DOCSLIB.ORG

Louisiana Freight Mobility Plan December 2015

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Louisiana Freight Mobility Plan December 2015 Louisiana Freight Mobility Plan December 2015 prepared for prepared by Louisiana Freight Mobility Plan prepared for Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development prepared by CDM Smith Inc. December 2015 LOUISIANA FREIGHT MOBILITY PLAN Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Summary of Investment Recommendations ............................................................................. 1-2 1.1.1 Capital Investments ...................................................................................................... 1-2 1.2 Summary of Policy and Program Recommendations ................................................................ 1-2 1.2.1 Policy recommendations .............................................................................................. 1-3 1.2.2 Program recommendations .......................................................................................... 1-3 2. STRATEGIC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Federal Requirements ............................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Coordination with Relevant Plans ............................................................................................. 2-2 2.2.1 Statewide Transportation Plan ..................................................................................... 2-2 2.2.2 Other Relevant Plans, Studies and Initiatives ............................................................... 2-2 2.3 Louisiana Freight Mobility Plan Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures ...................... 2-3 2.3.1 Goal A: Economic Competitiveness and Efficiency....................................................... 2-5 2.3.2 Goal B: Safety and Security ........................................................................................... 2-5 2.3.3 Goal C: Infrastructure Preservation and Maintenance ................................................ 2-6 2.3.4 Goal D: Environmental Stewardship ............................................................................. 2-6 2.3.5 Goal E: Performance and Accountability ...................................................................... 2-6 3. ECONOMIC CONTEXT OF FREIGHT ......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Freight and the Louisiana Economy........................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Gross State Product ...................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.2 Freight Related Employment ........................................................................................ 3-4 3.1.3 Example Supply Chains ................................................................................................. 3-6 3.1.4 Freight Implications on the State’s Economy ............................................................. 3-10 4. FREIGHT POLICIES, STRATEGIES AND INSTITUTIONS ............................................................................. 4-1 4.1 Freight Policies ........................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 National Freight Strategies ........................................................................................................ 4-3 4.3 Louisiana Freight Institutions .................................................................................................... 4-3 4.3.1 Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development ....................................... 4-3 LOUISIANA FREIGHT MOBILITY PLAN | i TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.3.2 Louisiana Highway Safety Commission ........................................................................ 4-3 4.3.3 Louisiana Office of Motor Vehicles ............................................................................... 4-3 4.3.4 Louisiana Economic Development ............................................................................... 4-3 4.3.5 Metropolitan Planning Organizations .......................................................................... 4-4 4.3.6 Parishes/Municipalities ................................................................................................ 4-4 4.3.7 Airports ......................................................................................................................... 4-4 4.3.8 Port Authorities ............................................................................................................ 4-4 4.3.9 Louisiana Department of Natural Resources ................................................................ 4-4 4.4 Funding Programs for Freight-Related Projects ........................................................................ 4-5 4.4.1 Key Federal Freight Funding and Financing Provisions ................................................ 4-5 4.4.2 State Transportation Funding Programs/Sources ........................................................ 4-8 4.5 Stakeholder Engagement .......................................................................................................... 4-9 4.5.1 Freight Advisory Committee ......................................................................................... 4-9 4.5.2 Port Survey ................................................................................................................. 4-10 4.6 Decision Making Process ......................................................................................................... 4-11 4.6.1 Defining Freight Projects ............................................................................................ 4-11 4.7 Louisiana State Freight Transportation Network .................................................................... 4-12 4.7.1 Tier 1: National Primary Freight Network .................................................................. 4-13 4.7.2 Tier 2: Remainder of the Interstates .......................................................................... 4-13 4.7.3 Tier 3: Critical Freight Corridors.................................................................................. 4-14 4.7.4 Tier 4: Freight Connectors .......................................................................................... 4-14 4.8 Prioritization Process ............................................................................................................... 4-18 4.8.1 The Prioritization Framework ..................................................................................... 4-18 5. LOUISIANA FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION ASSETS ................................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Highway Assets .......................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.1 Roadway Mileage ......................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.2 Bridges .......................................................................................................................... 5-2 5.1.3 Truck Parking and Intermodal Connectors ................................................................... 5-2 5.2 Railroad Assets........................................................................................................................... 5-3 5.2.1 Rail System Ownership ................................................................................................. 5-3 5.2.2 Rail Freight Terminals ................................................................................................... 5-6 5.3 Waterway and Port Assets ........................................................................................................ 5-6 LOUISIANA FREIGHT MOBILITY PLAN | ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 5.3.1 Waterways .................................................................................................................... 5-7 5.3.2 Ports .............................................................................................................................. 5-7 5.4 Aviation Assets ........................................................................................................................... 5-9 5.5 Pipeline Assets ......................................................................................................................... 5-11 6. CONDITION AND PERFORMANCE .......................................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Highways .................................................................................................................................... 6-1 6.1.1 Congestion and Bottlenecks ......................................................................................... 6-4 6.1.2 Pavement Conditions.................................................................................................... 6-6 6.1.3 Bridge Conditions ......................................................................................................... 6-7 6.1.4 Safety and Security ....................................................................................................... 6-8 6.1.5 Other Factors Affecting Performance and Capacity ................................................... 6-11 6.2 Railroads .................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Election Calendars: Key Dates to Remember. 2020 Congressional Primary Calendar
    Election Calendars: Key Dates to Remember. 2020 Congressional Primary Calendar January February March April May June July August September October November December Primaries Election Day Congressional Primaries Major-party Major-party State Date State Date filing deadline filing deadline Alabama Mar. 3 Nov. 8, 2019 South Carolina Jun. 9 Mar. 30 Arkansas Mar. 3 Nov. 11, 2019 Virginia Jun. 9 Mar. 26 California Mar. 3 Dec. 6, 2019 New York Jun. 23 Apr. 2 North Carolina Mar. 3 Dec. 20, 2019 Utah Jun. 23 Mar. 19 Texas Mar. 3 Dec. 9, 2019 Colorado Jun. 30 Mar. 17 Mississippi Mar. 10 Jan. 15 Oklahoma Jun. 30 Apr. 10 Ohio Mar. 17 Dec. 18, 2019 Arizona Aug. 4 Apr. 6 Illinois Mar. 17 Dec. 2, 2019 Kansas Aug. 4 Jun. 1 Maryland Apr. 28 Feb. 5 Michigan Aug. 4 Apr. 21 Pennsylvania Apr. 28 Feb. 18 Missouri Aug. 4 Mar. 31 Indiana May 5 Feb. 7 Washington Aug. 4 May 15 Nebraska May 12 Feb. 18 (incumbents); Tennessee Aug. 6 Apr. 2 Mar. 2 (non-incumbents) Hawaii Aug. 8 Jun. 2 West Virginia May 12 Jan. 25 Connecticut Aug. 11 Jun. 9 Georgia May 19 Mar. 6 Minnesota Aug. 11 Jun. 2 Idaho May 19 Mar. 13 Vermont Aug. 11 May 28 Kentucky May 19 Jan. 28 Wisconsin Aug. 11 Jun. 1 Oregon May 19 Mar. 10 Alaska Aug. 18 Jun. 1 Iowa Jun. 2 Mar. 13 Florida Aug. 18 Apr. 24 Montana Jun. 2 Mar. 9 Wyoming Aug. 18 May 29 New Jersey Jun. 2 Mar. 30 New Sept. 8 Jun.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Annual Budget, General Fund Revenues Are Estimated at $98.2 Million
    JEFFERSON PARISH, LOUISIANA 2019 PROPOSED BUDGET JEFFERSON PARISH OFFICIALS Jefferson Parish President Michael S. Yenni MEMBERS, JEFFERSON PARISH COUNCIL Christopher L. Roberts Councilman-at-Large, Division A Council Chairman Cynthia Lee-Sheng Ricky J. Templet Councilwoman-at-Large, Division B Councilman, 1st District Paul D. Johnston Mark D. Spears, Jr. Councilman, 2nd District Councilman, 3rd District Dominick F. Impastato, III Jennifer Van Vrancken Councilman, 4th District Councilwoman, 5th District Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguishing Budget Presentation Award to Jefferson Parish, Louisiana for its Annual Budget for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2018. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as a financial plan, as an operations guide, and as a communications device. This award is valid for a period of one year only. We believe our current budget continues to conform to program requirements, and we are submitting it to GFOA to determine its eligibility for another award. 2019 Jefferson Parish Annual Budget i Table of Contents by Function Description Page Description Page Budget Award i Public Safety (Cont.) Table of Contents ii Board of Zoning Adjustments 115 Transmittal Letter 1 Inspection & Code Enforcement 117 Administrative Adjudication 119 Parish Profile Bureau of Administrative Adjudication 121 Parish Profile 5 Dept of Property Maint Zoning/Quality of Life 122
    [Show full text]
  • Carrier Locator: Interstate Service Providers
    Carrier Locator: Interstate Service Providers November 1997 Jim Lande Katie Rangos Industry Analysis Division Common Carrier Bureau Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554 This report is available for reference in the Common Carrier Bureau's Public Reference Room, 2000 M Street, N.W. Washington DC, Room 575. Copies may be purchased by calling International Transcription Service, Inc. at (202) 857-3800. The report can also be downloaded [file name LOCAT-97.ZIP] from the FCC-State Link internet site at http://www.fcc.gov/ccb/stats on the World Wide Web. The report can also be downloaded from the FCC-State Link computer bulletin board system at (202) 418-0241. Carrier Locator: Interstate Service Providers Contents Introduction 1 Table 1: Number of Carriers Filing 1997 TRS Fund Worksheets 7 by Type of Carrier and Type of Revenue Table 2: Telecommunications Common Carriers: 9 Carriers that filed a 1997 TRS Fund Worksheet or a September 1997 Universal Service Worksheet, with address and customer contact number Table 3: Telecommunications Common Carriers: 65 Listing of carriers sorted by carrier type, showing types of revenue reported for 1996 Competitive Access Providers (CAPs) and 65 Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (CLECs) Cellular and Personal Communications Services (PCS) 68 Carriers Interexchange Carriers (IXCs) 83 Local Exchange Carriers (LECs) 86 Paging and Other Mobile Service Carriers 111 Operator Service Providers (OSPs) 118 Other Toll Service Providers 119 Pay Telephone Providers 120 Pre-paid Calling Card Providers 129 Toll Resellers 130 Table 4: Carriers that are not expected to file in the 137 future using the same TRS ID because of merger, reorganization, name change, or leaving the business Table 5: Carriers that filed a 1995 or 1996 TRS Fund worksheet 141 and that are unaccounted for in 1997 i Introduction This report lists 3,832 companies that provided interstate telecommunications service as of June 30, 1997.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Staff Report
    CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF NEW ORLEANS MITCHELL J. LANDRIEU ROBERT D. RIVERS MAYOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR LESLIE T. ALLEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR City Planning Commission Staff Report Executive Summary Summary of Uptown and Carrollton Local Historic District Proposals: The Historic Preservation Study Committee Report of April 2016, recommended the creation of the Uptown Local Historic District with boundaries to include the area generally bounded by the Mississippi River, Lowerline Street, South Claiborne Avenue and Louisiana Avenue, and the creation of the Carrollton Local Historic District with boundaries to include the area generally bounded by Lowerline Street, the Mississippi River, the Jefferson Parish line, Earhart Boulevard, Vendome Place, Nashville Avenue and South Claiborne Avenue. These partial control districts would give the Historic District Landmarks Commission (HDLC) jurisdiction over demolition. Additionally, it would give the HDLC full control jurisdiction over all architectural elements visible from the public right-of-way for properties along Saint Charles Avenue between Jena Street and South Carrollton Avenue, and over properties along South Carrollton Avenue between the Mississippi River and Earhart Boulevard. Recommendation: The City Planning Commission staff recommends approval of the Carrollton and Uptown Local Historic Districts as proposed by the Study Committee. Consideration of the Study Committee Report: City Planning Commission Public Hearing: The CPC holds a public hearing at which the report and recommendation of the Study Committee are presented and the public is afforded an opportunity to consider them and comment. City Planning Commission’s recommendations to the City Council: Within 60 days after the public hearing, the City Planning Commission will consider the staff report and make recommendations to the Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Ronald Reagan, Louisiana, and the 1980 Presidential Election Matthew Ad Vid Caillet Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2011 "Are you better off "; Ronald Reagan, Louisiana, and the 1980 Presidential election Matthew aD vid Caillet Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Caillet, Matthew David, ""Are you better off"; Ronald Reagan, Louisiana, and the 1980 Presidential election" (2011). LSU Master's Theses. 2956. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/2956 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ―ARE YOU BETTER OFF‖; RONALD REAGAN, LOUISIANA, AND THE 1980 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in The Department of History By Matthew David Caillet B.A. and B.S., Louisiana State University, 2009 May 2011 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to many people for the completion of this thesis. Particularly, I cannot express how thankful I am for the guidance and assistance I received from my major professor, Dr. David Culbert, in researching, drafting, and editing my thesis. I would also like to thank Dr. Wayne Parent and Dr. Alecia Long for having agreed to serve on my thesis committee and for their suggestions and input, as well.
    [Show full text]
  • The Jefferson Parish Comprehensive Plan
    This document is designed to be printed double-sided. This is the back of the cover and is intentionally blank. Contents 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 1 2. WHO WE ARE ....................................................................... 5 3. WHAT WE SAID.................................................................. 11 4. OUR VISION ....................................................................... 13 5. LAND USE ......................................................................... 19 6. HOUSING ........................................................................... 39 7. TRANSPORTATION ............................................................ 47 8. COMMUNITY FACILITIES & OPEN SPACE .......................... 57 9. NATURAL HAZARDS & RESOURCES ................................. 71 10. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ............................................ 79 11. ADMINISTRATION & IMPLEMENTATION ......................... 83 APPENDICES A: COMMUNITY PROFILE B: OPPORTUNITIES & CONSTRAINTS C: IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS SINCE 2003 D: UPDATE PROCESS Envision Jefferson 2040 Page i As adopted on November 6, 2019 Prepared by: Under the guidance of the Comprehensive Plan Administration of Update Steering Committee appointed by the Parish Michael S. Yenni, Parish President President and Councilmembers Walter R. Brooks, Chief Operating Officer Bruce Layburn Michael J. Power, Esq., Chief Administrative Bruce Richards Assistant, Development Lloyd Tran Jefferson Parish Planning Department
    [Show full text]
  • Greater New Orleans New Greater
    Greater New Orleans Greater New Orleans Urban Water Plan Urban Water Urban Water Plan A Comprehensive, Integrated & Sustainable Water Management Strategy St. Bernard Parish and the east banks of Jefferson and Orleans Parishes Implementation Implementation Greater New Orleans Inc. State of Louisiana Office of Community Development U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development Waggonner & Ball Architects September 2013 Greater New Orleans Urban Water Plan Implementation Waggonner & Ball Architects September 2013 4 Greater New Orleans always has been surrounded by water and has thrived for nearly 300 years. Today the region faces new challenges, both outside the levee walls from rising seas and inside from land subsidence and regular flooding. A new approach to water - the region’s most abundant natural asset - is the foundation for building a safe and sustainable future on the Mississippi River delta. Greater New Orleans Urban Water Plan 5 Waggonner & Ball Architects AUTHOR Maria Papacharalambous Waggonner & Ball Architects CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS Mark S. Davis Tulane Institute on Water Resources Law and Policy William Marshall Waggonner & Ball Architects Prisca Weems FutureProof Rebecca Rothenberg GCR Inc. CONTRIBUTING TEAM Jenna Anger FutureProof Harry Vorhoff Tulane Institute on Water Resources Law and Policy Frederic Augonnet Tulane Institute on Water Resources Law and Policy Rafael Rabalais (formerly GCR) Tyler Antrup GCR Inc. Aron Chang Waggonner & Ball Architects Ramiro Diaz Waggonner & Ball Architects 6 Background Greater New Orleans Urban Water Plan In 2010, the State of Louisiana’s Office of Community Development - Disaster Recovery Unit funded Greater New Orleans, Inc. (GNO, Inc.) to develop a Comprehensive, Integrated and Sustainable Water Management Strategy for the east banks of Orleans and Jefferson Parishes and St.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States
    Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States The Contemporary Debate over Supreme Court Reform: Origins and Perspectives Written Statement of Nikolas Bowie Assistant Professor of Law, Harvard Law School June 30, 2021 Co-Chair Rodriguez, Co-Chair Bauer, and members of the Commission, thank you for inviting me to testify. You have asked for my opinion about the causes of the current public debate over reforming the Supreme Court of the United States, the competing arguments for and against reform at this time, and how the commission should evaluate those arguments. The cause of the current public debate over reforming the Supreme Court is longstanding: Americans rightfully hold democracy as our highest political ideal, yet the Supreme Court is an antidemocratic institution. The primary source of concern is judicial review, or the power of the Court to decline to enforce a federal law when a majority of the justices disagree with a majority of Congress about the law’s constitutionality. I will focus on two arguments for reforming the Supreme Court, both of which object to the antidemocratic nature of judicial review. First, as a matter of historical practice, the Court has wielded an antidemocratic influence on American law, one that has undermined federal attempts to eliminate hierarchies of race, wealth, and status. Second, as a matter of political theory, the Court’s exercise of judicial review undermines the value that distinguishes democracy as an ideal form of government: its pursuit of political equality. Both arguments compete with counterarguments that judicial review is necessary to preserve the political equality of so-called discrete and insular minorities.
    [Show full text]
  • Jefferson Parish Council
    2019 Jefferson Parish, Louisiana Comprehensive Annual Financial Report far the year ended December 31, 2019 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT JEFFERSON PARISH, LOUISIANA Year Ended December 31, 2019 Prepared By: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE JEFFERSON PARISH, LOUISIANA COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTORY SECTION LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ................................................................................................................................................................ V GFOA CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVEMENT ....................................................................................................................................... XXI SELECTED OFFICIALS OF THE PARISH OF JEFFERSON .......................................................................................................... XXII ADMINISTRATION ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS ......................................................................................................................... XXVI DEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONAL CHART ................................................................................................. XXVII FINANCIAL SECTION INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT .................................................................................................................................................. 1 MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Improving the Top-Two Primary for Congressional and State Races
    Towards a More Perfect Election: Improving the Top-Two Primary for Congressional and State Races CHENWEI ZHANG* I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 615 1I. B ACKGROUN D ................................................................................ 620 A. An Overview of the Law RegardingPrimaries ....................... 620 1. Types of Primaries............................................................ 620 2. Supreme Court JurisprudenceRegarding Political Partiesand Primaries....................................................... 622 B. The Evolution of the Top-Two Primary.................................. 624 1. A laska................................................................................ 62 5 2. L ouisiana .......................................................................... 625 3. California ......................................................................... 626 4. Washington ............................. ... 627 5. O regon ........................................... ................................... 630 I1. THE PROS AND CONS OF Top-Two PRIMARIES .............................. 630 A . P ros ......................................................................................... 63 1 1. ModeratingEffects ............................................................ 631 2. Increasing Voter Turnout................................................... 633 B . C ons ....................................................................................... 633
    [Show full text]
  • Documentation
    HOUSE BILL NO. 1 ENROLLED TABLE OF CONTENTS SCHEDULE 01 - EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT ..................................13 01-100 Executive Office ...........................................13 Administrative ..........................................13 Governor's Office of Coastal Activities .......................14 01-101 Office of Indian Affairs ......................................14 01-102 Office of the Inspector General ................................15 01-103 Mental Health Advocacy Service ..............................15 01-106 Louisiana Tax Commission ...................................16 01-107 Division of Administration ...................................17 Executive Administration ..................................17 Community Development Block Grant .......................17 Auxiliary Account .......................................18 01-109 Coastal Protection & Restoration Authority ......................19 01-111 Governor's Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness .........................................20 01-112 Department of Military Affairs ................................22 Military Affairs Program ..................................22 Education Program .......................................23 Auxiliary Account .......................................23 01-116 Louisiana Public Defender Board ..............................24 01-124 Louisiana Stadium and Exposition District .......................25 01-129 Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Criminal Justice ........................26
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy in the Age of Pandemic – Fair Vote UK Report June 2020
    Democracy in the Age of Pandemic How to Safeguard Elections & Ensure Government Continuity APPENDICES fairvote.uk Published June 2020 Appendix 1 - 86 1 Written Evidence, Responses to Online Questionnaire During the preparation of this report, Fair Vote UK conducted a call for written evidence through an online questionnaire. The questionnaire was open to all members of the public. This document contains the unedited responses from that survey. The names and organisations for each entry have been included in the interest of transparency. The text of the questionnaire is found below. It indicates which question each response corresponds to. Name Organisation (if applicable) Question 1: What weaknesses in democratic processes has Covid-19 highlighted? Question 2: Are you aware of any good articles/publications/studies on this subject? Or of any countries/regions that have put in place mediating practices that insulate it from the social distancing effects of Covid-19? Question 3: Do you have any ideas on how to address democratic shortcomings exposed by the impact of Covid-19? Appendix 1 - 86 2 Appendix 1 Name S. Holledge Organisation Question 1 Techno-phobia? Question 2 Estonia's e-society Question 3 Use technology and don't be frightened by it 2 Appendix 1 - 86 3 Appendix 2 Name S. Page Organisation Yes for EU (Scotland) Question 1 The Westminster Parliament is not fit for purpose Question 2 Scottish Parliament Question 3 Use the internet and electronic voting 3 Appendix 1 - 86 4 Appendix 3 Name J. Sanders Organisation emergency legislation without scrutiny removing civil liberties railroading powers through for example changes to mental health act that impact on individual rights (A) Question 1 I live in Wales, and commend Mark Drakeford for his quick response to the crisis by enabling the Assembly to continue to meet and debate online Question 2 no, not until you asked.
    [Show full text]