another study found that the intensity of vehicle-related pollution decreased
within 300 feet of freeways in southern california (see Figure 3-2).19 Vehicle-
related pollution includes: black carbon, carbon monoxide, and ultrafine particles.
f i gure 3-2 d e crease in c oncen T r aT i on of f r eeway d i ese L
pa rT i cu LaTe m aT T er (d pm ) e m issions wi Th di s Ta nce
Source: Zhu Y, Hinds WC, Kim S, Sioutas C. 2002. Concentration and size distribution of ultrafine particles
near a major highway. Journal of Air and Waste Management Association. September. 52: 1032-1042.
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
0 200 400 600
Distance from Freeway (feet)Total Particle Number (cm3)800 1,000
405 freeway—Diesel <5%
710 freeway—Diesel >5%
truck routes
a T o o L k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r a f T m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 3 - 7
Particle number concentration was 25
times higher near freeways than it was
at locations not near freeways (back-
ground locations). The concentration of
ultrafine particles decreased within 300
meters downwind of freeways.
air Quality improvement
a number of strategies can help to
reduce the impact of truck emissions
on local communities. These strate-
gies include:
• New technologies for cleaner
engines and exhaust (equipment
replacement and equipment
repowering)
• Advanced fuels, such as biodiesel
blends
• Strategies that change truck usage
patterns (designating truck routes)
• Virtual container yards
• Land use strategies that reduce
local exposure to pollution (land
use siting).
most new technologies target either
engine improvements that reduce emissions or exhaust retrofits that remove
pollutants. new trucks (equipment replacement) and truck engines (equip-
ment repowering) meet stringent emissions standards and are cleaner than
older trucks and engines. Trucks can use advanced fuels, such as biodiesel
blends, to reduce emissions. Truck emissions can also be reduced with a
retrofit filter in the engine, which removes pollutants from the exhaust stream.
These filters vary in effectiveness; some can capture more than 85% of
pollutants.
operational practices that reduce freight trips can also reduce truck emissions.
empty containers account for a significant number of truck trips—500,000 trips
at the Port of Los angeles alone. containers can be filled with export cargo
at facilities so that they do not return empty to the ports.20 a virtual container
chapter three
3 - 8 | h e a L T h y c o m m u n i T i e s a n d h e a L T h y e c o n o m i e s
yard strategy can coordinate full containers. Loading empty containers can
eliminate truck trips and emissions. such matching services could be an effec-
tive tool to reduce emissions.
Local communities can reduce exposure to truck emissions through land-use
policies and development regulations. such policies move residents away
from sources of truck pollution, protect residents from nearby emissions,
and discourage new development near truck routes. Land-use siting policies
typically focus on the location of community service, such as schools and day
care centers. The state of california recommends that schools be set back
500 feet from major roadways, to reduce exposure to exhaust. Local govern-
ments may be able to re-route truck traffic from sensitive areas by designat-
ing truck routes.
Noise
noise impacts
goods movement projects impact noise levels in neighboring communities.
mobile-source noise is noise from truck traffic traveling along roadways.
mobile-source noise can impact sensitive land uses such as homes and
schools located near truck routes. other noise impacts can occur if a project
builds truck lanes and/or moves truck traffic closer to existing sensitive land
uses. The significance of noise impacts depends on the distance between
the truck routes and the land uses, and the amount of increased traffic along
truck routes.
While excess noise is often considered a quality-of-life impact, it can become a
health risk at high levels. hearing damage to residents may occur when exposed
to noise levels of 80 dB, approximately the noise level of heavy truck traffic.
doubling traffic on any given roadway causes a noise increase of approxi-
mately 3 dBa, which is considered barely audible to most people. When
evaluating noise impacts of a road construction project, it is necessary to
consider the noise emitting characteristics and the traveling speeds of dif-
ferent vehicles. Truck traffic noise can be measured in terms of automobile
traffic noise. For example, a heavy duty truck can produce noise similar to 11.5
automobiles. Information regarding noise impact analysis procedures can be
found in the caltrans Technical Noise Supplement (Tens).
c a se s T u dy
c i T y of s o u T h g aT e
With a high volume of truck
traffic on local city streets due to
its proximity to the Ports of Los
Angeles and Long Beach, City
traffic engineers have installed
rubberized asphalt material on
some city streets, which has led
to noticeable decreases in noise
impacts.
truck routes
a T o o L k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r a f T m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 3 - 9
noise impact improvement
several strategies help to reduce
noise impacts from trucks include:
• Planning traffic to reduce noise
exposure
• Soundproofing affected dwellings
• Installing noise barriers along land
uses.
Typical measures to shield residents
from freight noise include the instal-
lation of noise barriers, and sound-
proofing of structures.
Local communities can reduce noise
exposure from trucks through traffic
planning and/or land-use policies.
such strategies and policies move
truck traffic away from residents,
reduce noise exposure, or discourage
new development near truck routes.
Traffic planning and land-use policies
typically focus on the location of com-
munity services, such as schools and day care centers. alternative strategies
re-route truck traffic through designated truck routes, away from residential
neighborhoods. enforcing strict speed limits on truck routes may reduce noise
impacts on adjacent land uses.
t r A f fic A N d s A f ety
Traffic and safety impacts
Trucks contribute to traffic delays on regional highways, arterial streets, and
local roads. The Los angeles metropolitan area’s highway network is among
the most congested in the nation.21 In 2005, traffic congestion resulted in more
than 490 million hours of delay, which cost drivers $9 billion in lost time and
consumed nearly 400 million gallons of excess fuel. Truck traffic worsens traffic
congestion. It is estimated that 15—20% of truck volume occurs on congested
c a se s T u dy
mira L o ma
With a major railyard and ware-
housing located near residential
and school zones, the Mira Loma
community experiences heavy
truck traffic on local streets. The
Community Feedback Group
prioritized establishing clearly
designated and signed truck
routes away from sensitive land
uses as a strategy to improve
public safety.
chapter three
3 - 1 0 | h e a L T h y c o m m u n i T i e s a n d h e a L T h y e c o n o m i e s
roads, which ultimately increases
shipment costs by 50—250%.22
Truck traffic also impacts highway
users’ safety. In the six-county region,
truck accidents account for 6% of all
vehicle collisions and 7% of vehicle
fatalities. Truck accidents tend to
damage the other vehicle and cause
injury to its occupants. eighty-four
percent of fatalities in large truck
accidents are passengers in other
vehicles.23
Traffic and safety improvement
Federal, state, county, and city gov-
ernments can reduce congestion and
improve safety by reducing contact
between trucks and passenger cars.
strategies to improve traffic and
safety include:
• dedicated truck lanes, and
• designated truck routes.
separating the flow of trucks from
the flow of passenger cars is an effec-
tive way to reduce accidents. Truck
traffic can be limited to slower lanes
or to dedicated truck lanes. Truck traffic can be separated with designated
truck routes. separating truck traffic into specified corridors can also reduce
traffic congestion and improve safety.
truck routes
a T o o L k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r a f T m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 3 - 1 1
3.5 A esthetics
aesthetic impacts
a truck route could have negative aes-
thetic, or visual, impacts if it degrades
scenic qualities or visual character.
For example, a truck route can affect
a scenic vista or block views of trees,
rock outcroppings, and historic build-
ings within a state scenic highway.
These types of impacts are generally
limited to rural areas or where a new
highway is under construction. The
amount of visual impact depends on
the change between the character-
istics of the scenic landscape before
construction and the characteristics after construction. a freeway project may
have little visual impact if it is built level with the terrain and landscaped, or it
could have significant visual impact if it is an elevated roadway or overpass.
Truck routes could also have aesthetic impacts when they create substantial
light or glare, which could affect day or nighttime views in the area.
aesthetic impact improvement
The aesthetic impacts of truck routes—both highways and local roads—can be
reduced either during construction or afterwards. strategies include:
• landscaping to obscure the road from residents, and
• barrier walls.
Freeways add spillover light or glare to a surrounding community. These
impacts can be reduced by covering light sources (hooding of light sources)
or mounting streetlights at a lower level.24
While local communities may not
be able to directly influence the
equipment used on nearby rail
corridors, local communities
can take steps to reduce the
exposure of local residents to
locomotive exhaust.
a t o o l k i t f o r G o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 4 - 1
The BurlingTon norThern SanTa Fe
railway (BnSF) and the union Pacific railroad
(uP) own and operate most rail lines in the
six-county region. Pacific harbor lines is a
short-line railroad, moving cars and equip-
ment in and between the San Pedro ports
and intermodal railyards. There are three
main locomotive types operating in this
region: 1) line-haul freight locomotives, 2)
yard or switching locomotives, and 3) pas-
senger locomotives. line-haul and switching
locomotives are involved in goods movement
and account for the majority of the region’s
rail line environmental impacts.
uP and BnSF own five main rail alignments
in the area and the majority of rail freight
moves along these main lines. BnSF’s main
line is the San Bernardino Subdivision between Barstow and downtown los
angeles. The line is comprised of over 64 miles of tracks. uP’s main lines
are the los angeles Subdivision and the alhambra Subdivision. These two
alignments include 119 miles of track. uP currently handles over 50 freight
trains per day and BnSF handles over 100 along their most heavily used
rail line segments.25
of special note is the alameda Corridor (Corridor), a 20-mile freight rail
expressway running between the ports of los angeles and long Beach
and the transcontinental railyards near downtown los angeles. The
Corridor primarily transports imports and exports that move to and from
rail lines
chapter four
photo by Bruce Montgomery
chapter four
4 - 2 | h e a l t h y c o m m u n i t i e s a n d h e a l t h y e c o n o m i e s
the ports to outside regions. approximately half of the port cargo is imports
and exports. half of the Corridor is the Mid-Corridor-Trench, a ten-mile,
below-ground railway that eliminated many at-grade railroad crossings. The
Corridor currently handles an average of 55 train movements per day but is
built to handle up to 150.26
Passenger train locomotives, such as those operated by aMTraK and
Metrolink, are not involved in goods movement. however, they are often con-
sidered together with freight locomotives as part of the total regional railroad
system since freight and passenger trains share the same track in many parts
of the region.
f i G ure 4-1 up and b nsf re G i onal r a il system (not to scale)
15
215
210
10
5
Barstow
Cajon
Hiland
Yuma JunctionEl MonteCity of IndustryPomonaFullertonAtwoodWest ColtonColtonIndioUP Palmdale Line
UP Yuma Line
RiversideUP San Gabriel Line
BNSF Line
East
LA
San Fernando
UP Alhambra LineDowntown
LA
Ports of LA
and Long Beach
Irvine
Alameda Corridor
UP Lines
BNSF Lines
Other Lines
rail lines
a t o o l k i t f o r G o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 4 - 3
Air Qu A l ity
air quality impacts
railroad locomotives currently contribute 5-7% of total goods movement emis-
sions in the region. as a result of the new ePa standards, locomotive particulate
matter (PM) emissions will decline by 2020. More than 80% of railroad PM emis-
sions come from line-haul freight locomotives. railroad locomotives will produce
0.76 tons of PM emissions (PM2.5) per day in 2010, as shown in Figure 4-2.
like truck emissions, locomotive emissions are concentrated in corridors and at
intermodal stations or railyards. The levels of emissions vary depending on the
number of trains per day, the number of locomotives per train, and the types of
locomotives. The busiest segments (such as the BnSF Colton Crossing—West
riverside segment) produce a significant amount of particulate matter per day.
The magnitude of rail line emissions is generally much smaller than highway
f i G u re 4-2 b a seline r a ilroad p m 2.5 e m issions in s o uth c o ast a i r b a sin
Source: California Air Resources Board, adjusted to reflect new EPA locomotive emission standards adopted March 14, 2008.
0.00
0.10
0.20
2010 2020 2030
0.30
0.40
0.50
PM2.5 emmissions (tpd)0.60
0.70
0.80
Passenger
Freight Yard/Switch
Freight Line-Haul
chapter four
4 - 4 | h e a l t h y c o m m u n i t i e s a n d h e a l t h y e c o n o m i e s
table 4-1 train v olume and e m issions, 2006
Rail Segment
Average Train
Volume (trains/day)
Freight Passenger
PM2.5
Emissions per
Mile (grams /
day
bnsf railway
Barstow—San Bernardino 108 4 1,828
San Bernardino—Colton Crossing 100 19 1,782
Colton Crossing—West Riverside 116 19 1,980
West Riverside—Atwood 72 30 1,310
Atwood—Fullerton 64 14 1,110
Fullerton Jct.—Hobart 64 64 1,376
Hobart—Redondo 38 64 985
truck emissions. For example, the busiest truck corridor (i-710) produces ten
times more emissions per mile than the busiest rail corridor. Table 4-1 shows the
primary freight rail segments in the region with their corresponding daily train
volume and PM2.5 emissions per mile.
railroad emissions are greater where there is a large amount of train travel,
such as in the inland empire (riverside and San Bernardino Counties). in com-
parison, truck traffic and truck emissions are greatest in los angeles County.
The health impact of highway or rail segment emissions are greater in areas
where population is dense.
the busiest truck corridor
(i -710) produces ten times
more emissions than the
busiest rail corridor.
continued
rail lines
a t o o l k i t f o r G o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 4 - 5
ta ble 4-1 t r ain v o lume and em issions, 2006
Rail Segment
Average Train Volume
(trains/day)
Freight Passenger
PM2.5
Emissions per
Mile (grams /
day
union pacific railway
Indio—Garnet 51 2 793
Garnet—Colton Crossing 51 2 793
Colton Crossing—West Colton 35 2 596
West Colton—City of Industry (Alhambra Line) 29 2 488
City of Industry—Yuma Jct.27 2 450
Yuma Jct.—Pasadena Jct. 19 0 305
Pasadena Jct.—Ninth Street 24 12 448
West Riverside—Mira Loma 43 12 775
Mira Loma—East Los Angeles (San Gabriel
Line)
39 12 748
East Los Angeles—Ninth Street 26 12 525
Yuma Jct—Santa Clarita 4 25 190
alameda corridor
San Pedro Bay Ports—Downtown LA 55 0 902
Note: Emissions estimates reflect rail lines only and do not include railyard emissions (discussed in Section 5).
Source: Train volumes based on Leachman, R., Hicks, G., Fetty, G., Rieger, M. (2005): Inland Empire Railroad
Mainline Study—Final Report; emissions calculated by ICF.
chapter four
4 - 6 | h e a l t h y c o m m u n i t i e s a n d h e a l t h y e c o n o m i e s
air quality improvement
Strategies to improve air quality include:
• biodiesel fuels,
• gen-set locomotives or hybrid locomotives,
• building filtration systems, and
• restrictions on siting.
rail line emissions can be reduced by replacing older locomotives with newer,
cleaner engines, using alternative fuels (including biodiesel), or retrofitting
the locomotive. The two major railroads in Southern California (uP and BnSF)
currently operate locomotives that meet ePa emission standards. More
stringent standards will begin to take effect in the next several years. in the
future, railroads can reduce their emissions by replacing their locomotives or
by rebuilding existing engines.
gen-set locomotives or hybrid locomotives save fuel and produce fewer emis-
sions on short-haul railroad trips. Many of these locomotives are already in use
in the region.
While local communities may not be able to directly influence the equipment
used on nearby rail corridors, local communities can take steps to reduce the
exposure of local residents to locomotive exhaust. These strategies include
building filtration systems and restrictions on siting new community services
(e.g., schools, daycare centers) near the corridor.
Noise
noise impacts
locomotive and freight car pass-bys, train horns and whistles, and wheel friction
on tight curves are the main rail line noises. noise impacts vary depending on
the number and types of locomotives, the weight of freight cars, and the design
of the track. The level of train noise depends upon the distance from the track,
the elevations of noise sources, and the duration of a train pass-by. The FTa
and Fra developed models and methods to estimate passenger trains noise
impacts.27,28 The same tools can be applied to freight train noise impacts.
rail lines
a t o o l k i t f o r G o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 4 - 7
The basic train noise unit of measure
is called the sound exposure level
(Sel), also known as the “single-event
level.” The Sel describes the amount
of noise exposure from a single event,
such as a freight train passing by one
residence. Table 4-2 shows some
typical Sel values for freight trains.
For perspective, an ambulance siren
at 100 feet has a typical sound level
of 90 dBa, while a vacuum cleaner
at 10 feet has a typical sound level
of 70 dBa (see appendix for more
information).
ta ble 4-2 t y pical s o und e x posure l evels for fr ei G h t trains
at 50 f e et
Noise Source Sound Exposure Level (dBA)
Freight Locomotive 97
Freight Car 100
Horn 114
Source: Federal Railroad Administration. 2005. High-Speed Ground Transportation Noise and Vibration
Impact Assessment. Office of Railroad Development. October.
noise exposures from trains are often calculated as one-hour or twenty-
four-hour averages. Train noise is influenced by several factors, including the
lengths of the locomotive(s) and freight cars, the train speed, and the condi-
tion of the track. Figure 4-3 on the following page shows the average expo-
sures for typical train configurations.
Many cities and counties have noise exposure standards. The FTa’s noise
impact criteria assess the significance of noise impacts.
The FTa defines three categories for land uses that are sensitive to noise
impacts, or “sensitive receptors.” Categories 1 and 2 include land uses for
which quiet is an essential element (e.g. recording studios, outdoor amphithe-
aters, and residences). noise impact criteria are most restrictive for Category
1 and 2 land uses. The FTa criteria are stated in two alternative forms. The first photo by Scott Ashman
chapter four
4 - 8 | h e a l t h y c o m m u n i t i e s a n d h e a l t h y e c o n o m i e s
applies when surrounding noise levels are below 43 dBa leq and the second
form is a set of total, or absolute, noise levels. The absolute noise criteria are
shown in Table 4-3.
line-haul noise impacts along rail lines have been evaluated under the
California environmental Quality act (CeQa) and the national environmental
Policy act (nePa). Summaries of these evaluations provide examples of the
types of train operations noise impacts.
f i G ure 4-3 t ypical frei G h t train noise exposures
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
0 100 15050 250 300200 350 400
Distance from Tracks (feet)Hourly Average North Exposure500450 600550 650
1 Train/Hour
2 Trains/Hour
3 Trains/Hour
4 Trains/Hour
5 Trains/Hour
rail lines
a t o o l k i t f o r G o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 4 - 9
ta ble 4-3 fta no ise i m pact c r iteria
Existing Noise Exposure (dBA)Allowable Project Exposure (dBA)
45 51
50 53
55 55
60 57
65 60
70 64
75 65
Source: Federal Transit Administration. 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Office of
Planning and Environment. FTA-VA-90-1003-06. May.
noise impact improvement
Several strategies reduce noise impacts from trains and include:
• land use planning to avoid incompatible uses,
• soundproofing of affected dwellings,
• installation of noise barriers,
• quiet zone infrastructure improvements, and
• operational changes to reduce train horn noise.
noise shielding at specific locations is a common strategy. installation of noise
barriers along affected properties and/or soundproofing of affected structures
can reduce noise impacts. Providing noise shielding along the railroad right-
of-way may be effective in some cases if the barrier is located close to the rail
line. in general, a noise barrier is typically not effective unless located close to
the source or to the affected party.
infrastructure improvements along rail lines can reduce the need to sound train
horns, thus reducing noise impacts to communities near a railroad crossing.
infrastructure improvements include a quiet zone (with certain safety measures
installed), grade-separation, or dead-end streets. however, these infrastructure
c a se s t udy
south colton
Located at the crossing of two
main lines and near a major rail-
yard, the South Colton commu-
nity experiences constant noise
from locomotive horns. The
Community Feedback Group
identified soundproofing of
homes and quiet zone infrastruc-
ture as possible improvements
for consideration.
chapter four
4 - 1 0 | h e a l t h y c o m m u n i t i e s a n d h e a l t h y e c o n o m i e s
improvements may be costly. local communities can reduce noise exposure
from trains through land-use planning and policies. Such strategies and poli-
cies move residents away from train traffic, reduce noise exposure, or discour-
age new development near rail lines.
t r A f fic A N d s A f ety
traffic and safety impacts
rail lines can affect local and regional traffic in several ways. rail lines can have
significant local traffic impacts at railroad crossings. The interrupted flow of
traffic at railroad crossings can cause heavy local congestion, with local resi-
dents losing time and adding fuel expenses.
Congestion levels at intersections are expressed in terms of level of Service
(loS), a letter grading system ranging from a (best) to F (worst).30 grades are
assigned based on the average delay per vehicle (in seconds per vehicle).
intersections with loS a operate with little delay, while intersections with loS
F experience heavy congestion. This grading system is presented in Table 4-4.
rail lines
a t o o l k i t f o r G o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 4 - 1 1
ta ble 4-4 l evel of s e rvice d efinitions at Grade c r ossin G s
Level of Service Average Delay per Vehicle
(seconds/vehicle)
A < 5
B 5—10
C 10—20
D 20—30
E 30—45
F > 45
Source: Transportation Research Board. 2000. Highway Capacity Manual, 4th ed. National Research
Council. Washington, DC.
Vehicle delay is greater at busy rail crossings, and depends on both the
amount of vehicle traffic and rail traffic (see Table 4-5).31 other factors that
influence delay include the train length and the number of roadway lanes.
at-grade railroad crossings with relatively low vehicle traffic volumes and few
train trips, the loS will be C or better. in locations with moderate or frequent
train movements, rail crossings operate at or below loS e.
ta ble 4-5 d e lay and l e vel of s ervice at r a il c r ossinG s
Vehicle Traffic Rail Traffic
Low
25 trains / day
Moderate
50 trains / day
High
100 trains / day
Delay hrs/day LOS Delay hrs/day LOS Delay hrs/day LOS
Low: 10,000
vehicles / day 0.11 C 0.46 D 1.46 F
Moderate:
25,000
vehicles / day
0.32 C 1.30 E 4.15 F
High: 40,000
vehicles / day 0.60 D 2.41 F 7.70 F
Source: ICF International 2008. Analysis of Goods Movement Emission Reduction Strategies, Task 1 Final Report.
Prepared for Southern California Association of Governments. January.
chapter four
4 - 1 2 | h e a l t h y c o m m u n i t i e s a n d h e a l t h y e c o n o m i e s
traffic and safety improvement
rail crossing traffic and safety problems can be reduced by:
• reducing the volume of cars, or
• separating the rail crossing from cars (grade-separated).
local communities can calm traffic with methods that redirect traffic to
grade-separated crossings, which are not delayed by trains. Communities
can improve safety at rail crossings by installing or upgrading traffic control
systems. These systems alert cars of approaching trains and restrict car move-
ment across rail lines. These systems also redirect traffic by timing nearby
stoplights.
Vehicle-train conflicts can be eliminated with grade-separation infrastructure.
grade-separation involves construction of a roadway bridge over railroad
tracks or an underpass. More than 40 grade separation projects have been
proposed for the uP and BnSF lines in the region. These infrastructure proj-
ects are costly. The Trade Corridor improvement Fund estimates most planned
grade separations to cost between $30 and $90 million, with one as high at
$189 million.31
c a se s t udy
south colton
The South Colton community has
a rail spur that runs in the middle
of a city street with multiple
crossings across a short distance.
To address safety and traffic con-
gestion impacts, the Community
Feedback Group identified the
need to study redesigning local
traffic circulation and improved
crossing infrastructure.
rail lines
a t o o l k i t f o r G o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 4 - 1 3
Aesthetics
aesthetic impacts
The most significant aesthetic impacts
of a rail line occur when a new line is
constructed and it degrades the exist-
ing scenic qualities or visual character
of a site. Such impacts are not likely
to occur in the urbanized areas of the
region. The height of train cars also
contributes to visual impacts. Freight
trains with double-stacked container
cars can reach a height of up to 20
feet, which can reduce views of scenic
vistas.
aesthetic impact improvement
Many of the strategies to reduce
visual impacts are similar to those for
truck routes, including:
• setbacks,
• barrier walls, and
• selective landscaping.
unlike truck routes, rail lines are typi-
cally unlit, except at railroad crossings and railyards (discussed in Section 5).
There is typically no need to address spillover light or glare at rail lines.
railyards support a variety
of operations including:
locomotives, on-road and
off-road trucks, cargo-handling
equipment, transportation
refrigeration units, maintenance
shops, and other stationary
sources.
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 5 - 1
RailyaRds aRe anotheR majoR com-
ponent of the goods movement system in
southern California. Railyards are used for
switching rail cars to make up or break down
trains. many railyards contain facilities that
transfer containers and trailers between
trucks and rail cars. some railyards include
locomotive maintenance facilities. they are
often sited in mixed industrial and residential
areas.
there are nine major railyards in the southern
California region, shown in Figure 5-1. all
are owned and operated by either the UP
or BnsF railroads. these railyards support a
variety of operations including: locomotives,
on-road and off-road trucks, cargo-handling
equipment, transportation refrigeration
units (tRUs), maintenance shops, and other stationary sources. activity at
railyards can be measured in a variety of ways including: the number of
locomotives and their time of operation, truck counts at facility gates, the
number of pieces of cargo-handling equipment and their time of opera-
tion, or the number of container “lifts.”
railyards
chapter five
chapter five
5 - 2 | h e a l t h y c o m m u n i t i e s a n d h e a l t h y e c o n o m i e s
5 Yuma JunctionEast
LA
San Fernando
UP Alhambra LineDowntown
LA
Ports of LA
and Long Beach
LATC (UPRR)
Hobart (BNSF)Commerce/Eastern
(part of Hobart-BNSF)Commerce
(UPRR)
Dolores/ICTF (UPRR)Watson
(BNSF)
San Bernardino
(BNSF)Colton (UPRR)
Mira Loma (UPRR)
City of Industry (UPRR)
San
P
e
d
r
o
B
a
y
Air Qu A l ity
air quality impacts
Railyards contain locomotives, cargo-handling equipment, on-road trucks, as
well as off-road vehicles and stationary sources. Railyards equipped to handle
truck to train transfer of goods (intermodal facilities) attract heavy truck traffic.
all of these sources burn diesel fuel and emit toxic air contaminants such as
diesel particulate matter. the number of locomotives and intensity of their use,
the volume of on-road trucks serving the facility, and the activity of other diesel
equipment used in the railyard contribute to railyard emissions.
in 2005, UP, BnsF and aRB agreed to reduce railroad pollution.32 this agree-
ment requires that health Risk assessments (hRas) be conducted for 17
designated railyards in the state of California. a number of railyard hRas were
conducted in the region in 2007 and 2008. these assessments focused on the
health risks associated with diesel pollution. each assessment included analy-
sis to estimate potential cancer risk associated with railyard emissions.
the sources of diesel particulate matter (dPm) and the total emissions per
year were identified. locomotives were the dominant source of dPm emis-
sions for all of the railyards evaluated in the region. aRB collected data on the
f i gure 5-1 l os a n geles area—major class i railyards
railyards
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 5 - 3
types of locomotives and what locomotives were doing (i.e., moving, idling, or
undergoing maintenance testing). aRB estimated locomotive emissions and
modeled the air quality impacts on the surrounding community.
emissions vary by source type and railyard. total emissions from the southern
California region’s nine major railyards range from 4.9 tons per year to 23.9 tons
per year, with the highest level of emissions recorded at the BnsF hobart yard,
one of the largest railyards in the nation, which is located just south and east of
downtown los angeles. locomotives tend to be the highest emitting source,
followed by cargo handling equipment and on-road trucks. off-road trucks and
stationary sources have the lowest emissions among source types. table 5-1
shows the types of emission sources in the region’s eight major railyards.
health Risk assessments focused on potential cancer risk. Cancer risk is evalu-
ated as the number of chances of getting cancer in a certain population (one
million people). the risk of cancer at multiple distances from the railyard was
estimated. the risk of cancer was also estimated at the point of maximum
impact (Pmi). the Pmi is the location with the highest cancer risk level outside
ta ble 5-1 r a ilyard dpm e m issions by s o urce type (tons/year) and p e rcent c ontribution, 2005
Railyard Locomotives Cargo-Handling
Equipment
On-Road Trucks Off-Road Trucks
and Stationary
Sources
Total
BNSF San
Bernardino33
10.6 48% 3.7 17% 4.4 20%0.75 3%22.0
UP Colton34 16.3 99% NA NA 0.2 01%0.05 0.3%16.5
UP City of
Industry35
5.9 54% 2.8 26% 2.0 18%0.3 3%10.9
UP ICTF/
Dolores36
9.8 41% 4.4 19% 7.5 32%2.00 8%23.7
UP Commerce37 4.9 40% 4.8 40% 2.0 17%0.4 3%12.1
UP LATC38 3.2 44% 2.7 37% 1.0 14%0.50 7%7.3
UP Mira Loma39 4.4 90% NA NA 0.2 4%0.2 4%4.9
BNSF Hobart40 5.9 25% 4.2 18% 10.1 42%3.70 15.5%23.9
BNSF Watson 1.9 100% NA NA <0.01 <1% 0.04 <1%1.9
chapter five
5 - 4 | h e a l t h y c o m m u n i t i e s a n d h e a l t h y e c o n o m i e s
of the railyard boundary. table 5-2 summarizes the cancer risk estimates in
railyards in southern California.
the highest potential risk of cancer was associated with the BnsF san
Bernardino and the BnsF hobart railyards. the largest cancer risk area ranged
from 3,000 to 3,300 chances per one million individuals. Risk decreased at the
boundary of the railyard, and continued to decrease outside the boundary of
the railyard. the UP iCtF/dolores Railyard had the highest potential cancer
risk at its boundary. Potential cancer risk was estimated to be 700 chances
per one million people. in practically every assessment, potential cancer risk
decreased outside the boundary of the railyard. Cancer risk remained the
same (greater than 250 chances per one million individuals) at 0.5 mile from
ta ble 5-2 c ancer r i sk e s timates r eported by h ra s of s o uthern c alifornia r a ilyards, 2005
Railyard
Risk
At PMI
(per One
Million)
Risk At
Boundary
(per One
Million)
Risk per One Million (by Distance from Boundary of Railyard)
200
yards
400
yards
0.5
miles
1
mile
1.5
miles
2
miles
4+
miles
BNSF San
Bernardino41
3300 > 500 NA NA 100 50 NA 25 NA
UP Colton42 575 > 250 250 100 50 25 NA ≤10 NA
UP City of
Industry43
480 100-250 NA NA 50 25 NA 10 NA
UP ICTF/
Dolores44
1200 700 NA NA NA 100 NA 25 ≤10
UP
Commerce45
650 > 500 NA >250 100 50 NA 25 ≤10
UP LATC46 430 100-250 NA NA 50 25 NA 10 NA
UP Mira Loma47 160 50 NA NA 25 NA 10 NA NA
BNSF Hobart48 3000 > 500 NA >250a >250b 100 NA 50 10
Note a: Of the four railyards evaluated, potential cancer risk was estimated to be over 250 chances in one million within a half-mile of the railyard boundary at the
two smaller railyards.
Note b: Of the four railyards evaluated, potential cancer risk was estimated to be over 250 chances in one million within one mile of the railyard boundary at the
two larger railyards.
railyards
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 5 - 5
the boundary of the four Commerce
Railyards. Risks consistently
decreased, however, at 2 miles and 4+
miles from the boundary.
the health assessments concluded
that diesel emissions from all railyard
sources can exceed 20 tons per year.
Pmi potential cancer risks associated
with railyards may range from 160 to
3,300 chances per one million individ-
uals. studies predicted that potential
cancer risk decreased with greater
distance from railyards. the potential
cancer risk at 2 or more miles from the
railyard is significantly lower than the
risk at railyard boundaries.
air quality improvement
strategies to improve air quality
include:
• Hybrid and generator-set, or
“gen-set” locomotives,
• Appointment and scheduling
systems,
• Infrastructure improvements,
• Exhaust retrofits,
• alternative fuels (such as biodiesel),
• Building filtration systems, and
• Restrictions on siting new community services.
the emissions at railyards can be reduced by operating cleaner locomotives.
Potential strategies tend to target switcher locomotives, which move rail cars
in the yard and may be old equipment retired from line-haul use. new tech-
nologies for switcher locomotives, such as hybrid and gen-set locomotives can
substantially cut emissions and save fuel costs for the railroads.
chapter five
5 - 6 | h e a l t h y c o m m u n i t i e s a n d h e a l t h y e c o n o m i e s
Railyard emissions can also be reduced by limiting the idling of locomotives.
a number of strategies reduce idling times when there is no operational need
for engine idling. strategies include operator training and technology use,
such as an auxiliary power unit (aPU) or an automatic engine start-stop (aess)
device.
Railyards with significant truck traffic can reduce emissions with policies and
programs to streamline truck use. these policies include: appointment and
scheduling systems, as well as infrastructure improvements at loading plat-
forms and parking facilities. these policies allow trucks to move goods with
less downtime and congestion, and reduce fuel consumption.
many railyards use yard trucks, cranes, and other types of cargo handling
equipment. emissions from this equipment can be reduced with exhaust retro-
fits, alternative fuels (such as biodiesel), engine repowering, or electrification.
local communities can take steps to reduce the exposure of local residents
to railyard air pollution. these strategies include building filtration systems
and restrictions on siting new community services near railyards. also known
as sensitive receptors, these community services include schools and daycare
centers.
Noise
noise impacts
noise from railyards can significantly impact neighboring communities. noise
sources associated with railyard operations include: locomotive engines,
horns and whistles, and switching and moving operations. in addition, noise
from associated truck and railroad traffic can impact nearby communities.
the significance of the impacts depends on the distances between railyards
and sensitive land uses, and background noise levels. Railyard-related noise
impacts have been evaluated by recent studies prepared under CeQa.
noise impact improvement
several strategies reduce noise impact from railyards, including:
• Land use planning,
• Soundproofing of affected dwellings,
• Installation of noise barriers along sensitive land uses, and
• Operational practices to reduce noise generation (operating restrictions).
railyards
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 5 - 7
typical measures provide noise shield-
ing and can include the installation of
noise barriers along affected proper-
ties and soundproofing of affected
structures. the noise source can also
be shielded. Given the size of the
railyard, a noise barrier at the railyard’s
property line may not be effective.
Railyard operators can reduce noise
generation with operating restrictions
and programs, which include limiting
idling time and reducing train speed.
operation practices reduce noise
emissions at lower cost than noise
shielding.
local communities can reduce noise
exposure from railyard operation
through land-use planning and poli-
cies. these strategies discourage new
development near railyards.
t r A f fic A N d s A f ety
traffic and safety impacts
Railyards and facilities contribute to traffic congestion and safety problems on
roadways when they generate large numbers of truck trips. the flow of trucks
entering or exiting a railyard can cause congestion, which affects cars and
other trucks, and can affect residential and commercial areas.
truck traffic to and from railyards can be high. the main source of traffic is from
drayage trucks, which transfer cargo containers between railyards and local
freight facilities including ports and distribution centers. typically, railyards are
connected to nearby freeways by only a few routes that are built to handle
truck traffic. Because of this, residents along these truck routes can experience
large impacts from these truck trips.
in southern California, some of the greatest railyard truck impacts occur near
the UP dolores / iCtF intermodal yard in long Beach. this railyard, which is
chapter five
5 - 8 | h e a l t h y c o m m u n i t i e s a n d h e a l t h y e c o n o m i e s
four miles from the ports of los angeles and long Beach, generated more
than 2,500 truck trips per day in 2005.49 While the railyard has sufficient freeway
access (it is positioned near the intersections of i-710 and i-405 freeways), it
has only two established heavy truck routes. of these two routes, the south-
bound route is of most concern, since it passes through residential neighbor-
hoods in West long Beach. this community is deeply affected by the traffic
and air quality impacts of railyard truck traffic.
truck traffic at many railyards is expected to grow significantly over the next
decade as the volume of intermodal freight movement grows. For example,
UP is planning a modernization project within iCtF, which will greatly expand
cargo capacity of rail traffic. as a result, truck traffic to and from the railyard is
projected to double, to nearly two million truck trips per year. BnsF is plan-
ning a new near-dock railyard project south of the iCtF yard, which will further
increase railyard truck traffic in the area.
traffic and safety improvement
strategies to reduce railyard traffic and safety impacts are similar to those for
other large truck trip generators. Designated truck routes limit traffic conges-
tion in some locations, and direct trucks away from residential areas, reducing
the noise and air quality impacts.
Aesthetics
aesthetic impacts
Railyards have negative visual impacts when equipment or facilities block vis-
tas or create excessive light or glare. the sheer size of railyards can potentially
make these impacts more severe. Colton Railyard, for example, is 5.5 miles
long and almost 1/3 of a mile wide. Because of the space required, railyards
are predominantly located in industrial areas, where their visual impacts tend
to be less significant.
c a se s t udy
mira loma
Community activists in Mira
Loma successfully engaged the
local railyard operator in re-
aligning truck access points to
reduce truck traffic on nearby
residential areas. To further
reduce these impacts, the
Community Feedback Group
prioritized establishing clearly
designated and signed truck
routes away from sensitive land
uses as a strategy to improve
public safety.
railyards
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 5 - 9
aesthetic impact improvement
Railyards share many attributes with
other industrial land uses. many
industrial area strategies for aesthetic
impacts apply to railyards. many
cities have guidelines that apply to all
industrial land uses including:
• bordering walls,
• lighting controls, and
• landscaping.
Bordering walls block visual impacts
and reduce noise impacts. many
zoning regulations, such as setback
requirement and height restrictions,
reduce railyard visual impacts. local
city and county governments can use
landscaping, such as trees, shrubbery,
vines, and groundcovers as a visual
barrier between railyards and the sur-
rounding community.
Imported goods are merged
and sorted at many s outhern
Cal I forn I a d I s tr I but I on Centers
for del I v ery to dest I n atIo ns
aC ross the natIo n.
a t o o l k I t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r C h 2 0 0 9 | 6 - 1
Warehouses and distribution centers
are an important part of the regional goods
movement system. these centers are used to
receive, deliver, consolidate, distribute, and
store freight. imported goods are merged
and sorted at many southern california
distribution centers for delivery to destina-
tions across the nation. Many others serve as
distribution hubs for the large retail market in
southern california.
the locations of distribution centers overlap
with manufacturing facilities and connec-
tion points between freeways, ports, where
freeways connect with ports, airports, and
railyards. the region’s warehousing, distribu-
tion, and intermodal facilities account for
15% of the total u.s. market and 60% of the
West coast market.50 the largest distribution centers can encompass mil-
lions of square feet. Figure 6-1 on the following page shows the location of
distribution centers in the region.
Many distribution centers are clustered around major transportation links.
riverside and san bernardino counties support the largest cluster of ware-
houses, near ontario airport. other warehouse clusters are found close to
railyards near the intersection of i-5 and i-10, and along i-710.
warehouses and
distribution centers
chapter six
chapter six
6 - 2 | h e a l t h y C o m m u n I t I e s a n d h e a l t h y e C o n o m I e s
Air Qu A l ity
air Quality Impacts
Warehouses and distribution centers can be a significant source of air pollu-
tion for local communities. emissions from these facilities are caused by truck
traffic to and from the centers, truck idling, and the operation of equipment.
the impacts of truck idling can be large; a recent warehouse study showed
that 15 minutes of idling caused emissions that were 50% more than one truck
trip’s emissions.51 additional emissions can be caused by diesel-powered
transportation refrigeration units (trus). trus are used for perishable goods
(often called “reefers”). tru diesel emissions can pose a health risk to indi-
viduals living or working near refrigerated distribution centers.52
arb has adopted several control measures to reduce diesel emissions associ-
ated with warehouses and distribution centers. one measure targets truck
idling by prohibiting unnecessary idling for more than five minutes at one
fI g ure 6-1 l oCat Io n of Warehouses and d I s tr I but I o n Centers I n the s C ag r e g Io n
Source: Southern California Association of Governments. 2006. Inland Port Feasibility Study.
warehouses and distribution centers
a t o o l k I t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r C h 2 0 0 9 | 6 - 3
location.53 a second measure, phased
in between 2008 and 2019, requires
cleaner emission standards for trus
currently in use. a third measure will
require existing (in-use) trucks to meet
emission reduction standards begin-
ning in 2010 these warehouse-specific
regulations, when combined with
other ePa and arb truck standards
(section 3.2), will improve air quality in
neighborhoods surrounding ware-
houses and freight facilities.
the emissions from warehouse
construction can also have impacts,
due to the size and power of diesel
equipment involved in construction
projects. While construction emissions
can be difficult to measure directly,
they can be calculated using the
urbeMis emission model supported
by the south coast air Quality district
(scaQMd). urbeMis combines data
from other arb models to characterize
construction equipment, and uses a detailed schedule of construction tasks to
estimate the total number and hours of equipment utilized. More information
about urbeMis can be found at the scaQMd website.54
the health risk of emissions from distribution centers has been documented in
prior environmental studies. in 2007, arb completed a health risk assessment
(hra) on the uP Mira Loma auto Facility railyard.55 the Mira Loma railyard is
an automobile distribution center where new automobiles are delivered by
train, unloaded, and sorted. in 2005, about 702,000 new vehicles were deliv-
ered to the railyard. the facility operates 24 hours a day and 365 days a year.
the hra reported that approximately 91% of these Mira Loma emissions are
attributable to locomotives. on-road trucks and off-road equipment contrib-
ute the remaining 9% of diesel emissions. diesel particulate matter emissions
from the railyard and within a one mile radius of the railyard were approxi-
mately 35.6 tons per year.
chapter six
6 - 4 | h e a l t h y C o m m u n I t I e s a n d h e a l t h y e C o n o m I e s
studies show that downwind concentrations of diesel pollution decreases by
80% at approximately 1,000 feet from the Mira Loma facility (see Figure 6-2).
the Mira Loma hra indicated that the greatest cancer risk is located on the
northeast fence line of the property and is estimated to be 160 chances per
million people. the cancer risk at the boundary of the facility is estimated to
be 50 chances per million. cancer risk decreases with increased distance from
the facility: 25 chances per million at 0.5 miles from the facility, and 10 chances
per million at 1.5 miles from the facility.
air Quality Improvement
Limiting truck idling is one of the most effective strategies to reduce emissions
at distribution centers. strategies include:
• truck idle reduction, and
• limitations on emissions from truck trailers or containers.
as described above, arb has adopted a statewide regulation that limits truck
idling. truck idling can be reduced through on-site truck idle reduction poli-
cies enforced by distribution center owners and operators.
fIg ure 6-2 s ensI t I v I t y of C o n C entrat Io n to doW n WI n d d I s tanCe
f rom a d I s tr I but I o n C enters W I t h t r us
Source: California Air Resources Board. 2007. Health Risk Assessment for the Union Pacific Railroad Mira Loma Auto Facility Railyard. November.
0.0
0.4
0.2
0.6
0.8
1.0
0 1,000 2,000 3,000
Distance (feet)Rel. Conc.4,000 5,000 6,000
warehouses and distribution centers
a t o o l k I t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r C h 2 0 0 9 | 6 - 5
additional strategies limit emissions from truck trailers or containers with
transportation refrigeration units (trus), or “reefers.” reefers are a significant
source of pollution since they operate continuously and tend to be concen-
trated in one location. in 2004, arb attempted to reduce reefer emissions by
requiring tru upgrades. the ruling is currently unenforceable and is pending
a waiver from u.s. ePa.56 truck owners can upgrade to equipment with better
emission controls.
Noise
noise Impacts
Warehouses and distribution centers can create noise impacts to neighbor-
ing communities. typical noise sources include truck idling, truck entry and
exit, and operating heavy-duty equipment. these noise impacts are greatest
when heavy truck flow associated with a warehouse passes through residential
neighborhoods and other sensitive land uses. in addition, warehouse activities
such as freight loading and unloading can create additional noise impacts for
nearby residents. since warehouses and distribution centers are typically sited
in industrial zones, noise impacts from their on-site operational activities are
often lower than impacts from related truck and railroad traffic.
doubling traffic on any given roadway causes a noise increase of approxi-
mately 3 dba, which is considered barely perceptible to most people. When
evaluating traffic noise impacts from warehouses and distribution centers, it is
necessary to consider the noise-emitting characteristics of different vehicles.
truck traffic noise can be measured in terms of automobile traffic noise. For
example, a medium-duty and a heavy-duty truck traveling at 55 miles per hour
can produce noise similar to 5 and 13 automobiles, respectively.57
noise impacts from warehouses and distribution centers have been evaluated
by recent studies prepared under ceQa.
CEQA Example: Noise Impacts of Oakmont Industrial Building, City of Perris
the proposed project is the development of an approximately 697,578-square
foot warehouse building within the city of Perris in riverside county. three
homes are located south of the project site approximately 100 feet from
the site boundary and 200 feet from the truck court and loading docks. it is
estimated that 986 trucks would access the facility daily and 60% of the traffic
chapter six
6 - 6 | h e a l t h y C o m m u n I t I e s a n d h e a l t h y e C o n o m I e s
would occur on the southern portion of the site. the loudest noise occurs
when a truck turns on its backup warning horn. on-site truck activity noise
is estimated to be 66.6 dba Leq at the closest home. truck activities on the
south end of the site would create significant noise exposures for residences
located only 100 to 370 feet away.58
noise Impact Improvement
several strategies reduce noise impacts from warehouses and distribution
centers, including:
• Land use planning, soundproofing of affected dwellings,
• Installation of noise barriers, and
• Operational design features or practices to reduce noise generation.
typical measures, such as installing noise barriers along affected properties
and soundproofing affected structures, provide noise shielding at affected
land uses; the noise source can also be shielded. noise shields could screen
particular stationary equipment or along perimeter of the warehouse and
distribution center.
Warehouse and distribution center operators can adjust operation practices to
reduce noise generation. Practices to reduce noise generation include limit-
ing loading and truck activities during evening and/or nighttime hours, and
limiting unnecessary truck idling time. operation practices may reduce noise
emissions at lower cost than noise shielding.
Local communities reduce noise exposure from warehouse and distribution
operation through land-use planning and policies. such strategies and policies
discourage new development near the warehouse and distribution center.
t r A f fic A N d s A f ety
traffic and safety Impacts
residents near warehouses and distribution centers can experience higher
traffic congestion due to heavy truck traffic. the scale of these impacts
depends on the distribution center size, amount of use, and traffic levels
on connecting roads. traffic studies estimate that distribution centers in the
inland empire region generate between 330 and 530 daily truck trips per mil-
lion square feet of warehouse space.59, 60 the amount of warehouse vehicles
warehouses and distribution centers
a t o o l k I t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r C h 2 0 0 9 | 6 - 7
other than trucks causes additional
traffic impacts. Vehicle trips vary
between 1,100 and 1,600 daily vehicle
trips per million square feet of ware-
house space.61, 62
truck and vehicle trip impacts can be
greater if there are peaks during morn-
ing and evening hours. studies show
that most sites do not have peak peri-
ods.63 of 11 analyzed sites, only three
showed peaks in passenger car trips
and one showed peaks in truck trips.
traffic and safety Improvement
strategies to address traffic from
distribution centers are similar to
strategies for other freight facilities. strategies include:
• designated truck routes, and
• facility improvements.
designated truck routes can help to limit traffic congestion in some locations,
can channel trucks away from residential areas and reduce noise and air quality
impacts.
Loading or unloading delays within a distribution center can lead to truck
queues that spill over onto local roads, causing congestion. delays occur when
the number of shipments exceeds a facility’s capacity. Facility improvements
that allow for faster unloading, additional truck parking or additional waiting
areas for trucks can reduce traffic congestion on local roads.
traffic design
in addition to adding to the number of vehicles on local streets, large trucks
require more space than cars to make turns onto streets or into driveways.
Yet not all streets and intersections were originally designed to accommo-
date large trucks. similarly, how driveways are positioned at facilities can
force trucks to make tight turns or require backing into the facility, which may
Case s t udy
CI t y of south gate
Trucks frequently block local
streets to back into warehouse
facilities in the City of South
Gate, causing traffic delays
and unsafe conditions. The
Community Feedback Group
identified a number of potential
strategies including painting
backing zones on streets and
adding signage at such facilities,
and considering new City permit
and code requirements that
limit or prohibit backing at such
facilities.
chapter six
6 - 8 | h e a l t h y C o m m u n I t I e s a n d h e a l t h y e C o n o m I e s
require the truck to block the connecting street and cause traffic delays and
safety impacts.
Local communities can require new facility designs to ease truck traffic; well-
designed access points provide easy maneuvering and are located away from
nearby sensitive uses whenever possible. specific intersections that accommo-
date high truck volumes and turns can be improved for safer truck travel and
turns.
Aesthetics
aesthetic Impacts
distribution centers can create visual impacts during construction and on-
going impacts in operation. if a new facility is built on a site with scenic or aes-
thetic characteristics, there are visual impacts during construction. on-going
impacts may be caused by excess light, by the industrial nature of building
architecture or activities, or by shipping container stacking.
distribution centers are scattered throughout southern california and some
are in close proximity to residential areas. as a result, many communities may
be affected by the visual impacts of distribution centers.
aesthetic Impact Improvement
aesthetic impact improvement strategies include:
• landscaping requirements, and
• spillover light controls.
communities can adopt regulations that target the visual impacts of distri-
bution centers. Zoning regulations include landscaping requirements, such
as trees, shrubbery, vines, and groundcovers, which serve as a visual shield
between distribution centers and residential areas. these regulations can
specify the number and location of plants and the total landscaping coverage.
Case s t udy
C o a C h ella valley
Located in the eastern portion
of Riverside County, the com-
munities in the Coachella Valley
anticipate significant community
development in the long term,
potentially including expan-
sion of the Jacqueline Cochran
Regional Airport as an inland
port along with nearby support-
ing industrial and warehousing
spaces. The area is also located
close to State Route 86S (also
known as a key part of the
emerging “NAFTA Corridor”
route connecting the California/
Mexico border with points
north) and Interstate 10. The
Community Feedback Group
identified advance land use and
circulation planning for optimal
placement of future facilities,
residential and commercial land
uses to maximize economic
benefit and minimize potential
impacts.
warehouses and distribution centers
a t o o l k I t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r C h 2 0 0 9 | 6 - 9
communities can adopt regulations
to limit the amount of excess light
caused by light-industrial build-
ings. spillover light controls include
specifications on the type and loca-
tion of light sources, and limits on
the amount of spillover light from the
property. For example, some cities
require that lighting posts be less
than 18 feet tall and include reflectors
to direct light away from adjacent
properties. Zoning regulations stipu-
late that spillover light be lower than
a certain level.
communities face different chal-
lenges in mitigating the visual impacts
of distribution centers than they do
with railyards and ports. the size of
distribution centers can vary greatly
from several thousand square feet to millions of square feet. this prevents a
“one size fits all” approach. communities must adapt improvement options
to the size and operation of each distribution center, which are commonly
operated by individual, independent corporations. therefore, unlike railyards
and ports, each “owner” will need to be approached individually to determine
contacts and an approach to community enhancement.
The PorT of Los AngeL es occu P i es
4,300 A cres of LA n d ALo ng 43 mi L e s
of wATerfron T. iT is T h e LAr gesT P o rT
in T he u .s . A n d 13T h L A rges T wor L d-
w ide. The PorT of Long BeA c h is Th e
second Bu sies T P orT in Th e coun T ry
And uses 3,200 Ac res of L And A n d
con TA i ns 10 P i ers A n d 80 shi P docks.
A T o o L k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r A f T m A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 7 - 1
The Los AngeLes AreA is served by
The seaports of Los Angeles, Long beach,
and hueneme (in ventura County). The ports
of Long beach and Los Angeles are com-
monly referred to as the san Pedro bay (sPb)
ports. These ports handle 80% of California’s
and 30% of the nation’s sea trade ship-
ments.64 The majority of trade is international.
More than 81% of sea shipments are foreign
imports. The san Pedro bay port complex is
by far the largest in the nation and the 5th
largest in the world.65
After cargo arrives at the port, it is transferred
to its final destination by truck or rail. half of
container cargo travels by rail—21% is loaded
onto rail cars at the dock and 20% is trucked
to local railyards. Transporting goods by rail
minimizes truck trips and reduces the number of trucks, which lowers emis-
sions and increases safety in the region. The region’s goods movement
system is more productive with efficient railyards.66
Port of Los Angeles
The Port of Los Angeles uses 4,300 acres of land along 43 miles of water-
front. it is the largest port in the U.s. and 13th largest worldwide. The port
handled 8.3 million containers in 2007. The port handled $240 billion in
cargo and 1.2 million cruise ship passengers in 2006. businesses at the
port employ 22,800 workers in trucking, warehousing, shipping, and other
non-cargo jobs.67
ports
chapter seven
chapter seven
7 - 2 | h e A L T h y c o m m u n i T i e s A n d h e A L T h y e c o n o m i e s
each year 2,700 ships come to the Port of Los Angeles. This includes 80 ship-
ping lines and 15 cruise lines.68 The port has 27 major cargo terminals, includ-
ing eight container terminals that handle bulk cargo. Most bulk cargo includes
furniture, apparel, toys, electronic products and automobile parts.
There are 71 cranes at these eight terminals. seven of the terminals have on-
dock rail (direct ship to rail car) facilities. An additional on-dock railyard will be
constructed in 2009.69 railyards help to reduce truck trips to and from the port.
The port is served by the Pacific harbor Line, a small dispatching railroad.
Port of Long Beach
The Port of Long beach, adjacent to the Port of Los Angeles, occupies 3,200
acres of land and contains 10 piers and 80 ship docks. The port handles over
$140 billion in cargo and 7.3 million containers. it is the second busiest port
in the country. businesses at the port employ 29,800 in terminal operations,
cargo, packing, retail, and other areas. 70
The port’s terminals handle container and bulk shipments; many import fin-
ished goods and export raw and recycled materials. The top imports include
electronics, plastics, furniture, and clothing, while the top exports include
waste paper, chemicals, scrap metal, and plastic.
The port has seven major container terminals that operate 73 cranes. Five
of the terminals have on-dock rail facilities. Like the Port of Los Angeles, the
Port of Long beach is also connected to both UP and bnsF railroads via the
Alameda Corridor, and is served by the Pacific harbor Line.
Air Qu A l ity
Air Quality impacts
Marine port activities create air pollution, which impacts the region and local
communities. diesel engine-powered ocean-going ships, harbor craft, cargo
handling equipment, trucks, and locomotives produce pollution. Ports are one
of the biggest sources of diesel pollution in California. it is a top priority for
the Arb and region governments to reduce diesel pollution at the ports, in
surrounding communities, and throughout California.
The Ports generated 21% of diesel pollution emissions in the south Coast Air
basin, producing 2,236 tons of diesel pollution in 2006.71 Table 7-1 shows the
sources of port diesel emissions.
ports
A T o o L k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r A f T m A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 7 - 3
ships are the largest source of diesel pollution at the sPb ports. ships, or
ocean-going vessels (ogvs), produced 54% of the port’s diesel emissions in
2006. ocean-going vessels include container ships, tanker ships, bulk carriers,
automobile carriers, general cargo ships, roll-on roll-off ships, and cruise ships.
Container ships generate most of ship diesel pollution (62%), followed by
tankers (13%) and cruise ships (11%). diesel pollution comes from ship forward
motion, engines, and smaller sources. ship diesel emissions are shown in
Table 7-2 on the following page.
Freight trucks are the second largest source of emissions at sPb ports,
accounting for 32% of diesel emissions in 2006. The remaining source types,
harbor craft, cargo handling equipment, and locomotives, together account
for 13% of diesel emissions.
Commercial harbor craft, cargo-handling equipment, and locomotives also
produce diesel pollution. Commercial harbor craft, including tugboats, fer-
ries, small excursion craft, supply vessels, dredges, and service boats, help
move large ships and provide supplies to the port. Commercial harbor craft
includes: tugboats, ferries, small excursion craft, supply vessels, dredges,
and service boats. harbor craft tend to run on smaller diesel engines than
larger ships. Tugboats produce over 50% of diesel pollution from commercial
TA BL e 7-1 di ese L PArT i cu L ATe m ATT e r (dP m) em issions from The PorT s of Los Ange L e s An d
Long Be A c h in 2006
Source Type
Port of Los Angeles
Port of Long Beach
Both Ports
tons/yr percent tons/yr percent tons/yr percent
Ocean Going Vessels 546 49%670 60% 1,216 54%
Harbor Craft 52 5%47 4%99 4%
Cargo Handling Equipment 51 5%40 4%91 4%
Locomotives 72 6%47 4%119 5%
Heavy-Duty Vehicles 404 36%307 28%711 32%
Total 1,125 100%1,111 100% 2,236 100%
Source: Port of Los Angeles. 2008. 2006 Air Emissions Inventory. July; Port of Long Beach. 2008. 2006 Air Emissions Inventory. June.
chapter seven
7 - 4 | h e A L T h y c o m m u n i T i e s A n d h e A L T h y e c o n o m i e s
harbor craft. Cargo-handling equipment moves containers and bulk ship-
ments. Cargo-handling equipment includes yard tractors, cranes, forklifts,
and picks. Construction equipment may include tractors, loaders, dozers,
excavators, and backhoes. yard tractors are the most common type of han-
dling equipment. yard tractors produce 60% of cargo-handling equipment
emissions.
A study of emissions exposure conducted by Arb indicates that cancer risk is
elevated more than 15 miles from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long beach
due to diesel pollution.71 near the port boundaries, potential cancer risk
exceeded 500 chances per million people. Potential cancer risk decreases with
distance from the ports. The ports cause other health effects including prema-
ture death, asthma attacks, work loss days, and minor restricted activity days.
estimated health cases each year include:
• 29 premature deaths for individuals over the age of 30;
• 750 asthma attacks;
• 6,600 days of work lost for individuals aging from 18 to 65;
• 35,000 minor restricted activity days for individuals ages 18 to 65.
TA BL e 7-2 d P m em issions from oc e A n -go ing ve sseLs AT The PorTs of Los Ange L e s And
Long Be A c h in 2006
Vessel Type
Port of Los Angeles
Port of Long Beach
Both Ports
tons/yr percent tons/yr percent tons/yr percent
Bulk Vessel 33 6%53 8%86 7%
Container Ship 345 63%404 60%749 62%
Cruise Ship 82 15%51 8%133 11%
Tanker 57 10%98 15%155 13%
Other 30 5%64 10%94 8%
Total 547 100%670 100% 1,217 100%
Source: Port of Los Angeles. 2008. 2006 Air Emissions Inventory. July; Port of Long Beach. 2008. 2006 Air Emissions Inventory. June.
ports
A T o o L k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r A f T m A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 7 - 5
The study also indicates that that
there are approximately 120 annual
premature deaths associated with the
ports’ pollution.
other studies also show that the areas
surrounding the ports are affected by
port pollution. An ePA study showed
that diesel pollution from the ports
was found in an area approximately
12 times the size of the Port of Long
beach. similarly, diesel pollution
was found in an area approximately
9 times the size of the Port of Los
Angeles.72
Air Quality improvement
Air quality improvement strategies include:
• Vessel speed reduction
• Shore power/cold ironing
• Cleaner marine vessel fuels
The ports of Los Angeles and Long beach have developed a plan to reduce
port pollution. The plan includes goals, emission reductions, and funding
needs through 2011.73 it includes 12 measures to control emissions from all
major emission sources at the ports. The plan includes the Ports’ Clean Truck
Program, which includes a ban on older trucks. A fee placed on containers will
fund the replacement and retrofit of these trucks. The plan could reduce port
diesel emissions by more than 50%.
The ports’ vessel speed reduction (vsr) program limits ship speeds 24 miles
from the coastline to reduce ship pollution. There is a proposal to extend the
boundary to 40 miles from the coastline.
Pollution from ship engines in the port can be eliminated using shore power/
cold ironing strategies. instead of running an engine, ships are electrically
powered from the terminal. This strategy requires improvements to both
terminals and ships to work.
chapter seven
7 - 6 | h e A L T h y c o m m u n i T i e s A n d h e A L T h y e c o n o m i e s
switching to cleaner marine vessel fuels with lower sulfur content also reduces
diesel pollution. Most ships use residual oil bunker fuel, which has high sulfur
content. Arb will require the use of lower sulfur fuel when ships are near the
port in the future (within 20 miles). extending that requirement to a larger area
or requiring the use of low sulfur fuel could further reduce pollution. barriers
to carrying out these strategies include fuel costs, methods to enforce rules,
and legal challenges.
Noise
noise impacts
noise impacts from port operations occur on-site as well as on nearby roads
and rail lines. often, the noise impacts from the on-road and rail lines are
greater than those from port property since truck and rail traffic tend to be
closer to residential areas that are sensitive to noise.
Container ships, assist tugboats, cargo handling equipment, short-haul trucks,
and switcher locomotives generate noise at ports. Particularly loud noises
include “clanking” of containers when moved and truck horns. Loud noises
from railways include locomotive engines, train horns, rail cars starts and stops,
and rail car linking.74 industrial equipment also produces noise. off-port noise
sources include diesel trucks and trains.
noise impact improvement
Most of the noise impacts from ports are from truck and rail activity, rather
than on-site activity. several strategies reduce noise impact from trucks,
including:
• traffic planning,
• soundproofing of affected dwellings, or
• installation of noise barriers.
This section discusses effective strategies to reduce traffic noise impacts. More
information about each strategy can be found in section 8.
Typical strategies provide noise shielding at affected areas. Measures include
installation of noise barriers along affected properties and/or soundproofing
of affected structures. Providing noise shielding along the railroad right-of-way
is also possible. noise barriers are effective when located close to the noise
source or the affected area.
ports
A T o o L k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r A f T m A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 7 - 7
Local communities can reduce noise
exposure from ports through traffic
planning and/or land-use policies.
such strategies and policies move
truck traffic away from residents,
reduce exposure to noise, or discour-
age new development near truck
routes. Traffic planning and land-use
policies typically focus on sensitive
community services, such as schools
and day care centers. Traffic planning
and/or land use policies designate
truck routes, to reduce truck traffic in
neighborhoods. reducing and enforc-
ing truck speeds with strict speed
limits may also reduce noise impacts.
Land-use planning and policies can reduce train noise impacts as well. such
strategies and policies discourage new development near rail lines.
t r A f fic A N d s A f ety
Traffic and safety impacts
Traffic impacts near the Ports of Los Angeles and Long beach are especially
severe. The number of trucks and vehicles, the size of local roads, and the
number of vehicles on regional freeways all contribute to congestion. i-710
and i-110 have the most port truck traffic because they link the ports to major
yards and east-west freeways. A traffic analysis conducted by the Port of Los
Angeles determined that sixteen nearby intersections operate in a congested
state in the morning or evening. Average daily trips at the Port of Los Angeles
and Long beach exceed 49,500 truck trips and 34,000 auto trips.78
”drayage” trucks travel to and from ports and railyards. drayage trucks
account for nearly 6 million truck trips in the region (see Table 7-3). As port
activity grows, so will the number of truck trips to and from the ports. The
number of drayage truck trips is projected to increase 50% by year 2014.79
drayage trucks mostly move empty containers or empty truck frames to and
from the ports. one study suggests that only 2% of empty containers are
reloaded before returning to ports.80
TA BL e 7-3 c o n TA i ner Truck Tri Ps AT i n T ermod A L r A i LyA r ds
Associ AT e d wi T h T h e PorT s of Los Ange L es A n d
Long Be A c h (2007)
Container Type One-Way Trips
Import 2,565,320
Export 431,314
Empty 2,782,894
All 5,779,528
Source: California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons for
Proposed Rulemaking—Proposed Regulation for Drayage Trucks, Appendix B: Emissions Estimation
Methodology for On-Road Diesel-Fueled Heavy Duty Drayage Trucks at California’s Ports and Intermodal
Railyards.
chapter seven
7 - 8 | h e A L T h y c o m m u n i T i e s A n d h e A L T h y e c o n o m i e s
Traffic and safety improvement
The impacts of port truck traffic can
be reduced using several strategies,
such as shifting trips to off-peak
times or using rail transportation.
To shift trucks to off-peak times,
the ports participate in the PierPass
program, which offers incentives to
trucks to operate at nights and on
weekends. Trucks must pay a fee
if they visit the port during peak
daytime hours. This program could
be expanded by raising user fees
or prolonging the hours fees are
charged. however, an expanded pro-
gram may result in higher noise and
emissions impacts during evenings
and weekends.
Truck trips can be further shifted from peak to off-peak times using a schedul-
ing or appointment system. Under this system, truck traffic is tied to specific
hours in the day. The Port of Los Angeles’ “Terminal gate Appointment
system” streamlines truck arrivals and departures at certain terminals.
scheduling systems keep labor costs low compared to extended hours of
operation.
directly transferring cargo to rail at ports can reduce truck trips. This requires
expanding the rail infrastructure. On-dock rail reduces the number of truck
trips to rail stations. Currently, 21% of cargo at the ports is transferred directly
to rail at on-dock rail facilities. A proposed increase in on-dock rail would
eliminate 30,000 daily truck trips by 2035.
Aesthetics
Aesthetic impacts
existing port facilities located along scenic shoreline can have large visual
impacts on surrounding communities. however, impacts from new port termi-
nals and facilities at existing facilities are relatively small as they do not tend to
change the visual character of the port.
ports
A T o o L k i T f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n T d r A f T m A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 7 - 9
since many ports operate throughout
the day, spillover of lighting or glare
frequently impacts surrounding areas.
due to the large size of the ports,
most spillover light falls on adjacent
port property rather than on resi-
dential property. spillover lighting at
ports is not a great concern.
Aesthetic impact improvement
since ports encompass such a large
area, many construction projects
on port property are removed from
residential areas. Thus, visual impacts
from port projects can be small. Ports
or local governments can choose
strategies to reduce the visual
impacts of port projects, including:
• landscaping,
• barrier walls, and
• lighting restrictions.
.•• .
• ••,
• ••.. l . Y . f�f-rT �. . • ► 1
•
.: -
r .P•
r•• �• � ■�•.
•
. 0 �; • Y"
11;.••- • r • r �•r • • •
�}}.�� , •.:•#:.. f�:
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 1
This section contains one-page fact sheets for the following strategies:
strategies
chapter eight
TAb le 8-1 su M MA ry of s T r ATe G i es, Type of s T r AT eG ies, A n d f r ei G h T Mode continued
Strategy
Category Freight Modes
Air
Quality
Noise Traffic Aesthetics Trucks Rail Railyards Distribu-
tion
Centers
Ports
section 8.1: Air Quality strategies
Building Filtration Systems •• • • • •
Land Use Siting •• • • • •
Truck Idle Reduction •• • •
Alternative Fuels—Biodiesel •• •
Alternative Fuels—Natural Gas ••
Engine Replacement ••
Exhaust Retrofit—Diesel
Oxidation Catalyst
•• •
Exhaust Retrofit—Flow-Through
Filter
•• •
Exhaust Retrofit—Diesel
Particulate Filter
•• •
Accelerated Truck Replacement ••
Hybrid-Electric and Hybrid-
Hydraulic Trucks
•• •
chapter eight
8 - 2 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
TAb le 8-1 su M MA ry of s T r ATe G i es, Type of s T r AT eG ies, A n d f r ei G h T Mode continued
Strategy
Category Freight Modes
Air
Quality
Noise Traffic Aesthetics Trucks Rail Railyards Distribu-
tion
Centers
Ports
Locomotive Idle Reduction •• ••
Accelerated Locomotive
Replacement or Rebuild
•• •
Hybrid or Gen-Set Locomotives ••
Ocean-Going Vessel Speed
Reduction
••
Ocean-Going Vessel Fuel
Requirements
••
Shore Power / Cold Ironing ••
section 8.2: noise strategies
Noise Barrier •• • • • •
Soundproofing Features •• • • • •
Project Design and Operation
Features
••• • •
Quiet Zones ••
section 8.3: Traffic and safety strategies
Traffic Planning Tools •• • • •• • •
Truck Parking Regulations • • •• • •
Designated Truck Routes ••• •
Highway Incident Management
for Trucks
••
Rail-Highway Grade Separation ••
Upgraded Rail Crossing Systems ••
Traffic Redirection ••
continued
strategies: air quality
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 3
Key to strategy timeframes
A general guide to the relative timeframe necessary to implement each
strategy. These ranges are:
Short: 0–5 years
Mid: 5–10 years
Long: 10+ years
key to strategy costs
A general guide to range of estimated costs is indicated for each strategy
($, $$, $$$ or $$$$). These ranges are:
$: less than $10,000
$$: $10,000—$100,000
$$$: $100,000—$1 million
$$$$: greater than $1 million
TA b le 8-1 s uM MA ry of s T r AT e G i es, Type of s T r AT eG i es, A n d f r ei G h T Mode continued
Strategy
Category Freight Modes
Air
Quality
Noise Traffic Aesthetics Trucks Rail Railyards Distribu-
tion
Centers
Ports
Scheduling and Appointment
Systems
••• • •
Extended Hours of Operation ••• • •
Expansion of On-Dock Rail Service •••
Virtual Container Yard ••
section 8.4: Aesthetic impact strategies
Spillover Lighting Controls •• • •
Landscaping •• • •
continued
chapter eight
8 - 4 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S
Strategy: Building Filtration Systems
Description
Filtration systems can be installed in residential and commercial buildings to
provide fresh air filtration, reducing exposure to diesel particulate matter (PM).
Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems can be equipped
with high efficiency filters for particulates and a carbon filter can remove other
chemical matter. Ventilation systems can thus protect people, especially chil-
dren, elderly and those with health conditions from diesel emissions coming
from trucks, locomotives and yard equipment.
The placement of the air intake for HVAC systems needs to be done so that it
deals most effectively with the sources of air pollution (this is pre-determined
through modeling and scientific analysis). Regular maintenance for the HVAC
and filtration systems should also be planned to ensure that intake isn’t
blocked and filters and systems are working most effectively.
The Port of Long Beach provides grants to schools, preschool and daycare
centers near its facility to purchase and install high efficiency filters and HVAC
systems.
Benefits
• A well-designed system would remove 80% of fine particulates and have
added health benefits in terms of reducing allergens in the air.
Challenges
• Best suited for buildings near large pollution sources, such as freeways or
railyards.
Costs
• Filtration systems can be added to current HVAC systems at modest cost.
AT A Gl A n ce
Building filtration systems
can remove particulates from
indoor air, reducing exposure
to children at school.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 5
strategies: air quality
po T en Ti A l l oc Al Ac Tio ns A nd pA rTne rs
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Encourage schools and childcare facilities to add
PM filtration systems if they are located near PM
sources.
Potential Potential Partners: Local communities,
school districts, cities, Air Quality Management
District, First Five Agencies, Department of
Public Health.
Short $
Require health risk assessment studies for new
childcare centers to determine if filtration sys-
tems are necessary.
Potential Potential Partners: Cities and counties,
Department of Public Health.
Short $
Seek grants for existing child care centers to
upgrade HVAC systems.
Potential Potential Partners: Cities, coun-
ties, Air Quality Management District, First 5
Commissions of California (provide funding for
programs for children ages 0-5), Department of
Public Health.
Short $
Recommend filtration systems for new buildings
constructed near pollution sources.
Potential Potential Partners: Cities, coun-
ties, Department of Public Health, Air Quality
Management District.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 6 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
AT A Gl A n ce
When schools are sited at least
500 feet away from freeways,
students benefit from cleaner
air and health risks are avoided.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Land Use Siting
Description
Local and regional governments and school districts can protect children and
other sensitive individuals by siting new schools, libraries, day care centers,
and senior centers away from diesel emission sources. ARB recommends siting
new land uses likely to serve sensitive individuals at least 500 feet away from
freeways or high-traffic roads. Siting these land uses within 1,000 feet of a
major service and maintenance railyard or directly downwind of ports should
also be avoided, according to ARB.
Benefits
• Fewer children and other sensitive individuals are exposed to diesel PM
emissions.
• Also reduces noise exposure.
Challenges
• More practical to control the siting of new facilities than relocate existing
facilities.
• Financially- or space-challenged facilities have difficulty finding affordable
sites away from these pollution sources.
• Local and regional governments are typically not involved in school sit-
ing issues. These topics are addressed by school districts and the state
government.
Costs
• New school complexes are expensive—Los Angeles Unified School District
estimates $46,000 per student, or at least $50 million per school.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 7
strategies: air quality
po T e n T i A l l o c Al Ac T i ons A n d pA rTn ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Locate new schools away from freeways.
Potential Partners: School Districts, children’s
health advocates, Public Health Departments,
cities, counties.
Long $$$$
Encourage new daycare and senior centers to
locate away from freeways.
Potential Partners: Cities, Children’s health advo-
cates, Department of Public Health.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 8 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
AT A Gl A n ce
Distribution centers can reduce
idling emissions by enforc-
ing idle reduction policies for
delivery trucks.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Truck Idle Reduction
Description
Equipment at freight facilities can be left to idle for a significant amount of
time, resulting in unnecessary fuel consumption and emissions. This strategy
involves implementing idling reduction technologies or operational policies
to eliminate unnecessary idling. Many facilities limit truck and yard equipment
idling to less than five minutes, in compliance with ARB regulations.
Benefits
• Fewer people are exposed to diesel PM emissions.
• Benefits accrue throughout the life of the newly relocated facility.
Challenges
• Idling reduction might be required for all vehicles and equipment across-
the board regardless of proportion of benefit or feasibility.
• Trucks and locomotives coming into a business, yard or warehouse are
operated by others and technology strategies cannot be implemented by
the facilities themselves.
Costs
• Truck anti-idling devices (Auxiliary Power Units) cost between $3,000 and
$5,000.
• At freight facilities, idle reduction programs may require additional truck
parking or loading bays.
po T en Ti Al l oc A l AcTions A nd pA rTners
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Encourage freight facilities to adopt anti-idling
policies.
Potential Partners: States, councils of govern-
ment, cities, counties, air districts, facility opera-
tors.
Short $
Require signage at freight facilities to inform
truck drivers of CARB idling restrictions.
Potential Partners: State, cities and counties.
Short $
Ensure that new development projects provide
adequate truck loading and unloading.
Potential Partners: Cities, counties, facility
operators.
Short $
Promote regulations to keep trucks from idling
outside of freight facilities.
Potential Partners: State, councils of govern-
ment, cities and counties.
Short $
Encourage trucking / rail companies to install
anti-idling technology. Provide funding
incentives.
Potential Partners: State, councils of govern-
ment, cities and counties, facility
operators.
Short $$
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 9
strategies: air quality
po T en Ti Al l o c A l AcTi ons A n d pA rTners
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Encourage freight facilities to adopt anti-idling
policies.
Potential Partners: States, councils of govern-
ment, cities, counties, air districts, facility opera-
tors.
Short $
Require signage at freight facilities to inform
truck drivers of CARB idling restrictions.
Potential Partners: State, cities and counties.
Short $
Ensure that new development projects provide
adequate truck loading and unloading.
Potential Partners: Cities, counties, facility
operators.
Short $
Promote regulations to keep trucks from idling
outside of freight facilities.
Potential Partners: State, councils of govern-
ment, cities and counties.
Short $
Encourage trucking / rail companies to install
anti-idling technology. Provide funding
incentives.
Potential Partners: State, councils of govern-
ment, cities and counties, facility
operators.
Short $$
chapter eight
8 - 1 0 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S continued
Strategy: Alternative Fuels—
Biodiesel
Description
Biodiesel is a renewable fuel made of vegetable oils, animal fats, and recycled
cooking oils. It is most commonly used as a blend of 20% biodiesel and 80%
conventional diesel (B20). While B20 reduces emissions as compared to diesel,
it may require modifications on older locomotives. Higher blends of biodiesel,
up to pure biodiesel (B100), can also be used in many applications, but require
special handling. Biodiesel blends also require upgrades to seals, gaskets and
hoses.
While pure biodiesel has slightly less energy content than regular diesel fuel,
the energy content of B20 biodiesel blend is nearly equal to that of regular
diesel. There is a 2% loss of energy content when switching from diesel to
biodiesel.
Benefits
• Use of B20 results in approximately a 10-15% reduction in particulate matter
(PM) emissions. PM reductions increase with the percentage of biodiesel.
Biodiesel also reduces emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocar-
bons (HC). However, emission results vary depending on engine size.
Challenges
• Biodiesel can slightly increase oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions (a precur-
sor to smog).
• There are few biodiesel fueling stations, and biodiesel must be transported
by truck or rail, instead of by pipeline.
• Truck or locomotive fueling systems must be inspected or upgraded to
ensure compatibility with biodiesel.
Costs
• The retail price of B20 is very similar to conventional diesel, due in part to a
federal excise tax credit.
• Development of biodiesel fueling stations can be prohibitively expensive.
AT A Gl A n ce
A blend of 20% biodiesel can
be used in most existing diesel
engines to reduce emissions at
minimal additional cost.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 1 1
strategies: air quality
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2002): A Comprehensive Analysis of Biodiesel Impacts on
Exhaust Emissions - Draft Technical Report. EPA420-P-02-001.
-80%
-50%
-60%
-70%
-40%
-20%
-30%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
0 20 40 80 10060
Percent biodieselPercent change in emmisionsHC
PM
CO
NOx
po T e n T i A l l o c Al Ac T i ons A n d pA rTn ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Develop infrastructure for biodiesel distribution
and sale.
Potential Partners: Federal and State govern-
ments, Ports, local councils of government.
Short to Mid $$$$
Partner with truck fleet owners and freight facili-
ties to encourage voluntary use of biodiesel.
Potential Partners: Ports, Trucking Associations,
Local councils of government.
Short $
Use biodiesel in municipal fleets (refuse trucks,
fire engines, buses, etc.).
Potential Partners: Local councils of government,
cities, counties.
Short $$
chapter eight
8 - 1 2 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
Natural gas equipment can
reduce port and railyard emis-
sions, but requires refueling
stations.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Alternative Fuels—
Natural Gas (LNG)
Description
With commercially available low emission vehicles and fueling stations, natural
gas is the leading alternative fuel in California. In 2004, there were just over
2,400 natural gas heavy-duty vehicles in the U.S., with about two thirds in
California. By some estimates, more than 120,000 heavy-duty trucks can be
fueled by LNG nationwide every year. Natural gas options are also available
for cargo handling and yard equipment, as well as locomotives. Currently
BNSF is operating four LNG switching locomotives (used to combine and re-
combine cars into trains) in Southern California.
Natural gas vehicles store fuel in one of two forms: compressed natural gas
(CNG) is stored as a gas in high-pressure cylinders, and liquefied natural
gas (LNG) is stored as a liquid in cryogenic tanks. While both LNG and CNG
vehicles produce fewer emissions than diesel vehicles, each has different
strengths. LNG tanks store much more fuel than CNG tanks and can power
vehicles further before refueling, but LNG requires more expensive refueling
stations. In contrast, CNG tanks carry less fuel but are much lighter and more
appropriate for smaller vehicles such as forklifts and cargo loaders.
Benefits
• Natural gas equipment reduces emissions through cleaner combustion.
• A new natural gas truck can reduce emission by more than 80% compared
to a pre-2007 truck.
Challenges
• Because natural gas has less energy per gallon, a LNG or CNG vehicle has
a 40-75% reduction in operating range as compared to diesel vehicles.
• This strategy requires development of LNG & CNG fueling infrastructure
(stations, getting fuel from where it is generated to the site, etc.).
• High-purity natural gas is required for current BNSF LNG switcher
locomotives.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 1 3
strategies: air quality
Costs
• Cost of new natural gas equipment can exceed cost of new diesel
equipment.
• LNG vehicles have higher maintenance costs and require additional equip-
ment and expertise as compared to diesel vehicles.
• While prices vary, natural gas can be more expensive than diesel. However,
recent natural gas prices are below diesel prices. Potential Local Actions
and Partners
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Provide incentives and regulation to encourage
facility operators to upgrade cargo handling
equipment to natural gas.
Potential Partners: California Air Resources
Board, Ports.
Short $
Build out natural gas fueling & distribution
infrastructure.
Potential Partners: LNG Providers, Ports, local
communities.
Short to Mid $$$$
Use natural gas in municipal fleets (refuse trucks,
buses, etc.).
Potential Partners: Cities, Counties.
Short $$$
chapter eight
8 - 1 4 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
New, efficient engines can
replace older engines to save
fuel and reduced emissions.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Engine Replacement
Description
Engine replacement strategies are similar in approach to strategies to replace
the entire vehicle, but can be more cost effective. Diesel engines last much
longer than gasoline-powered engines; 20-year-old engines are not uncom-
mon. Many older vehicles are powered by engines built prior to the imple-
mentation of clean air standards. By replacing the current engine with a new
engine or a newer used engine, owners can reduce pollutants significantly
without replacing the entire vehicle. This strategy is most cost effective in
freight trucks.
Benefits
• Engine replacement can introduce improvements faster than a replacement
strategy.
• While engine retrofits are cheaper than retiring and replacing vehicles, the
emission reductions are smaller.
Challenges
• Older trucks are often owned by individuals or small businesses, who can’t
afford to invest in engine upgrades.
• While grant and loan programs can reduce program costs, funding of these
programs competes with other public funding priorities.
• Model year 2007 and newer engines are not compatible with pre-2007 truck
bodies.
Costs
• The cost of engine repowering ranges from $20,000 to $40,000. This strat-
egy can be more cost effective than vehicle replacement strategies.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 1 5
strategies: air quality
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Provide incentives for equipment owners to
upgrade to new engines.
Potential Partners: Ports, local councils of gov-
ernment, Federal and State government.
Short $$
Inform equipment owners about ways to comply
with ARB regulations for trucks that are in
service.
Potential Partners: Ports, Trucking Associations,
councils of government.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 1 6 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
DOCs are more economical
than other filters, but offer less
benefit.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Exhaust Retrofit—Diesel
Oxidation Catalyst (DOC)
Description
A DOC retrofit system (a similar technology is known as a “particulate trap”
when used on buses) consists of either an in-line engine muffler replacement
or an add-on control device. The DOC sits in the exhaust stream of a vehicle
and all exhaust from the engine passes through it. Retrofits of DOCs have
been under way for more than 20 years in the off-road vehicle sector, with over
250,000 engine retrofits, most notably in the underground mining industry, on
some public transportation industry buses where CNG isn’t in use on over 1.5
million heavy duty highway trucks in the U.S since 1994.
Benefits
• DOCs are certified by the California Air Resources Board to reduce PM
emissions by at least 25%.
Challenges
• DOCs must be sized for each engine, and fit within existing engine com-
partment dimensions and design.
• DOC technology cannot be directly transferred from truck engines to loco-
motive engines.
• As of 2009, DOCs are an experimental technology for locomotive use, but
may become viable in the future.
Costs
• Costs vary according to engine size and application.
• On-road trucks: $1000 - $4000.
• Off-road and marine vehicles: significantly more expensive, vary by
horsepower.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 1 7
strategies: air quality
po T e n Ti A l l o c Al Ac Ti ons A n d pA rTners
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Provide incentives for equipment owners to
upgrade to new technology (per truck).
Potential Partners: Federal, state and local gov-
ernments, Ports.
Short to Mid $$
Inform equipment owners that grants and loans
are available to upgrade vehicles with DOCs
and other exhaust retrofits.
Potential Partners: ARB, Ports, Trucking
Associations.
Short $
Retrofit municipal diesel vehicles with DOCs.
Potential Partners: Cities and counties.
Short $$
chapter eight
8 - 1 8 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
FTFs can capture more
pollution than DOCs, but at
greater cost.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Exhaust Retrofit—
Flow-Through Filter (FTF)
Description
Monetary incentives for truck retrofit can encourage emissions reductions from
the in-use fleet at relatively low cost. As with DOCs, FTF devices often can
be retrofitted to existing trucks with only minor modifications to the exhaust
system. This section analyzes scenarios for the installation of FTFs on trucks
that can accept this technology.
FTFs are appropriate for applications that may be unsuitable for traditional
filters, which can become blocked when used on equipment with a stop-and-
go duty cycle and low exhaust temperatures.
Benefits
• FTFs are certified by the California ARB to reduce PM emissions by at least
50%.
• Applicable to older, dirtier engines without size or design restrictions of
other technologies.
Challenges
• Limited commercial production.
• FTF technology cannot be directly transferred from truck engines to loco-
motive engines.
• As of 2009, FTFs are an experimental technology for locomotive use, but
may become viable in the future.
• Current FTF equipment is only approved for trucks built after 1991
Costs
• More expensive than DOCs.
• On-road trucks: $6,000-8,000.
• Off-road and marine vehicles: unknown costs but likely to be considerably
more expensive.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 1 9
strategies: air quality
p o Te n T iA l l o c A l Ac T ions And pArT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Provide incentives for equipment owners to
upgrade to new technology (per truck).
Potential Partners: Federal and State govern-
ment, Ports.
Short to Mid $$
Inform equipment owners that grants and loans
are available to upgrade vehicles with DOCs and
other exhaust retrofits.
Potential Partners: ARB, Ports, Trucking
Associations.
Short $
Retrofit municipal diesel vehicles with FTFs.
Potential Partners: Cities and counties.
Short $$
chapter eight
8 - 2 0 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
DPFs are the most effective
technology to remove
particulate matter from
engine exhaust.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Exhaust Retrofit—Diesel
Particulate Filter (DPF)
Description
As with DOCs and FTFs, DPF devices often can be retrofitted to existing trucks
with only minor modifications to the exhaust system. Around the world, more
than 200,000 DPFs have been installed as retrofits and more than 1 million
DPF-equipped cars have been sold in Europe. DPFs have also been used
successfully on a variety of off-road engines since the mid-1980s. DPFs are
required in all new on-road 2007 and newer diesel vehicles.
Benefits
• Several models of DPF are certified by the ARB to reduce PM emissions by
at least 85%.
• DPFs also reduce CO and HC emissions.
Challenges
• DPFs can significantly increase back-pressure on the engine, which can
reduce engine life.
• DPF technology cannot be directly transferred from truck engines to loco-
motive engines.
• As with DOCs, DPFs must be properly sized for each engine.
Costs
• DPFs are generally more expensive than FTFs. For on-road mobile sources
such as cars and trucks, the price ranges from $6,000-$15,000.
• For construction equipment, the cost of a DPF will increase as engine
horsepower increases: $6,000-$9,000 for a 250 hp engine found in equip-
ment such as large bulldozers and construction cranes.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 2 1
strategies: air quality
p o T e n T iA l l o c A l Ac T ions And pArT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Provide incentives for equipment owners to
upgrade to new technology (per truck).
Potential Partners: Federal and State govern-
ment, Ports.
Short to Mid $$
Inform equipment owners that grants and loans
are available to upgrade vehicles with DOCs
and other exhaust retrofits.
Potential Partners: ARB, Ports, Trucking
Associations.
Short $
Retrofit municipal diesel vehicles with DPFs.
Potential Partners: ARB, Ports, Trucking
Associations.
Short $$ - $$$
chapter eight
8 - 2 2 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
Replacement strategies phase
out the oldest, dirtiest equip-
ment, but can take many years
to implement.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Accelerated Truck
Replacement
Description
Many trucks in operation today were built before the adoption of stringent
federal and state emission standards. By retiring older vehicles and replacing
them with newer trucks with modern engine and exhaust technology, emis-
sions can be significantly reduced. Retired trucks should always be scrapped
to ensure that they are not sold and continue to cause pollution. Monetary
incentives for truck replacement can promote more rapid turnover of the
truck fleet.
Currently, the ARB and the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have several
programs in place to speed up the process of upgrading truck fleets. Local
governments in the area impacted by port-generated traffic and pollution,
led by the Gateway Cities, took an early lead in finding funding for truck
replacement.
Benefits
• Can reduce PM and NOx emissions by 90%.
• New equipment can reduce operating or maintenance costs for vehicle
owners.
Challenges
• Older trucks are often owned by individuals or small businesses, who can’t
afford to invest in vehicle upgrades.
• Grant and loan programs can assist these owners, but funding for these
competes with many other government needs and programs.
Costs
• New heavy-duty trucks can cost more than $75,000.
• It is cheaper to replace old trucks with newer used trucks (1 or 2 years old),
but there is less benefit as well.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 2 3
strategies: air quality
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Provide incentives for equipment owners to
upgrade to new vehicles (per truck).
Potential Partners: Federal and State govern-
ment, Ports.
Short $$
Inform equipment owners about ways to comply
with ARB regulations for in-use trucks.
Potential Partners: ARB, Ports, Trucking
Associations.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 2 4 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
Hybrid trucks can save fuel and
reduce emissions, especially in
stop-and-go delivery vehicles.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Hybrid-Electric and
Hybrid-Hydraulic Trucks
Description
Hybrid vehicles contain a secondary energy source (usually batteries or
hydraulic accumulators to absorb energy lost in braking) in addition to the
primary engine, and electronic control systems to allow both energy sources
to power the truck in varying combinations depending on operating condi-
tions. Hybrid truck technology is developing rapidly. Diesel-electric and
diesel-hydraulic medium-duty trucks for specific applications have entered
commercial production, and hybrid heavy-duty trucks are expected to be
widely available by 2010. A truck replacement strategy with hybrids would be
implemented the same way as a pure diesel strategy, except that the target
markets or truck populations must be more precisely defined in order to gain
the emissions benefits of hybrid technology.
Benefits
• Estimated for current technology: 30% reduction in fuel use, PM and NOx.
• Benefits may increase as technology matures.
Challenges
• Hybrid technology needs to be developed further before it can be applied
to many truck types.
• Only certain, smaller types of vehicles such as parcel delivery trucks, are in
testing as of 2009.
Costs
• Cost to purchase a hybrid truck is much higher than a comparative conven-
tional truck.
• How much a hybrid freight (tractor-trailer) truck would cost isn’t known yet,
since this type is currently not being manufactured.
• Cost effectiveness expected to be lower than that of diesel-for-diesel truck
replacement.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 2 5
strategies: air quality
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Educate truck operators about new develop-
ments and options for hybrid trucks.
Potential Partners: Trucking associations, coun-
cils of government, Air Quality agencies.
Short $
Provide financial incentives for truck operators to
adopt hybrid technology.
Potential Partners: SCAQMD, State and Federal
governments, Ports.
Short $$
chapter eight
8 - 2 6 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
In recent years, railyards have
greatly reduced emissions
from idling. Further reductions
bring air quality improvements.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Locomotive Idle Reduction
Description
Idling locomotives are responsible for a large portion of emissions at railyards.
Locomotives idle at railyards to power cabin equipment, communications, air
conditioning, and brakes. Idling is often necessary for maintenance purposes
and while waiting for dispatch orders, but some idling time is unnecessary
for operations and can be eliminated. Idling can be reduced through railroad
policies, operator training, and new technology. As part of a 2005 agreement
with ARB, the UP and BNSF have installed idling reduction devices on nearly
all of their locomotives that operate within California. The devices shut down
the engine after 15 minutes in cases where idling is unnecessary. Rail employ-
ees are also being trained to shut down locomotives that idle in excess of 60
minutes, and the railroads are subject to fines if a locomotive idles unnecessar-
ily for longer than this.
Benefits
• Depending on how a locomotive is operated, idling reduction strategies
can reduce idling emissions 25-75%.
• Annual fuel savings can be greater than $1,000 per year per locomotive.
Challenges
• While most new and recent-model locomotives are equipped with anti-
idling devices, older locomotives still need to be upgraded.
• Many line-haul locomotives operate across multiple states and may not be
subject ARB’s agreement with the railroads.
Costs
• Typical locomotive idle reduction devices cost $10,000 plus $3,000 for
installation.
• Anti-idling devices save money over time—the lifetime fuel savings are
greater than the upfront cost.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 2 7
strategies: air quality
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Encourage railroads to adopt facility-wide
anti-idling policies (locomotives, trucks, cargo
equipment).
Potential Partners: FRA, ARB, cities and coun-
ties, railroad and facility operators.
Short $
Encourage railroads and ARB to extend idle
reduction agreements to interstate locomotives.
Potential Partners: ARB, FRA, railroad operators.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 2 8 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
Replacement strategies phase
out the oldest, dirtiest equip-
ment, but can take many years
to implement.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Accelerated Locomotive
Replacement or Rebuild
Description
Locomotives have a long service life. This strategy would accelerate the
replacement or rebuilding of existing locomotives with those meeting the new
federal emission standards. The new standards will require that locomotives
built after 2004 meet lower emission standards when they are rebuilt as part of
normal service intervals. Starting in 2015, new locomotives will be required to
meet more stringent standards.
UP has acquired (by mid-2009) almost 3,600 new EPA certified (Tiers 0, 1, 2)
locomotives out of 8,500 total, and has been focusing its Tier 2 locomotives on
trains to / from Southern California.
Benefits
• The Tier 2 rebuild standards will reduce PM by 50% compared to existing
Tier 2 engines.
• When available beginning in 2015, Tier 4 locomotives will reduce emission
by 75-90% compared to existing Tier 2 engines.
• By 2010, railroads in Southern California will have upgraded locomotives to
reduce NOx by 67%.
Challenges
• Tier 4 standards don’t become effective until 2015.
• Railroads are national, so keeping upgraded locomotives concentrated
in areas with the greatest air quality impact, such as Southern California is
voluntary.
Costs
• A new long-distance (line-haul locomotive) costs more than $2 million. A
new switcher locomotive designed to move cars locally from route to route
(a switcher locomotive) costs more than $1 million.
• EPA estimates Tier 4 locomotives will cost $100,000 more than current
generation locomotives
• Grant and loan programs can reduce program costs.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 2 9
strategies: air quality
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Provide incentives for railroads to upgrade to
cleaner locomotives.
Potential Partners: Federal, state and local
governments.
Short $$$$
Work with railroads to encourage deployment
of cleaner locomotives in Southern California
service.
Potential Partners: local legislators, councils of
government, cities, Ports.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 3 0 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
Hybrid locomotives can reduce
emissions more than 60%. They
are best suited for railyard
activities.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Hybrid or Gen-Set
Locomotives
Description
This strategy involves replacing a fraction of locomotive yard/switching
engines with a hybrid-electric or generator set (“gen-set”) switching engine.
Hybrid-electric (“Green Goat”) engines use a combination of a 50,000 lb.
heavy-duty battery rack to supply electrical power, and a small diesel genera-
tor to provide additional prime power, and charge the battery rack. A gen-set
switching locomotive is similar to the Green Goat, but is entirely powered by
two, three, or perhaps four smaller diesel generator engines meeting lower
emission standards than the current locomotive standards.
Hybrid and gen-set locomotives are appropriate for switching activities at
railyards, which involve significant periods of idling or low-power use. This
technology is currently not feasible for line-haul locomotives, which are much
higher horsepower units that haul large loads over long distances at high
power settings.
As of 2009, UP is operating 61 gen-set locomotives and 10 hybrid switchers in
the South Coast Air Basin.
Benefits
• Hybrid: reduce fuel consumption 40-60%, reduce emissions by 80-90%.
• Gen-Set: reduce emissions by 80-90% and fuel consumption 16-37%.
Challenges
• The technology is still in development.
• Few models are currently in production.
• While gen-set switchers are as powerful as existing switchers, hybrid switch-
ers are not as powerful.
• Green Goats are less reliable than Gen-Sets because of challenges with the
battery packs.
• Railyards need two Green Goat locomotives to replace one diesel locomo-
tive, since the Green Goats need downtime to recharge batteries.
• Personnel must be trained to maintain new technology switchers.
Costs
• Initial cost of hybrid switcher: $750k for 1000 HP locomotive.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 3 1
strategies: air quality
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Support research programs to develop new
retrofit options since it is cheaper to retrofit
existing switchers than replace them.
Potential Partners: Air regulatory agencies,
ports, railroads, councils of government, cities
and counties.
Short $
Support incentive programs to defray the cost
of new switchers.
Potential Partners: Air regulatory agencies,
ports, railroads, councils of government, cities
and counties.
Short $
Replace switcher locomotives at railyards.
Potential Partners: Railroads.
Short to Mid $$$
chapter eight
8 - 3 2 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
If ships reduce their speed near
port, they emit up to 25% less
pollution.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Ocean-Going Vessel Speed
Reduction
Description
Ocean-going vessels (OGVs) or cargo ships typically operate at reduced speed
within 25 miles of the coastline. Beyond this boundary, they operate at full
cruising speed. At full speed, ships have much higher emissions. This strategy
extends the coastal zone further away from shore, to reduce ship emissions.
Since May 2001, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have enacted a
voluntary speed reduction program to encourage ships to reduce their speed
from cruise to 12 knots (approximately 14 miles per hour) within 20 nautical
miles or 23 land miles of Point Fermin (in San Pedro, Los Angeles County),
both during entrance and exit.
Benefits
• Expanding the current speed reduction zone would result in 26% less
nitrous oxide (NOx).
Challenges
• Voluntary speed reduction programs require participation from shippers.
However, participation can be encouraged through incentives and fee
rebates.
Costs
• Ship operators face highest costs due to added delay.
• Expanded program: $4.4 million (Port costs), $39 million (delay costs)
annually.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 3 3
strategies: air quality
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Initiate pilot project with the California
Air Resources Board (ARB) or the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Potential Partners: Ports, councils of govern-
ment, State of California, U.S. EPA.
Short $
Coordinate with shipping companies to change
operating practices.
Potential Partners: Ports, councils of govern-
ment.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 3 4 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Ocean-Going Vessel
Fuel Requirements
Description
Most OGVs use high-sulfur bunker fuel in their main and auxiliary engines. In
2007, the ARB began enforcing a rule mandating the use of low-sulfur fuel in
auxiliary engines. This ruling is projected to decrease PM emissions from ships
within 24 miles of the coastline. This strategy extends the fuel requirement to
main engines, so that all fuel consumed is low-sulfur.
Main engines on OGVs are responsible for approximately 60% of total OGV
NOx emissions and 80% of total OGV PM emissions at the Ports of Los
Angeles and Long Beach. While ARB’s adopted Auxiliary Engine Rule requires
use of lower sulfur fuel in OGV auxiliary engines, there is currently no similar
regulation for main engines.
Benefits
• Reduce NOx emissions by 7% and PM emissions by 62% by the year 2035.
Challenges
• Expenses of fuel replacement could lead to further diversion of cargo and/
or price increases of imported goods.
Costs
• Infrastructure costs to shippers for upgrading ships to accommodate new
fuel type.
• Incremental fuel costs due to price differential between bunker fuel and
low-sulfur fuel.
• Both the port / terminal and the ship owner must install expensive electrical
infrastructure.
AT A Gl A n ce
By substituting conventional
marine bunker oil with cleaner
diesel fuels, ship operators can
reduce marine emissions.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 3 5
strategies: air quality
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Coordinate with fuel suppliers to bring cleaner
fuels to port.
Potential Partners: Ports, cities of Los Angeles
and Long Beach, Air Quality Management
District, councils of government.
Short $
With EPA or ARB, develop clean-fuels pilot
program.
Potential Partners: Air Quality Management
District, councils of government, Ports.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 3 6 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
Shore power allows berthed
ships to operate using electric-
ity rather than auxiliary diesel
engines.
8.1 A ir Qu A l ity Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Shore Power/Cold Ironing
Description
According to the most recent assessment of the sources of pollution-causing
emissions almost half of the emissions from ocean going vessels in the South
Coast Air Basin occur at the berth where the ship unloads or loads and lays
over while waiting to depart. Cold ironing enables ships to shut down their
(diesel) auxiliary engines and run off the shore-side electrical power grid to
supply power at the dock for refrigeration, electricity, and other needs.
The U.S. Navy has been using shore power for many decades to provide elec-
tricity to its ships while docked for long periods of time. A growing number of
U.S. West Coast and European ports are also adopting shore power to reduce
emissions from commercial vessels.
Benefits
• Reduce berthed emissions by 90-95%.
Challenges
• Both the port / terminal and the ship owner must install expensive electrical
infrastructure.
Costs
• The ARB calculated per-ship costs at $500,000 per vessel.
• ARB reported port costs to be $3.5 million per terminal plus $1.5 million per
berth.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 3 7
strategies: air quality
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Work with ARB and EPA for shore power pilot
projects.
Potential Partners: Ports, councils of govern-
ment, cities.
Short $
Provide incentives to ship owners to upgrade
vessels.
Potential Partners: Air Quality Management
District, Federal and State government, ports.
Short $$$
chapter eight
8 - 3 8 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.2 n o i S e Str At egie S
Strategy: Noise Barrier
Description
A noise or sound barrier is a natural or man-made feature (such as a wall or a
berm) designed to reduce noise experienced by people in buildings, parks or
homes near a noise source and a receiver that reduces noise.
When a direct path along the line of sight between the noise source and the
receptor is interrupted, some of the acoustical energy will be transmitted
through the barrier material and continue to the source, albeit at a reduced
level. The amount of this reduction depends on the barrier material’s mass
and rigidity, and is called the transmission loss. The remaining direct noise
is either partially or entirely absorbed by the noise barrier material (if sound
absorptive), and/ or partially or entirely reflected (if the barrier material is
sound reflective). A smooth, hard barrier surface, such as masonry or concrete,
is considered to be almost perfectly reflective. A barrier surface material that is
porous with many voids is said to be absorptive.
Benefits
Typically, when a barrier just breaks the line of sight between the source and
the receiver, the sound level at the receiver is reduced by approximately 5 dB.
As the height of the barrier increases above the line of sight, the noise reduc-
tion at the receiver increases.
A noise barrier is most effective when located closer either to the source or
the receiver. For instance, barriers close to vehicles can provide noise reduc-
tions of 6 to 10 dB. For barriers further away, such as the right-of-way line or
for trains on the far track, the height must be increased to provide equivalent
effectiveness.
Challenges
• A noise barrier is ineffective for reducing noise for a receiver located much
higher than the barrier.
• Barrier height restrictions.
• Property rights to construct noise barrier at the receiver.
• May create additional maintenance costs.
• Graffiti and lack of maintenance may cause aesthetic problems (although
barrier may have aesthetic benefits as well if it hides unsightly land uses).
AT A Gl A n ce
Natural and man-made barriers
absorb noise and reduce visual
impacts.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 3 9
strategies: noise
Costs
• As a rule of thumb, sound walls cost $150 to $280 per foot of length, assum-
ing a wall 6 to 8 feet high.
• Sound barriers are easier to install at ground level. Costs may be twice as
high on bridges and elevated railways.
• Maintenance costs may increase due to graffiti.
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Install sound walls along property line of
affected sensitive land uses.
Potential Partners: Agency or company with
oversight of the affected property: Caltrans, cit-
ies, counties, rail operators, facility operators.
Mid $$-$$$
Require developers to consider sound barriers
as an option for mitigating noise impacts.
Potential Partners: Cities, counties, Caltrans.
Short $
For existing facilities, work with facility operator
to focus operations away from properties not
separated by sound barriers.
Potential Partners: Cities, counties, facility
operators.
Short $
If highway or rail projects are expected to cre-
ate excess noise, install sound walls along the
right-of-way.
Potential Partners: Caltrans, rail operators, cities,
counties.
Short $$$
chapter eight
8 - 4 0 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.2 n o i S e Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Soundproofing Features
Description
By installing soundproofing features, homes affected by noise can be insu-
lated against that noise. The two main methods of soundproofing are reduc-
ing the sound and/or absorbing the sound. Typical soundproofing features
include installation of dual-pane/soundproofing windows, and/or sound-
proofing doors with higher sound-blocking ratings, known officially as Sound
Transmission Class, or STC ratings.
STC ratings are the official way to measure noise reduction through a parti-
tion, such as a window. It is roughly equivalent to the decibels (dBs) that are
blocked. Every 10 STC points reduces noise by 50%. Double-paned windows
can block more sound than many typical windows but often, to achieve signifi-
cant noise reduction, soundproof windows and walls need to be installed. The
table below shows the range of noise reduction for typical installations.
Benefits
• Soundproofing using proven materials has been successful near major facil-
ities in Southern California. Currently, the Federal Aviation Administration
is working with Los Angles World Airports (LAWA) to fund soundproofing
in residential areas near LAX and Van Nuys Airports. Approximately 8,200
residents are eligible for home upgrades as part of this program.
• Requires significant funding but avoids need for relocation of either
residence or freight line/facility (which can be much more costly and
disruptive).
AT A Gl A n ce
Soundproofing features
insulate residences from
excess noise.
Single-Pane
Window
Double-Pane
Window
Soundproof
Window
Soundproof
Window over
Double Pane
Regular Wall Sound-
Proofed Wall
STC “Points”15-24 24-29 (or
higher)
33-40 43-49 34-38 35-58
Percentage
Increase in
Noise Blocked
--0-50%61-76%80-87%--1-78%
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 4 1
strategies: noise
Challenges
• Soundproofing projects require cooperation from owners of affected
dwellings.
• Determining responsibility for requiring, funding and implementing sound-
proofing programs –cities cannot require retrofit of existing facilities so
incentives or cooperative programs are required.
• Windows must be completely closed to reduce noise; this can be a prob-
lem in hot weather, and it may be necessary to install ventilation and air
conditioning systems. (This may already be a problem along noisy transpor-
tation corridors.).
• Does not address noise intrusion on outdoor activities.
Costs
• A typical double-pane window costs about $350 to $900, depending on the
size and specifications.
• Typical cost to add soundproof windows to existing windows is $350 to
$800 per window.
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Add soundproofing features to local building
codes in areas affected by excess noise.
Potential Partners: Cities, counties.
Short $
Instruct developers to pay for soundproofing for
affected home owners when new projects cause
noise impacts.
Potential Partners: Cities, counties.
Short $
Research ways to secure funding (for example,
grants and new legislation) for programs which
would help homeowners sound-proof windows
and doors.
Potential Partners: Cities, counties.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 4 2 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
Noise reduction features, such
as barriers and shielding can be
installed at the noise source.
8.2 n o i S e Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Project Design and
Operation Procedures
Description
Noise can be reduced at the source by making changes to how a project is
designed or operated. Such measures may include, but are not limited to,
shielding of on-site stationary equipment, locating noise-generating activi-
ties or equipment away from adjacent sensitive land uses such as homes and
schools, and increasing the distance between the source of the noise and the
adjacent residents and businesses.
Benefits
• Reduce noise generation from the source.
Challenges
• Limited effectiveness on a small site.
• There may not be enough room for an increased distance or buffer zone
between the source of the noise and the people affected by it in highly-
developed areas.
• Requirements cannot be dictated by cities or counties for railroads.
Costs
• The costs vary depending on project scope.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 4 3
strategies: noise
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
For new projects, require shielding of noise-
generating equipment.
Potential Partners: Cities, counties.
Short $
For new projects, require noise-generating
activities or equipment to be located away from
adjacent sensitive land uses such as homes,
schools and hospitals.
Potential Partners: Cities, counties.
Short $
For existing and new projects, facilitate commu-
nication between operators and local communi-
ties to build mutual awareness of operational
needs, impact concerns, and potential solutions.
Potential Partners: Cities, counties, facility
operators.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 4 4 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
Quiet zone regulations reduce
noise from train whistles,
but require additional safety
measures.
8.2 n o i S e Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Quiet Zones
Description
Federal safety regulations require locomotives to sound horns when approach-
ing public rail crossings. Due to local concerns with locomotive horn noise, the
FRA has published regulations allowing the creation of zones where locomo-
tive horns could be silenced under non-emergency circumstances. The FRA
requires that the railroad crossings in quiet zones be upgraded so drivers
are aware of upcoming trains. These upgrades may include concrete barri-
ers preventing drivers from circumventing the gates, sealed or “quad” gates
or automatic whistles (also called wayside horns) mounted at the crossing.
Beyond major infrastructure improvements, in specific circumstances there
could be options for reduced horn length, volume and/or frequency that still
meet FRA requirements.
Benefits
• Minimizes excess noise from train horns impacting neighborhoods near rail
crossings.
Challenges
• Very high cost if it involves multiple crossings in densely-developed areas.
• Dead-end streets can limit access for residents, businesses and emergency
vehicles.
• Requires coordination among local government, rail operator, and the FRA.
• It is the responsibility of local jurisdictions to fund and maintain quiet zones.
Costs
• Four-quadrant gate systems cost approximately $2,000,000.
• Maintenance of quiet rail crossings would cost approximately $10,000 a
year.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 4 5
strategies: noise
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Explore opportunities with railroads for reduced
horn use, frequency and or volume at specific
locations that still meet FRA requirements.
Potential Partners: Railroads, FRA, cities, coun-
ties.
Short $
Designate a section of rail corridor as a “quiet
zone.”
Potential Partners: Railroads, FRA, cities, coun-
ties.
Short $
Search for funding from legislation and grants
for new rail crossing systems, compatible with
quiet zone regulations.
Potential Partners: councils of government,
cities,
counties.
Short $
Install four-quadrant gates at rail crossings.
Potential Partners: Railroads, FRA, cities, coun-
ties.
Mid $$$$
Install permanently mounted whistles at grade
crossings to replace sounding of train horns.
Potential Partners: Railroads, FRA, cities, coun-
ties.
Mid $$
chapter eight
8 - 4 6 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
AT A Gl A n ce
Traffic planning tools are used
by local governments to make
their streets “freight friendly.”
8.3 t r A f fic Str At egie S
Strategy: Traffic Planning Tools
Description
Traffic planning encompasses a number of tools that local governments can
use to reduce the impacts of freight trucks on local streets. These strategies,
which can be implemented either at the time of new development or as road-
side redevelopment, can reduce the frequency of trucks blocking passenger
cars. However, it can be very costly to correct design decisions after they are
installed. Some specific strategies include:
• Require that new freight facilities be designed with sufficient space for truck
queuing inside the facility.
• Position driveways so trucks can turn in and out without blocking intersec-
tions. To the extent possible, locate driveways and loading docks away from
sensitive receptors.
• Intersection improvements: widen turning radii, provide sufficient through-
and turn-lanes.
• Discourage loading and unloading on public streets.
• Require new warehouses and distribution centers to specify driveway and
circulation details when plans are submitted for review and approval.
• In new communities, design street systems to facilitate truck movement and
minimize queuing.
Benefits
• Reduces local road congestion.
• Improves roadway safety.
• Allows freight facilities to be a “good neighbor” to share public roads with
local residents.
Challenges
• Once design decisions are made, it is costly to rebuild existing lanes or
intersections.
Costs
• Public works projects can cost hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars.
• Many planned projects can be made “freight friendly” at little additional
cost.
• When a new freight facility is built, a portion of the infrastructure costs
could be paid by the developers, if specific infrastructure improvements
reduce impacts caused by the facility.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 4 7
strategies: traffic
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Coordinate impacts of new roadway connec-
tions with adjacent cities and counties to ensure
consistent design and operations.
Potential Partners: City public works depart-
ments, facility operators.
Short $
Assess truck volumes and travel patterns on
roadways to identify priority improvement areas.
Potential Partners: City public works depart-
ments, Caltrans.
Short $$
Coordinate signal systems with adjacent jurisdic-
tions, and with county transportation agencies
and Caltrans.
Mid $$$
Assess the need for industry or truck impact fees
in local communities to support financing of
infrastructure improvements.
Potential Partners: City public works depart-
ments.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 4 8 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.3 t r A f fic Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Truck Parking Regulations
Description
Truck parking on local streets can be a significant problem in some residential
areas, creating visual and noise impacts. Trucks park on local streets when
they are waiting for access to a port terminal, delivery dock, railyard, or other
freight facility. In some cases, trucks may be parking overnight in residential
areas.
To minimize the impact of truck parking on communities, local governments
can require proposed freight facilities to set aside sufficient truck parking for
their operations. Cities can also establish and enforce parking restrictions in
residential areas, and can designate alternative areas that are acceptable for
truck parking.
Benefits
• Reduces the noise and aesthetic impacts of parked trucks.
• Creates more available parking.
• Allows freight facilities to be a “good neighbor.”
Challenges
• Cities have little leverage to expand or change existing facilities.
• Truck parking regulations may be opposed by truck operator associations.
Costs
• Public works projects can cost hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars.
• In the planning stage, parking can be added to freight facilities at low cost.
AT A Gl A n ce
Cities and counties can reduce
truck parking on public streets
through a variety of codes and
ordinances.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 4 9
strategies: traffic
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Enact planning codes to ensure that new freight
facilities have adequate truck parking.
Potential Partners: City/county planning and
public works departments.
Short $
Post street signage pointing truckers to desig-
nated truck parking sites.
Potential Partners: City/county public works
departments, Caltrans.
Short $
Cities and counties can pass ordinances to pro-
hibit vehicle parking on certain roadways.
Potential Partners: City/county planning and
public works departments.
Short $
Design and install traffic calming measures, i.e.
oblique parking spaces, can make road seg-
ments friendlier to cars and pedestrians.
Potential Partners: City/county public works
departments, Caltrans.
Mid $$$
Create or designate areas for truck staging or
resting (public or private facilities) in areas out-
side of residential and other sensitive land uses.
Potential Partners: City/county planning and
public works departments.
Short $-$$$
In addition to enforcement, communicate new
or existing route information to truckers through
trucking companies or places where truckers are,
such as rest areas or fueling stations.
Potential Partners: City/county public works
departments, trucking companies and associa-
tions.
Short $
Assess the need for industry or truck impact fees
in local communities to support financing of
infrastructure improvements.
Potential Partners: City/county.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 5 0 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.3 t r A f fic Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Designated Truck Routes
Description
Due to the forecast growth in freight traffic, a system of designated truck
routes can maintain and leverage Southern California’s competitiveness as
a hub for international trade. Designated truck routes concentrate trucks on
roads with adequate truck capacity, while preserving other lanes or roads for
passenger vehicles. This tool is best suited for communities and corridors with
high levels of truck volumes passing by residential areas. Reduction in local
road congestion results in travel time savings for drivers. Another benefit is
safety, separating trucks from local traffic, pedestrians and bicyclists.
As an alternate or companion approach, cities can designate residential
streets or neighborhoods as “truck free zones.” This would minimize noise and
traffic impacts on local residents.
Benefits
• Dedicated truck routes can direct truck traffic away from homes, schools
and other “sensitive receptor” sites, minimizing pollution exposure.
• By reducing the number of truck / passenger car interactions, this strategy
can increase roadway and pedestrian safety.
• Can speed truck travel and save companies money.
Challenges
• Enforcement is key to success—requires coordinated monitoring by local
law enforcement.
• Requires coordinated traffic planning among cities on the route and, in
some cases Caltrans.
Costs
• Low implementation costs, once appropriate truck corridors are identified.
• Truck companies may save money due to time savings from reduced
congestion.
AT A Gl A n ce
Designated truck routes sepa-
rate truck traffic from passen-
ger cars, speeding traffic and
increasing safety.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 5 1
strategies: traffic
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Identify truck corridors that would most benefit
from designated truck routes.
Potential Partners: Caltrans, city/county public
works and planning departments, councils of
government, major trucking companies/local
warehouses.
Short $
Designate “truck free zones” on streets or in
neighborhoods.
Potential Partners: City/county public works and
planning departments, local residents.
Short $
Require new distribution centers to establish
truck routes through local neighborhoods and
add on-site signage to direct trucks exiting the
facility.
Potential Partners: City/county public works and
planning departments, distribution centers.
Short $
Implement truck routes on selected corridors.
Potential Partners: Caltrans, city/county public
works department, councils of government,
major trucking companies and distributors.
Short $$
Repave roadways with “quiet pavement”
materials that reduce road noise.
Potential Partners: City public works depart-
ment, state highway department.
Short to Mid $$
In addition to enforcement, communicate new
or existing route information to truckers through
trucking companies or places where truckers are
such as rest areas or fueling stations.
Potential Partners: City public works depart-
ment, trucking companies.
Short $
Assess the need for industry or truck impact fees
in local communities to support financing of
infrastructure improvements.
Potential Partners: City public works and finance
departments.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 5 2 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.3 t r A f fic Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Highway Incident
Management for Trucks
Description
Incident management programs seek to detect and clear roadway incidents
such as accidents, stalls and spills quickly and effectively, thereby minimizing
their congestion impacts. The strategy can be applied region-wide or can
be focused on a specific corridor, and can address delay caused by traffic
incidents (crashes, stalls, cargo spills) or non-traffic incidents (bridge collapse,
emergency road work). Freeway service patrol programs currently exist for
passenger cars throughout Southern California. This strategy would extend
freeway service patrol programs to be able to service heavy duty trucks in
selected areas.
Benefits
• Reduce congestion and increase average speeds.
• By one estimation, over half of total roadway delay is caused by traffic
incidents.
Challenges
• Requires coordinated communication among Caltrans, CHP and local traffic
management and reporting systems to detect and report events.
• Truck tow services are currently being tested by Metro and are not
widespread.
Costs
• The estimated cost is $1.6 million annually for equipment, labor, fuel, and
maintenance for the Big Rig Service Patrol being operated by Caltrans and
Metro on the I-710 and SR-91 freeways.
AT A Gl A n ce
Coordinated systems for quick
response to accidents or stalls
(Highway incident management
systems) can reduce traffic con-
gestion by quickly identifying
vehicle incidents and dispatch-
ing assistance.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 5 3
strategies: traffic
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Secure funding for incident management pilot
program.
Potential Partners: Local transportation commis-
sions, councils of government, Ports and cities.
Short $
Search for public-private partnerships to imple-
ment a program.
Potential Partners: Local transportation commis-
sions, councils of government, Ports and cities.
Short $
Provide incident management services along
truck corridors.
Potential Partners: Caltrans, CHP, local transpor-
tation commissions.
Mid $$$$
chapter eight
8 - 5 4 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.3 t r A f fic Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Rail-Highway Grade
Separation
Description
Unseparated (at-grade) street-railroad crossings increase traffic delay and
pose a safety risk due to the possible collision of vehicles and trains. They can
also delay emergency service vehicles such as ambulances. Grade-separated
crossings eliminate these risks, since roads and rail tracks no longer intersect.
Grade separation can be accomplished by building road overpasses or under-
passes around the rail line.
Local governments can reduce traffic congestion as well as noise and air qual-
ity impacts by aggressively pursuing grade separation projects.
Benefits
• Elimination of traffic delay due to passing trains.
• Safety benefits.
• Reduced pollution and fuel savings.
• Improved access for emergency vehicles.
Challenges
• More practical to build grade-separation when constructing new roadways
than to retrofit existing rail crossings with new infrastructure.
• Grade separation projects are very expensive.
Costs
• The Trade Corridor Improvement Fund estimates most planned grade
separations to cost between $30 and $90 million, with one as high at $189
million.
AT A Gl A n ce
By grade-separating railroad
crossings, both trains and
vehicles can travel through the
crossing with no delay or safety
impacts.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 5 5
strategies: traffic
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Pursue funding opportunities to fund grade
separation projects.
Potential Partners: councils of government,
County transportation commissions, Caltrans,
local communities.
Short $
Identify crossings which benefit most from grade
separation.
Potential Partners: Local communities, railroads,
councils of government, County transportation
commissions, Caltrans.
Short $
With state or federal partners, replace at-grade
crossings with grade-separated crossings.
Potential Partners: Caltrans, FRA railroads,
councils of government, County transportation
commissions, local communities.
Mid $$$$
chapter eight
8 - 5 6 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.3 t r A f fic Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Upgraded Rail Crossing
Systems
Description
Rail crossing systems prevent conflicts between vehicles and oncoming trains.
“Second Train Coming” systems alert drivers to situations in which one train
follows another while crossing gates are down.
Upgraded rail crossing systems can improve overall traffic flow by coordinat-
ing signals with nearby traffic lights. With coordinated signals, traffic can be
redirected away from the railroad crossing, or stopped at intersections before
reaching the crossing.
Further, photo-enforced systems can reduce traffic violations in which motor-
ists drive around rail crossing gates. In Los Angeles, a photo enforcement
system reduced violations by 92%.
Benefits
• Increase safety by discouraging drivers from driving around crossing gates.
• Reduce traffic delays using intelligent traffic lights at nearby intersections.
Challenges
• Larger systems require electrical and communication infrastructure for
expanded coordination with nearby signals.
• Funding and implementation responsibilities are often unclear, leading to
lack of action.
Costs
• Average cost of crossing signal system is $150,000.
• Costs potentially can be shared among state and local agencies, and may
be eligible for legislative funding or grants.
AT A Gl A n ce
Rail crossing systems can
reduce delay and increase
safety at a much lower cost
than building grade-separated
rail crossing.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 5 7
strategies: traffic
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Identify at-risk traffic intersections.
Potential Partners: City/county public works
department, community members, rail opera-
tors, Caltrans.
Short $
Coordinate with state agencies and rail opera-
tors to select and implement crossing signal
system.
Potential Partners: County transportation com-
mission, FRA, city/county public works depart-
ment, rail operators, Caltrans.
Short to Mid $$$
Work with state and federal agencies as well as
rail operators to minimize safety hazards and
congestion at rail crossings.
Potential Partners: County transportation com-
mission, FRA, city/county public works depart-
ment, rail operators, Caltrans.
Short $$
chapter eight
8 - 5 8 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.3 t r A f fic Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Traffic Redirection
Description
Communities can alleviate congestion at busy at-grade rail crossing by divert-
ing or redirecting vehicles to less-congested intersections. This strategy is
most effective when traffic is directed to a nearby grade-separated crossing,
where all vehicles can cross the rail corridor without any delay. Even when
there is no nearby grade-separated crossing, traffic redirection can reduce
delay by moving vehicles from overly congested crossings to under-used
crossings.
Traffic redirection plans can be implemented using additional signage to
inform drivers, and roadside improvements to increase the number of vehicles
that can travel through grade-separated crossings. In addition, traffic calming
techniques, such as speed bumps and dead-end streets, can redirect vehicles
away from railroad crossings. Traffic redirection strategies are implemented by
local transportation agencies and public works departments, not by railroad
companies.
Benefits
• Traffic redirection reduces costs associated with congestion and accidents.
• Communities experience regional benefits from improved traffic flow.
• Cars are directed to safer crossings.
Challenges
• Implementation requires coordination among local governments and
regional traffic agencies.
• Traffic calming measures may inconvenience local community members
traveling to and from work and other activities.
• Dead-end streets can limit access for residents, businesses and emergency
vehicles.
Costs
• Implementation costs will vary depending on degree of new construction.
AT A Gl A n ce
By redirecting traffic away from
rail crossings to grade sepa-
rated lanes, municipalities can
reduce traffic congestion and
safety risks.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 5 9
strategies: traffic
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Identify crossings best suited for traffic redirec-
tion.
Potential Partners: City public works depart-
ments, councils of government, local community
members.
Short $
Develop alternative vehicle routes & determine
if street upgrades are necessary.
Potential Partners: City public works depart-
ments, local community members.
Short $
Implement redirection strategies.
Potential Partners: City public works depart-
ments.
Short $$
chapter eight
8 - 6 0 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.3 t r A f fic Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Scheduling and
Appointment Systems
Description
This strategy schedules the arrival of vehicles to ports and intermodal (truck/
rail) facilities to reduce congestion on roadways. Efficient scheduling can
reduce idling time and loading time, helping to reduce emissions and noise
impacts.
The Port of Los Angeles “Terminal Gate Appointment System” schedules
truck arrival times at nine terminals. Appointment systems are also used at
railyards to smooth the flow of truck traffic. BNSF operates a “pre-mount”
appointment system in which truck operators can reserve a container for
pickup the following morning.
The PierPass system for the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach provides
incentives for delivery of goods during less-congested times.
Benefits
• Freeway congestion reduced by moving truck trips to off-peak times.
• Less idling at freight facilities.
• Significant reductions in pollutants caused by congestion and idling.
Challenges
• System must have approval of all parties: facility operators, shippers, truck
and rail operators.
• Shifting trips to off-peak times may conflict with driver hours-of-service
restrictions.
• Evening and nighttime operation may increase noise and light impacts on
neighboring communities.
Costs
• Transactions with appointments take longer than transactions without
appointments—potentially lower efficiency for terminals.
• At the Port of Los Angeles, terminals operating appointment systems are
exempt from PierPass charges for peak-time shipments.
AT A Gl A n ce
Truck scheduling systems
reduce traffic congestion both
at the freight facility and on
nearby streets.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 6 1
strategies: traffic
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Coordinate with freight facilities on implement-
ing scheduling system.
Potential Partners: Ports, shipping companies,
cities, trucking companies.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 6 2 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.3 t r A f fic Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Extended Hours of
Operation
Description
Many freight facilities handle the majority of truck volume during the daytime,
when roadway congestion is high due to auto use. Modified operating hours
can reduce truck traffic during peak traffic times (morning and evening com-
mute periods). The resulting drop in truck volume reduces impacts on free-
ways and local roads during the most congested periods.
Extended hours-of-operation strategies have been implemented at a number
of ports, with mixed results. The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach partici-
pate in the PierPass program, which encourages off-peak operation. Marine
container terminals offer extended hours of operation (currently 6pm-3am
Monday-Thursday and 9am-6pm Saturday) with up to 40% of containers being
moved by truck occurring during off peak hours.
In addition, many rail intermodal stations operate with extended hours. The
BNSF Hobart railyard near Los Angeles operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week.
Benefits
• Increases utilization of current port and railyard terminals, lifts and other
infrastructure.
• Reduced truck traffic on roadways during peak congestion and commute
times.
Challenges
• Implementation requires coordination among shippers, facility operators,
and truck operators.
• This strategy puts more trucks on the road in early morning and late eve-
ning hours, causing additional noise impacts.
• For short trips, there may be conflicts if the shipper operates with extended
hours, but the receiver does not.
• Port terminals bear additional operating costs due to expanded labor
needs.
Costs
• Main costs are operating and labor costs associated with extended hours.
AT A Gl A n ce
By extending operating hours,
ports, railyards and warehouses
can load trucks outside of peak
traffic times.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 6 3
strategies: traffic
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Coordinate with freight facilities on extending
hours-of-operation into off-peak periods.
Potential Partners: Shippers, Ports, truck opera-
tors, local communities.
Short $
For existing and new projects, facilitate commu-
nication between operators and local communi-
ties to build mutual awareness of operational
needs, impact concerns, and potential solutions.
Potential Partners: Cities and counties, local
operators.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 6 4 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.3 t r A f fic Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Expansion of On-Dock Rail
Service
Description
Although approximately 50% of freight from and to the Ports of Los Angeles
and Long Beach is intermodal, only about 20% is loaded directly to/from the
rail docks . The remaining cargo is shipped using rail terminals located away
from the ports (off-dock), and requires the use of local, or drayage trucks
for transportation between the terminals and the rail and distribution yards.
Because the transfer or drayage trucks tend to be older and emit more pollu-
tion, elimination of drayage trips can result in significant health and air quality
benefits.
Infrastructure improvements can increase the capacity and utilization of
on-dock rail ramps at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Railroad
operational improvements are also necessary. The Ports are currently pursuing
on-dock rail strategies, but face significant cost and regulatory hurdles.
Benefits
• By shifting truck traffic to rail, on-dock rail can eliminate 30,000 daily truck
trips by 2020.
• Reduction in traffic congestion, especially near the ports.
• Reduction in pollution and improved air quality.
Challenges
• Requires major infrastructure changes to bring new rail service to terminals.
• On-dock rail projects require lengthy environmental review.
Costs
• The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have analyzed $1 billion of new
projects to increase on-dock rail capacity.
AT A Gl A n ce
On-dock rail replaces truck
trips from ports with direct rail
service.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 6 5
strategies: traffic
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Support efforts to increase on-dock rail and
coordinate with ports and terminal operators to
build on-dock rail.
Potential Partners: Ports, port-adjacent com-
munities, railroads, terminal operators, councils
of government.
Short $
Expand on-dock rail infrastructure at ports.Long $$$$
Expand rail line capacity to handle additional
port shipments, especially targeting bottlenecks
in the rail network.
Potential Partners: Ports, railroads, port-adjacent
communities, terminal operators, councils of
government.
Short to Mid $$$$
chapter eight
8 - 6 6 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.3 t r A f fic Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Virtual Container Yard
Description
When a container delivery is unloaded, the empty container is returned to a
storage location or another shipper. Moving empty containers from place to
place is unproductive and creates unnecessary congestion and cost. Currently,
only about 2% of emptied import containers are matched with shippers need-
ing an export container. The rest are typically brought back to the ports. This
strategy would electronically match shippers needing containers with nearby
empty containers so that unnecessary container movements are avoided.
Benefits
• Reduces truck trips and truck vehicles miles traveled associated with mov-
ing empty containers.
• Reduces emissions of all pollutants. Magnitude depends on effectiveness
of strategy.
Challenges
• In order to implement a virtual container yard, shippers must coordinate
with truckers, ports, and customers to manage the flow of containers.
• Institutional, risk, and legal issues may also exist.
Costs
• Several companies offer Virtual Container Yard internet services. Truck
operators and shippers pay a monthly fee for participation.
• Trucking companies will save money, by reducing VMT, which lowers fuel
and maintenance costs.
AT A Gl A n ce
A Virtual Container Yard
electronic system pairs ship-
pers with receivers to reduce
the number of empty container
trips.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 6 7
strategies: traffic
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Partner with private firm to publicize and roll out
virtual container yard services.
Potential Partners: councils of government,
Ports, Cities.
Short $$
chapter eight
8 - 6 8 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.4 A e S t hetic S A n d A p pe A r A n ce Str At egie S
Strategy: Spillover Lighting Controls
Description
Ambient levels of lighting from freight facilities can be intense according to
the density of site development. Installation of new lighting structures can
lower the amount of light entering neighborhoods from adjacent and nearby
facilities such as ports, distribution centers and railyards. Some communities in
other areas have adopted “nighttime sky” ordinances requiring lowered light
levels.
What is called spillover lighting can be reduced or eliminated by setting limits
on allowable types or sizes of outdoor lighting, or specifying how the lighting
should be shielded.
Shielding regulations may specify the shape of shielding fixtures or the angle
of lighting with respect to the ground, all designed to reduce or eliminate light
leaking into adjacent areas or communities.
Benefits
• Reduced spillover light and nighttime glare for adjacent residents.
Challenges
• Lighting specifications must shield residents while allowing sufficient light
for project site.
• While relatively simple for cities to require for new construction projects,
they have less ability to place requirements on pre-existing facilities.
• Cities have no jurisdiction over railroad facilities.
Costs
• Low cost—does not require new implementation technologies.
AT A Gl A n ce
Spillover light can create
distractions for local residents.
Lighting controls limit spillover
light.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 6 9
strategies: aesthetics and appearance
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
For new facilities: Include lighting specifications
in building codes and zoning ordinances.
Potential Partners: City planning departments,
freight facilities, distribution centers, manufac-
turers.
Short $
For existing facilities: Promote lighting controls
and encourage owners of existing facilities to
modify lighting.
Potential Partners: City planning and public
works departments, freight facilities, distribution
centers, manufacturers.
Short $
chapter eight
8 - 7 0 | h e A l T h y c o M M u n i T i e s A n d h e A l T h y e c o n o M i e s
8.4 A e S t hetic S A n d A p pe A r A n ce Str At egie S c ontinued
Strategy: Landscaping
Description
Freight facilities can have high visibility from surrounding roadways and resi-
dential zones. These visual impacts can be reduced using landscaping to block
or soften aesthetic characteristics of the site.
Landscaping can create a buffer zone between land uses, and allow freight
facilities to better match the visual characteristics of surrounding communities.
The selection of landscaping plants, shrubbery, or trees is often made with
priorities given to native plants, fast-growing plants, and landscaping that
requires less water and upkeep.
Benefits
• Hides or soften visual impacts of freight facilities from surrounding
residents.
• Some funding is available from the federal government through
Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) grants.
Challenges
• Must be compatible with project site, must be maintained by responsible
party.
• Cities cannot place requirements on railroad owned and operated facilities.
Costs
• Landscaping is a low-cost strategy for reducing the visual impact of
facilities.
AT A Gl A n ce
Landscaping in front of freight
facilities can soften their
appearance from the road or
nearby housing, reducing visual
impacts.
A T o o l k i T f o r G o o d s M o v e M e n T d r A f T M A r c h 2 0 0 9 | 8 - 7 1
strategies: aesthetics and appearance
p oTe n T i A l lo c A l Ac T i ons A n d pA rT n ers
Action Timeframe Relative
Cost
Include landscaping ordinances and mainte-
nance plans in zoning regulations.
Potential Partners: City planning departments,
current distribution centers.
Short $
Coordinate with Caltrans and county transporta-
tion agencies to provide landscaping on state
roads.
Potential Partners: Caltrans, County transporta-
tion commissions, councils of government, local
communities.
Short $
Provide funding to maintain landscaping on or
near public property.
Potential Partners: Cities, counties, councils
of government, local communities, Federal
Highway Administration.
Short $$
Create design guidelines to promote the best
features of a landscaping project.
Potential Partners: Caltrans, councils of govern-
ment, local communities, city/county planning
and public works departments.
Short $
community members, public
agencies and goods movement
representatives must work together
in a way that builds common under-
standing, trust and agreement on
desired outcomes.
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 9 - 1
Goods movement is GettinG more and
more attention. this toolkit gives an idea of
some of the phrases—or keywords—that are
used to describe goods movement issues
and projects. now that you have an idea of
these keywords and possible strategies to
address impacts, how do you get started?
Where can you go for more information?
Who can help in your efforts to take action?
Following are potential first steps to consider.
monitor agendas and news items and
attend meetings
most communities have a Planning
Commission, Public Works Commission
and/or traffic/transportation Commission
that advises the city or county and elected
officials on decisions about community
development including land use, transportation and community design.
agendas are posted on city/county websites. newspapers (especially local
community papers) report on upcoming issues and meetings. By attend-
ing meetings when related issues come up you can become familiar with
others (elected officials, staff, freight-related industries and operators and
interest groups) who are involved in goods movement. You can also con-
tact community and homeowner associations, attend their meetings, ask
questions and find sources of support for addressing local impacts.
how to get involved
chapter nine
chapter nine
9 - 2 | h e a l t h y c o m m u n i t i e s a n d h e a l t h y e c o n o m i e s
contact local planning, transportation and other resource agencies
as described in Chapter 1 of this toolkit, local planning and transportation
or public works departments deal most directly with goods movement. staff
members can provide much information on the history of and potential future
efforts related to the impacts in question. they can let you know when General
Plan updates are scheduled and how specific concerns or issues are being
addressed through the planning process. other resource agencies such as
councils of governments, transportation commissions, and regional transpor-
tation planning agencies work closely with local agencies on specific projects
and have additional information. the quickest way to access this information is
on their websites, but a call to the agency asking to speak to the department
dealing with freight or goods movement issues is another way to find useful
information and contacts.
contact your local elected official (councilmember or supervisor)
Local elected officials and their staffs (a councilmember in an incorporated city,
or a supervisor in an unincorporated area) are particularly important in keeping
current and making sure the community is informed about goods movement-
related programs and actions. they direct their planning and transportation
departments and request support from other resource agencies to find solu-
tions to community problems. in addition to directly contacting a local elected
official’s office, you may attend their regularly scheduled meetings to speak
during public comment periods and meet others who are involved in resolving
goods movement-related issues in the community.
how can everyone work together?
Creating the right solutions to address impacts is not always simple or easy.
one solution could be very helpful for a goods movement representative,
but may not meet the needs of a local community that experiences impacts.
Likewise, a local community may decide that there is only solution they will
accept, but is impossible for a goods movement representative to include in
their operations, or is not enforceable by a public agency. How can everyone
work together to create meaningful, realistic solutions that keep goods mov-
ing and reduce or eliminate impacts on communities?
there is no universal approach, but there are guiding principles to consider
when taking action. in general, community members, public agencies, and
goods movement representatives must work together in a way that builds
how to get involved
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | 9 - 3
common understanding, trust, and agreement on desired outcomes. Here are
guiding principles to consider:
• Bring everyone together: invite everyone to the table including goods
movement representatives, residents, businesses, local agencies, and any
others with a stake in the impacts.
• Create a clear, open process for understanding the impacts and develop-
ing potential solutions.
• Establish ground rules to support an atmosphere of mutual respect and
productive discussion.
• Identify roles: ensure that everyone understands how their participation is
part of the process, and how decision-making occurs.
• Keep clear records of communications and discussions.
• Make the process accessible to everyone: Hold open public meetings at
times and locations for the greatest number of people. Post communica-
tions and discussion records at local information sources such as public
buildings and on websites. Let others contribute ideas and comments in
ways other than attending and speaking at meetings.
Several rating Sc ale S have been
developed to analyze adver Se
e ffectS of community noi S e on
people. Since environmental noi S e
fluctuate S over time, the S e Sc aleS
con Sider that the effect of noiS e
o n people depend S largely upon
the total acou S tical energy
content of the noi S e , a S well a S
the time of day when the noi S e
o ccurS .
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d S m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | a -1
Sound iS a preSSure wave tranSmitted through the air. it iS
described in terms of loudness or amplitude (measured in decibels), fre-
quency or pitch (measured in hertz [hz] or cycles per second), and duration
(measured in seconds or minutes). the decibel (dB) scale is a logarithmic
scale that describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations that
make up any sound. “Logarithmic” is a scale of measurement in which an
increase of one unit represents a tenfold change in the quantity measured.
the pitch of the sound is related to the frequency of the pressure vibration.
Because the human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies, a special
frequency-dependent rating scale is used to relate noise to human sensi-
tivity. the a-weighted decibel scale (dBa) provides this compensation by
discriminating against upper and lower frequencies in a manner approxi-
mating the sensitivity of the human ear. the scale is based on a reference
pressure level of 20 micropascals (zero dBa). the scale ranges from zero
(for the average least perceptible sound) to about 130 (for the average
human pain level).
the normal range of conversation is between 34 and 66 dBa. Between 70
and 90 dBa, sound is distracting and presents an obstacle to conversation,
thinking, or learning. above 90 dBa, sound can cause permanent hearing
loss. examples of various sound levels in different environments are shown
in table a-1 (typical Sound Levels).
characteristics of sound
appendix
appendix
a -2 | h e a lt h y c o m m u n i t i e S a n d h e a lt h y e c o n o m i e S
table a-1 typical Sound l evelS
Common Sounds A-Weighted Sound Level
in Decibels
Subjective Impression
Oxygen Torch 120 Pain Threshold
Rock Band 110
Pile Driver at 50 feet 100 Very Loud
Ambulance Siren at 100 feet 90
Garbage disposal 80
Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feet 70 Moderately Loud
Air Conditioner at 100 feet 60
Quiet Urban Daytime 50
Quiet Urban Nighttime 40 Quiet
Bedroom at Night 30
Recording Studio 20 Just Audible
10 Threshold of Hearing
0
Source: Aviation Planning Associates. 1978. Calculations of Maximum A-weighted Sound Levels (dBA)
Resulting from Civil Aircraft Operations.
a noise environment consists of a base of steady “background” noise that is
the sum of many distant and indistinguishable noise sources. Superimposed
on this background noise is the sound from individual local sources. these
local sources can vary from an occasional aircraft or train passing by to virtu-
ally continuous noise from, for example, traffic on a major highway. to the
human ear, a sound that is 10 dBa higher than another is judged to be twice
as loud; 20 dBa higher is four times as loud; and so forth. in general, a differ-
ence of more than 3 dBa is a perceptible change in environmental noise, while
a 5 dBa difference typically causes a change in community reaction, and an
increase of 10 dBa is perceived by people as doubling of loudness.
noise measurement Scales
Several rating scales have been developed to analyze adverse effects of community
noise on people. Since environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales con-
sider that the effect of noise on people depends largely upon the total acoustical
energy content of the noise, as well as the time of day when the noise occurs. those
that are applicable to looking at freight-related issues in communities are as follows:
characteristics of sound
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d S m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | a -3
• Leq, the equivalent noise level, is an average of sound level over a defined
time period (such as 1 minute, 15 minutes, 1 hour, or 24 hours). thus, the
Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they
deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure.
• L90 is a noise level that is exceeded 90 percent of the time at a given loca-
tion; it is often used as a measure of “background” noise.
• CNEL, the Community Noise Equivalent Level, is a 24-hour average Leq with
a 5 dBa “penalty” added to noise during the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00
p.m., and a 10 dBa penalty added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m.
to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and night-time.
the logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBa 24-hour Leq would
result in a measurement of 66.7 dBA CNEL.
• Ldn, the day-night average noise, is a 24-hour average Leq with an additional
10 dBa “penalty” added to noise that occurs between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.
The Ldn metric yields similar values (within 1 dBA) as do the CNEL metric.
As a matter of practice, Ldn and CNEL values are considered to be equiva-
lent and are treated as such in this assessment.
noise attenuation
the noise level from a particular source generally declines as the distance to the
receptor increases. other factors such as the weather and reflecting or shielding
also intensify or reduce the noise level at any given location. typically, a single
row of buildings between the receptor and the noise source reduces the noise
level by about 5 dBa. exterior noise levels can normally be reduced by 15 dBa
inside buildings constructed with no special noise insulation. the u.S. epa esti-
mates that residences in “warm” climates provide at least 12 dBa of exterior-to-
interior noise attenuation with windows open and 24 dBa with windows closed.
noise from traffic on roads depends on the volume and speed of traffic and
the distance from the traffic. a commonly used rule of thumb for traffic noise is
that for every doubling of distance from the road, atmospheric spreading over
“hard” or “soft” sites reduces the noise level by about 3 or 4.5 dBa, respec-
tively. For a stationary source, the noise is reduced by at least 6 dBa for each
doubling of distance. Further, because of the logarithmic nature of the decibel
scale, a doubling of traffic on any given roadway or doubling a stationary
source would cause a noise increase of approximately 3 dBa.
a -4 | h e a lt h y c o m m u n i t i e S a n d h e a lt h y e c o n o m i e S
glossary
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): California Environmental
Quality Act, enacted in 1970, requires government agencies in California to
identify the significant environmental impacts of their actions, and avoid or
mitigate those impacts if possible. CEQA applies to all projects undertaken by
public agencies, as well as to private projects that are subject to the review or
approval of a public agency.
Cargo Handling Equipment: Cargo-handling equipment refers to equipment
used at ports, railyards, and other freight facilities to moves containers and
bulk shipments. examples include yard tractors, cranes, forklifts, top picks, and
side picks.
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM): diesel particulate matter is the particulate
component of diesel exhaust from diesel fuel, which includes diesel soot and
aerosols such as ash particulates, metallic abrasion particles, sulfates, and
silicates.
Drayage Trucks: drayage trucks are those that travel short distances to move
goods to and from ports and rail yards.
EMFAC: The EMission FACtors (EMFAC) model is used to calculate emission
rates from all motor vehicles, such as passenger cars to heavy-duty trucks,
operating on highways, freeways and local roads in California. Developed by
the California Air Resources Board, EMFAC2007 is the most recent version of
this model.
Gen-set Locomotive: a generator set (“gen Set”) locomotives uses a series of
smaller diesel engines (each approximately 700 horsepower) to directly power
the traction motors. one or two of the engines can be shut down in operations
with lower power demand, saving fuel and reducing emissions.
glossary and acronyms
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d S m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | a -5
glossary and acronyms
Grade Crossing: a grade crossing is the intersection of a roadway and a
railroad line “at grade,” so vehicles must wait when a train is passing through
the crossing.
Harbor Craft: Commercial harbor craft help move large ships and provide
supplies to the port. they include tugboats, ferries, small excursion craft, sup-
ply vessels, dredges, and service boats.
Health Risk Assessment: heath risk assessments are used to estimate
whether current or future chemical exposures will pose health risks to a broad
population, such as a city or a community. the u.S. environmental protection
agency (u.S. epa) is a leading risk assessment agency at the federal level. in
California, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA)
in the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) has the primary
responsibility for developing procedures and practices for performing health
risk assessments.
Hybrid Locomotive: a hybrid-electric locomotive uses a small, low-emission
diesel engine to charge a battery pack that powers the traction motors. these
engines can also recover braking energy to improve fuel efficiency. used in
rail yards, these locomotives use less fuel and reduce emissions compared to
conventional switcher locomotives.
Intermodal: intermodal transportation involves the use of more than one
mode of transport for a journey. intermodal freight typically refers to ship-
ments that travel by both truck and railroad.
Level of Service (LOS): Level of Service (LoS) is a letter grading system rang-
ing from ranging from a (best) to F (worst) that measures the congestion levels
on roadways or at intersections. grades are assigned based on the average
delay per vehicle.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): the national environmental policy
act of 1969 requires agencies to evaluate the environmental impacts of any
“major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environ-
ment.” nepa applies to any action that involves the use of federal funds, the
need for federal approval in the form of permits, or a location on federal land.
Ocean Going Vessels (OGV): ocean going vessels or ships include container
ships, tanker ships, bulk carriers, automobile carriers, general cargo ships, roll-
on roll-off ships, and cruise ships.
a -6 | h e a lt h y c o m m u n i t i e S a n d h e a lt h y e c o n o m i e S
glossary and acronyms
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx): oxides of nitrogen are compounds of oxygen and
nitrogen such as nitric oxide (no), nitrogen dioxide (no2) and nitrous oxide
(n2o). along with reactive organic gas (rog), nox is the main ingredient in
ground level ozone, commonly called smog.
Particulate Matter (PM): particulate matter is the term for solid or liquid
particles found in the air. Some particles are large or dark enough to be seen
as soot or smoke. Because particles originate from a variety of mobile and
stationary sources (diesel fuel, woodstoves, power plants, etc.), their chemi-
cal and physical compositions vary widely. particulate matter can be directly
emitted or can be formed in the atmosphere when gaseous pollutants such
as So2 and nox react to form fine particles. pm10 refers to particles less than
or equal to 10 microns and pm 2.5: refers to particles less than or equal to 2.5
microns), also called fine particulate matter or “Fine particles” such as those
found in smoke and haze.
Reactive Organic Gas (ROG): reactive organic gas are organic chemical
compounds that react in the atmosphere (nitrogen oxides) to form ground
level ozone, commonly called smog. they are released by a variety of sources
including burning of petroleum fuels, use of solvents, petroleum processing
and storage, and pesticides. the u.S. epa refers to these gases ad volatile
organic compounds (VOCs).
Sound Exposure Level (SEL): SeL is the basic noise unit, also known as the
“single-event level.” the SeL describes the amount of noise exposure from a
single event, such as a freight train passing by one residence.
Switching locomotive: Switching locomotives are just used in the rail yards
to move rail cars to tracks for loading or unloading intermodal containers or
move rail cars onto a track to assemble an outbound train.
Transportation Refrigeration Units (TRUs): transportation refrigeration units
(trus), or “reefers”, are gasoline and diesel powered cooling units that are
installed on vehicles used in transporting produce, meat, dairy products, and
other perishable goods. trus are found on refrigerated vans, trucks, trailers,
and railcars.
URBEMIS: the urBan emiSsions (urBemiS) is a software program which is
used to estimate emissions from construction and operation of land use devel-
opment. The URBEMIS 2007 model uses the California Air Resources Board’s
EMFAC2007 model for on-road vehicle emissions and the OFFROAD2007
model for off-road vehicle emissions.
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d S m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | a -7
glossary and acronyms
a c ronyms
aeSS automatic engine Start-Stop device
apu auxiliary power unit
aQmp air Quality management plan
arB air resources Board
B100 Biofuel blend, 100% biodiesel
B20 Biofuel blend, 20% biodiesel
BnSF Burlington northern Santa Fe railway
CA EDD California Employment Development Department
CARB California Air Resources Board
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFG Community Feedback Group
CHE Cargo Handling Equipment
CHP California Highway Patrol
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNG Compressed Natural Gas
CO Carbon Monoxide
COG Council of Government
dB decibel
dBa decibel adjusted
DOC Diesel Oxidation Catalyst
dpF diesel particulate Filter
dpm diesel particulate matter
EMFAC ARB EMission FACtor model
a -8 | h e a lt h y c o m m u n i t i e S a n d h e a lt h y e c o n o m i e S
glossary and acronyms
epa environmental protection agency
Fhwa Federal highway administration
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
Fra Federal railroad administration
Fta Federal transit administration
FtF Flow-through Filter
GCCOG Gateway Cities Council of Governments
gvwr gross vehicle weight rating
HC hydrocarbon
hp horsepower
hra health risk assessment
HVAC Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning System
ICTF Intermodal Container Transfer Facility
LauSd Los angeles unified School district
Lawa Los angeles world airports
LaX Los angeles international airport
Leq equivalent Sound Level
Lng Liquefied natural gas
LoS Level of Service
mSw municipal Solid waste
naFta north america Free trade agreement
nepa national environmental policy act
nhtSa national highway traffic Safety administration
nox oxides of nitrogen
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d S m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | a -9
glossary and acronyms
ogv ocean-going vessel
opr California Office of Planning and Research
phimF puente hills intermodal Facility
pm particulate matter
pm-10 particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter
pm-2.5 Fine particulate matter (less than 2.5 micron2 in diameter)
pmi point of maximum impact
poLa port of Los angeles
poLB port of Long Beach
rog reactive organic gas
SanBag San Bernardino associated governments
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SeL Sound exposure Level
SpB San pedro Bay
STC Sound Transmission Class
tea transportation enhancement activities grant
tru transport refrigeration unit
up union pacific railroad
urBemiS urBan emiSsion model
uSdot united States department of transportation
vmt vehicle-miles traveled
vSr vessel Speed reduction
a -1 0 | h e a lt h y c o m m u n i t i e S a n d h e a lt h y e c o n o m i e S
1 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2008. 2008 Regional
transportation plan goods movement report.
2 South Coast Air Quality Management District, http://www.aqmd.gov.
3 Wilbur Smith Associates, Multi-County Goods Movement Action Plan. April
30, 2008.
4 Comprised of Los Angeles, Orange, Imperial, Riverside, San Bernardino, and
Ventura Counties.
5 husing, John. Logistics & distribution: an answer to regional upward Social
Mobility. Southern California Association of Governments, 2004.
6 Wilbur Smith Associates, Multi-County Goods Movement Action Plan. April
30, 2008
7 Wilbur Smith Associates, Multi-County Goods Movement Action Plan. April
30, 2008.
8 Wilbur Smith Associates, Multi-County Goods Movement Action Plan. April
30, 2008.
9 Wilbur Smith Associates, Multi-County Goods Movement Action Plan. April
30, 2008.
10 husing, John. Logistics & distribution: an answer to regional upward Social
Mobility. Southern California Association of Governments, 2004.
11 Wilbur Smith Associates, Multi-County Goods Movement Action Plan. April
30, 2008.
12 2007 Air Quality Management Plan, South Coast Air Quality Management
district.
13 More information on EMFAC can be found at ARB’s website: http://www.arb.
ca.gov/msei/msei.htm
14 McConnell R, Berhane K, Yao L, Jerrett M, Lurmann F, Gilliland F, Künzli N,
gauderman J, avol e, thomas d, peters J. 2006. traffic, susceptibility, and
childhood asthma. environmental health perspectives. may: 114(5): 766-772.
references
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d S m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | a -1 1
references
15 Guaderman WJ, Avol E, Lurmann F, Künzli N, Gilliland F, Peters J, McConnell
R. 2005. Childhood asthma and exposure to traffic and nitrogen dioxide.
epidemiology. november. 16(6): 737-743.
16 Lin S, Munsie JP, Hwang SA, Fitzgerald E, Cayo MR. 2002. Childhood asthma
hospitalization and residential exposure to state route traffic. environmental
Research. February. 88(2): 73-81.
17 english p, neutra r, Scalf r, Sullivan m, waller L, Zhu L. 1999. examining
Associations Between Childhood Asthma and Traffic Flow Using a Geographic
information System. environmental health perspectives. 107(9): 761-767.
18 Brunekreef B, Janssen NA, de Hartog J, Harssema H, Knape M, van Vliet P.
1997. air pollution from truck traffic and lung function in children living near
roadways.
19 Zhu Y, Hinds WC, Kim S, Sioutas C. 2002. Concentration and size distribu-
tion of ultrafine particles near a major highway. Journal of air and waste
management association. September. 52: 1032-1042.
20 port of Los angeles (2006): goods movement projects. available online at
http://www.portoflosangeles.org/development_goods.htm
21 texas transportation institute. 2007. annual urban mobility report.
22 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2008. 2008 Regional
transportation plan goods movement report.
23 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2008. 2008 Regional
transportation plan goods movement report.
24 Rincon Consultants. 2002. visual impacts Study for the uvp interchange
Portion of the UVP Extension / Interchange Project.
25 Leachman, r., hicks, g., Fetty, g., rieger, m. (2005): inland empire railroad
mainline Study – Final report.
26 Leachman, r., hicks, g., Fetty, g., rieger, m. (2005): inland empire railroad
mainline Study – Final report.
27 Federal transit administration. 2006. transit noise and vibration impact
assessment. office of planning and environment. Fta-va-90-1003-06. may.
28 Federal railroad administration. 2005. high-Speed ground transportation
noise and vibration impact assessment. office of railroad development.
october.
29 Transportation Research Board. 2000. Highway Capacity Manual, 4th ed.
National Research Council. Washington, DC.
30 ICF International 2008. Analysis of Goods Movement Emission Reduction
Strategies, Task 1 Final Report. Prepared for Southern California Association of
governments. January.
31LAEDC, 2008. Southern California Consensus Group Projects TCIF
application economic analysis. January.
a -1 2 | h e a lt h y c o m m u n i t i e S a n d h e a lt h y e c o n o m i e S
references
32 Particulate Emissions Reduction Program at California Railyards. June 2005.
Memorandum of Understanding between California Air Resources Board,
union pacific, and BnSF railroads.
33 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Draft Health Risk Assessment for
the BnSF railway San Bernardino railyard. april.
34 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Draft Health Risk Assessment for
the Union Pacific Railroad Colton Railyard. April.
35 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Health Risk Assessment for Union
Pacific Railroad City of Industry. April.
36 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Health Risk Assessment for the UP
Intermodal Container Transfer Facility (ICTF) and Dolores Railyards. April.
37 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Health Risk Assessment for the
Union Pacific Railroad Commerce Railyard. November.
38 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Health Risk Assessment for the
Union Pacific Railroad Los Angeles Transportation Center Railyard. November.
39 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Health Risk Assessment for the
union pacific railroad mira Loma auto Facility railyard. november.
40 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Health Risk Assessment for the
Four Commerce Railyards. November.
41 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Draft Health Risk Assessment for
the BnSF railway San Bernardino railyard. april.
42 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Draft Health Risk Assessment for
the Union Pacific Railroad Colton Railyard. April.
43 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Health Risk Assessment for Union
Pacific Railroad City of Industry. April.
44 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Health Risk Assessment for the UP
Intermodal Container Transfer Facility (ICTF) and Dolores Railyards. April.
45 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Health Risk Assessment for the
Union Pacific Railroad Commerce Railyard. November.
46 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Health Risk Assessment for the
Union Pacific Railroad Los Angeles Transportation Center Railyard. November.
47 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Health Risk Assessment for the
union pacific railroad mira Loma auto Facility railyard. november.
48 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Health Risk Assessment for the
Four Commerce Railyards. November.
49 air resources Board, “health risk assessment for the up intermodal
Container Transfer Facility (ICTF) and Dolores Railyards,” April 2008. available
at http://www.arb.ca.gov/railyard/hra/up_ictf_hra.pdf
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d S m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | a -1 3
references
50 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2006. Inland Port
Feasibility Study.
51 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2003. North Rialto
Distribution Warehousing Project, Environmental Impact Report. City of Rialto.
52 City of Rialto. 2003. North Rialto Distribution Warehousing Project,
environmental impact report.
53 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2004. Rulemaking on Airborne Toxic
Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling.
Final Approval. July. Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/idling/idling.
htm.
54 AQMD website about the URBEMIS model: http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/urbe-
mis.html
55 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Health Risk Assessment for the
union pacific railroad mira Loma auto Facility railyard. november.
56 Details about the ARB TRU regulations are available online at: http://www.arb.
ca.gov/diesel/tru.htm
more information about the pending epa waiver is available online at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/tru/documents/status_update_12_08.pdf
57 Caltrans. 2002. Highway Traffic Noise Training Modules. February.
58 draft environmental impact report (deir), oakmont industrial Building
Project. 2006. City of Perris. December.
59 City of Fontana 2003, Truck Trip Generation Study. August.
60 national association of industrial and office properties. 2005. San Bernardino
/ Riverside County Warehouse / Distribution Center Vehicle Trip Generation
Study (inland empire Study). January.
61 national association of industrial and office properties. 2005. San Bernardino
/ Riverside County Warehouse / Distribution Center Vehicle Trip Generation
Study (inland empire Study). January.
62 National Association of Industrial and Office Properties. 2008. Western
Riverside County Warehouse / Distribution Center Trip Generation Study. May.
63 national association of industrial and office properties. 2005. San Bernardino
/ Riverside County Warehouse / Distribution Center Vehicle Trip Generation
Study (inland empire Study). January.
64 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2002. Goods
movement program white paper. January.
65 american association of port authorities. 2007. north american port
Container Traffic 2007
66 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2008. 2008 Regional
transportation plan goods movement report.
a - 1 4 | h e a lt h y c o m m u n i t i e S a n d h e a lt h y e c o n o m i e S
references
67 Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, 2007. ACTA Port Impact Study
68 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2002. Goods
movement program white paper. January.
69 Port of Los Angeles Website. Available at: http://www.portoflosangeles.org/
faq.htm.
70 Port of Long Beach Website. Available at: http://www.polb.com/html/1_about/
overview.html.
71 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2006. Diesel Particulate Matter Exposure
assessment Study for the ports of Los angeles and Long Beach – Final report.
april.
72 ICF. 2007. Estimation of diesel particulate matter concentration isopleths for
marine harbor areas and railyards (revised). memorandum for epa. September.
73 port of Los angeles and port of Long Beach (2006): Final 2006 San pedro Bay
Ports Clean Air Action Plan, Technical Report, November 2006. Available at
www.portoflosangeles.org/DOC/CAAP_Tech_Report_Final.pdf
74 Los Angeles Harbor Department and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2007.
Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (DEIS/
DEIR), Berths 136-147 [TraPac] Container Terminal Project. December.
75 Los Angeles Harbor Department and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008.
Re-Circulated Draft Environmental Impact Statement Environmental Impact
Report (DEIS/DEIR), Berths 97-109 [China Shipping] Container Terminal
project. april.
76 City of Los Angeles. 2006. The Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide: Your
Resource for Preparing CEQA Analyses in Los Angeles.
77 Los Angeles Harbor Department and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2007.
Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (DEIS/
DEIR), Berths 136-147 [TraPac] Container Terminal Project. December.
78 port of Los angeles 2004, port of Los angeles Baseline transportation Study.
april.
79 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Staff Report: Initial Statement of
reasons for proposed rulemaking – proposed regulation for drayage trucks,
appendix B: emissions estimation methodology for on-road diesel-Fueled
Heavy Duty Drayage Trucks at California’s Ports and Intermodal Railyards.
80 Tioga Group (2002): Empty Ocean Container Logistics Study, report prepared
to Gateway Cities Council of Government, Port of Long Beach, and Southern
California Association of Governments.
81 SCAQMD. July, 2007. eir, SeS Long Beach Lng import terminal, appendix d6
82 PierPass website, available at http://pierpass.org/offpeak_information
83 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 2008. Multi-County
goods movement action plan.
a t o o l k i t f o r g o o d S m o v e m e n t d r a f t m a r c h 2 0 0 9 | a -1 5
references
84 u.S. epa. 1974. information on Levels of environmental noise requisite to
protect public health and welfare with an adequate margin of Safety. march.
85 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 2008. Multi-County
goods movement action plan.
86 U.S. EPA. 1978. Protective Noise Levels. Condensed Version of EPA Levels
Document. Office of Noise Abatement and Control, Washington, DC. EPA-
550/9-79-100. November.
6000 `EZ 1-19.10/11
osmium° sweiBoid pue susid uo ssivauao3 uoRei odsusal Aiunoo emsaenia
�a�n� runuxuo
tf It u0:0 tte tie emun- Agij aH
sluaWuaan00 palepossy ouipaeuaae ueg —
uoissiwwoo uoRepodsuau. Alunoo apisaania —
Aliao4nnb'
uoRepodsuail ueijiodogaW /lunoo saia6uy sod —
saauped .
g pug s}pia}si4 suameo -
:sapua6y peai .
SJOUTied APIS
aan�n� au� ui aigelapdn —
sunsaa 6uRsel pue apaanseaua saonpoad —
eiep wean° ui papunoae —
spaau pazneool pue leuoibaa sassaappy —
spadw!
WauaanoW spoob ssaappe seep! Jo «nuaw„ e sapinaki —
���u� nom e elm° .
spAleue
leoiuuoal Lap Aijunwwoo aupwoo .
uoRewiolui
wewenow spoob pue rD ini6upeew aleaao .
sanRoafg0 pue sieog
Nunoo ouipaeuaa8 ueS) uoijoo Aijo .
AalleA eIla1-10B00 .
euao-i eaiW .
(-0 sdnoag )pegpaad Apnwwoo -
aapwuaoo Aaosinpy leoiuuoal -
dool )pegpaal snonupoo aleijiped .
9Jr11.0111TS AJOS!ApV
door Noeqpeed snonuRuoo
shod puelui .
spodeaS .
saawa° uoRngiaisip pug asnouaae/A .
spaeA aofen .
sauanion uiaq. Aneay u}inn sauil I!ea •
og.}eaT )ionij Aneay ylinn sAennu6iH .
senweed wewenoN spoog
siiiauaq pue spedwi -
OpOU00a •
sewpgRedwoo ash puei •
iensin •
sweua8 uoRonpa}d uoRsabuo0 •
espN •
uTieaH pue suo!ss!w3 a!b •
spAieuv spedwi
sdiysaauped -
s}iouaq pug s}sod -
suonipuoo Aijunwwoo -
:uo paseq Aijunuauaoo upea suoRnios
aW00 pue apseallsoua Amuapi .
Aijunuauaoo -
spedwi pug Aijiped -
:Jo adA1 paaoHel .
saoRoad Isaq uo pase8 .
suoRnps pug se!baleijs
saanosaa leuonippy -
saipnqs aseo .
sai6alailg .
spedwi .
:sapow luawanoua spoo6 owoadS -
}uawanow spoo6 j.o soiseq pug punoalloe8 -
luawanoW spoof ao} 1N100l .
saiba}al}s pug sanssi `ssaooad -
ou.pads-Aliunwuaoo -
sawoomp pug ssaooad :podaa i(Jewwng .
Heieno.sewoomo Apnls
swelled uopinaip pool 6uiAnpoua aapisuo0 -
s}uawanoaduai Ala}es wiaa}ui aapisuo0 -
suoproasaawi Asia-}e Arnua131 -
suopaedas apea6 Tonalsuoo -
:skennpeoa pug sou!' uaanniaq
suopauuoo pue s}oiijuoa aonpaa .
se!beleils--AelleA ellegoe00
seaaB ieRuapisaa yainn ap}eduaooui -
:sasnouaaenn
doianap ol aanssaad bupuRuo0 .
seaae reRuapisaa ul —
siooyos aeaN —
:64pi pug buwed tugenan. sianal .
ulieau
Aijunwwoo uo spedwi Aijienb air bu!obuo .
spedwi--ewoi aim!
suoispap
asn puei aano loawoo [Boo! lo )ioei .
sijjauaq
oiuiouooa ueyn. aaoW sPBdu.Ii Wauianow
spoo6 aouaiaadxa swapisaa leooi .
suieg paddols
ao nno's u,oij suoRoasaam pa>lool8 •
spedwi--ewoi aqn
sluiod ssapoe >ional -
saaiaaeq punos -
auanion pug Aouanbaa} uaoH -
:suoilaiado paeA Hal aol seep! nnau Amuapi .
S6UISSOn HL'J IilIM
suoi}oasaa}ui Asia-ie ssaappe pug Apluapi .
sainoa >pm nnau aalo}ua pue luauaaiduai .
se!balags--ewoi eaiW
spoo
diysaautied s,uoissivawoo ay} aziseudw3 -
:sianal impel pue ems aaeyg .
(60N `8Z AeW)
doys)aonn aaidcu3 puem ayi y6noM
luawanoW spoof 5upuenp y aamead .
suoi}eziueaao paseq-Apnwwoo -
sapua6e pool pug aaulaed -
:o} ppol aingia1sia .
sdels ixeN
muope leuq a01 uoissivaw00 ol. paennaod .
pue :ijmool.
l}yap auk uo indui apinoad pug ania08a .
uoRepuauawooatd gels
uonepodsueli 4uno9 apisaania