California Freight Mobility Plan

California Freight Mobility Plan
Name	California Freight Mobility Plan
Established	2010
Jurisdiction	State of California
Parent agency	California Department of Transportation

California Freight Mobility Plan

The California Freight Mobility Plan serves as the statewide strategic framework developed to coordinate freight transportation planning among entities such as the California Department of Transportation, California Air Resources Board, California Transportation Commission, Metropolitan Transportation Commission (San Francisco Bay Area), and regional agencies including the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the San Diego Association of Governments. It addresses multimodal freight flows across hubs like the Port of Los Angeles, Port of Long Beach, Port of Oakland, and intermodal connectors including the Union Pacific Railroad and BNSF Railway, integrating policy directions from statutes such as Senate Bill 391 (2010) and Assembly Bill 32. The plan informs capital programming by institutions such as the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and U.S. Department of Transportation.

Overview and Purpose

The plan defines statewide priorities for freight movement linking seaports like the Port of Hueneme and Port of Stockton with inland gateways such as the Inland Empire and Central Valley, major airports including Los Angeles International Airport and Oakland International Airport, and Class I rail corridors operated by Union Pacific Railroad and BNSF Railway. It coordinates modal policies among agencies including the California Energy Commission, California Air Resources Board, California State Transportation Agency, and regional bodies such as the Southern California Association of Governments and Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments. Objectives include reducing congestion on corridors like Interstate 5 (California), Interstate 10, State Route 99 (California), improving connectivity to logistics centers such as the City of Commerce, and aligning with federal initiatives from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Historical Development and Revisions

Initial versions reflected legislative mandates from measures enacted by the California State Legislature and were influenced by historic freight studies from institutions including the RAND Corporation and California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. Subsequent revisions incorporated findings from metropolitan freight plans prepared by entities like the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (San Francisco Bay Area), Southern California Association of Governments, and research from the University of California, Berkeley and Stanford University. Stakeholder engagement involved ports, Class I railroads, shortline operators such as Pacific Harbor Line, truck associations like the California Trucking Association, labor organizations including the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, and environmental groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club.

Goals, Strategies, and Policy Framework

The plan’s goals align with statewide policy frameworks set by Senate Bill 375 (2008), Assembly Bill 32 (Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006), and Senate Bill 32 (2016), coordinating freight strategies with air quality mandates from the California Air Resources Board and land use policies administered by county organizations like Los Angeles County and Orange County Transportation Authority. Strategies emphasize investment prioritization, operational improvements at chokepoints such as the Tehachapi Pass, adoption of low-emission technologies supported by the California Energy Commission and incentive programs from the Carl Moyer Program, and resilience planning referencing guidance from the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and the California Seismic Safety Commission.

Implementation and Funding

Implementation draws on funding streams from the California Transportation Commission allocations, state transportation funds under Proposition 1B (California) and Senate Bill 1 (2017), federal grants administered by the Federal Highway Administration and U.S. Maritime Administration, and public-private partnerships involving terminal operators and logistics firms such as Maersk, Mediterranean Shipping Company, and Amazon (company). Financing mechanisms include the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program, Solutions for Congested Corridors Program, and contributions from regional cap-and-trade allocations overseen by the California Air Resources Board. Project delivery partnerships have involved agencies like Caltrans District 7 and entities such as the Los Angeles Harbor Department.

Key Projects and Infrastructure Investments

Major projects identified include grade separation projects on corridors like the BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision, improvements at rail yards such as the Southern Pacific Railroad Yard (Oakland), port access projects at the Port of Long Beach including the Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project, and truck access and drayage improvements in the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach complex. Inland port and freight village initiatives have been considered in the Inland Empire and near rail hubs like the Stockton Metrolink Station and the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge approaches; multimodal terminals tie into airports such as Sacramento International Airport and intermodal facilities served by Amtrak. Investments align with resilience upgrades for sea level rise concerns noted by the California Coastal Commission and climate adaptation guidance from the California Natural Resources Agency.

Environmental, Community, and Equity Impacts

Environmental mitigation measures described in the plan respond to air quality regulations from the California Air Resources Board and emissions targets under Assembly Bill 32. Community engagement processes involved affected jurisdictions such as San Pedro and West Oakland, community-based organizations including the East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, and labor stakeholders like the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. Equity analyses reference state guidance from the California Department of Public Health and the California Environmental Protection Agency regarding cumulative impacts in disadvantaged communities identified by the CalEnviroScreen. Noise, emissions, and land-use impacts intersect with conservation efforts led by groups like the Audubon Society and The Nature Conservancy.

Performance Metrics and Outcomes

Performance monitoring uses metrics aligned with federal performance measures promulgated by the U.S. Department of Transportation, air quality benchmarks from the California Air Resources Board, and freight mobility indicators tracked by the California State Transportation Agency and academic partners at University of Southern California and University of California, Davis. Outcomes reported include estimated reductions in delay on corridors such as Interstate 710 (California), modal shift indicators for containerized cargo through the Port of Oakland, and emission reductions quantified under programs like the Carl Moyer Program and state cap-and-trade reporting administered by the California Air Resources Board.

Category:Transportation planning in California