Planning for freight: The Los Angeles Region Genevieve Giuliano University of Southern California

October 2016 VREF Urban Freight Conference

Introduction q  Overview: Regional planning in the Los

Angeles region q  The ports: driver of freight

transportation planning q  Changes and challenges in California q  Some observations

OVERVIEW The Los Angeles Region

LA Region

Population Employment Size (KM2)

CSA total 17,872,394 7,034,637 88,049

Urbanized area 17,634,468 6,995,204 14,010

6 counties (one rural) 191 cities

Los Angeles Region urbanized area

Southern California Association of Governments

q  The Metropolitan Planning Organization §  1962 Federal legislation: “3C”

transportation planning •  Comprehensive, coordinated, collaborative •  Region level transportation planning

§  SCAG established 1965 as region’s designated MPO •  Represents all counties and municipalities

within the region •  Primary task: long and short range regional

transportation plan

SCAG today q  Organizational structure

§  70 member Regional Council representing 191 cities and 6 counties

§  All members elected officials q  Responsibilities

§  Regional long and short range transportation plans

§  Conformity with air quality plan §  Financial consistency

Complex environment

Sub-regional councils of

government COGs

Bottoms up project

development

California Air Resource Board

CARB

SC Air Quality Management District

SCAQMD

Top down regulation

County transportation

commissions CTCs

Regional Transportation Plan

Putting the plan together q  Challenges for SCAG

§  How to incorporate locally motivated projects

§  How to meet fiscal constraints §  How to meet conformity requirements

q  SCAG lever §  Approves conformity of plan §  Plan cannot be approved by state or US

without approval §  Funding tied to conformity

San Pedro Bay Port Complex

Top 10 container ports, 2014, M-TEUs World North America 1 Shanghai 2 Singapore 3 Shenzhen 4 Hong Kong 5 Ningbo 6 Busan 7 Qingdao 8 Guangzhou 9 Dubai 10 LA/LB

35.3 33.9 24.0 22.2 19.5 18.7 16.6 16.1 15.2 15.1

1 Los Angeles 2 Long Beach 3 NYNJ 4 Seattle-Tac 5 Savannah 6 Vancouver 7 Oakland 8 Hampton 9 Manzanillo 10 Houston

8.3 6.8 5.7 3.4 3.3 2.9 2.4 2.4 2.4 1.9

Ports as economic engines q  Account for about 500K jobs, direct and

indirect q  Some of the best paying blue collar jobs

West, East, Gulf import market shares

CHANGES AND CHALLENGES Environmental policy Changes in international trade

Environmental policy in California q  Historical leader in US

§  1967 California Air Resources Board, earliest vehicle emission requirements

§  1970 NEPA/CEQA §  1972 coastal protection §  1990 ZEV mandate

•  Targets for new car sales

Climate change policy q  2006 AB 32

§  Reduce GHG emissions 15% by 2020 §  Implementation by CARB §  Implementation fee on major generators §  Phased cap and trade program (2013)

q  Follow-on legislation §  AB 1493 – GHG reduction targets for

passenger vehicles §  AB 375 – Sustainable communities

Freight sector regulation

July 2015: Governor’s Executive Order B-32-15

Develop an integrated action plan that will “establish clear targets to improve freight efficiency, transition to zero-emission

technologies, and increase competitiveness of California’s freight system”

2016 California Sustainable Freight Action Plan

CFAC targets q  State climate change plan target:

reduce GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030

q  2030 system efficiency target: increase freight efficiency by 25% §  Freight efficiency = freight sector GDP/

freight sector GHGs q  2030 transition target: 100,000 zero

emission heavy duty trucks in operation

Implications for ports and supply chain q  Trucks vs trains q  Rising costs of compliance q  Uncertainty re future costs, targets,

types of regulation §  Warehouse and distribution centers as

mobile sources q  Barriers to infrastructure improvement

projects §  SCIG

Changes in ocean shipping industry q  Competition and concentration

§  Alliances §  Predatory pricing §  Cost shedding

q  Outcomes §  Weakened link between carrier, MTO §  Shift to larger vessels for scale economies §  Sell-off of carrier owned chassis fleet §  Abandonment of block stowage

How does this affect regional planning?

q  Freight planning focuses on ports, regional freight flows

q  Last mile viewed as city responsibility

Focus of regional freight planning q  Increase capacity of rail network q  Highway, intermodal infrastructure

conditional upon clean vehicle technologies

q  Environmental justice q  Air quality and climate change

regulation main drivers of regional transport planning

Observations q  Fundamental conflict between

economic value and environmental costs of ports

q  Power of regulatory agencies (CARB, SCAQMD)

q  Conflicts between counties and municipalities

q  Regional plan as mechanism to maintain access to state and federal funding, not long term plan for future

THANK YOU giuliano@usc.edu