Centre County Transportation Plan Regional Freight Transportation Perspective
May 2003
230 South Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 19102 INTRODUCTION...... 1
NATIONAL FREIGHT TRENDS AND ISSUES...... 1
UNDERSTANDING FREIGHT DEMANDS ...... 4
NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL FREIGHT FORECASTS ...... 5
PENNSYLVANIA ...... 5
PENNSYLVANIA FREIGHT POLICY ...... 5
A KEYSTONE LOCATION ...... 6
PORTS AND BORDER CROSSINGS ...... 11
PENNSYLVANIA FREIGHT ...... 17
EXISTING HIGHWAY FACILITIES ...... 18
RAIL FREIGHT ...... 21
AIR FREIGHT ...... 21
CENTRE COUNTY FREIGHT ...... 22
TRUCK TRAFFIC VOLUMES...... 22 Interstate 80...... 22 US Route 322 ...... 22 US Route 220 ...... 22
TRUCK FREIGHT FORECASTS IN CENTRE COUNTY...... 23
CENTRE COUNTY AIR FREIGHT...... 25
CENTRE COUNTY RAIL FREIGHT ...... 25
TRUCK STUDIES ...... 26
US ROUTE 322 ORIGIN/DESTINATION (SOUTH CENTRAL CENTRE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
STUDY) (1999) ...... 27
US ROUTE 322 SEVEN MOUNTAINS TRUCK SURVEY (1994) ...... 27
CORRIDOR O (US ROUTE 322 (1998) ...... 27
US 30 O/D SURVEY (2001) ...... 28
PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE ENTRY/EXIT STUDIES ...... 28
US ROUTE 11/15 CENTRAL SUSQUEHANNA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION PROJECT (CSVT) ...... 28
US ROUTE 219 TRAVEL TIME STUDIES (1998)...... 29
US ROUTE 219 PLANNING STUDIES ...... 29
TRUCK TRAVEL COST COMPARISONS ...... 30
EFFECTS ON PENNSYLVANIA AND CENTRE COUNTY ...... 32
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page i May 2003 Figure 1: Relationship Between Freight Demand, GDP and Goods Production ...... 3 Figure 2: Preliminary Freight Forecast Growth Rates ...... 5 Figure 3 Pennsylvania Truck Flows (1998)...... 7 Figure 4: Regional Road Network (Truck Volume 1998) ...... 8 Figure 5: Delaware Truck Flows (1998)...... 9 Figure 6: Michigan Truck Flows (1998)...... 9 Figure 7: New York Flows (1998) ...... 10 Figure 8: Ohio Truck Flows (1998) ...... 10 Figure 9: Top Gateways for International Freight ...... 11 Figure 10: Pennsylvania Total International Truck Flows (1998)...... 13 Figure 11: Delaware River Inland Movement of Maritime Cargo by Truck (1998) ...... 14 Figure 12: NY-NJ Region Inland Movement of Maritime Cargo by Truck (1998)...... 14 Figure 13: Baltimore Inland Movement of Maritime Cargo by Truck (1998)...... 15 Figure 14: Virginia Inland Movement of Maritime Cargo by Truck (1998) ...... 15 Figure 15: Buffalo International Truck Flows for Border Crossings (1998)...... 16 Figure 16: Detroit International Truck Flows for Border Crossings (1998) ...... 16 Figure 17: Top Destinations for Freight Tonnage from Pennsylvania ...... 17 Figure 18: Top Origins of Freight to Pennsylvania ...... 17 Figure 19: Shipment Characteristics by Modes of Transportation - Pennsylvania...... 18 Figure 20: Average Annual Traffic Growth Rates - Pennsylvania ...... 19 Figure 21: Pennsylvania Highway Truck Volumes – 1998 ...... 20 Figure 22: Pennsylvania Total Rail Flows (1998) ...... 21 Figure 23: Centre County Truck Volumes 2000 ...... 24
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page ii May 2003 capacity especially at international trade gateways and along major trade corridors to handle the forecast traffic growth2.
The US economy is evolving as a service and information economy, which affects the composition and movement of freight, both domestically and internationally. The goods being produced require different kinds of freight handling. There has been a decline in manufacturing, but an increase in manufacturing output due to more automation. E-commerce is generating customized mass-market products and services that generate more small shipments of light high value freight. This has implications in increasing demand for package and air freight services, thus increasing air cargo activities. Small package shipments by trucks and air have increased substantially --- from 1975 to 1995, truck delivery increased from $5 million to over $35 million and air shipments from a negligible $1 million to over $15 million per year. This will put added strain on the transportation system to handle future growth forecast.
The movement is now toward Just-in-Time deliveries or manufacturing-to-order, both of which are time- definite-delivery operations. This creates lower inventory levels and a greater dependence on reliable transportation service. This is also a factor in increasing truck delivery and air cargo services rather than rail services. The carriers/transportation system (freight suppliers) is also changing. The change from a modal fragmented system to cross-modal coordination may lead to more complex organizational arrangements. Gains in IT and ITS technology and operations research allow for global coordination and integration of production and shipping efforts.
The railroad industry has also realized significant productivity gains over the last decades. This includes shifts to unit trains, improved communications facilities, reduced crews and improved fuel efficiency. There are questions as to what additional gains are possible, given the current technology. The need to expand intermodal connections, especially in the eastern United States, has been identified; intermodal activity in the west is well established as compared to the eastern United States.
The freight volume for international goods is forecast to double between 1998 and 2020 with domestic freight growing almost 90%. An important issue is how to handle the projected increase in freight traffic effectively. The need for improvements to the National Highway System is recognized. The National Highway System intermodal connectors are in poor physical condition and characterized by poor geometric deficiencies, “missing links,” and inadequately coordinated investment strategies3. The peak period travel times during the day have increased significantly from 1982 to 1999. Between 1980 and 1998, vehicle travel increased 72% and road miles within the system grew by only 1%.
2 Cambridge Systematic, Inc., Multi-modal Freight Analysis Framework, Freight Theme Transportation Policy, Working Paper, FHWA, Office of Freight Management, 2002. 3 Texas Transportation Institute. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 2 May 2003 INTRODUCTION This regional freight perspective report is prepared as part of the Centre County Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element. The purpose is to identify regional freight transportation trends and issues that will affect Centre County. Freight movement, especially truck freight is an important issue in Centre County, particularly given the growing traffic levels throughout the County. This report will address the following questions: From a national perspective, what are the key trends and issues for freight movement? How will these national trends affect Pennsylvania? What is the forecast for freight movement in the future (2020)? What is Pennsylvania’s role in freight movement? What is the current level of freight activity in Pennsylvania? What is the current level of freight activity in Centre County? What changes are expected in truck, air, and rail freight activities? What do other traffic studies tell us about current truck freight movements and the implications for Centre County?
The research for this study included a review of available freight reports from USDOT, FHWA, the US Census Economic Census, PENNDOT, Army Corps of Engineers, and selected Pennsylvania traffic studies; and research and coordination with various freight facilities, and other sources.
NATIONAL FREIGHT TRENDS AND ISSUES Freight demands are responding to three major shifts: a change from a national market to a global market, a shift from a manufacturing to a service-based economy, and movement from traditional manufacturing and warehouse system to a customer-dictated just-in-time delivery system.
The US economy is changing from a national to a global economy.1 In 1970, the US international trade by value as a share of the US GDP (gross domestic product) was 11%. By 1997, it had grown to over 25% of the GDP. There are many factors in the growth of international trade. Deregulation policies beginning in the late 1970’s have affected freight movement by easing restrictions. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has increased freight trade from 26% in 1990 to almost 33% in 1999. This has increased traffic through the north-south trade route corridors and border crossings. Outsourcing manufacturing is occurring, which creates dispersed intermodal supply chains and increasing freight traffic and congestion along trade corridors and at ports, airports and border crossings. It has been estimated that major air-cargo hubs will have a four-fold increase in air cargo volume and the major ports will double or triple container volumes over the next 20 years. Some issues include infrastructure
1 Gary Maring, USDOT, FHWA, Office of Freight Management and Operations, ‘Some Broad Themes Related to U.S. Freight Shipments’ presentation. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 1 May 2003 Figure 1 shows the overall United States GDP, GDP in US Goods, and the increase in ton-miles of freight activities over the period from 1980 to 1991. It is representative of the increase in freight, especially truck traffic volumes, that has been occurring since Federal deregulation of the transportation industry in the 1980’s.
Figure 1: Relationship Between Freight Demand, GDP and Goods Production
Sources: Ton-Miles – Eno Transportation Foundation, Transportation in America, Tenth Edition, Vienna, Virginia, 1992. GDP and Goods Production – U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States, Various Editions.
As identified by FHWA, the current planning efforts in the public and private sectors are disconnected, intermodal links are not seamless and operations are not well managed across modes. One of the recommendations included in the FHWA “Institutional Structures and Planning Frameworks” is to prioritize projects that support a national freight system. A full-time integrated operation cannot eliminate congestion, but can reduce delays, improve reliability, and reduce fatalities.4
FHWA has also identified changes in public policy from an emphasis on economic deregulation to safety regulation, from modal to multi-modal surface transportation policy, and to increased environmental accountability.5 The increased focus on safety and environmental issues, and on economic
4 Ibid. Gary Maring. 5 , Bruce Lambert, FHWA, National Multimodal Freight: Trends, Issues, Forecast Policy Implications, 2001. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 3 May 2003 competitiveness, will require a careful assessment and decision-making. Another trend in transportation policy is from system construction or major infrastructure investments to system optimization and the addition of spot capacity improvements.
National security concerns are now also an issue. Identifying and tracking container contents and credentials are critical issues now and in the future. Toll agencies can be an effective contributor to identifying truck volumes within their system, tracking containers and checking credentials by sharing information with each other and with public agencies. Chassis/container tracking, now in use by some private companies, improves intermodal fleet management, mobility, shipper visibility and positive identification, especially for hazardous materials. New technologies such as the smart card technology for terminal dray operators have improved efficiency and security. Commercial Vehicle Operation/Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVO/CVISN) has also been identified as an effective tool in collecting truck and freight information, improving efficiency for trucks traveling through weigh stations in each state, and improving safety for interstate trucking.6
UNDERSTANDING FREIGHT DEMANDS Growing demands for passenger and freight movement through urban and border areas have increased congestion and inefficiencies throughout the entire transportation system. In response to these trends, FHWA has developed a Freight Productivity Program7 to assess freight demands and the implications for the surface transportation system, and to develop policy and program initiatives to improve freight efficiency. The Freight Analysis Framework (FAF) is a comprehensive national data systems analysis tool developed to support this effort. The purpose of its methodology is to estimate trade flows through the nation’s infrastructure. The FAF provides an approximation of current national freight flows by mode, on a county-to-county basis and for commodity flows. The FAF will help identify needed areas of improvement to increase freight mobility, including highlighting regions with mismatched freight demand and system capacity, and encouraging the development of multi-state and regional approaches to improving operations. It also considers operational efficiencies and anticipated investments by states and metropolitan planning organizations.
The FAF examines four key intermodal elements: highway, railroad, water, and air. A comprehensive database for different modes was developed from various public data sets (Commodity Flow Surveys, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Transportation Statistics) and private data sets (Journal of Commerce, PIERS, Reebie). To evaluate the effect of anticipated volumes upon the network, the FAF includes economic trade forecasts for both domestic and international trade for the years 2010 and 2020. The base year data and the forecast data are mapped to transportation networks to examine routings and
6 “Building Freight Capacity Through Better Operations: Defining the National Agenda,” USDOT, FHWA Freight Operations Conference, July 26-27, 2001, Long Beach, CA. 7 FHWA, Office of Freight Management and Operations. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 4 May 2003 lane densities. The FAF links transportation infrastructure databases and develops capacity estimates to identify shortfalls that need to be addressed to support the nation’s freight transportation needs.
National and International Freight Forecasts The Federal Highway Administration’s Office of Freight Management and Operations has prepared preliminary 2010 and 2020 freight tonnage forecasts.8 FHWA forecasted US domestic freight tonnage to increase by 2.9% annually, or 87% cumulatively between 1998 and 2020. International freight tonnage on the United States highway network is anticipated to grow faster than domestic freight -- at 3.4% annually, or 107% over the same period. Overall, this represents nearly a doubling of freight volumes over this period (Figure 2). Initial regional level forecasts from 1998 to 2020 show a 79% increase in total freight tonnage for the Pennsylvania/ New Jersey/ New York/ New England region.
Figure 2: Preliminary Freight Forecast Growth Rates US Domestic 1998-2020: 2.9% (Cumulative: 87%) 1998-2010: 3.4% 2010-2020: 2.4% US International 1998-2020: 3.4% (Cumulative: 107%) 1998-2010: 4.0% 2010-2020: 2.9% International Sectors US/Canada 1998-2020: 3.1% US/Mexico 1998-2020: 3.5% US/Rest of World 1998-2020: 3.4%
PENNSYLVANIA Pennsylvania Freight Policy The state’s approach to policy development and planning initiatives is driven by the “Moving Pennsylvania Forward” strategic goals. The freight transportation policy, planning and programming framework includes federal, state, regional, county, local and private sector representatives. The State Transportation Advisory Committee, the Rail Freight Advisory Committee, the Motor Carrier Advisory Committee and regional planning organizations provide input to the State Transportation Commission, the General Assembly, the Administration and the Department of Transportation.
8 Gary Maring, USDOT, “Freight Trends/Issues, Multimodal System Flows and Forecasts, and Policy Implications.” April 2001, EU/US Forum. Also FHWA, Office of Operations, 7.26.01. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 5 May 2003 PENNDOT’s policy approach to transportation infrastructure recognizes several key planning issues, including the identification of international freight that requires the expansion of interstate trade corridors; operations improvements that are needed to expedite traffic flows and increase the capacity of the transportation system; and metropolitan capacity for both passenger and freight transportation. PENNDOT’s objectives of maintaining the existing system, implementing selected capacity expansion, and maintaining competitiveness through a total transportation system planning (including multi-modal and intermodal connections) approach are key elements of the strategy. The link between freight transportation and economic development is recognized as an important component supporting these objectives. 9
In addition to these policy approaches, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation has developed a truck counting program called Statewide Truck Evaluation Project (STEP) to address the need for current and credible vehicle classification data. The project is in the early stages. A statewide network was established to outline major truck routes. Also, the Bureau of Planning and Research is working with a preliminary high truck volume traffic corridors map to sketch possible truck route alternatives. After PENNDOT analyzes the truck traffic corridors map, site locations will be selected for approximately 50 continuous counters.
A Keystone Location Pennsylvania, the “Keystone State,” is geographically situated at the crossroads of the country’s transportation system. Approximately 40% of the US population, 60% of the Canadian population, 40% of this country’s manufacturers and 41% of the domestic trade and service industries are within a 500- mile radius of Harrisburg.10 (Figure 4) A number of national and international trade corridors traverse the state. Freight moving from the ports and border crossings on the Atlantic coast and the Great Lakes is most likely traveling through Pennsylvania. Interstate 80 serves as a primary trade route from the Atlantic coast west to San Francisco. Interstate 76 and Interstate 79 serve freight moving from Chesapeake Bay and Mid-Atlantic states to the Great Lakes and west. Interstate 81 serves traffic moving from Canada and New York State south to the Chesapeake Bay region, with connections to the Gulf ports and Texas. Interstate 95 serves truck traffic up to Vermont and Maine and south to Florida. Nearly 50% of the commercial truck traffic in Pennsylvania is moving through the state to outside destinations11.
The following figures, taken from the U.S. DOT Freight Analysis Framework (FAF), illustrate Pennsylvania’s primary role in the national and regional freight network. Additionally, FAF maps for
9 Ron Marshall, Freight Transportation Policy, Planning and Programming in Pennsylvania – Then, Now & Next Steps, PENNDOT Bureau of Rail Freight, Ports and Waterways, September 2000. 10 Ibid, Ron Marshall. 11 USDOT, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 1997.
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 6 May 2003 states having high truck freight flows into Pennsylvania are also provided. Figure 3 illustrates current (1998) combined (domestic and international) truck freight flows in tons from and to Pennsylvania. The largest state-to-state truck freight flows (above 10.0 million tons) are to Delaware, Michigan, New York- New Jersey, and Ohio. Figures 5 - 8 illustrate freight movement from Michigan, Delaware, New York, and Ohio. The second highest truck freight flows (5 million to 10 million tons) are from Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.
Figure 3 Pennsylvania Truck Flows (1998)
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 7 May 2003 Figure 4 REGIONAL INTERSTATE ROAD NETWORK (TRUCK VOLUMES - 1998)
MI
75 Lake CanadaCanada 43 Huron VT MI Lake Ontario NH NY 87 90 Lake 96 Michigan Detroit 81 94 Lake Erie 90 MA Cleveland R 79 Centre County CT RI 80 80 75 71 PA 99 78 New York OH 76 NJ IN 77 Philadelphia
Baltimore MD 79 DC Washington DE WV 64 64 Atlantic 64 Ocean KY VA 65 75
24 81 40 95 TN 40 NC 75
Atlanta 85
SC 20
AL GA 16
75 65 95
10 0 50 100 150 200 Miles Truck Volumes - 1998 Source: ESRI Data & Map CD 2, FHWA Office 0 - 3,000 Gulf of of Freight Operations and Management Mexico 3,000 - 10,000 Projection: Geographic FL 10,000 - 20,000 Datum: NAD27 Map revised: May 2003 20,000 - 30,000
30,000 - 40,000
Figure 5: Delaware Truck Flows (1998)
Figure 6: Michigan Truck Flows (1998)
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 9 May 2003 Figure 7: New York Flows (1998)
Figure 8: Ohio Truck Flows (1998)
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 10 May 2003 Ports and Border Crossings As shown in Figure 9, the top gateways for international freight proximate to Pennsylvania are in New York, New Jersey, Delaware River/ Chesapeake Bay (including the Port of Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore), and the Great Lakes ports including Cleveland. A high tonnage of international freight also passes through the Buffalo and Detroit border crossings.
Figure 9: Top Gateways for International Freight
As discussed previously, Pennsylvania is geographically situated at the crossroads of the country’s transportation system. Pennsylvania has port facilities on the Delaware River (Atlantic Ocean), the Great Lakes (Lake Erie) and the inland waterways (Monongahela, Upper Ohio and Allegheny Rivers). Pennsylvania ranked seventh in terms of overall waterborne traffic (115.5 million tons) in 1999. As forecast by the FHWA Freight Analysis Framework12 Project, import/export freight tonnage could double by 2020.
12 FHWA, Office of Freight Management and Operations, 2002. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 11 May 2003 Figure 10 shows total international truck flows either originating in or destined for Pennsylvania. The highest state-to-state flows are from Michigan, Vermont, New York and New Jersey.
Figure 11 shows 1998 inland movement of maritime cargo by truck from the Delaware River ports including the Port of Philadelphia. As of 2000, the Port of Philadelphia ranked 19th (43.8 million tons overall) nationally. The maritime facilities of the Delaware River comprise one of the largest freshwater shipping complexes in the world, handling the second largest volume of international tonnage on the East Coast. Southwestern Pennsylvania is a major origin and destination for truck freight from Centre County. The highest state-to-state flows are to New York and Michigan; other high flows are within Pennsylvania and flows to Texas.
The inland Port of Pittsburgh ranked fifteenth with 53.9 million tons; but it is ranked number one as an inland port. Located at the northeastern head of navigation along the Inland Waterway System of the United States, it includes 37 public river terminal facilities, most with intermodal connections. Four interstate highways and six railroads serve the Port District, including Norfolk Southern and CSX.13 The Great Lakes Port of Erie did not make the top 100 port rankings. As of 1999, the Port of Erie shipped a total of 0.5 million tons. About 12% of trucks on US Route 322 had an origin in northwestern Pennsylvania or the Great Lakes.
Major transportation routes link key ports in the Mid-Atlantic region with the Midwest. New York and New Jersey ports rank third nationally in terms of overall domestic and foreign trade (138.7 million tons) in year 2000. Figure 12 shows the inland movement of maritime cargo by truck in the New York/New Jersey region. Network flows (through Pennsylvania and Centre County) of over one million tons traverse Interstate 80 from NY/NJ region to Detroit and Chicago area.
Figure 13 shows Baltimore port freight flows. This port ranks 21st with 40.8 million tons. The heaviest traffic movement through Pennsylvania in on Interstate 70/76 is up to the Great Lakes. Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania exhibit the highest port-to-state flows.
Figure 14 shows port freight flows in Virginia. The heaviest traffic movement through Pennsylvania is on Interstate 70/76 to the Great Lakes. Maryland and Virginia exhibit the highest port-to-state flows.
Figure 15 illustrates international truck flows through the Buffalo, New York border crossing. Major (more that 1 million tons) border crossing to state flows are to Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. Major trade routes south and southeast through Pennsylvania include Interstate 79, US Route 219, US Route 15 and Interstate 81.
13 Ibid, Ron Marshall, September 2000. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 12 May 2003 Figure 16 shows international truck flows crossing though Detroit at the Windsor border crossing. Interstate 80 and Interstate 76 serve as the major trade routes for freight shipments through Pennsylvania.
Figure 10: Pennsylvania Total International Truck Flows (1998)
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 13 May 2003 Figure 11: Delaware River Inland Movement of Maritime Cargo by Truck (1998)
Figure 12: NY-NJ Region Inland Movement of Maritime Cargo by Truck (1998)
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 14 May 2003 Figure 13: Baltimore Inland Movement of Maritime Cargo by Truck (1998)
Figure 14: Virginia Inland Movement of Maritime Cargo by Truck (1998)
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 15 May 2003 Figure 15: Buffalo International Truck Flows for Border Crossings (1998)
Figure 16: Detroit International Truck Flows for Border Crossings (1998)
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 16 May 2003 Pennsylvania Freight Based on the 1997 Economic Census14 (Commodity Flow Survey), the top destination states of truck freight tonnage originating from Pennsylvania are shown in Figure 17. The top origins of states sending freight to Pennsylvania are shown on Figure 18.
Figure 17: Top Destinations for Freight Tonnage from Pennsylvania
New Jersey 21,538,000 tons 3.9 % New York 21,365,000 tons 3.9 % Ohio 20,576,000 tons 3.8 % Maryland 17,412,000 tons 3.2 % Delaware 6,410,000 tons 1.2 % West Virginia 6,027,000 tons 1.1 % Other States < 6 million tons 9.1 % PENNSYLVANIA 404,315,000 tons 73.8 %
Figure 18: Top Origins of Freight to Pennsylvania
Ohio 19,961,000 tons 3.6 % West Virginia 19,346,000 tons 3.5 % New Jersey 17,519,000 tons 3.2 % New York 11,582,000 tons 2.1 % Virginia 8,593,000 tons 1.6 % Maryland 8,275,000 tons 1.5 % Kentucky 8,356,000 tons 1.5 % Other States < 6 million tons 10.0 % PENNSYLVANIA 404,315,000 tons 73.0 %
Approximately three quarters of all freight tonnage (truck, rail, air, water) have both an origin and a destination point within Pennsylvania. The top tonnage destinations outside of the state are New Jersey, New York, Ohio and Maryland. The top states sending freight tonnage destined for Pennsylvania include Ohio, West Virginia, New Jersey and New York.
Rail tonnage has been decreasing, while truck and airfreight indicated significant increases (Figure 19). Based on Commodity Flow Survey data from 1993 and 1997, air and truck freight tonnage in
14 US Economic Census Transportation, Commodity Flow Survey, 1997. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 17 May 2003 Pennsylvania saw a 246 and 42% increase, respectively. Rail freight tonnage declined during the period by 35%. In 1997, rail carried about 8% of the tonnage (45 million tons) compared to freight carried by truck (78% or 429 million tons).
In terms of ton-miles, most commodities are moved by truck. Trucks shipments are double that of rail: 41 billion versus 21 billion ton-miles, respectively. Commodities carried by air increased by over 200% between 1993 and 1997. Only a limited percentage of freight movement is through multiple carriers, while 94% is transported through single carriers. In 1997, the average miles per shipment for all modes was 481 miles, a 33% increase over 1993. As indicated, the average truck shipment was 106 miles, reflecting local destinations in Pennsylvania. Water related shipments were not published for 1997. However, a review of 1993 data indicated that the total weight of commodities shipped by water represent a minute percentage of the total tonnage.
Figure 19: Shipment Characteristics by Modes of Transportation - Pennsylvania
Shipment Characteristics by Modes of Transportation Tons Ton-Miles Average miles per shipment 1997 1993 Percent 1997 1993 Percent Percent Modes (thousands) (thousands) Change (millions) (millions) change 1997 1993 change
All mode 548,166 416,916 31.5 75,869 78,019 -2.80 481 361 33.5
Single modes 514,371 392,309 31.1 67,578 68,698 -1.50 118 138 -13.9
Multiple modes 11,066 16,040 -31.0 5,606 8,158 -31.30 820 554 48.2
Trucks 428,616 302,035 41.9 41,641 36,039 15.80 106 123 -13.6
Rail 45,926 70,319 -34.7 20,653 28,031 -26.30 432 480 -10.1
Air 215 62 246.2 223 73 204.80 1,258 1,280 -1.7
Water s 19,780 s s 4,554 s 173 190 -40.4
Source; 1997 Economic Census, Transportation, Pennsylvania
s data not published
Existing Highway Facilities Given the tremendous tonnage carried annually on roadways in Pennsylvania, the highway system is critical for freight movement both statewide and in Centre County. Traffic volume data from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PENNDOT) indicates that traffic volumes on urban interstate highways increased by around 10% from 1995 to 2000. Volumes over the same period on rural interstate highways grew faster, by 13%. In total, the traffic volumes on urban and rural principal arterials experienced a cumulative growth rate of 8.8% and 8.6%, respectively, from 1995 through 2000 (Figure 20).
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 18 May 2003 Figure 20: Average Annual Traffic Growth Rates - Pennsylvania
Urban Rural Urban Rural Year Interstate Interstate Arterial Arterial 1995 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 2.0% 1996 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 2.0% 1997 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 2.0% 1998 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 2.0% 1999 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2000 0.5% 2.0% 0.5% 0.3%
Cumulative Total 1995-2000 9.9% 13.0% 8.8% 8.6%
Source: PENNDOT
Figure 21 shows the major Pennsylvania road network. FHWA FAF 1998 truck volumes are also shown. This illustrates in more detail the major trade routes passing through the Commonwealth.
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 19 May 2003 Figure 21 PENNSYLVANIA HIGHWAY TRUCK VOLUMES - 1998
90 ERIE WARREN McKEAN BRADFORD 81 CRAWFORD 6 6 SUSQUEHANNA TIOGA WAYNE 6 POTTER 6 322 62 15 VENANGO FOREST 219 220 WYOMING LACKAWANNA ELK CAMERON SULLIVAN 79 84 MERCER LYCOMING LUZERNE PIKE CLINTON 80 220 180 CLARION CLEARFIELD COLUMBIA MONROE JEFFERSON MONTOUR LAWRENCE BUTLER 80 80 UNION CARBON ARMSTRONG CENTRE 209 422 76 119 322 NORTHUMBERLAND NORTHAMPTON 220 522 81 SCHUYLKILL BEAVER 219 MIFFLIN SNYDER LEHIGH INDIANA HUNTINGDON 15 76 CAMBRIA 78 ALLEGHENY BLAIR JUNIATA BUCKS BERKS 22 PERRY DAUPHIN 222 LEBANON 476 WESTMORELAND 202 219 422 99 522 MONTGOMERY 76 CUMBERLAND 70 BEDFORD LANCASTER 76 WASHINGTON 76 322 FRANKLIN 95 FAYETTE PHILADELPHIA 79 15 30 SOMERSET FULTON YORK CHESTER DELAWARE GREENE ADAMS 222 40 220 83 70 81 1
Truck Volumes - 1998
7,500 - 11,000 0 - 2,000 010203040 Miles 2,000 - 4,500 11,000 - 15,000 Source: Centre County Planning Office and FHWA Office of Freight Management Projection: State Plane - North Zone 4,500 - 7,500 15,000 - 20,000 Datum: NAD83 Map revised: May 2003
*AADTT - Average Annual Daily Truck Traffic AADT represents the annual average truck traffic per day Rail Freight Between 1993 and 1997, rail freight tonnage originating in Pennsylvania decreased by 35% (Figure 19). Rail freight flows within the United States are illustrated in Figure 22. Pennsylvania has 70 railroads and 5,600 miles of rails statewide, over half of which are Class I (owned by a major carrier). The Pennsylvania Statewide Long Range Transportation Plan15 identifies a number of rail freight objectives: expand intermodal rail freight facilities; eliminate at-grade crossings of freight lines by state owned roads; and accommodate double stack capacity within strategic rail corridors. Major freight lines transporting above five million tons per year do not pass through Centre County.
Figure 22: Pennsylvania Total Rail Flows (1998)
Air Freight Air freight is experiencing rapid growth nationwide and within the Commonwealth. According to the Commodity Flow Survey, air freight tonnage originating in Pennsylvania increased by 246% between 1993 and 1997. The Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg and Lehigh Valley International Airports are major aviation facilities in Pennsylvania serving commercial carriers, freight, and general aviation (US Department of Transportation identifies major airports as those with at least 250,000 enplanements16). The Philadelphia International Airport alone contributed over 560,000 tons of cargo to the regional freight
15 PennPlan Moves!, Pennsylvania Statewide Long Range Transportation Plan, 2000-2025. 16 US Department of Transportation, Bureau of Statistics, Pennsylvania. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 21 May 2003 system in 1998, almost double the tonnage of air cargo handled at the airport in 1990. Air freight is expected to increase due to improved logistics, and package shipment needs, especially for E- Commerce. Intermodal coordination of air freight and trucking will continue to be an issue to be addressed.
CENTRE COUNTY FREIGHT Truck Traffic Volumes Figure 23 shows PENNDOT 2000 truck traffic volumes on state maintained roads in Centre County. One interstate highway and two US highways travel through Centre County. Interstate 80, US Route 322 and US Route 220 are primary commercial corridors within the study area and are part of the National Highway System network. Interstate 80 carries the most truck traffic within the County. US Route 220 links with Interstate 99 in Bald Eagle, Pennsylvania. Interstate 99 is a north-south roadway that stretches from Bedford to Bald Eagle. The completion of Interstate 99 will provide Centre County with a four-lane, limited access highway connection between Interstate 80 and Interstate 70/76.
Interstate 80 Interstate 80, the second longest interstate in the United States, is an east-west transcontinental route traveling through 11 states and stretching from San Francisco, California to Teaneck, New Jersey. The 11 states it crosses are California, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Interstate 80 carries the greatest volume and percentage of truck traffic in Centre County. The 2000 PENNDOT Traffic Volume Map shows an annual average of 27,000 vehicles per day (AADT) on Interstate 80 west of US Route 220, and 21,000 vehicles per day east of US Route 220. Annual average daily truck volumes (AADTT) range from 42% to over 51% in certain sections.
US Route 322 US Route 322 is a 494-mile highway stretching from Atlantic City, New Jersey to Cleveland, Ohio, traveling through New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Ohio. Traffic volumes on US Route 322 within Centre County range between 10,000 and 23,000 vehicles per day (AADT). Truck volumes range between 14% to 20% in certain sections of US Route 322 east of State College.
US Route 220 US Route 220 is a 678-mile highway that traverses North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey. It carries between 5,800 and 13,000 vehicles per day (AADT). Truck volumes (AADTT) range from 15% to over 21% in certain sections.
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 22 May 2003 Other state maintained highways, including State Routes 350, 26, 50, 45 and 144, also carry significant traffic volumes and truck traffic. State Route 350 is a link between Interstate 99 at Bald Eagle in Blair County and Interstate 80 at the Woodland interchange in Clearfield County.
Truck Freight Forecasts in Centre County The FHWA Office of Freight Management17 has recently released data on existing (1998) and forecasted (2020) freight flows in Pennsylvania. These forecasts are based on moderate economic growth. Truck traffic is expected to grow throughout the Commonwealth over the next 20 years. Much of this growth will occur in urban areas and on the interstate highway system. In Centre County, the growth forecast under the Freight Analysis Framework studies includes only limited roads – Interstate 80, US Route 322, and US Route 220. The roads studied reflect existing configurations and do not reflect future planned transportation improvements such as the completion of Interstate 99. (Through the Centre County Long Range Transportation Plan travel demand model, more refined data will be available in 2003).
These forecasts identify significant future growth in truck traffic on Interstate 80 of almost 10,000 additional trucks by 2020, or an almost doubling of truck traffic on sections of Interstate 80 in Centre County. Compared to Interstate 80, lower truck traffic growth rates are forecast on US Route 322 during this 22-year period, increasing only 30% to 45%, depending upon the section. Truck traffic forecasts (AADTT) on Route 220 (an increase of 75% to over 100%) and Route 26 (an increase of 30% to almost 85%) should be taken with caution since future Interstate 99 improvements will affect traffic volumes on certain segments. Traffic volumes should be re-examined periodically as sections of Interstate 99 are opened. In comparison, annual average daily passenger traffic volumes on Interstate 80, Route 220 and Route 26 are forecast to increase at a generally lower rate (less than 50%), depending on the section, compared to truck traffic volumes. The increase in forecasted truck traffic on Interstate 80 reflects its position as a major national and international trade corridor.
17 USDOT, Office of Freight Operations and Management, 2002. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 23 May 2003 Figure 23 CENTRE COUNTY TRUCK VOLUMES - 2000
Centre County, Pennsylvania
Truck Volumes - 2000 0-300 300 - 700 700 - 2,000 2,000 - 4,500 4,500 - 7,000
7,000 - 10,500
* AADTT - Average Annual Daily Truck Traffic Burnside AADTT represents the annual average truck traffic per day. Township 144
879 Liberty Township Curtin Township Snow Shoe Township Boggs 53 Snow Shoe Township Borough Howard Borough Howard Township 26 80
80 150 Marion Township
144 64 Miles Union Milesburg Township Township Borough Walker 445 Township Rush Bellefonte Philipsburg Township 504 Borough Borough Unionville Borough 192 26 Millheim South Philipsburg Borough Haines Borough 322 Spring 45 Township Huston 220 Benner Township Gregg Township Township Township 550 26 Penn 350 Centre Hall Borough Township Worth Patton 150 970 Township Township College Township 144 322 BUS 322 322 Port Matilda Borough State College Borough 322 Halfmoon 350 Potter Taylor Township Township Township Harris 220 26 Township Ferguson Township
02.557.510 45 Miles
Source: Centre County Planning Office, and PennDOT Projection: State Plane - North Zone Datum: NAD83 Map revised: April 2003
TRUCK COUNTS BASED ON PENNDOT YEAR 2000 VEHICLE COUNTS ON STATE MAINTAINED ROADS ONLY Centre County Air Freight Air freight is growing in importance nationally and statewide; within Centre County, it is a growing but limited mode of freight movement. There are six public use aviation facilities in the County. They are Bellefonte Airport, Centre Airpark near Centre Hall, Mid-State Airport in Rush Township, Penn’s Cave Airport east of Centre Hall, Ridge Soaring Gliderport in Huston Township, and University Park Airport near State College Borough. Completed in 1993, the University Park Airport handles the majority of passenger service. With the exception of small packages on commercial flights and UPS/Federal Express, no significant freight tonnage is moved via University Park Airport. Three commercial carriers, Northwest Airlink, United Express, and US Air Express, serve the University Park Airport. The airlines provide nonstop service to Harrisburg, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Washington International, Dulles International, and Detroit.
There were 113,597 enplanements at the University Park Airport in 2001, with a projected growth to 146,500 enplanements in 2005 and 174,600 in 201018. The airport’s current capacity of 200,000 annual enplanements is adequate to meet the projected growth over the next decade19. The Airport’s recently completed Master Plan has shown a roadway extension of Seibert Road to link with the Park Avenue Interchange of future Interstate 99. Other building expansion, parking and related improvements are planned to handle the expected growth of this airport that will include increased freight activity.
Discussions have also surfaced of encouraging commercial use of Mid-State airport as an Intermodal center for commercial freight. The Mid-State Airport is in a Keystone Opportunity Zone (KOZ) as is the adjoining Black Moshannon Technical Center. These airport facilities are underutilized and provide an opportunity for economic development initiatives in coordination with the available airport infrastructure. However, poor access to the airport from State Route 504 will affect the desirability of the airport for extensive truck freight operations. Even with the planned Corridor O improvements, the airport is still about eight (8) miles from the planned interchange with US Route 322 and State Route 504.
Centre County Rail Freight Two major railroads operate in Centre County, Pennsylvania: Norfolk Southern and Nittany & Bald Eagle Railroad (NBER). Norfolk Southern is a major freight rail company that serves the Eastern United States and has major classification yards in Allentown, Conway and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Norfolk Southern has two east-west lines that are located outside of Centre County to the north and south of the County. The northerly line runs through Lock Haven in Clinton County; the southerly line runs through Tyrone in Blair County. Norfolk Southern has trackage rights on the NBER mainline between Tyrone and Lock
18 Charles Welch, Centre County Airport Authority Fall 2002. 19 University Park Airport Master Plan, Delta Associates, 2002. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 25 May 2003 Haven and runs an average of 1.25 coal trains per day or 105 per year. Norfolk Southern annual tonnage on the NBER mainline is approximately 3.8 million.
NBER is a local freight railroad company operating on 70 miles of SEDA-COG Joint Rail Authority rail lines that run north-south, linking the Norfolk Southern lines in Tyrone and Lock Haven. A rail line between Pleasant Gap and State College links with a line through Bellefonte to Milesburg. The NBER has 12 terminals between Tyrone and Lock Haven. The NBER engine terminal is located in Bellefonte. In 1986, NBER was running 865 carloads per year. Currently, NBER runs almost 14,000 carloads in addition to the loads handled by Norfolk Southern. NBER forecasts an increase in future tonnage and is planning track upgrades and improvements.20
Other railroad lines operating under the SEDA-COG Joint Rail Authority System, which link to the lines in Centre County, include: the North Shore Railroad with 36.5 miles of tracks between Northumberland and Berwick; the Shamokin Valley Railroad with 27 miles of track between Sunbury and Mount Carmel; the Juniata Valley Railroad with 11.7 miles of track north of Lewistown; and the Lycoming Valley Railroad with 38 miles of track adjacent to US Route 220.
Statewide, rail service has declined based upon the 1993-1997 US Economic Census Commodities Flow Survey. In the County, however, rail activity has been increasing. Future increases in service will depend upon growth in manufacturing and other businesses that can utilize rail and are not time sensitive. Within Centre County, the rail lines are links to the major rail network outside of the County. Expansion of intermodal connections with truck freight transfers could reduce truck traffic volumes as rail traffic continues to grow in the County. These intermodal connections should be further evaluated.
TRUCK STUDIES Selected studies were reviewed to document where long haul truck traffic is going and whether traffic currently using other routes such as US Route 11/15, the Pennsylvania Turnpike, Interstate 79, Route 30 will divert to Centre County once the planned transportation improvements (Interstate 99, Corridor O) are completed. The answer is complex since it relies on knowledge of origins and destinations of the freight activity. Trucks select routes based upon a number of factors. Mileage (or distance) is an important factor but it is not the only consideration. Travel time, travel cost, and road conditions all play a part in the decision. Review of these studies indicates that a majority of traffic currently using other routes would not be likely to divert to Centre County roads.
The following summarizes some key findings of these studies focused on long haul truck movements.
20 Todd Hunter of Nittany & Bald Eagle Railroad (NBER), 2002.
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 26 May 2003 US Route 322 Origin/Destination (South Central Centre County Transportation Study) (1999)21 12-hour survey within the SCCCTS area. >75% of heavy trucks (tractor-trailers) are moving through the SCCCTS area. Most of the straight trucks (not tractor-trailers) have local destinations in the State College Area (50%). Most of the heavy trucks have neither origins nor destinations in the Greater State College Area (>75%). Top origin and destination pairs for heavy trucks outside of Centre County are: - Great Lakes to Southeastern PA - Southeast PA to Northwest PA - Northwest PA to Chesapeake Bay - Great Lakes to Chesapeake Bay
US Route 322 Seven Mountains Truck Survey (1994)22 24-hour/ 7-day survey of trucks 46% of the trucks had either an origin or destination in PA. 39% had both an origin and destination in PA. 75% of trucks use Interstate 80; 90% use Interchange 24 (Bellefonte). Top origin and destination pairs for heavy trucks outside of Centre County are: - Great Lakes to Southeastern PA - Great Lakes to Harrisburg - Great Lakes to Chesapeake Bay Findings: Consistent with 1998 US Route 322 O/D Survey; most trucks (75%) on US Route 322 travel through the State College area and use Interstate 80.
Corridor O (US Route 322 (1998)23 Survey purpose to determine diversion to US Route 322 bypass from Port Matilda to Philipsburg. 70% of trucks travel through the Corridor O study area at least once a week. Truck traffic predominately uses State Route 350 on trips through study area. About 25% of trucks travel through the study area. Top origin and destination pairs for trucks routing through at Interstate 99 at Bald Eagle are: Altoona to Erie Region (25%) Altoona to North Central PA (12%)
21 US Route 322 Origin/Destination Survey - SCCCTS (1999) conducted by Orth-Rodgers & Associates, Inc. 22US Route 322 Seven Mountains Truck Survey (1994) conducted by Orth-Rodgers & Associates, Inc. 23 Corridor O (US Route 322) Origin/Destination Survey conducted by Orth-Rodgers & Associates, Inc., 1998. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 27 May 2003 Bradford to Altoona (12%) Altoona to North Central US (10%) North Central PA to Mid-Atlantic US (9%) Altoona to New York/New England US (8%) Findings: The Route 322 bypass could divert trucks off State Route 350.
US 30 O/D Survey (2001)24 2,400 trucks interviewed representing 50% of truck traffic 84% of the trucks travel beyond the US 30 corridor in Lancaster PA Destinations within PA include Harrisburg or other locations. Eastbound trucks – 20% originate and 43% destined outside PA Westbound trucks – 50% originate and 15% destined outside of PA Findings: Centre County does not receive a majority of this truck traffic from US Route 30.
Pennsylvania Turnpike Entry/Exit Studies25 Evaluation of entry and exit data from commercial vehicles using PA Turnpike data:
Exit 8 – New Stanton 86% of the trucks had an origin in south central PA, New Jersey, NY/Long Island/ northeast US 85% of the trucks had destinations in western PA, or west of Pennsylvania
Exit 11 – Bedford 75% of trucks had an origin in New Jersey, south central PA, southwest PA, or Midwest 76% of trucks had destination in the Chesapeake Bay region or southwest PA
Exit 16 – Carlisle 77% of trucks had an origin in southwest PA or Midwest 86% of trucks had a destination in northern and central New Jersey, NY/Long Island, south- central PA
Findings: Most traffic would not divert to US Route 322 or I-99 in Centre County.
US Route 11/15 Central Susquehanna Valley Transportation Project (CSVT) 26 60-70% of trucks move through the CSVT study area Origins of southbound trucks on US 15 - 37% other states - 2% Canada - 26% northeast and northwest PA Destinations of southbound trucks on US 15 - 26% other states - 32% regions south of Snyder County Origins of northbound trucks on US 15
24 US Route 30 Survey provided by McCormick Taylor & Associates. 25 PA Turnpike Entry/Exit Studies provided by McCormick Taylor & Associates. 26 CSVT survey prepared by Orth-Rodgers & Associates, Inc. Additional data provided by McCormick Taylor & Associates, Inc.
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 28 May 2003 - 37% other states - 40% regions south of Snyder County Destinations of northbound trucks on US 15 - 25% other states - 18% to regions north of Union and Northumberland Counties - 26% northeast and northwest PA - 3% to Canada
Findings: Most traffic would not divert to US Route 322 or I-99 in Centre County.
US Route 219 Travel Time Studies (1998)27 Travel time studies on Route 219 were conducted to evaluate diversions of traffic from other routes to US Route 219. Travel times without improvements to US Route 219 are shown.
Wytheville, VA to Buffalo, New York Interstate 77 to I-79 to I-90 523 miles 9 hours 08 minutes US Route 219 533 miles 11 hours 32 minutes US Route 219 to US 99 to US Route 15 to I-90 686 miles 13 hours 54 minutes
Findings: Without improvements to US Route 219, it is not likely that traffic will use either US Route 219 or the US Route 15 alternative from Wytheville, VA area due to excessive travel time difference.
Hagerstown, MD to Buffalo, New York I-70 to I-99 to US Route 15 to I-90 417 miles 8 hours 15 minutes I-70 to I-99 to PA Route 36 to US Route 219 296 miles 6 hours 57 minutes I-70 to US Route 219 327 miles 6 hours 46 minutes
Findings: Truckers would likely use the US Route 219 alternative since travel time and distance is better than US Route 15.
US Route 219 Planning Studies There have been a number of recent planning studies on sections of US Route 219 in Pennsylvania that highlight current deficiencies of the roadway. These deficiencies reduce the effectiveness of the US Route 219 corridor for truck freight movement along the Continental 1 trade route from Florida to Ontario, Canada. Improvements are underway along sections of the Continental 1 route; however, ’missing links’ especially in Pennsylvania, reduce the efficacy of the corridor as a major truck freight route until future improvements are implemented.
A comprehensive two-phased planning study was performed on US Route 219 from Interstate 80 south of Carrollton in 1995.28 The needs assessment identified the need to improve US Route 219 to improve
27 US Route 219 Travel Time Studies, prepared by Orth-Rodgers & Associates, Inc., 1998. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 29 May 2003 travel efficiency, increase safety and reduce congestion, noise, and other impacts on selected population centers along the corridor. The study highlighted that the current road provides ‘very poor service’ to support linkages to National Highway System connections to serve long distance trips in and through Pennsylvania, international freight movement, in addition to local connections to population centers along the corridor, The circuitry (indirect, winding alignment) of the road, which increases the travel distance, was considered a major deficiency especially compared to I-79 between Pittsburgh and I-80.
A Needs Report of US Route 219 from Carrolltown to Interstate 8029 was completed in February 2000. This report identified deficiencies such as safety deficiencies with trucks involved in 44 percent of the corridor accidents; unacceptable future levels of service over the entire corridor, and the lack of mobility and long travel times due to the circuitry of the corridor which affects economic development.
A recent corridor issues analysis of the US Route 219 corridors between Dubois, PA/I-80 and Buffalo, NY was completed in November 200230. It also considers the broader context of the Continental 1 trade corridor between Ontario and Miami traversing nine states. While there are upgrades underway along the corridor, such as I-68 to I-76 in New York, Pennsylvania is the most problematic in terms of the ‘missing links’ needed to complete the international trade corridor. Currently a majority of freight flows on the DuBois to Buffalo study corridor are for local origins and destinations. i.e. the route is currently not preferred by truckers to get to connect to Canada or other interstate movements. The study also highlights the circuitry of the US Route 219 corridor south of St. Mary’s. The report identified a number of strategies to both study the corridor and to coordinate Continental 1 and Pennsylvania improvement efforts. The study also notes that the DuBois area has potential to serve as an inland intermodal port.
Truck Travel Cost Comparisons An analysis was conducted comparing trucking costs on major routes through Centre County with other routes31 as follows:
Bedford, PA to I-81/ I-80 Interchange Route Miles Cost (operating costs/ mile) I-99 to I-80 to I-81 181 $286.60 - $325.00 I-76 to I-81 177 $283.20 - $318.60 (plus $21.35 tolls*)
28 Executive Summary, Needs Analysis and Phase I Alternatives Analysis, U.S. 219, Carrolltown to Interstate 80, August 1995.
29 Needs Report, State Route 0219, Section C21, Carrolltown to Interstate 80, Orth-Rodgers & Associates, Inc., February 2, 2000.
30 Route 219 Continental 1- U.S. 219 Corridor Assessment Buffalo NY to I-80/ DuBois PA, Final Report, Gannett Fleming, November 2002. 31 McCormick Taylor & Associates, 2003. Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 30 May 2003 State College to Harrisburg US Route 322 to SR 11/15 106 $169.00 - $190.80 I-80 to SR 11/15 142 $227.20 - $255.60
Youngstown to Harrisburg PA Turnpike Exit 19 to Ohio Turnpike 266 $425.60 - $478.80 (plus $69.25 tolls*) US Route 322 from Exit 19 (PA Turnpike) to Ohio Turnpike 278 $444.80 - $500.40 * Toll costs may be further discounted.
Findings: It is unlikely that trucks currently using the PA Turnpike will shift routes through Centre County, even with completion of the major Centre County road projects, since there will not be a significant change in the travel miles and costs.
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 31 May 2003 EFFECTS ON PENNSYLVANIA AND CENTRE COUNTY Freight is expected to grow significantly over the next twenty years, especially international freight coming through ports and border crossings. Pennsylvania’s centralized keystone location with major trade routes traversing the state makes this fact inevitable. Interstate 80 and Interstate 76 are the primary east-west trade routes through Pennsylvania. Interstate 95, Interstate 81, US Route 15 and Interstate 79 serve north/south traffic through Pennsylvania.
In Centre County, future completion of Interstate 99 and other planned transportation improvements, such as Corridor O, will also change local travel patterns within and through Centre County primarily to the extent that they direct traffic to the new alignments. For example, the recent opening of US Route 220 north of the Mount Nittany Expressway to the Bellefonte Interchange with Interstate 80 will serve to route long haul truck traffic and other through traffic off State Route 26.
Even with completion of Interstate 99 to Interstate 80, it is not expected that significant changes in freight hauling routes will occur unless other major actions currently unknown that may effect market logistics, port activity or regulatory policy are effectuated. The major travel corridors will continue to serve long distance haulers that traverse Centre County. Interstate 80 currently serves as a key trade corridor and it will continue this role as evidenced by the FHWA FAF forecasts. Other major roads will also continue to serve truck freight flows to the extent that they currently are more reliable, cost effective, and time effective routes as determined by the truck operators or owners. Future changes in freight supply, logistics, new technology and other factors yet unknown may, however, affect how freight is being moved.
The ports and border entries are expected to grow in volume of traffic. Future changes in facilities or operations may change the level of activity and freight movements. There has been discussion of inland port facilities in Pennsylvania to serve as an intermodal center. Development of a major intermodal facility especially if coordinated with rail facilities and air cargo can change freight movement patterns; however the effect will be primarily on those roads that currently serve as major trade routes. For example, inland intermodal port facilities are being considered in the DuBois area, and at the Letterkenny Army Depot near Chambersburg in Franklin County.
In conclusion, specifically regarding Centre County, our findings are:
1. Truck flow patterns will remain constant – I-80 carrying the largest proportion of freight with other routes carrying significantly less.
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 32 May 2003 2. While the patterns remain constant, the growth in truck freight will continue to increase with truck traffic expected to grow at a rate faster than projected traffic on some major roads, such as Interstate 80.
3. It is unlikely that trucks now using the PA Turnpike will shift routes through Centre County even with the completion of the major Centre County road projects – as the remaining projects will not significantly change the cost structure for through trucks. These improvements will, however, enhance local freight mobility for Centre County industry.
4. As the Long Range Plan process proceeds, consideration needs to be given to the relationship between land use and freight movement. This consideration, in terms of policy recommendations, should consider: a. types of land use permitted along freight routes; and, b. land use and access controls at interchanges.
5. Change in state and national freight facilities and operations should be regularly monitored to assess future implications for Centre County.
Regional Freight Perspective Report Page 33 May 2003