Final SACOG Phase 1 Goods Movement Report

THE TIOGA GROUP 

SACOG REGIONAL GOODS MOVEMENT 

STUDY 

Phase One Report 

The Tioga Group•Economic & Planning Systems 

Meyer, Mohaddes Associates• Jock O’Connel 

Prepared for: 

Sacramento Area Council Of Governments 

September 10, 2006 

288 Rheem Blvd., Moraga, CA 94556 

(925) 631-0742 fax (925) 631-7936 www.tiogagroup.com

THE TIOGA GROUP 

Jason Crow 

Senior Planner 

Sacramento Area Council of Governments 

1415 L Street, Suite 300 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Dear Mr. Crow: 

September 10, 2006 

We appreciate the opportunity to submit this Final Report for Phase One of the SACOG Regional Goods 

Movement Study. For this project, the Tioga Group was joined by Economic & Planning Systems, 

Meyer, Mohaddes Associates, and Jock O’Connel. 

The report follows the original Scope of Work closely, reorganized somewhat to make the material flow 

more smoothly and to reflect emerging priorities. As this is the first study of a multi-phase program, we 

have incorporated a fair amount of background information on the goods movement industry and how it 

operates in the SACOG region. 

We are grateful SACOG’s asistance in gathering and transmiting comments from Caltrans, the Port of 

Sacramento, the Sacramento County Airport System, Investnet, and other parties as well as the SACOG 

staff. The study team has reviewed these comments and made numerous changes in the draft report. 

We are committed to meeting and exceeding SACOG’s expectations for this project, and look forward to 

working on Phase two. 

Sincerely, 

Daniel Smith, Principal and Project Manager 

288 Rheem Blvd., Moraga, CA 94556 

(925) 631-0742 fax (925) 631-7936 www.tiogagroup.com

Contents 

I. INTRODUCTION 7 

II. HIGHWAYS AND TRUCKING 13 

III. RAILROADS 39 

IV. AIRPORTS 53 

V. PORT OF SACRAMENTO 59 

VI. FREIGHT AND DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES 69 

VII. GOODS MOVEMENT DATA AND GAP ANALYSIS 85 

VIII. GOODS MOVEMENT DECISION FACTORS 117 

IX. LOGISTICS TRENDS 127 

X. REGIONAL GOODS MOVEMENT ISSUES & NEEDS 131 

XI. GOODS MOVEMENT ECONOMIC IMPACTS 181 

XII. LAND USE AND REAL ESTATE ISSUES 197 

XIII. GOODS MOVEMENT LAND USE IMPLICATIONS 203 

XIV. NEXT STEPS 215 

APPENDIX A: GOODS MOVEMENT STAKEHOLDERS 217 

APPENDIX B: JURISDICTIONS SURVEY 233 

APPENDIX C: CASE STUDIES 239 

090906 Final SACOG Phase 1 Goods Movement Report THE TIOGA GROUP 

Page i

Exhibits 

Exhibit 1: Freight Transportation Participants 8 

Exhibit 2: SACOG Regional Goods Movement Network 9 

Exhibit 3: Goods Movements To, From, and Within the SACOG Region 10 

Exhibit 4: SACOG Region as Crossroads 11 

Exhibit 5: SACOG Region as Hub 12 

Exhibit 6: SACOG Region Highways 13 

Exhibit 7: Truck Percentages on Sacramento (City) Freeways 14 

Exhibit 8: Trucking Industry Structure. 16 

Exhibit 9: Dedicated and Contract Carriage 17 

Exhibit 10: For-Hire Carrier Revenue 17 

Exhibit 11: Four Prevalent Vehicles and Combinations 18 

Exhibit 12: Straight Truck 18 

Exhibit 13: Tractor 19 

Exhibit 14: Trailer 19 

Exhibit 15: Semi-trailer 20 

Exhibit 16: Converter Gear or “Doly” 20 

Exhibit 17: Tractor/Semi-trailer 21 

Exhibit 18: Western Doubles 21 

Exhibit 19: Truck and Trailer 22 

Exhibit 20: California Truck Fleet Composition 22 

Exhibit 21: Class 1-8 Gross Vehicle Weight Classifications 23 

Exhibit 22: California Truck Classifications 23 

Exhibit 23: Medium-duty Truck Body Type Examples 24 

Exhibit 24: Heavy-duty (Class 6-7) Truck Body Type Examples 25 

Exhibit 25: Tractor and 28-foot “Pup” Trailer 25 

Exhibit 26: Class 8 Tractors & Semi-Trailers 26 

Exhibit 27: Truck Types and Applications 27 

Exhibit 28: Heavy Duty Truck Uses - 1997 27 

Exhibit 29: Private and For-Hire Length of Haul 28 

Exhibit 30: Truck Payloads (Fresno COG Model) 29 

Exhibit 31: Generalized Truck Trip Patterns 30 

Exhibit 32: Trucking Industry Composite Expense Shares 32 

Exhibit 33: SACOG Truck “Terminal” Locations 34 

Exhibit 34: Yuba City-Marysville Regional Cluster 34 

Exhibit 35: West Sacramento Trucking Cluster 35 

Exhibit 36: West Sacramento Aerial Photo 35 


Page ii

Exhibit 37: Woodland Trucking Cluster 36 

Exhibit 38: MISTER Terminal Data by City 36 

Exhibit 39: MISTER Terminal Data by County 37 

Exhibit 40: Sacramento Area Rail Lines 39 

Exhibit 41: Sacramento Area Rail Connections 40 

Exhibit 42: Mechanized Intermodal Lift Equipment 41 

Exhibit 43: Typical Intermodal Terminal–BNSF Stockton 41 

Exhibit 44: Northern California/ Nevada Rail Intermodal Terminals 42 

Exhibit 45: Rail Auto Loading Facility (Richmond) 42 

Exhibit 46: Northern California Rail Auto Terminals 43 

Exhibit 47: California Rail Network 44 

Exhibit 48: Elvas Junction 45 

Exhibit 49: Double-stack Train on UP Canyon Subdivision 47 

Exhibit 50: Haggin Junction 48 

Exhibit 51: BNSF Train Operating Over Canyon Subdivision via Trackage Rights 49 

Exhibit 52: 2005 McClellan Transloading Carload Volume 50 

Exhibit 53: Sacramento Air Cargo Activity (Metric Tons) 55 

Exhibit 54: Port of Sacramento Facilities 59 

Exhibit 55: Port of Sacramento Tonnage 1990 - 2004 60 

Exhibit 56: Port of Sacramento Cargoes 60 

Exhibit 57: Port of Sacramento Area 61 

Exhibit 58: Port of Sacramento Hinterland 62 

Exhibit 59: Port of Sacramento General Cargo Wharf 6 66 

Exhibit 60: Central Freight Lines Terminal 70 

Exhibit 61: Con-Way Express Terminal 70 

Exhibit 62: FedEx Freight West Terminal 71 

Exhibit 63: Oak Harbor Freight lines Terminal 71 

Exhibit 64: Old Dominion Terminal 72 

Exhibit 65: Overnite & Other Terminals 72 

Exhibit 66: Roadway Terminal 73 

Exhibit 67: Watkins Freight Terminal 73 

Exhibit 68: Yellow Freight Terminal 74 

Exhibit 69: UPS Terminal 74 

Exhibit 70: Yellow Freight LTL Terminal Outside Tracy 75 

Exhibit 71: LTL and Parcel Terminal Locations 76 

Exhibit 72: 49er Travel Plaza 77 

Exhibit 73: Truck Scales 78 

Exhibit 74: Commercial Card Lock Fueling Sites 79 


Page iii

Exhibit 75: Truck Stop Fueling 80 

Exhibit 76: JR Davis Yard at Roseville 81 

Exhibit 77: Simple Supply Chain 82 

Exhibit 78: Woodland Distribution Center 82 

Exhibit 79: Sierra Northern Transloading at McClellan 84 

Exhibit 80: Sacramento Area Freight O/D Summary (2002) 87 

Exhibit 81: Major Commodity Flow Shares 88 

Exhibit 82: Destinations of Outbound Commodity Flows 88 

Exhibit 83: Origins of Inbound Commodity Flows 89 

Exhibit 84: Outbound Commodity Shares - 2002 90 

Exhibit 85: Inbound Commodity Shares–2002 91 

Exhibit 86: Local Commodity Shares - 2002 92 

Exhibit 87: Estimated Through vs. Local Freight Flows -2002 93 

Exhibit 88: Estimated Through Tonnage by Commodity - 2002 94 

Exhibit 89: Average Daily 3-5 Axle Trucks on Major SACOG Routes in 2004 95 

Exhibit 90: Average Daily 2004 3-5 Axle Trucks on Highways 5, 50, 70 96 

Exhibit 91: Average Daily 2004 3-5 Axle Trucks on Highways 80, 99, 113, 505 97 

Exhibit 92: Truck Count “Taper” on US Highway 50 (West to East) 98 

Exhibit 93: Truck Count “Taper” on US Highway 990 (South to North) 98 

Exhibit 94: California State Truck Flows - 1998 99 

Exhibit 95: Total Sacramento BEA Rail Tonnage -2003 100 

Exhibit 96: Outbound Rail Movements–2003 to 2020 100 

Exhibit 97: Inbound Rail Movements–2003 to 2020 101 

Exhibit 98: Local Rail Movements–2003 to 2020 101 

Exhibit 99: Projected Bay Area Train Counts 102 

Exhibit 100: 1999-2004 USACE SF Bay Tonnage Data 102 

Exhibit 101: USACE Port Data (000 short tons) 103 

Exhibit 102: Air Cargo at SMF and MHR–Metric Tons 104 

Exhibit 103: Carrier Shares of Sacramento Area Air Cargo 105 

Exhibit 104: SMF Actual vs. Master Plan Forecasts, Metric Tons 109 

Exhibit 105: MHR Actual vs. Master Plan Forecasts, Metric Tons 110 

Exhibit 106: International Air Cargo at SFO, Metric Tons 112 

Exhibit 107: Domestic Air Cargo at SFO, Metric Tons 113 

Exhibit 108: Supply Chain Schematic 118 

Exhibit 109: Cola Supply Chain Example 119 

Exhibit 110: Conceptual Modal Tradeoffs 121 

Exhibit 111: Mode Selection 122 

Exhibit 112: Unit Cost vs. Length of Haul 123 


Page iv

Exhibit 113: 100-ton Capacity Rail Car 125 

Exhibit 114: Logistics Costs as a Percent of GDP 128 

Exhibit 115: Supply Chain and Inventory Relationships 129 

Exhibit 116: Jurisdiction Survey Issue Ranking 132 

Exhibit 117: SACOG Goods Movement Study Survey Results 133 

Exhibit 118: California State Truck Route Types 142 

Exhibit 119: Sacramento County Truck Routes 144 

Exhibit 120: Yolo County Truck Routes 145 

Exhibit 121: Yuba County Truck Routes 146 

Exhibit 122: Sutter County Truck Routes 147 

Exhibit 123: Placer County Truck Routes 148 

Exhibit 124: El Dorado County Truck Routes 149 

Exhibit 125: City of Roseville Truck Routes 150 

Exhibit 126: City of Woodland Truck Routes 151 

Exhibit 127: Sacramento Metro Area Truck Routes 153 

Exhibit 128: Sacramento Area STAA Map 154 

Exhibit 129: Sacramento City Truck Routes 155 

Exhibit 130: Parking Location Issues - Conceptual 157 

Exhibit 131: Truck Parking in Residential Areas 158 

Exhibit 132: On-Street Truck Parking 159 

Exhibit 133: Trailer Drop Lot 160 

Exhibit 134: UC Riverside HHDDT Road Test Results 161 

Exhibit 135: American River Crossings 162 

Exhibit 136: El Dorado County Truck-Involved Collisions 168 

Exhibit 137: Placer County Truck-Involved Collisions 169 

Exhibit 138: Sacramento County Truck-Involved Collisions 170 

Exhibit 139: Sutter County Truck-Involved Collisions 171 

Exhibit 140: Yolo County Truck-Involved Collisions 172 

Exhibit 141: Yuba County Truck-Involved Collisions 173 

Exhibit 142: Reported Truck Traffic Generators 174 

Exhibit 143: Employment Growth Projections by Area 182 

Exhibit 144: SACOG Total Employment by Sector 183 

Exhibit 145: Total Employment by SACOG County and Sector, 2004 185 

Exhibit 146: Projected Employment by Industry (2004-2030) 186 

Exhibit 147: Projected Employment by Industry (2004-2030) 187 

Exhibit 148: Industry Employment as Percentage of Total Employment 187 

Exhibit 149: Logistics Sector Employment by County, 2004 189 

Exhibit 150: Logistics Sector Employment, 2004 190 


Page v

Exhibit 151: County Shares of Logistics Employment 191 

Exhibit 152: Average Annual Payroll in Logistics Sectors, 2004 191 

Exhibit 153: Regional Employment, Weekly Salary, and Annual Salary, 2004 192 

Exhibit 154: Logistics Sector Average Annual Wages, 2004 193 

Exhibit 155: Employment in Selected Sectors, Sacramento Region: 1990–2003 194 

Exhibit 156: Clusters of Opportunity by Employment Concentration 195 

Exhibit 157: SCAOG Region Leading Agricultural Commodities 195 

Exhibit 158: SACOG Region Manufacturing Employment, Payroll, Value Added 196 

Exhibit 159: Net Rentable Industrial Square Feet (in 1,000's 197 

Exhibit 160: Industrial Vacancy Rates by Submarket 198 

Exhibit 161: Industrial Net Absorption (in 1,000 square feet) 198 

Exhibit 162: Sacramento Region Trends 199 

Exhibit 163: IKEA Distribution Center Example 200 

Exhibit 164: West Sacramento Distribution Centers 200 

Exhibit 165: Estimated Space Demand 2004-2030: Warehouse/Distribution 201 

Exhibit 166: Industrial Lease Rates by Submarket 201 

Exhibit 167: Bay Area Warehouse Market Summary, 1Q06 202 

Exhibit 168: Narrower Streets 206 

Exhibit 169: Riverside Gateway Opportunity Site 206 

Exhibit 170: Opportunity Site Development Scenarios 207 

Exhibit 171: Alley Access to Older Buildings 208 

Exhibit 172: Mixed Use Developments 208 

Exhibit 173: Supporting Land Uses for Transit-Oriented Development 209 

Exhibit 174: I80 Trucking Cluster 213 

Exhibit 175: US50 Trucking Cluster 214 

Exhibit 176: Partial List of SACOG Region Trucking Firms 217 

Exhibit 177: SACOG Area LTL Truck Terminals 226 

Exhibit 178: SACOG Region Truck Stops (Partial Listing) 226 

Exhibit 179: SACOG Region “Card Lock” Truck Fueling Stations 226 

Exhibit 180: SACOG Region Truck Repair and Services 227 

Exhibit 181: Firms Described as Warehouses or Distribution Centers 228 

Exhibit 182: Air Cargo & Air Freight Forwarders 229 

Exhibit 183: Moving and Storage Companies 230 

Exhibit 184: Private Sector Goods Movement Advisory Group Attendees 231 

Exhibit 185: Public Sector Goods Movement Advisory Group Attendees 232 

Exhibit 186: Daily Deliveries at Whole Foods Market 251 


Page vi

I. Introduction 

Background 

The Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) and other agencies are confronting serious 

long-term freight mobility issues in California. Straightforward capacity increases that 

worked in the past–more highways, larger airports–are not enough for the future. Moreover, 

capacity increases that compromise the environment, tax the budget, and impinge on sensitive 

communities may no longer be possible or desirable. 

As both the regional Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Regional Transportation Planning 

Agency, SACOG has multiple freight transportation responsibilities. Regional policy makers 

need better information on goods movement: 

 

 

 

to understand the role freight transportation and distribution plays in the broader 

economic development of the SACOG region and the surrounding portions of 

northern California; 

to recognize planning and policy decisions with implications for freight transportation, 

and recognize freight transportation trends with implications for public policy 

and planning; and 

to make the well-informed trade-offs that are an inescapable part of planning in a 

complex urban environment. 

The recent development of the State Goods Movement Action Plan and the enormous funding 

commitment that it contemplates underscores the need for reliable, comprehensive goods movement 

information and insights. 

SACOG intends to develop a regional freight action plan that will be completed in three phases. 

Phase One of this effort, the subject of this report, begins this process by assessing current conditions 

in the SACOG region. The freight action plan is to be linked with the SACOG/Valley Vision 

Blueprint transportation and land use study, which will in turn serve as a key input to the 

2030 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and Metropolitan Transportation Improvement 

Plan (MTIP). This Phase One study wil thus serve as a building block of SACOG’s freight 

transportation policy and programming for years to come. 

This report addresses goods movement activities in the six-county SACOG region including 

highway, railroad, marine, and air cargo transportation. Warehouse and distribution centers, 

transloading facilities, and truck stop facilities are also discussed. 

A key objective of Phase One was to develop a well-organized body of data and information on 

goods movement in the SACOG region. This report, with its appendices, should provide planners 

and oficials with the “big picture” on freight transportation and distribution functions in the 

region and a firm basis for choosing where and when more detailed subsequent inquiry may be 

required in Phase Two. Economic and other factors influencing current goods movement deci- 


Page 7

sions in the region were incorporated in a trend analysis covering the next 10-20 years. Finally, 

this report preliminarily identifies the land use implications of goods movement in the region. 

Regional Freight Movements 

There can be numerous parties involved in seemingly simple freight movement, as shown in 

Exhibit 1 and listed below. 

Exhibit 1: Freight Transportation Participants 

SHIPPER - 

PREPARES AND 

ORGINATES THE 

MOVEMENT AT 

ORIGIN 

CARRIER– 

MOVES THE FREIGHT 

CONSIGNEE 

(RECEIVER) - 

RECEIVES THE 

FREIGHT AT 

DESTINATION 

INTERMEDIARY 

(OR THIRD PARTY) – 

ARRANGES TRANSPORTATION 

FOR OTHERS 

FLEET OPERATOR – 

OPERATES (AND MAY 

OWN) THE VEHICLES 

BENFICIAL OWNER – 

ACTUALLY OWNS THE GOODS 

(AND MAY BE THE SHIPPER OR 

THE CONSIGNEE) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shippers (typically manufacturers or other producers and distributors) prepare 

freight for transport and originate the movement. 

Consignees or receivers (typically customers of the shippers) receive the freight at 

the destination. 

The shipper or receiver may or may not actually own the goods. The party who 

owns the goods being shipped is the beneficial owner. 

Carriers (transportation service providers) are firms that move freight by one or 

more mode. The direct customer of a freight carrier may be a shipper, a consignee, 

a beneficial owner, an intermediary, or even another carrier. 

Fleet operators operate (and may also own and maintain) the vehicles used to 

move freight. Fleet operators include both for-hire carriers (that transport freight 

for customers as the primary business) and private operators (that transport their 

own freight, usually for final delivery to customers). 

Intermediaries or third parties (including freight forwarders, shipper’s agents, third 

party logistics managers, and brokers) arrange transportation on behalf of shippers 

or receivers. 

There are three basic goods movement patterns corresponding to the triple role of the SACOG 

Region. 


Page 8

Regional Network 

Exhibit 2 shows the complete SACOG region goods movement network, a complex of highways, 

rail lines, streets, waterways, and airports. Besides the overall complexity, this exhibit clearly 

illustrates the convergence of the network in Sacramento. 

Exhibit 2: SACOG Regional Goods Movement Network 


Page 9

Regional Production and Consumption: Local Movements 

The region produces and consumes goods as a function of its population, resources, and economic 

activity. Production and consumption results in goods movements to, from, and within the 

region (Exhibit 3). 

Exhibit 3: Goods Movements To, From, and Within the SACOG Region 

REGIONAL PRODUCTION & 

CONSUMPTION: 

MOVEMENTS TO, FROM, 

AND WITHIN 

These movements are predominantly truck trips but also include air cargo (with pickup and delivery 

by truck), waterborne shipments (with inland transport by truck or rail), and rail carload 

service (direct or transloaded). 

Crossroads: Through Movements 

The highways and rail lines converging and radiating in the SACOG region make it a crossroads 

for goods movements between other regions (Exhibit 3). 


Page 10

Exhibit 4: SACOG Region as Crossroads 

REGIONAL CROSSROADS: 

THROUGH MOVEMENTS 

The through movements are again mostly truck trips but also include substantial volumes of carload 

and intermodal rail trafic. There is no through maritime trafic and “through” air trafic 

does not affect the region. 

Regional Hub 

The confluence of the rivers and valleys and its central location have made the Sacramento area a 

regional hub for more than a century, since the establishment of Suter’s Fort. Its role as a hub 

results in consolidation, distribution, and transloading movements ( Exhibit 5). 


Page 11

Exhibit 5: SACOG Region as Hub 

REGIONAL HUB: 

CONSOLIDATION, DISTRIBUTION, & 

TRANSLOADING MOVEMENTS 


Page 12

II. Highways and Trucking 

Highways 

The highway network in the SACOG region has multiple layers. 

 

 

 

The Interstate highway system is a federally-funded backbone for regional and interregional 

movement. As shown in Exhibit 6, the SACOG region is served by Interstate 

5 running north-south, Interstate 80 running east-west, Business 80 running 

through Sacramento, and Interstate 505 connecting them through Winters. 

The California State highway system (US50 and US99, Exhibit 6) predate the Interstate 

system. Now, they provide access to portions of the region off the Interstates. 

US99, in particular, serves the population centers of the Sacramento and San Joaquin 

Valleys that Interstate 5 bypasses. 

Surface streets and roads are a mixed city and county system. For the purposes of 

goods movement, they provide access to most actual origins and destinations. 

Exhibit 6: SACOG Region Highways 

Interstate 5, Interstate 80, SR99, SR70, and US50 all converge in Sacramento. The percentage of 

truck traffic on freeways in the City of Sacramento is summarized in Exhibit 7. I5 through downtown 

Sacramento has the highest truck percentage (9.6 percent), while US50 has the lowest percentage 

of trucks (3.4 percent). 


Page 13

Exhibit 7: Truck Percentages on Sacramento (City) Freeways 

Interstate/Highway 

Vehicle 

Percentage of 

1 Truck AADT1 

AADT Trucks 

I5 at I Street 170,000 16,320 9.6% 

I80 east of Jct. I5 143,000 8,190 5.7% 

US50 east of Jct. SR 99 221,000 7,450 3.4% 

SR99 south of Jct. US50 216,000 9,740 4.5% 

Bus. 80 north of Jct. US 50 163,000 8,150 5.0% 

1 AADT = Average annual daily traffic volumes. Volumes reflect freeway segments closest to downtown Sacramento 

for comparison purposes. Source: Caltrans, 2004; City of Sacramento 

The I80 bypass keeps east-west I80 traffic out of downtown Sacramento, but does not help US50 

traffic. The rapid residential and commercial development east of Sacramento to Placerville and 

the comparable growth in the Carson Valley south of Reno, however, has greatly increased the 

demand for trucking on US50. Interstate 505 provides a bypass between I5 and I80 (and SR113 

between Woodland and Davis provides an alternate bypass). North-south traffic on I5 itself, 

however, must still pass through the western edge of downtown Sacramento. SR99 and SR70 

merge north of Sacramento and merge with I5 east of the Sacramento airport. To continue on 

SR99, trucks must jog 2 miles east through congested urban traffic in Sacramento. 

Usage of Freeways and Highways 

Truck drivers and dispatchers view the highway network from a different perspective than auto 

drivers. The general comments below reflect common industry experience. 

Interstate 80 

Interstate 80 is the only practical route to/from the Bay Area and it is used for multiple purposes. 

One is for distribution of finished goods into the population and manufacturing located in the 

Bay Area. Another is for trips to the Port of Oakland for export of agricultural products from the 

SACOG region. Imports to the SACOG region and northern Nevada coming into the Ports of 

Benicia (autos) and Oakland (containers) also use this route. This route and I80 east are also 

used by trucks between California and points east of the Sierra Nevada for all purposes. Finally, 

it is the only route for the long haul trucks using I80 to/from points east of Sacramento to get 

to/from the Bay Area. This is the primary route for goods consumed in the SACOG region coming 

from the east, and the route for distribution of finished goods originating or rehandled in the 

SACOG region and distributed to the east (e.g. Reno/Sparks). This is also the route for trucks 

that transit the SACOG region to/from points west (Bay Area), south (Central Valley), and to an 

extent north (Sacramento Valley). 

Interstate 80 is subject to heavy, recurring congestion all the way to Oakland and lacks rest areas 

and truck parking closer to the Bay Area. To the east this route may have insufficient capacity 

for growing trucking operations as lane reductions occur too soon. Safety can be compromised 

when truckers have to move one lane to the left as lanes are dropped. Drivers find it difficult to 

cross oncoming traffic entering at Business I80 to get to the right hand lanes and sightlines approaching 

the junction where Business I80 merges from the right are also a source of problems. 


Page 14

Interstate 5 

Truckers use I5 to access local customers, West Sacramento industry, and trucking domiciles. I5 

is the primary route to from Northern California and Pacific Northwest. There are relatively few 

customers south on I5 so truckers use it primarily as a through route to/from San Joaquin County 

and points south. Truckers have difficulty with the frequency of interchanges and entering lanes 

on I5. I5 is perceived as lacking capacity, with too many entrances and exits north of Meadowview. 

US50 

Truckers use US50 to access local customers all the way to South Tahoe. Truck drivers avoid it 

on weekends and holidays because of the vacation traffic. US50 is not a high-capacity highway, 

especially east of Placerville. 

US99 

Truckers use US99 to access local customers and trucking terminals that are mostly bypassed by 

I5, so US99 is the primary route for trips to Central Valley points as far as Bakersfield. This is 

the “trucker’s aley”.US99 was built to older designs, with awkward entrances and exits in some 

areas. There are few rest stops. Where US99 still has intersections with surface streets truckers 

would prefer limited access. 

SR65/70 

State highways 65 and 70 are used to access local customers. Truckers also use SR65 connecting 

to SR20 as a “cut-of” between I80 and I5. These routes suffer from lack of capacity, rough 

pavement, and heavy side traffic. 

Howe-Power Inn/ Watt Ave/Grant Line-Sunrise/Hazel-Sierra College 

These surface routes are used for local service and to bypass US99/Business I80 during periods 

of congestion. The “funnel efect” geting acros the American River creates its own congestion. 

SR12 

SR12 is used for local service and as a cut-off between Napa, Sonoma, Solano, and Central Valley 

areas. SR12 is becoming a major trucking route to bypass Sacramento. This route requires 

special mention because so little of it is within the SACOG territory. 

Trucking Industry Structure 

In the context of freight movement, the “trucking industry” is usualy taken to include commercial, 

private, and owner-operators of trucks carrying goods.The concept of “carying goods” becomes 

complex when the “goods” can include new equipment being delivered to the buyer, the 


Page 15

same equipment being moved the next day to a job site, or a combination of the same equipment, 

supplies, and personnel. 

There are many diferent definitions of the “trucking industry” and many diferent estimates of 

its size. In March 2000 there were reportedly more than 500,000 motor carriers in the U.S. As 

of 1998, about 9.7 million people were employed in logistics, of which about 30 percent were 

truck drivers. The chart in Exhibit 8 provides an overall perspective on the trucking industry for 

fleets larger than 10 vehicles. 

Exhibit 8: Trucking Industry Structure. 

Total 

84,872 Fleets 

12,383,061 Vehicles 

For-Hire 

28,448 Fleets 


Private 

37,975 Fleets 

3,092, 720 Vehicles 

Private-Type 

18,449 Fleets 


Common Carriers 

25,534 Fleets 


Lease/Rental 

2,914 Fleets 


Retail & Wholesale 

Delivery 

7,605 Fleets 

628,024 Vehicles 

Government 

9,544 Fleets 


Schools 

3,744 Fleets 


Public Utility 

3,842 Fleets 


Buses 

1,319 Fleets 


Interstate 

Local 

Intrastate 

Full-Service Lease 

Finance Lease 

Rental 

Food 

Distribution 

7,159 Fleets 


Construction 

& Mining 

11,386 Fleets 


Federal 

Municipal 

State 

County 

School District 

Private Contractors 

Telephone 

Electric 

Gas 

Interstate 

Local 

Intrastate 

Manufacturing 

& Distribution 

5,870 Fleets 


Petroleum 

3,100 Fleets 


Sanitation 

& Refuse 

1,307 Fleets 


Other Services 

1,548 Fleets 


For-Hire vs. Private Fleets. Commercial carriers are companies where trucking is the primary 

business. At private carriers, trucking is not the primary business, but is conducted in support of 

the primary business (e.g., sale of goods). Owner-operators can be commercial carriers, but most 

often provide capacity to either commercial or private carriers under contract. 

These categories overlap, as do the purposes of their truck trips. For example: 

 

 

Commercial contract carriers may operate as a private fleet while in the service of a 

major customer. 

Owner-operators commonly drive for either a commercial trucking firms or for a 

private fleet, supplying a tractor and occasionally a trailer. 

In common public parlance, “trucker” refers to for-hire carriers. There are two types: 

 

Common carriers. Common carriers are those that offer services to anyone with 

freight to move. In practice, common carriers typically specialize by commodity or 

region. Most trucking firms familiar to the general public are common carriers. 


Page 16

Dedicated carriers. For-hire motor carriers include companies that operate on a dedicated 

basis under contract to a shipper or receiver of the goods (also sometimes called 

contract carriers). Some carriers are exclusively common or dedicated carriers while others 

offer both common and dedicated service. 

It is often hard to distinguish between dedicated and private fleets. In Exhibit 9, the Pepsi truck 

has a tractor with the Pepsi logo. Pepsi-Cola contracted out with a truckload carrier to provide 

dedicated service, and the dedicated tractors used for Pepsi shipments carry the Pepsi logo. In 

the other picture, DuPont owns both the tank truck and the tractor, while the driver is hired on a 

contract basis. DuPont is a private fleet operator while Pepsi-Cola is not. 

Exhibit 9: Dedicated and Contract Carriage 

The for-hire carrier sector can be split out by revenue, as shown in Exhibit 10. Typical closedvan 

truckload business accounts for about 29% of the revenue, but all kinds of truckload business 

together accounts for almost 60%. Less-than-truckload (LTL) carriage accounts for much more 

of the revenue than of the vehicles or miles, because the revenue per ton is much higher (as is the 

cost). 

Exhibit 10: For-Hire Carrier Revenue 

Household Goods 

5% 

Tank 

6% 

Bulk 

2% 

Refrigerated 

7% Other 

9% 

Less Than 

Truckload 

42% 

Truckload 

29% 


Page 17

Truck Types and Uses 

“Trucks” and combination vehicles vary in their configuration. Four types of commercial vehicles 

and combinations are common in California (Exhibit 11). 

Exhibit 11: Four Prevalent Vehicles and Combinations 

Straight truck 

3 axle tractor with tandem axle 

semi-trailer (“semi”) 

2 axle tractor with two 

single axle semitrailers 

(“doubles”) 

Three axle straight truck 

coupled to a two axle full 

(pull) trailer 

These and all truck combinations all are made up of one or more basic units defined below. 

A truck (Exhibit 12) is a single powered unit with both the steering axle and the drive axle(s) on 

a single chassis, and a provision for mounting a body on the top of the chassis. Trucks are often 

caled “straight trucks” to distinguish them from tractor-trailers. The majority of trucks are 

straight trucks, especially the smaller types used in local goods movement and service delivery. 

Exhibit 12: Straight Truck 


Page 18

A tractor (Exhibit 13) is a single powered unit with a steering axle and drive axle(s), with a device 

caled a “fifth wheel” that alows the tractor to be coupled to a semi-trailer. 

Exhibit 13: Tractor 

A trailer (Exhibit 14) is a non-powered, stand-alone cargo-carrying unit that can be pulled by a 

truck or another powered unit. True trailers are self-supporting. 

Exhibit 14: Trailer 

A semi-trailer (Exhibit 15) is an unpowered unit with a kingpin mounted in an upper coupler at 

the nose suitable for connecting to the fifth wheel on a tractor. A semi-trailer has axles only at 

the rear and must be connected and pulled via the fifth wheel. 


Page 19

Exhibit 15: Semi-trailer 

A “converter gear” or “doly” (Exhibit 16) can be used under the front of a semi-trailer, effectively 

converting the semi-trailer into a true trailer. Thus converted, a semi-trailer can be hitched 

to another semi-trailer to create “doubles” or “triples”, or puled behind a straight truck. 

Exhibit 16: Converter Gear or “Doly” 

Tractor/semi-trailer. (Exhibit 17) A tandem axle tractor pulling a tandem axle semi-trailer usualy 

40’ to 53’ long. The combination usualy has an overal length of 65-75’. 


Page 20

Exhibit 17: Tractor/Semi-trailer 

Western doubles. (Exhibit 18) A single axle tractor puling two single axle trailers (usualy 28’) 

connected to each other with a converter gear. The combination has an overall length of 65-75’. 

Exhibit 18: Western Doubles 

Truck and trailer. (Exhibit 19) A tandem axle straight truck pulling a full trailer. The combination 

usualy has an overal length of 50’-75’ depending on the spacing between the axles. 


Page 21

Exhibit 19: Truck and Trailer 

Truck Classifications 

Trucks may be classified in many different ways but the most common method uses gross vehicle 

weight. Manufacturers are required by law and industry standards to provide GVWR (gross 

vehicle weight rating) for every vehicle, divided into eight classes. The Vehicle Inventory and 

Use Survey (VIUS) provides fleet composition data for California (Exhibit 20). 

Exhibit 20: California Truck Fleet Composition 

Class GVWR Vehicles 

% of Total 

Vehicles 

Annual Miles 

% of Total 

Miles 

Avg. Miles 

1 6,000 lb or less 5,749,109 67.6% 77,953,261,227 67.1% 13,559 

2 6,001 to 10,000 lb 2,293,163 27.0% 27,067,965,325 23.3% 11,804 

3 10,001 to 14,000 lb 46,897 0.6% 742,912,501 0.6% 15,841 

4 14,001 to 16,000 lb 25,135 0.3% 414,865,297 0.4% 16,505 

5 16,001 to 19,500 lb 5,144 0.1% 41,011,297 0.0% 7,973 

6 19,501 to 26,000 lb 182,826 2.1% 2,349,220,285 2.0% 12,849 

7 26,001 to 33,000 lb 32,270 0.4% 1,260,160,254 1.1% 39,051 

8 33,001 lb and greater 170,149 2.0% 6,321,962,604 5.4% 37,155 

Total 8,504,693 100.0% 116,151,358,790 100.0% 13,657 

Source: Vehicle Inventory and User Survey Data (VIUS), U.S. Census Bureau 

The silhouette drawings (Exhibit 21) suggest the variety of body types and applications within 

each weight classification. 


Page 22

Exhibit 21: Class 1-8 Gross Vehicle Weight Classifications 

The number of Clas 1 and 2 light trucks overwhelms the “truck” population (Exhibit 22), as 

these include vans, SUVs, and pickups used for personal transportation and incidental service or 

goods movement trips. These two clases represent over 90% of the California “trucks” in use. 

Exhibit 22: California Truck Classifications 

T r u c k s 

7 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 

6 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 

5 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 

4 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 

3 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 

L IG H T 

T R U C K S 

2 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 

1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 

M E D IU M 

T R U C K S 

H E A V Y 

T R U C K S 

- 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 

V e h ic le C la s s 

Source: Source: Vehicle Inventory and User Survey Data (VIUS), U.S. Census Bureau 

Class 3-5 Trucks 

By many definitions, “trucks” start at Clas 3. The population of Classes 3 through 5 is definitely 

a minority of the total count. (Exhibit 20) These light-to-medium duty trucks are heavily concentrated 

in private fleets for local goods movement and services. In recent years, the number and 

proportion of Class 3–5 trucks has been increasing. The growing demand for more vehicles of 


Page 23

this size is related to increasing population in metropolitan centers, changes in inventory practices, 

greater demand for expedited services, greater demand for parcel and express services, and 

the growth of the service industry. 

Exhibit 23 illustrates the wide variety of body types within the medium-duty group, in this case 

Class 5 vehicles of 16,001-19,500 lbs GVWR. In particular, the medium duty trucks are well 

suited for service applications that require truck-mounted equipment such as utilities, landscaping, 

and towing. Medium duty chassis are also used for motor homes, shuttle buses, and other 

passenger and recreational applications. 

Exhibit 23: Medium-duty Truck Body Type Examples 

School Bus Cube Ambulance 

Shuttle Bus Motor Home Rolloff 

Service Snow Removal Landscaping Dump 

Flatbed Utility Stake 

Class 6-8 Trucks 

Class 6 trucks are sometimes classified as medium-duty, while Class 7 trucks are usually classified 

as heavy-duty. The differences can be minimal. Some chassis are sold as either Class 6 or 

Class 7 depending on the engine and running gear installed. 

Clas 7 and Clas 8 vehicles include the “18 wheelers” and dominate the intercity activity on the 

major highways. In an urban area, Class 7 and Class 8 vehicles are also prominent, but the reason 

is a combination of factors. First, there are the intercity vehicles that happen to be in the urban 

area at the time of picking up, delivering or transiting goods. Second, there are the local 

trucks that do not leave the area. Local sub-sectors of the trucking industry such as dump trucks 

hauling aggregates, tank trailer haulers, and intermodal trucking use Class 8 tractors but operate 

within a given metropolitan area. 

The body types in Exhibit 24 illustrate the variety of Class 6 and Class 7 applications. These 

units are also configured as tractors for short-haul use with semi-trailers, particularly in urban 

areas for local pickup and delivery, as shown in Exhibit 25. 


Page 24

Exhibit 24: Heavy-duty (Class 6-7) Truck Body Type Examples 

Exhibit 25: Tractor and 28-foot “Pup” Trailer 

Source: Tioga Group photo 

Class 8 trucks (33,000 lbs. and over) are heavy-duty vehicles by any definition. Class 8 includes 

both straight trucks and tractors for use with semi-trailers. Exhibit 26 shows Class 8 tractors in 

semi-trailer applications. 


Page 25

Exhibit 26: Class 8 Tractors & Semi-Trailers 

By some estimates, there are roughly 20 million trucks in the United States of which a little more 

than 10% are the Clas 8 heavy duty vehicles, or “big rigs,” commonly asociated with “trucking”. 

 

 

 

 

39% of the vehicles are in common carrier fleets such as Con-Way West or Roadway. 

25% of the vehicles are in private fleets that serve commercial businesses, particularly 

wholesale and retail delivery, construction, and mining. 

24% are in private-like fleets, mostly government, such as PG&E, telephone companies, 

or Caltrans. 

12% are in lease/rental fleets such as Penske or Ryder Truck Rental, which in operation 

would be divided primarily between the commercial carriers and the private 

business fleets. 

Truck Type Applications 

Exhibit 27 shows, in the shaded entries, the GVWR classes typically used in three kinds of trucking. 

As the diagram suggests, service providers make much more use of light GVWR Class 1 

and Class 2 vehicles than freight haulers on either the long-haul or local levels. The major area 

of overlap in light-duty trucks is likely to be in Class 2, which includes some parcel delivery vehicles, 

and Class 3, which includes a broader array of parcel, delivery and other light freighthauling 

trucks. 


Page 26

Exhibit 27: Truck Types and Applications 

Over-the 

–Road 

Point-to- 

Point 

Autos, 

SUVs, 

Minivans 

Pickups, 

Vans 

Utility 

Light 

Trucks 

10,000+ 

lb 

GVWR 

Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 

Class 

4 

Medium Trucks 

14,000+ lb GVWR 

Class 

5 

Class 

6 

Heavy Trucks 

26,000+ lb 

GVWR 

Class 

7 

Class 

8 

Pickup & 

Delivery 

Local 

Networks 


Class 

4 

Class 

5 

Class 

6 

Class 

7 

Class 

8 

Service, 

Diffuse 

Networks 


Class 

4 

Class 

5 

Class 

6 

Class 

7 

Class 

8 

Exhibit 28 shows the uses of heavy duty trucks, the classes that are most visible to the public as 

“trucks”. 

 

 

Only about a third of the heavy-duty trucks are used in for-hire trucking (e.g. hauling 

other people’s goods for pay). 

Two-thirds of the heavy-duty trucks are used by private firms (hauling their own 

goods), service industries, or government 

Exhibit 28: Heavy Duty Truck Uses - 1997 

8% 

For Hire 

15% 

32% 

Construction 

M ining 

Utilities 

Forestry 

8% 

M anufacturing 

Retail 

6% 

6% 

3% 

2%2% 

18% 

Service 

Agriculture 

Wholesale 

Private fleets are overwhelmingly used in local and regional business. (Exhibit 29) A very large 

part of the total trucking activity is therefore carried out by local and regional carriers, contrac- 


Page 27

tors, and fleet operators whose names are not familiar to the general public. This perspective 

contrasts with a common asociation of “trucking” with large semi-trailers bearing prominent 

trucking company names moving over long distances. 

90% 

80% 

Exhibit 29: Private and For-Hire Length of Haul 

1997 California Shipments: Truck LOH Distribution 

70% 

Sh 60% 

are 

of 

50% 

To 

ns 

40% 

For-Hire Truck 

Private Truck 

Parcel & USPS 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

Exhibit 30: Truck Payloads (Fresno COG Model) 

MHDT Payload 

HHDT Payload 

Commodity Description 

Long- 

Long- 

Local 

Local 

Distance 

Distance 

Farm Products 4.8 7.2 11.5 13.9 

Forest Products 1.1 13.3 3.0 15.6 

Fresh fish or other marine products 3.3 8.8 6.3 12.2 

Metallic Ores 7.0 8.8 7.0 5.9 

Coal 7.0 8.8 7.0 5.9 

Crude Petroleum, natural gas or gasoline 2.6 14.1 3.9 13.1 

Nonmetallic minerals 7.0 14.1 7.0 5.9 

Ordinance or accessories 3.4 4.9 8.2 10.1 

Food and kindred products 3.3 8.8 6.3 12.2 

Tobacco products 4.8 7.2 12.6 14.2 

Textile mill products 1.5 3.5 6.4 10.8 

Apparel or other finished textile products 1.5 3.5 6.4 10.8 

Lumber or wood products 2.5 10.2 9.0 12.1 

Furniture or fixtures 0.8 0.9 3.5 9.4 

Pulp, paper or allied products 3.2 19.1 7.1 13.9 

Printed matter 3.2 19.1 7.1 13.9 

Chemicals or allied products 8.3 12.2 3.7 12.1 

Petroleum or coal products 2.6 14.1 3.9 13.1 

Rubber or miscellaneous plastic products 0.5 6.7 3.8 10.7 

Leather or leather products 1.5 3.5 6.4 10.8 

Clay, concrete, glass or stone products 2.6 10.1 9.5 10.8 

Primary metal products 1.4 5.4 6.1 9.3 

Fabricated metal products 1.4 1.9 6.9 8.0 

Machinery excluding electrical 2.2 8.0 4.2 11.0 

Electrical machinery, equipment or supplies 2.2 8.0 4.2 11.0 

Transportation equipment 1.2 1.3 4.2 10.5 

Instruments, photographic goods, optical goods 1.5 6.1 3.4 12.0 

Miscellaneous products of manufacturing 2.2 6.1 8.6 10.0 

Miscellaneous mixed freight 3.4 4.9 8.2 10.1 

Hazardous waste or materials 3.4 13.6 4.0 10.2 

Unweighted Average 3.0 8.5 6.3 11.0 

Although the experience of individual truck fleet operators and customers may vary widely, the 

numbers reveal some instructive tendencies. 

 

 

Local movements are significantly lighter than long-distance moves. In fact, the local 

average shown are only half the long-distance averages. This is consistent with 

the tendency to make more partially loaded trips in local service. In particular, 

trucks making a series of calls on a local route will usually be only partly filled at 

any given time. 

Few trucks are loaded to their full weight capacity. The heaviest average weights 

are shown for forest products (e.g. logs or wood chips, not finished lumber). While 

a Class 8 tractor and semi trailer may technically be able to carry twenty tons or 

more, the average of the weights shown for long-haul, heavy duty trucks is just 11 

tons and the range is 5.9 to 15.6 tons. 


Page 29

Trucking Movement Patterns 

Local trucking movements include pickups (gathering or assembly), delivery (distribution), 

empty movement (repositioning or stem miles), and an endless variety of combinations. Residential 

customers of United Parcel Service, FedEx Express and other parcel carriers tend to view 

them as delivery services, while commercial customers see them as both delivery and pickup 

services. 

In contrast, inter-regional truckload trips typically enter the region to deliver an inbound load at a 

local destination, reposition the empty trailer to another shipper to pick up an outbound load, and 

then depart the region. The empty repositioning move may originate and terminate in the local 

area, but is treated as part of the inter-regional freight movement. A more perplexing case is 

when a “long-haul” truckload carier takes a local load in the course of repositioning for a longhaul 

assignment. 

The “goods” or “freight” being picked up and delivered in local trucking can include waste, returned 

goods, recyclables, etc. Examples of such movements include the following: 

 

 

 

 

 

Garbage and recycling pickups. 

Hazardous and biohazard materials pickups for disposal. 

Empty pallets, bins, and other shipping containers being returned empty. 

Construction debris or excavation spoils. 

Used equipment, vehicles and goods of all kinds 

Historically, commercial trucking services were divided into those with fixed, repetitive routes 

and “iregular route” cariers whose origins and destination varied with the shipment. Deregulation 

and other changes have erased the official designations, but there are still only a few basic 

trucking patterns (Exhibit 31). 

Exhibit 31: Generalized Truck Trip Patterns 

(Repeats on itself) 

Hub and spoke 

Irregular route 

Fixed route 


Page 30

Hub and Spoke. These are long haul, multi-national, inter-city networks operated 

by commercial LTL and parcel carriers. Typically the carrier gathers small shipments 

at multiple local terminals, shuttles them to regional hubs, where shipments 

are consolidated into larger trucks for over-the-highway (OTR) movement to local 

terminals for intra-city operations. At destination, the shipments are sorted and 

transferred into smaller trucks for local delivery. UPS, USPS, FedEx Ground, 

FedEx Freight, Yellow Roadway, Conway and other nationally known parcel and 

LTL carriers operate this way. 

Irregular Route. Truckload shipments usually move directly from origin to destination. 

If the shipment is local and repetitive, the truck may return to origin empty. 

However, for regional and long haul movements the truck must be “repositioned” 

empty to its next load. Trucks and drivers move from assignment to assignment, 

and may never follow the same pattern twice. 

Fixed Route. The archetypical pattern for local trucking is delivery of small shipments 

along a fixed route within a given city. Mail delivery is a familiar example. 

The actual route may be fixed, as in mail delivery, or may vary within a territory, as 

in UPS or FedEx Ground parcel service. The patern can apply to “descending” 

loads (the truck starts out ful and ends up empty after making deliveries), “ascending” 

loads (the truck starts out empty and ends up ful after making pickups), or a 

combination (which usually is the case with mail). 

There are common variations on each of the above. 

The “spoke” portion of intercity hub and spoke networks is typicaly some variation 

on fixed routes but not necessarily daily. 

Some intercity routes can have very fixed patterns in terms of timing and locations. 

Some intra-city routes can be very irregular when responding to demand that is 

placed with very short notice such as emergency shipments. 

These general transportation patterns apply to both freight movement and service delivery and 

each can be observed in endless variations and combinations. The rail, air, marine, and pipeline 

modes do not have the pickup and delivery flexibility of trucks and operate almost exclusively in 

hub-and-spoke patterns. 

Trucking Cost Structure 

Commercial trucking is a highly competitive, low-margin business that is easy to enter. An operator 

can start a busines with a commercial driver’s license, a cel phone, and a one-month 

rental payment on a used tractor. A broker only needs the cell phone. There is very little difference 

in the services offered by the thousands of interstate truckload carriers vying for business 

from customers negotiating for lowest price. These factors drive down profit margin, and force 

successful truckers to pay close attention to cost control. 

Each part of the trucking industry has a distinctive breakdown of cost categories. There is a particular 

difference in the amount of transportation service that is purchased from others, princi- 


Page 31

pally from owner-operators who supply themselves as drivers of their own tractors pulling trucking 

company or private fleet loads. 

 

 

 

 

Less-Than-Truckload (LTL) firms rarely purchase transportation, and typically 

have employee drivers. 

Truckload (TL) firms typically spend about 20% of the their total expenses on purchased 

transportation, some are 100% purchased transportation meaning they use 

no company employees as drivers 

Private fleet operators are predominately company employees; use of owneroperators 

does occur but often with the owner-operator as a contract motor carrier. 

Owner-Operators, by definition, do not purchase transportation from others, but 

rather sell capacity to fleet operators. 

Exhibit 32 estimates the amount of total expense devoted to for purchased transportation and reports 

that figure as the total “sales” for owner-operators. The breakdown for owner-operators is 

then used to allocate this total between labor (themselves), fuel, and equipment. 

Exhibit 32: Trucking Industry Composite Expense Shares 

Equipment & 

Maintenance 

18% 

Insurance 

4% 

Administration 

4% 

Fuel 

24% 

Compensation 

& Benefits 

(labor) 

50% 

 

 

 

 

About half of all trucking costs are labor–direct compensation and benefits– 

which are paid locally. 

Fuel is about one-quarter of the total cost. Most of the firms headquartered or located 

in the SACOG region are regional or local truckers, rather than the long-haul 

specialists headquartered in the Midwest and elsewhere. 

Equipment–buying or leasing trucks and maintaining them–is about 18%, or 

nearly one-fifth the total. The equipment may be sourced in the region or nationally, 

but virtually all maintenance labor, replacement parts, and tire purchases are local. 

The “overhead” categories of administration and insurance each account for about 

5% of the total and are local expenditures for compensation, fees, rents, communications, 

etc. 


Page 32

Private fleets account for more than half of the total expenditures, and those firms are probably 

drastically under-represented in the databases. 

Truck Fleet Locations 

Trucking fleets are based in many locations in the study area but they tend to cluster near heavy 

industrial areas, low rent commercial areas, freeways, or customers. Some trucking facilities are 

multi-user sites where one party owns or leases the site and act as a landlord to other trucking 

companies. All trucking facility sites tend to have basic provisions for security, auto parking, 

finished surfaces, and access to main roadways. 

Due to high land costs in metropolitan areas in California, businesses such as trucking are often 

forced to relocate to rural areas along major highways. Relocation from urban service territories 

can increase VMT, aggravate peak travel hours and direction, and emit more pollutants than if 

the business could remain at its original location. 

Exhibit 33 displays the enormous number of locations in the SACOG region from which at least 

one commercial truck is operated. The listings include trucks used for goods movement as well 

as to provide services. 

For this Phase 1 report the project team assembled truck fleet locations from two sources: 

 

 

The California Highway Patrol Management Information System for Terminals 

(MISTER), which lists the location at which a truck should be available for inspection 

(red truck icons on the maps, about 3,500 records). 

The Yahoo! Yellow Pages which accept paid, self-descriptive listing (blue truck 

icons on the maps, about 400 records). 

The two sources result in roughly 3,900 truck terminal or company listings with valid, mapable 

street addresses. (Another 300–400 listings have post office boxes or non-mapable addresses.) 

The obvious observation from Exhibit 33 is that the trucks follow the people and the highways. 

The “people” provide both the owner/driverand the customers, while the highways provide the 

access. 


Page 33

Exhibit 33: SACOGTruck “Terminal” Locations 

Besides the major concentration in the Sacramento metropolitan area there are clusters of trucking 

activity at other confluences of people and highways. 

Exhibit 34 shows a cluster of truck locations in the Yuba City/Marysville area, with most locations 

on the west side of the river. 

Exhibit 34: Yuba City-Marysville Regional Cluster 

Exhibit 35 shows a cluster of trucking locations in West Sacramento. A comparison of the map 

in Exhibit 35 with the aerial photo in Exhibit 36 reveals that the truck locations correspond to a 

mix of industrial, commercial, and residential areas. Residential “terminal” or trucking company 


Page 34

locations result from owner-operators or small businesses operating trucks from their home, or 

drivers and tradesmen taking commercial trucks home at night. 

Exhibit 35: West Sacramento Trucking Cluster 

Exhibit 36: West Sacramento Aerial Photo 

Exhibit 37 shows another cluster of trucking addresses in and near Woodland, again in a mix of 

industrial, commercial, and residential locations. 


Page 35

Exhibit 37: Woodland Trucking Cluster 

Within the region, truck “terminals” as reflected in the MISTER database are heavily concentrated 

in Sacramento itself (Exhibit 38) and in Sacramento County (Exhibit 39). 

CITY 

Exhibit 38: MISTER Terminal Data by City 

COUNTY 

TRUCKS 

OWNED 

SHARE 

CUMULATIVE 

SHARE 

SACRAMENTO SACRAMENTO 6,050 38% 38% 

WEST SACRAMENTO YOLO 1,360 9% 47% 

WOODLAND YOLO 1,010 6% 54% 

YUBA CITY SUTTER 911 6% 59% 

MARYSVILLE YUBA 466 3% 62% 

ELK GROVE SACRAMENTO 451 3% 65% 

RANCHO CORDOVA SACRAMENTO 377 2% 68% 

NORTH HIGHLANDS SACRAMENTO 345 2% 70% 

ROSEVILLE PLACER 327 2% 72% 

FOLSOM SACRAMENTO 327 2% 74% 

AUBURN PLACER 307 2% 76% 

ROCKLIN PLACER 298 2% 78% 

GALT SACRAMENTO 296 2% 80% 

ALL OTHERS 3,205 20% 20% 

SACOG TOTAL 15,730 100% 100% 


Page 36

Exhibit 39: MISTER Terminal Data by County 

603 

1,668 

1,300 

2,701 

794 

8,664 


Page 37

III. Railroads 

Rail Network 

The rail system serving the SACOG region (Exhibit 40) is a legacy of multiple rail mergers. The 

lines were originally built by the Southern Pacific (SP), the Western Pacific (WP), and the Sacramento 

Northern (SN, a Western Pacific subsidiary). 

Exhibit 40: Sacramento Area Rail Lines 

UP Valley Subdivision 

to Oregon 

UP Canyon Subdivision 

to Feather River 

Canyon 

Binney 

Junction 

UP Roseville 

Subdivision to 

Donner Pass 

Sierra Northern at 

Port of Sacramento 

Sierra Northern at 

McClellan 

UP Martinez 

Subdivision to 

Oakland 

Dormant CCT 

Line to Lodi 

UP Sacramento 

& Fresno Subdivisions 

to Stockton 

Exhibit 41 shows how these legacy routes converge and connect in the SACOG area. The key 

junctions are: 

 

 

 

 

Haggin, where the north-south former WP route passes under the former east-west 

SP route. The two routes are connected by tracks that climb from the WP route to 

the SP route. 

Elvas, where the former SP lines from the Bay Area, Fresno, and Roseville meet. 

Binney Junction, (off the map) north of Yuba City/Marysville, where the former SP 

and WP lines meet. 

Winnemucca, NV (off the map) where the former SP Donner Pass and WP Feather 

River Canyon routes meet. 


Page 39

Exhibit 41: Sacramento Area Rail Connections 

HAGGIN 

ELVAS 

Railroad Facilities 

The railroads have several types of facilities serving the SACOG region: 

 

 

 

 

 

trackage and right-of-way, including line-haul routes to, from, and through the region, 

and a network of local trackage serving industrial customers; 

classification yards, where line-haul trains are made up and broken down, freight 

cars are classified into groups, and local trains arrive and depart; 

local or industrial yards, serving similar functions as classification yards but on a 

smaller scale; 

transload facilities where bulk or other commodities are transferred between freight 

cars and trucks, and may also be stored or processed; and 

maintenance facilities, where locomotives and freight cars are serviced and maintained, 

and light repairs are made. 

There are two other kinds of railroad facilities that are not present in the SACOG region: intermodal 

terminals, and auto loading terminals. 

Intermodal terminals (also caled “intermodal ramps”, “piggyback ramps”, or just “ramps”) are 

facilities where containers or trailers are transferred between rail and truck modes. Virtually all 

such terminals use mechanized lift equipment to make the transfer (Exhibit 42). 


Page 40

Exhibit 42: Mechanized Intermodal Lift Equipment 

Trailers or containers on chassis are parked awaiting either outbound loading or inbound pickups 

by local truckers. Most of the land occupied by intermodal terminals is parking (Exhibit 43). 

Exhibit 43: Typical Intermodal Terminal–BNSF Stockton 

The SACOG region does not have an intermodal terminal, but is served from major regional 

terminals in Oakland, Richmond, North Richmond (dedicated to UPS), Stockton, Lathrop, or 

Sparks. Exhibit 44 shows the terminal locations and 75-mile local trucking zones around each. 

As indicated, most of the SACOG region is covered from existing terminals. 


Page 41

Exhibit 44: Northern California/ Nevada Rail Intermodal Terminals 

Intermodal operations have strong scale effects in both economics and service. Railroads are 

very reluctant to establish new terminals in markets that can be served from existing locations. 

An intermodal terminal in the SACOG region is therefore both unlikely and unnecessary for the 

near future. 

Auto loading facilities (“auto ramps”) are locations where autos and light trucks are transferred 

between specialized rail cars (“Auto racks”) and equaly specialized trucks. (Exhibit 45) At origins, 

typically ports or assembly plants, autos are loaded onto rail cars for national distribution. 

At destinations, autos are unloaded from rail cars for regional distribution by truck. 

Exhibit 45: Rail Auto Loading Facility (Richmond) 


Page 42

Some facilities, such as the ones at the Port of Benicia (Exhibit 46), are both origins and destinations. 

At the Port of Benicia one facility receives imported Toyotas by ship and transfers them to 

rail cars for national distribution and to trucks for local distribution. At the other Benicia terminal, 

domestic autos are received by rail and shipped out by truck. 

Exhibit 46: Northern California Rail Auto Terminals 

Facilities at the Port of Richmond and the adjacent BNSF terminal (Exhibit 45) can likewise 

move autos inbound and outbound. The third facility in Northern California, at Warm Springs 

adjacent to the NUMMI plant, ships the assembled NUMMI output but can also be used to receive 

and distribute autos from other assembly plants. 

Northern California, including the SACOG region, is adequately served from these three auto 

terminals. Auto terminals, like intermodal terminals, have scale and service economics, so it is 

not likely that one would be established in the SACOG region in the near future. The Port of 

Stockton has previously sought to develop an import auto terminal. 

The consolidation and rationalization of rail facilities through merger or sale is an ongoing trend. 

 

 

 

Large freight yards and other facilities that were built and sized for a bygone era of 

large-scale carload trafic are abandoned, “down-sized”, or rebuilt into intermodal 

terminals. 

Duplicate facilities acquired through merger are eventually rationalized, sometimes 

quickly and sometimes in stages over a period of years. 

Branch lines and industrial tracks that do not produce adequate revenue are abandoned 

or sold. Sometimes short line operators can purchase and operate such lines 

successfully with a lower cost structure. 


Page 43

Exhibit 47 shows the overall state rail network, of which the SACOG system is an integral part. 

Exhibit 47: California Rail Network 

Union Pacific System 

The Union Pacific system is currently organized as follows. 

Martinez Subdivision 

The former SP trackage between Sacramento and the Bay Area, now operated as UP’s “Martinez 

Subdivision,” is a high capacity double-track main line. This line carries UP freight trains and 

BNSF freight trains operating on trackage rights. Besides freight trains, the Martinez Subdivision 

carries 32 daily Capitals (operated by BARTD under contract to the Capital Corridor JPA) 

and 4 daily long-distance Amtrak trains (eastbound and westbound California Zephyr and Coast 

Starlight). UP’s lines to the Bay Area and Fresno meet at Elvas, a three-way “wye” junction 

north of Elvas Avenue in Sacramento (Exhibit 48). The Martinez subdivision continues northeast 

to Roseville, parallel to Interstate 80. 


Page 44

Exhibit 48: Elvas Junction 

Roseville Subdivision 

This former SP line extends from Roseville to Sparks, Nevada over Donner Pass. This route carries 

the Capital pasenger trains to and from Auburn and Amtrak’s CaliforniaZephyr between 

Oakland and Chicago. This western portion of the transcontinental railroad began with construction 

eastward from Sacramento by the Central Pacific and joined with the Union Pacific in Utah. 

Through corporate expansion and merger the Central Pacific became the Southern Pacific. Lines 

were extended west to the San Francisco Bay Area, north to Oregon, and south through the San 

Joaquin Valley to Southern California and points east. The route over Donner Pass and west to 

the Bay Area was subsequently double-tracked, creating a high-capacity route between California 

and Ogden. The SP-UP connection through Ogden handled the majority of the rail traffic in 

the Central Corridor for over a century. 

In December, 1982, the Union Pacific purchased the Western Pacific, whose line through the 

Feather River Canyon is discussed below. The UP/WP connection at Salt Lake City replaced the 

UP/SP connection at Ogden as UP’s prefered route to California. The UP/WP merger thus 

shifted a significant volume of traffic off the Donner Pass route and onto the Feather River Canyon 

route. 


Page 45

In the late 1980s and early 1990s SP’s finances declined. SP’s trafic in the Southern Coridor to 

and from the Los Angeles area was growing while Donner Pass traffic dropped. A key factor 

was (and is) the clearances through the many Donner Pass tunnels. Much of the West Coast rail 

traffic was in double-stack cars carrying international containers. These cars require overhead 

clearances of over 21 feet when loaded with “high cube” 9’6” containers. The Donner Pas tunnels 

do not have sufficient clearances for unrestricted double-stack cars. The Donner Pass route 

has 20–25 tunnels on each of the two tracks. Most are short, and present varying engineering 

obstacles to increased clearances. The summit tunnel (Tunnel 41), however, passes through 

10,325 feet of granite, and is expected to be the major obstacle to a clearance project. While 

carefully loaded combinations of shorter and taller containers will fit, the constraints discourage 

double-stack traffic over Donner Pass. In the early 1990s, SP’s cash-short management decided 

to remove much of the double-track from Donner Pass, leaving it a single-track railroad with 

passing sidings. (The right-of-way and other features remain in place). 

The Donner Pass route has a relatively steep grade, a maximum of 2.2%. Railroad grades this 

steep require additional locomotives, both to climb the grades and to provide braking power to 

descend the grades safely. The need for additional motive power increases operating costs. 

Heavy snowfall on Donner Pass requires additional equipment and labor, also increasing costs. 

The grades and curves dictate slower train speeds. Speed limits on the mountainous portion of 

the Donner Pass route are much slower compared to the flatter, straighter line west of Sacramento. 

In 1996, UP acquired SP and merged it into the UP system. UP now has two routes over the Sierra 

Nevada, the other being the former WP route. 

Canyon Subdivision 

UP’s Canyon Subdivision is the former WP route between Oroville and Portola through the 

Feather River Canyon. UP’s general practice is to route al trains with double-stack cars (which 

now includes virtually all intermodal trains) over the Canyon Subdivision. (Exhibit 49) Manifest 

freights and other trains are split between the Canyon and Roseville Subdivisions. In the 

1980s, Union Pacific, American President Lines, and the Port of Oakland shared the cost of increasing 

clearances through the Feather River Canyon tunnels to accommodate double-stack 

container trains. 


Page 46

Exhibit 49: Double-stack Train on UP Canyon Subdivision 

The Donner Pass (Roseville Subdivision) and Feather River Canyon (Canyon Subdivision) 

routes meet at Winnemucca, Nevada. Between Winnemucca and Wells, Nevada the two lines are 

operated together as double track, an arrangement made between SP and WP preceding the 

mergers. At Wells, the lines split. The former SP line goes to Ogden and the former WP line 

goes to Salt Lake City. As both these routes and the former UP and DRGW lines linking Ogden 

and Salt Lake City are all now part of Union Pacific, these lines are all operated as a single network. 

The former Western Pacific route through Sacramento extends from Stockton through Sacramento, 

Marysville, and Oroville before turning east through the Feather River Canyon over 

Beckworth Pass to Nevada. The line is paralleled by SR70. 

At Keddie in the Feather River Canyon, the “High Line” branches of north toward Oregon (left 

in Exhibit 49). Under WP and subsequent UP operation until 1996, this line connected with Burlington 

Northern (now BNSF) at Bieber, forming a through route between the Pacific Northwest 

and California. With WP’s Santa Fe connection at Stockton, this arangement created a northsouth 

competitor to SP’s dominant route.As a condition to the UP-SP merger of 1996, BNSF 

purchased the former WP line between Bieber and Keddie, and obtained trackage rights between 

Keddie and BNSF’s own line at Stockton. BNSF thus has a north-south route between the Pacific 

Northwest, California, and the southwest. 

From Sacramento east to where the two lines join at Winnemucca, Nevada, the Feather River 

line is 65 miles longer (393 miles versus 328), but has a 1% maximum grade as opposed to the 

2.2 % maximum grade on the Donner Pass route. The Feather River line, however, has tight 

curves, limited room for passing sidings, and unstable soil conditions that slow operations and 

raise costs. 


Page 47

Fresno Subdivision 

The Fresno Subdivision is the former SP route from Sacramento through Stockton to Fresno and 

points south. The Fresno Subdivision includes three branches: the Placerville Industrial Lead 

along Folsom Blvd. to Hazel Ave.; the Ione Industrial Lead from Galt east to Ione; and the 

Woodbridge Industrial Lead west from Lodi to Woodbridge. The former SP line south of Sacramento 

is now UP’s Fresno Subdivision. This single-track line passes through Stockton, Fresno, 

and Bakersfield before crosing the Tehachapis to southern California. The Fresno Line is UP’s 

primary line south, with the former WP line described below as a secondary route. 

Valley Subdivision 

The Valley Subdivision is the former SP line north of Roseville through Marysville and Chico to 

Oregon. It meets the Canyon Subdivision at Binney Junction. This subdivision is a single-track 

railroad with passing sidings and operates basically as it did under SP ownership. 

Sacramento Subdivision 

UP’s Sacramento Subdivision is the former WP line passing through Sacramento between Stockton 

and Oroville. The Sacramento Subdivision includes two branches: the Pearson Industrial 

Lead extending south through Yuba City parallel to Highway 99 and the Yuba City Industrial 

Lead extending west from Yuba City parallel to SR20. The former SP and WP lines cross and 

join at Haggin (north of 20 th and C Street) in Sacramento (Exhibit 50). The former WP line 

heads north to Oroville and the Feather River Canyon. 

Exhibit 50: Haggin Junction 

BNSF Trackage Rights 

As a condition of the 1996 UP/SP merger, BNSF Railway (BNSF) obtained extensive trackage 

rights over UP’s former SP and WP routes covering most of the SACOG area network. 


Page 48

Between Bakersfield and Elvas on the Fresno Subdivision. 

Between Elvas and Oakland on the Martinez Subdivision. 

From Elvas via the Roseville Subdivision over Donner Pass (and east to Denver). 

BNSF currently uses the trackage rights for the following movements through the SACOG area. 

 

 

 

 

Intermodal trains between the Port of Oakland and points east (e.g. Chicago) use 

UP trackage from Oakland to Elvas and Elvas to Bakersfield. South of Bakersfield 

they use UP’s ex-SP route through the Tehachapis and finally reach BNSF’s own 

trackage at Barstow. This practice puts BNSF double-stack trains through urban 

Sacramento. 

BNSF trains of all kinds between Southern Oregon and California or the southwest, 

but chiefly manifest (carload) freights, use the Sacramento Subdivision to link 

BNSF lines south of Stockton to the BNSF line north of Keddie. Such a BNSF 

freight would thus pass through urban Sacramento as well. 

BNSF trains between Northern California (e.g. originating at Richmond or Stockton) 

and Denver (or points east) can use the Sacramento and Canyon Subdivisions 

(Exhibit 51) through the Central Corridor. 

BNSF trains rarely use the Roseville Subdivision over Donner Pass, but have the 

right to do so. 

Exhibit 51: BNSF Train Operating Over Canyon Subdivision via Trackage Rights 

Sierra Northern 

Beginning in 2003, the Sierra Northern Railway combined the former operations of the Sierra 

Railroad Company (which formerly operated between Oakdale and Tuolumne) and the Yolo 

Short Line (which operated between Sacramento and Woodland, and south of Sacramento to Willow 

Point, both on former Sacramento Northern lines). The former Yolo Short Line operations 

are in the SACOG region. 


Page 49

Siera Northern’s operations in West Sacramento and the port area are currently handling roughly 

2,200 cars annually. Commodities include lumber, dry and liquid agricultural chemicals, ammonia, 

rice, paper, and steel. Sierra Northern connects with both UP and with BNSF via trackage 

rights for this traffic. 

Sierra Northern has also begun serving transloading operations at the former McClellan AFB. As 

shown in Exhibit 52, last year Sierra Northern handled over 1,600 carloads of freight at 

McClellan, most of it lumber, minerals, and other industrial products. This business has grown 

steadily, and is taking long-haul truck trafic of the region’s highways. 

Exhibit 52: 2005 McClellan Transloading Carload Volume 

Lumber and Lumber 

Prods, 1200 

Pumice, 299 

Food Products , 123 

Soybeans, 18 

Drywall, 10 

Others, 34 

As of mid 2006, Sierra Northern was handling an even broader range of commodities at 

McClellan, including ethanol, propane, steel, food grade oils, and tomato paste besides those 

cited in Exhibit 52. 

Railroad Operations 

Rail freight traffic is a composite of traffic and operations types. 

 

 

 

 

Intermodal traffic in trailers or containers moves between intermodal terminals, 

with the local movement on each end of the trip handled by motor carriers. The 

SACOG region does not have any intermodal terminals, but is served from UP terminals 

in Oakland, Lathrop, or Sparks and BNSF terminals in Richmond or Stockton. 

(Exhibit 44) 

Motor vehicles moved by rail also originate and terminate at specialized hubs, with 

final delivery by motor carier. There are no “auto ramps” in the SACOG area. 

The nearest such facilities are in the Bay Area at Benicia, Richmond, and Warm 

Springs. 

Unit trains are full trainloads of freight cars carrying a single commodity (typically 

coal, minerals, or grain) and shuttling between origin (mine or growing area grain 

elevator) and destination (power plant or export port) with an empty return. 

Manifest trains are made up of individual freight cars with a mix of commodities, 

origins, and destinations. These traditional freight trains are usually given the lowest 

priority 


Page 50

Individual freight cars (or, more commonly, small groups of cars) are moved to and from customer 

locations by local switch crews operating out of regional freight yards such as Roseville. 

Transloading facilities, such as that operated by Sierra Northern at McClellan, handle groups of 

freight cars and transfer the freight to or from trucks, often with intermediate storage. 


Page 51

IV. Airports 

Overview 

There are essentially three types of air cargo carriers: 

 

 

 

all-cargo operations like FedEx, UPS, and DHL which provide door-to-door service 

and are often known as “integrated cariers”; 

airlines like United and Southwest which carry a combination of passenger and 

cargo airlines and are known accordingly as “combination cariers”; and 

all-cargo airlines which only offer airport-to-airport service and are sometimes refered 

to as “non-integrated” cargo cariers. 

The non-integrated all-cargo carriers and the combination carriers tend to rely extensively on 

freight forwarders, consolidators, and other logistics providers to generate business and transport 

air cargo between the airport and the shipper or consignee. 

Note that a growing part of the regional “air cargo” volume is moved by truck. FedEx and the 

other integrated carriers use trucks to provide overnight service between the Sacramento area and 

the Bay Area, and to other markets that do not actually require air transport to meet customer expectations. 

Air cargo operations in Sacramento are dominated by the nation’s three leading “integrated carriers” 

–FedEx, UPS, and DHL. Southwest and other pasenger airlines cary “bely cargo” in 

baggage compartments, making up the balance. 

The six-county SACOG region is the primary market for air cargo operations at MHR and SMF, 

with most of the market to the south and west rather than to the north. Depending on the policies 

of individual carriers, the two Sacramento area airports can also be used as hubs for feeder service 

to smaller Northern California markets beyond the SCAOG counties. 

After a decade of rapid growth in the 1990s, air cargo volumes at both SMF and MHR declined 

between 2000 and 2002. Since 2002, the amount of air cargo handled at the two airports has increased 

at an average annualrate of 0.69 percent, even though the region’s economy expanded 

and its population increased. 

The air cargo forecasts contained in the Draft Master Plans for SMF and MHR are dated; SCAS 

has engaged Leigh-Fisher Associates to revisit the MHR forecast. 

Future growth of air cargo operations at SMF and MHR will depend on the demand for air cargo 

services within the airports’ geographic market. Consideration should be given to enlarging the 

definition of the geographic market or “catchment area” for air cargoservices provided by SMF 

and MHR to encompass Solano County, portions of Contra Costa County lying along Interstate 

580, and the southern San Joaquin Valley. 


Page 53

In theory, air cargo operations at SMF and MHR could be bolstered substantially by the relocation 

to Sacramento of one of the regional sorting facilities currently maintained at Oakland International 

Airport by the major integrated carriers, although a recent ebbing of air cargo traffic at 

Bay Area airports may have reduced the incentives for such a move. 

The volume of air cargo handled at MHR could also rise substantially with regularly scheduled 

all-cargo flights between MHR and the Far East. However, the shortage of outbound air cargo 

handicaps MHR’s chances. 

There is a high probability that SMF will see the inauguration of direct or even non-stop passenger 

service to Europe before 2020, but this will have a relatively modest impact on air cargo volumes. 

Absent some development that would fundamentally alter air cargo operations at SMF and 

MHR, air cargo volumes will most likely increase at an average annual growth rate of about 1.8 

percent at both airports over the next decade. As rising jet fuel costs increasingly push all but the 

most time-sensitive shipments from air to surface modes of transportation, the air cargo growth 

rate is expected to slow to 1.2 percent between 2016 and 2032, and to 0.8 percent between 2032 

and 2050. 

Air cargo operations at Mather Airport (MHR) currently generate approximately 966 weekly 

truck trips. At Sacramento International Airport (SMF), the number of truck trips associated with 

air cargo operations is estimated at 1,275 per week. The great majority involve delivery vans. 

The number of airport truck trips is expected to decline over the next two to three years, and 

grow slower than air cargo volumes due to increased efficiencies. 

Mather is also the centerpiece of a larger business park and distribution industry cluster, which 

will generate truck traffic commensurate with the level of business activity there independent of 

the air cargo activity at the airport itself. 

Current Air Cargo Operations 

After a period of very rapid growth during the 1990s, air cargo activity at Sacramento’s two major 

commercial airports has been relatively flat, especially since 2001. (Exhibit 53) Despite the 

steady expansion of the region’s economy and its population base, outbound cargos have diminished 

by 8.7 percent since 2002. 


Page 54

Exhibit 53: Sacramento Air Cargo Activity (Metric Tons) 

Annual Metric Tons 

250,000 

200,000 

150,000 

MATHER MAIL 

100,000 

MATHER FREIGHT 

50,000 

SMF MAIL 

SMF FREIGHT 

0 

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

As there are only the three dominant integrated carriers and a handful of passenger airlines and 

non-integrated cargo carriers serving the two Sacramento airports, the success and failures or 

policy shifts of individual carriers can have, and has had, profound effects on cargo volumes. 

As indicated in Exhibit 53, mail business at Mather rose rapidly in 1999 and 2000 

with Kity Hawk’s contractual operations for the Postal Service. Kity Hawk lost 

this business to FedEx in 2001, and the mail business at Mather disappeared by 

2002. FedEx did not bring all of this mail business to SMF, although Exhibit 53 

shows a jump in dedicated air freight in 2001-2002 paralel to Kity Hawk’s los. 

 

 

Southwest is reportedly canceling its own Postal Service contract, with the business 

picked up by FedEx. 

Emery Worldwide operated at Mather in 1996-2003, but consolidated operations 

at Stockton in March 2003. In December 2004, UPS purchased Emery, and some 

of Emery’s traffic may reappear at Mather as UPS cargo. 

The local operations of FedEx, UPS, and DHL are all closely woven into extraordinarily intricate 

goods movement systems on “split-minute” schedules. The arival and departure times of their 

aircraft at SMF and MHR are tightly scheduled to coordinate the elaborate hub-and-spoke systems 

each of these carriers manages. The late departure of a plane from SMF or MHR can ripple 

through the whole system. 


Page 55

Truck Traffic at SMF and MHR 

Air cargo i has always been an intermodal enterprise. Ever since the first mail pouch was flown 

the 250 miles from New York City to Washington in 1918, trucks have provided the first and last 

links between shippers, receivers, and the airlines carrying their goods. 

Given the importance shippers place on ensuring that goods arrive in time to meet overnight or 

some other time-definite delivery schedule, facilitating the efficient movement of trucks associated 

with air cargo operations at Sacramento International Airport (SMF) and Mather Airport 

(MHR) will be an ongoing challenge to regional transportation planning. Much of the truck 

movement on which the air cargo operations at the two airports depends occurs during peak early 

morning and late afternoon travel hours, adding to the challenge. 

The relationship between trucks and planes has grown tighter as the air cargo industry has been 

steadily transformed into a business of time-definite delivery. The ability to transport a crate of 

lobsters puled from their traps in Maine’s Casco Bay on Tuesday morning to arestaurant in Folsom 

in time for lunch the next day depends on much more than timely flight connections between 

Portland and Sacramento. It also requires efficient, well-coordinated trucking operations at 

both ends to move shipments economically and expeditiously to and from airports. Congestion 

on streets and highways in the vicinity of airports, difficulty negotiating uncooperative intersections, 

and inconvenient access routes to key thoroughfares can disrupt the exacting timetables on 

which much of the air cargo industry now operates. 

To meet their ground transport needs, each of the three integrated carriers serving SMF and 

MHR maintains a fleet of trucks and vans to transport incoming cargos either directly to customers 

or to sorting facilities where shipments are processed for later delivery. These vehicles are 

similarly responsible for picking up outbound shipments and conveying them back to the airports 

in time for departing flights. ii 

Providing the truck access to SMF and MHR contributes to the ability of the air cargo industry 

to serve the needs of businesses, institutions and consumers throughout the region. Doing so, 

however, is complicated by projections foreseeing significant population growth in communities 

neighboring the two airfields. Traffic congestion along the Highway 50 corridor in the vicinity of 

Rancho Cordova is expected to be especially acute, with adverse implications for the movement 

of vehicles to and from Mather Field. 

i 

Air cargo comprises both air freight and air mail, but not passenger baggage or materials related to passenger 

service or aircraft operation. Air cargo is transported aboard air-freighters and in the cargo holds of passenger 

aircraft. The later is commonly refered to as “bely cargo.” While it may be desirable to differentiate freight from 

mail, this is no longer possible since most U.S. air mail is now carried by FedEx which, as a matter of corporate 

policy, reports all cargos it carries, including U.S. mail, as freight. 

ii 

In addition to using trucks to convey inbound and outbound cargos, FedEx, UPS and DHL also rely upon small 

feeder aircraft to expedite express shipments to and from various Northern California communities such as Redding, 

Ukiah, Chico, Eureka and Fresno. 


Page 56

As of late June 2006, air cargo operations at MHR were generating approximately 966 weekly 

truck trips, according to data supplied by UPS and DHL. However, this number is expected to 

decline as DHL streamlines its local cargo-handling operations and UPS builds a new sort facility 

in the Rancho Cordova area. 

 

 

At present, DHL reports about 526 weekly truck trips. DHL is still in the process 

of integrating its operations with its Airborne Express subsidiary. It expects to 

achieve efficiencies in cargo handling through enhanced automation of the loading, 

unloading, and ground transportation of larger air cargo containers. 

UPS makes about 400 weekly truck trips. More than half of the UPS vehicles now 

working MHR on a typical day are the familiar brown “package cars.” Their primary 

role is delivery and pick-up of parcels in those parts of the Sacramento region 

that are served by the UPS sort facility in West Sacramento. Once UPS opens 

its new sort facility closer to MHR, fewer of these vans will need to call at the 

airport. 

Air cargo operations at SMF currently generate an estimated 1,275 truck trips per week, based on 

figures supplied by FedEx and Southwest Airlines. Although FedEx handles the vast majority of 

air cargo at SMF, Southwest accounts for approximately half the volume of cargo carried aboard 

passenger aircraft at SMF. The number of truck trips at SMF is greater because belly cargo is 

generally delivered or picked up by numerous individual customers. 

Southwest Airlines, for example, reported that its cargo facility at SMF averages some 430 truck 

trips per week (75 vehicles per day Monday through Friday; 20 - 25 on Saturdays and Sundays). 

Approximately three-quarters of these vehicles were said to be small trucks or vans; the rest being 

medium-sized trucks, 16 to 24 feet in length. Only about once a week does a delivery or 

pick-up involve a larger vehicle. 

Forecasting the extent of truck traffic at SMF and MHR is simultaneously straightforward and 

vexing. On the one hand, the number and mix of trucks needed to support air cargo operations at 

the two airports will primarily be a function of the volume of air cargo being handled at any 

given time. (Assuming there will be no significant expansion in the geographic market the airports’ 

air cargo operations are serving.) 

The number of truck trips associated with the operations of FedEx at SMF would be expected to 

increase as air cargo volumes grow. Given the likelihood that higher cargo volumes would be 

accommodated by transporting more cargo to and from the airport in tractor-trailers, the actual 

rate of increase in the number of truck trips will likely be less than the growth rate for air cargo. 

For reasons already alluded to, the volume of truck traffic associated with air cargo operations at 

MHR and SMF is expected to decline over the next two to three years. Hyper-efficient integrated 

carriers like FedEx, UPS, and DHL will contrive to maximum the use of their transportation assets. 

For that reason, we expect to see new truck-trips at MHR and SMF increase at no more than 

one percent per year through 2050. 

Air cargo is primarily a function of population and economic activity in general, and is associated 

with large population centers. Much of the focus of air cargo operations at both SMF and 

MHR is on the Sacramento region itself. Apart from that, trucks associated with UPS and DHL 


Page 57

operations at MHR are much more likely to be transporting cargos to the south than to the north. 

Representatives of UPS and DHL both expressed concern with access to southbound Highway 

99. They also indicated their desire to see more efficient ways of moving between the Highway 

50 and the Interstate 80 corridors. FedEx representatives told us their location at SMF was ideal 

for serving customers along the Interstate 80 corridor but they also expressed concern about access 

to the southern parts of the Sacramento region. FedEx representatives also told us there is 

little air cargo destined for or generated from locations north along the Interstate 5 corridor. 


Page 58

V. Port of Sacramento 

Overview 

The Port of Sacramento , which opened in 1963, has traditionally handled bulk and break bulk 

commodities with a heavy emphasis on export rice and forest products and imported agricultural 

chemicals.The port’s facilities (Exhibit 54) consist primarily of semi-specialized bulk and general 

cargo handing capabilities. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Covered bulk commodity warehouse space 

General cargo warehouse space 

The Pier 1 rice elevator (Farmer’s Rice) 

Wharf 2, suitable for general cargo with two transit sheds. 

The Pier 5 grain and bulk terminal, with shiploaders and bulk storage. 

Wharf 6, for general cargo, discussed below. 

Wharf 7, for general cargo with a transit shed 

Pier 7, with shiploader and conveyor system for wood chips 

Additional bulk and general cargo storage facilities. 

The Port also has some 280 acres of developable industrial land. 

Exhibit 54: Port of Sacramento Facilities 


Page 59

As shown in Exhibit 55, however, Port of Sacramento tonnage has been declining since 1990, 

with a brief peak in 1994. 

Exhibit 55: Port of Sacramento Tonnage 1990 - 2004 

Short Tons (000) 

Port of Sacramento Tonnage 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Fundamentally, the Port has suffered from the inability to find new customers to replace the 

dwindling agricultural and timber industries that had once been its economic mainstay. As a 

2004 maritime demand analysis prepared for the Port Commission by Parsons Brinckerhoff concluded: 

“The markets for the Port of Sacramento’s traditional base cargoes have undergone major 

structural changes in the past decade that are beyond the control of the Port. Moderate to severe 

declines have been seen in bulk rice exports, bulk grain, woodchips, logs and other commodities 

due to production isues in Northern California and market shifts overseas.” (Exhibit 56). 

Exhibit 56: Port of Sacramento Cargoes 

1000 

900 

800 

Port of Sacramento Cargoes 

Rice 

Wood Chips 

Fertilizer 

Ammonia 

Other 

Short Tons (000) 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Source: US Waterborne Commerce, US Army Corps of Engineers. 


Page 60

The Port operates with several handicaps. As a break-bulk port in an age of containerization, the 

Port of Sacramento has been increasingly limited in the range of goods in which it could profitably 

traffic. The 43-mile shipping channel which connects the Port to the Sacramento River near 

Rio Vista is dredged to 30-feet deep, five feet shallower than the shipping channel leading to the 

Central Valey’s other inland port, the Port of Stockton. Larger vesels carying heavier cargos 

have been able to call on a nearby port whose highway and rail connections enable it to vie for 

many of the same regional markets as the Port of Sacramento. Even more debilitating is the 

Port’s proximity to larger, more eficient ports in the Bay Area that are capable of handling a 

much wider array of cargos which can be transported to and from the Sacramento area by truck 

and rail, usually at a lower cost and with greater timeliness than shipments routed through the 

Port of Sacramento. 

Sacramento’s facilities are geographically limited in scope. As shown in Exhibit 57, the Port is 

surrounded by rapid residential and commercial development antithetical to port expansion. Although 

some of the neighboring land is available for port use, the basic outlines of the port are 

fixed. 

Exhibit 57: Port of Sacramento Area 


Page 61

The ability of the Port to generate new business is also limited by the potential of its natural hinterland. 

As shown in Exhibit 58, markets to the west and east of the Port are agricultural areas or 

foothills, as are most of the areas to the north. The former wood chip and lumber cargoes have 

declined with Northern California lumber industry. The rapidly growing distribution and population 

centers of the central San Joaquin Valley are more easily served through the Port of Stockton, 

a formidable competitor to the south. 

Exhibit 58: Port of Sacramento Hinterland 

Sacramento does not presently have terminal facilities suitable for autos or containers. Wharf 

Six has just 6 acres of shipside storage area, whereas even small container terminals have 35 

acres or more and modern container terminals cover as much as 300 acres of land. 

A Change in Governance 

Within the last year the Port has undergone substantial changes in its governance and administration. 

In January 2006, the Port Commission was formally reconstituted to provide the City of 

West Sacramento with a majority of the Commision’s seats, and the Port came under the direct 

management of the City of West Sacramento, effectively turning control of the Port over to its 

host city. The next step in the agreement was to introduce legislation at the State Capitol to 

amend the state’s Harbor and Navigation Code to codify a further agreement by which the Sacramento-Yolo 

Port District Commission would be reduced from seven to five members, with 

four of the commissioners to be appointed by the city council of the City of West Sacramento 

and one by the Yolo County Board of Supervisors. 


Page 62

Strategic Alliance with the Port of Oakland 

Another major change has been the establishment of a strategic alliance between the Port of Sacramento 

and the Port of Oakland. The purpose of the strategic alliance is to enhance the prospects 

for an economically successful Port of Sacramento by: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Improving operating efficiencies; 

Creation of a synergistic marketing strategy; 

Introduction of Oakland’s maritime industry relationships and aliances; 

Consolidation and leverage of governmental, business and professional alliances; 

Economic development of new sustainable business and new revenue; 

Reduction of pollution through a possible water borne cargo barging operation and 

other enhancements; 

Elimination of operating losses at the Port of Sacramento; 

Development and funding of needed infrastructure at the Port of Sacramento; and 

Development of environmental enhancement and mitigation programs at the Port of 

Sacramento using successful programs developed by Oakland. 

As a September 2006 port press release explained, the local port commission retains executive 

authority but the Port of Oakland manages business development This strategic partnership is 

intended to transform the Port of Sacramento into an active working waterfront creating hundreds 

of jobs in that region and creating greater economic stability for the area. The essence of 

the Port of Oakland’s long-term strategic alliance with the Port of Sacramento is to restructure its 

operations from an “operating port” into a “landlord port.” Toward this end the Port of Oakland 

will provide services through a management agreement including the following: maritime management 

services, maritime marketing services, commercial real estate advisory, management 

and development services, project management and advisory services, government and community 

advisory services, and project finance and advisory services. 

The agreement involves three phases. 

 

 

Phase I (Jan. 1, 2006–June 30, 2006) includes: Oakland will work with Sacramento 

to secure a terminal operator to provide a broad range of maritime services in 

Sacramento by June 30, 2006; Oakland will work with Sacramento to prepare a 

strategic plan including marketing and operations for consideration by Sacramento; 

Oakland and Sacramento will develop the details of the exclusive Terminal Operations 

Franchise covering phases II and III of the alliance including the scope, responsibilities 

and financial terms; Oakland will establish the appropriate legal entity 

to carry out the terms of the agreements of the three phases; Oakland will initiate 

the marketing of the Port of Sacramento to shippers and other strategic port customers; 

compensation and reimbursement to Oakland for services rendered will be 

established and agreed upon by both ports. 

Phase II (July 1, 2006–December 30, 2007) includes: Prior to July 1, 2006 Oakland 

and Sacramento will have worked out the details of a contract for Oakland (i.e. 


Page 63

to provide management services to Sacramento for port and terminal operations; to 

provide assistance in marketing of the Port of Sacramento; to asist in Sacramento’s 

efforts to deepen its channels; to obtain Sacramento port-related funding; and to assist 

in completing the planning for Sacramento port infrastructure); Oakland and 

Sacramento will jointly develop performance measures and report the performance 

results to the Oakland and Sacramento port commissioners prior to June 30, 2007; 

and either Oakland or Sacramento can terminate the contract as of December 30, 

2007 upon six months advance notice. 

Phase III (January 1, 2008 to December 30, 2016) includes: Sacramento will grant 

to Oakland an eight-year exclusive Terminal Operations Franchise according to 

terms to be developed during Phase I; Oakland and Sacramento will jointly develop 

a methodology to assess performance and an annual performance assessment will 

be conducted and reported to the Oakland and Sacramento port commissioners; 

Oakland and Sacramento will establish terms and conditions of early termination 

under the agreement; and the contract may be extended for an additional 10 years. 

In September 2006, the Ports of Sacramento and Oakland finalized a 10-year agreement with 

Stevedoring Services of America (SSA) to assume the role of port operator. Besides operating the 

Port terminals, SSA will be engaged in seeking new business. 

New Business Investments at the Port 

Two significant import cement project have recently been approved which promise to result in 

new import tonnage and revenue flows to the Port, as well as benefits to the region. 

The CEMEX project includes the construction and operation of a cement terminal, an aggregate 

terminal, and a ready mix concrete batch plant. The cement and aggregated materials would be 

imported via existing ship and rail facilities and transferred by conveyers to a 120-foot high, 

60,000-ton cement storage dome and aggregate piles up to 50 feet in height. These materials 

would then be loaded into trucks or rail cars for distribution. The batch plant would receive cement 

and aggregates from the terminals to produce concrete on site for delivery to regional customers 

by truck. Transportation facilities would consist of a new rail loading facility and ship 

dock. The project also involves relocation from an existing cement rail terminal at 1501 South 

River Road and the ultimate demolition of all structures on the site which CEMEX acquired in 

its purchase of RMC. According to the traffic analysis submitted by the transportation consultant, 

Fehr & Peers, in January 2005, the project is expected to generate 1,072 daily vehicle trips, 81 

morning peak hour vehicle trips and 87 afternoon peak hour vehicle trips. 

In a second project with Newport Beach-based A&A Ready Mixed Concrete, the Port Commission 

has agreed to lease a currently vacant and undeveloped 3.5-acre parcel and to provide bond 

financing to A&A for the purpose of constructing and operating a new cement import and distribution 

facility at the Port. The new facility would consist of a 70,000-ton capacity, dry bulk cement 

storage warehouse and container truck-loading facility. Two mobile dockside units would 

vacuum cement from ships and send it via underground and overhead pipes to a bulk storage 

warehouse with a 70,000-ton capacity. The cement would be loaded into bulk carrier trucks for 

delivery to batch plants within Northern California. Construction is expected be completed 


Page 64

within a year. The $19 million facility will have the capacity to unload and store up to 800,000 

tons of cement yearly. Port officials indicated this project alone could double the port's tonnage, 

in addition to yielding as much as $1.8 million annually in new revenue. The proposed project 

would replace A&A's existing cement import and distribution operation which consists of 

unloading bagged cement at the port, transporting the bagged cement to a warehouse on Richards 

Boulevard in Sacramento and then distributing it to batch plants in Northern California. 

West Sacramento officials believe these two projects, expected to come online in Spring 2008, 

will bring the port back up to over 2 million annual cargo tons. 

Port Outlook 

Notwithstanding the strategic alliance with the Port of Oakland and the appointment of a new 

port operator, the Port of Sacramento will face continued challenges. 

The Port does enjoy some advantages, including a location adjacent to Highway 50 and easy access 

to the nearby crossroads of two Interstate Highways, 80 and 5. The Port also has direct rail 

service from the Union Pacific Railroad, whose main line linking the Bay Area to Roseville, 

UP’s main rail yard for Northern California, pases through West Sacramento. 

The same road and rail links which pass so close to the Port and which appear to be assets, however, 

are also efficient conduits for transporting goods that might otherwise have been shipped 

via the Port.Sacramento’supstream location adds hours of transit time and cost compared with 

Bay Area ports. As the Parsons Brinckerhoff Maritime Demand Analysis observed: “The additional 

70 nautical mile voyage to and from Sacramento compared with Bay Area ports, adds 

about six hours of one-way sailing time and $12,000 to $15,000 in round-trip voyage and pilotage 

costs for a Sacramento port cal.” 

The issue that may pose the biggest political challenge involves the relatively shallow 30-foot 

depth of its shipping channel. The competing Ports of Stockton and Benicia both have channel 

depths of 35 feet. Five feet makes a huge difference. In 1999, California Portland Cement reportedly 

favored the Port of Stockton over Sacramento because of the former’s deeper shipping 

channel. Stockton's channel, which had been dredged to 35 feet in 1987, could accommodate 

35,000-ton oceangoing loads while Sacramento's shallower channel has a 25,000-ton limit. One 

Sacramento fertilizer importer has reportedly estimated that its ocean transportation costs were 

$15-$20 per ton higher than its competitor at the Port of Stockton. 

As part of its strategic alliance with the Port of Sacramento, the Port of Oakland has committed 

itself to bringing its considerable political influence to bear in lobbying federal and state government 

to finance the project to dredge the Sacramento ship channel to 35 feet.The “limited 

reevaluation report” for channel depening is expertly to be complete in 2008, and the Ports are 

seeking to have funding included in the 2008 Federal budget. The price tag for that project is informally 

estimated at $60 million. (Not to be out-maneuvered, the Port of Stockton is said to be 

studying the possibility of dredging its channel to a depth of 40 feet.) 


Page 65

Over the next three years, Port of Sacramento officials plan to make several improvements to 

make the facilities more attractive to shippers, expanding conveyor systems and putting new 

roofs on buildings that store dunes of bulk fertilizer, for instance. The costs of the improvements 

will be covered with cash reserves from the real estate sale. 

One primary area of potential competition between Sacramento and other regional ports would 

be break bulk. Sacramento’s general cargo Wharf 6 (Exhibit 59) could compete with other break 

bulk facilities for higher value commodities such as steel or project cargoes. 

Exhibit 59: Port of Sacramento General Cargo Wharf 6 

The Port is currently considering potential break bulk cargoes such as lumber, construction materials, 

windmill equipment, and power cells. Port Commissioners also recently agreed to begin 

negotiating a 20-acre lease with Sacramento-based Wickland Oil Co. to move its riverfront oil 

storage tanks to Port property. 

Two other regional infrastructure projects are related to the Port because of their proximity and 

impact on Port operations. The Harbor Blvd. interchange improvement, estimated to cost 

$33,470,000, and west side rail relocation, which will cost $27,265,000 to $41,145,000. 

Barge Potential 

Part of Oakland's motivation to partner with Sacramento stems from an expectation by industry 

experts that international cargo volume is likely to double by 2020, if not sooner. Oakland is the 

fourth-busiest container port in the nation and has nearly doubled its maritime facilities since 

2000. Its ability to expand will depend partly on its ability to divert large numbers of containers 

to more environmentally benign forms of transport to and from inland markets. 


Page 66

Northern California barge economics have been the source of considerable speculation but very 

little analysis. A state-sponsored study in the late 1980s concluded that barging would be too 

costly, requiring permanent operating subsidies–an unthinkable idea at the time. A more recent 

self-funded conceptual study by JWD Associates led to more promising results but relied on relatively 

large-scale movements for favorable economics. The issue was also addressed briefly in 

the October 2003 SJCOG Inland Port Feasibility Study and the 2006 SJCOG CIRIS Implementation 

Plan, both times with negative results. The most preliminary feasibility study, by Seaworthy 

Systems, Inc., draws on elements of conceptual agile port systems but is not yet a finished proposal. 

Issues as yet unaddressed in Oakland–Sacramento barge concepts include: 

 

 

 

 

 

Oakland berth and terminal access. Wharf frontage is in high demand, and none 

of the Oakland terminals were designed with barge operations in mind. If a barge 

calls at only one terminal, inter-terminal drayage would cost as much or more as 

marine–rail drayage. 

Scale economics. To realize its inherent efficiency a barge system requires a relatively 

large start-up volume. There is a tradeoff between volume and service frequency 

if the volume must be consolidated from multiple Oakland terminals. 

Port of Sacramento backland. Marine container terminals on the west coast are 

essentially parking lots, with loaded containers placed on chassis. This landintensive 

practice may be hard to accommodate in Sacramento’s limited space. 

Central Valley market access. The California Inter-Regional Intermodal System 

(CIRIS) proposal incorporates rail shuttle service to the Stockton, Modesto, and 

Fresno markets. It would be prohibitively costly to dray containers from Sacramento 

to service those markets. 

Customer acceptance. Non of the recent barge studies or proposals have analyzed 

and documented the potential market or the willingness of customers to switch from 

truck to barge. 


Page 67

VI. Freight and Distribution Facilities 

Truck Terminals 

Freight handling within the trucking sector can include sorting, consolidation, deconsolidation, 

and transfer or transloading. Only a smal percentage of “trucking facilities” actualy handle the 

freight. The archetypical “trucking terminals” that split long-haul truckloads for local delivery or 

combine local pickups into long-haul truckloads are the limited province of LTL and parcel carriers. 

The vast majority of truckload common carriers do not have freight handling facilities. 

The vast majority of private fleet freight handling is accomplished at the production and distribution 

facilities they serve, not at separate truck terminals. 

LTL sorting and consolidation operations resemble warehouse operations in their trip generation 

and distribution patterns. The primary function of an LTL terminal is to consolidate outbound 

loads from local pickups and deconsolidate inbound loads for local delivery. LTL terminals do 

not fulfill orders or reconfigure shipments; instead they consolidate, deconsolidate and sort existing 

shipments. 

 

 

 

Consolidation. Outbound LTL shipments are collected from local customers using 

smaller trucks or local tractors puling single 28’ semi-trailers. These shipments are 

brought to the LTL terminal to be consolidated (combined) into outbound trailers 

for over-the-road (or sometimes rail intermodal) movement to destination terminals. 

Deconsolidation. Inbound OTR shipments have been combined into trailer loads 

at origin and are now deconsolidated (split) into individual shipments for local delivery. 

Sorting. Outbound shipments are sorted into OTR trailer loads bound for destination 

terminals. Depending on the operating scheme of the carrier, trailer loads may 

serve single or multiple destinations. Inbound shipments are sorted into loads for 

local delivery trucks according the route or territory system in use. 

Less-than-truckload (LTL) truck terminals look much like warehouses and DCs but their purpose 

is materially different. Exhibit 60 through Exhibit 69 show LTL and parcel terminals in the 

SACOG region. 


Page 69

Exhibit 60: Central Freight Lines Terminal 

Exhibit 61: Con-Way Express Terminal 


Page 70

Exhibit 62: FedEx Freight West Terminal 

Exhibit 63: Oak Harbor Freight lines Terminal 


Page 71

Exhibit 64: Old Dominion Terminal 

Exhibit 65: Overnite & Other Terminals 

Exhibit 65 is particularly noteworthy as it shows a group of LTL terminals in the same location. 


Page 72

Exhibit 66: Roadway Terminal 

Exhibit 67: Watkins Freight Terminal 


Page 73

Exhibit 68: Yellow Freight Terminal 

Exhibit 69: UPS Terminal 

The larger truck terminals used by commercial TL or LTL carriers often combine most or all of 

the functions described above at one site. Exhibit 70 shows a multi-purpose LTL terminal. 


Page 74

Exhibit 70: Yellow Freight LTL Terminal Outside Tracy 


Page 75

As Exhibit 71 suggests, these terminals are centrally located within their market, but placed on 

the periphery of the Sacramento urban core. 

Exhibit 71: LTL and Parcel Terminal Locations 


Page 76

Truck Stops 

Truck stops (Exhibit 72) are a commercially provided part of the highway infrastructure and are 

necessary for efficient and safe long-haul trucking operations. 

Exhibit 72: 49er Travel Plaza 

A full-service truck stop usually offers: 

 

 

 

 

parking for tractors and/or 

trailers; 

telephone/fax/computer 

communications; 

restaurant service; 

convenience store; 

 

 

 

 

fueling; 

truck and equipment servicing; 

overnight accommodations; and 

scales (Exhibit 73 below). 


Page 77

Exhibit 73: Truck Scales 

Source: Industry association website 

Truck stops are geared for over-the-road (OTR) truckers who drive multi-day trips and use them 

for: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

routine stops for food, fuel, etc.; 

tractor and trailer servicing; 

emergency repairs; 

mandated rest between driving shifts; 

layovers between loads and trips; 

drop-lots for trailers; 

communications with home office, dispatchers, and customers; 

contacts with brokers, insurance agents, etc.; and 

obtaining trip permits, cash advances, etc. 

The largest truck stops may also offer office space for truck brokers, insurance agents, or field 

representatives of trucking firms. 

Some truckload carriers with no need for terminal facilities in every city routinely use truck stops 

instead, basing significant tractor and trailer fleets there. Local and regional trucking firms with 

their own terminals typically have little use for a nearby truck stop. Although local truckers need 

fueling facilities, servicing, and scales, typically their local terminal or other vendors satisfy 

those needs. The real need for a truck stop comes from national and regional OTR truckload carriers 

and owner-operators that are not locally based. 


Page 78

Truck Fueling Facilities 

Truck fleets have different fueling needs than passenger vehicles: diesel fuel is much more 

common, fuel tanks are much larger, the cost of fuel is more critical, and fuel is needed around 

the clock. There are five basic fueling choices. 

 

 

Smaller trucks and fleets that are more likely to use gasoline instead of diesel fuel 

often use commercial gas stations. 

Truck fleets of many types commonly use “card lock” fuel facilities with unmanned 

self-service pumps activated by special fleet operator credit cards. There are several 

regional and national chains of these card lock fueling sites, as shown in 

Exhibit 74 

Truck stops provide fuel among their many other services (Exhibit 75) 

Exhibit 74: Commercial Card Lock Fueling Sites 


Page 79

Exhibit 75: Truck Stop Fueling 

 

 

Source: Tioga Group photo 

Larger carriers and fleet operators may have their own fuel tanks and pumps and 

buy fuel in bulk. This is less common than it once was because of environmental 

restrictions and costs. 

Mobile trucks often fuel off-road construction equipment and smaller fleets. 

There are special circumstances applicable to California. Due to the relatively high fuel costs in 

California, long-haul trucks avoid buying fuel while in the state. Since long-haul tractors carry 

as much as 250 galons of fuel and get 6 to 8 miles per galon, they have “cruising ranges” of 

1,500 miles or more and can easily get in and out of state without buying fuel. 

Rail Freight Yards 

The J. R. Davis Yard at Rosevile (commonly refered to as Rosevile Yard) served as SP’s major 

classification and service facility in Northern California and fulfills that same role in the merged 

UP system. 

 

 

 

Davis Yard classifies (sorts) freight cars moving north-south as well as east-west. 

Davis Yard is also the major Northern California point for servicing, manufacturing, 

and repairing freight cars and locomotives. 

Davis Yard serves as the operating hub for local switching assignments, which typicaly 

operate as “turns” out of Rosevile. 

Roseville has been a railroad depot site since 1874. The Roseville freight yard is 100 years old, 

having been established in 1906. There are about 1,000 total employees. 


Page 80

Davis Yard is over 6 miles long and covers 780 acres, bridging Sacramento and Placer counties. 

The yard was extensively rebuilt in 1997–1999 at a cost of $142 million. The classification 

portion of the facility is a “hump” yard, where groups of cars are pushed over a low hil to rol 

into sorting tracks by gravity. 

Exhibit 76: JR Davis Yard at Roseville 

Roughly 60 trains per day pass through Davis Yard, and up to 2,000 cars are classified each day. 

The diesel locomotive facility services over 2,000 units per month and repairs over 600. The facility 

pumps roughly 2 million gallons of diesel fuel into locomotive tanks each month. The diesel 

shop alone has about 300 employees. 

Distribution Facilities 

Warehouses and distribution centers (DCs) hold inventory, re-configure shipments, and transfer 

freight between vehicles and modes. As intermediate handling facilities, warehouses, distribution 

centers, transloads and other establishments occupy places in the supply chain between production 

and eventual consumption, as shown in Exhibit 77. 


Page 81

Exhibit 77: Simple Supply Chain 

Raw 

materials 

Manufacturer 

Warehouse 

Wholesaler 

Warehouse 

User 

Information flows 

Customer service functions 

Supply, production and order forecasts 

The term “warehouse” is the original generic term for a place where goods are held pending a 

future use. There is a trend to distinguish a “warehouse” from a distribution center (DC) based 

on the duration of storage and the complexity of the operation. Distribution centers such as the 

one shown in Woodland (Exhibit 78) may perform the same functions as warehouses but are 

typically distinguished as follows: 

 

 

“Distribution” usualy refers to the management and delivery of finished goods to 

customers. “Distribution centers” are ordinarily on the “downstream” end of the 

supply chain between factory and customer. 

Distribution centers typically conduct more complex order fulfillment functions, 

creating mixed loads of products in response to customer orders rather than shipping 

in large, regular lots. 

Exhibit 78: Woodland Distribution Center 


Page 82

Inbound and outbound trucking at warehouses and DCs typically involve different participants 

with different operating patterns. 

 

 

Inbound Trucks. Loaded inbound trucks may belong to a supplier operating a private 

fleet or to a for-hire trucking company engaged by the supplier. Inbound 

trucks generally have delivery appointments, and may wait nearby to be certain of 

arriving on time to be unloaded. Empty inbound trucks from private fleets will 

usually return to origin or move to another assignment. 

Outbound Trucks. Outbound shipments usually employ a different fleet of trucks 

and drivers to serve a different set of customers, locations, and requirements. Some 

DCs and warehouses have their own private fleets for outbound shipments based at 

or very near the DC. Many DCs and warehouses depend on one or more preferred 

for-hire carriers for outbound service. Some use dedicated contract carriers that 

look and act like a private fleet. Some customers require that a DC or warehouse 

use a specific for-hire carrier for outbound shipments. 

Rail-Truck Transloading Facilities 

Transloading facilities (Exhibit 79) transfer freight between modes, with storage, inventory management 

or other handling a secondary concern. The truck trips that originate at transloads are 

almost always full truckloads that return empty. Most transloading now occurs at private facilities 

with a rail spur serving the facility. Most of it is for distribution of commodities, not assembly 

into railcar loads. Such facilities include: 

 

 

 

Rail-Truck Bulk Transfer Facilities 

Municipal Solid Waste Transloads 

Tank Farms 

 

 

 

Temporary Projects 

Seasonal Agriculture 

International Cargo Transloading 

and Consolidation 


Page 83

Exhibit 79: Sierra Northern Transloading at McClellan 


Page 84

VII. Goods Movement Data and Gap Analysis 

Goods Movement Data Sources 

Goods movement data sources are a patchwork. There is no single database providing comprehensive 

information, the combined coverage of available sources is incomplete, and major 

sources display inherent weaknesses and incompatibility. The short comings and weaknesses are 

most obvious, and most frustrating, at the local and regional level where SACOG and its member 

jurisdictions have the greatest responsibilities. 

Primary and secondary freight flow data sources include: 

 

 

 

 

Commodity Flow Survey (CFS), U.S. Census Bureau, 1992, 1997, 2002 (forthcoming) 

TRANSEARCH 

Freight Analysis Framework (FAF), FHWA 

Intermodal Transportation Management System (ITMS), Caltrans 

There are also multiple data sources for the truck, rail, air, and marine modes. TRANSEARCH 

and the Caltrans ITMS are both attempts at combining and reconciling multiple sources. (ITMS 

is based on 1996 TRANSEARCH data.) Despite the best efforts of the firms and agencies involved 

these sources do not provide reliable current information on the movement of commodities 

or freight vehicles to, from, within, or through the SACOG region. 

For regional planners, there are four approaches to bridge the gap. 

Truck counts. Manual or automatic truck counts at selected locations can yield 

valuable insights into the number and pattern of truck movements. Manual counts 

have the advantage of identifying truck types as well as counting them. 

 

 

Surveys. Surveys, such as the one undertaken for this study, can elicit data, opinions, 

and perceptions—all of which are valuable to planners and policy makers. 

Survey results are, however, limited to what respondents know and chose to reveal. 

Stakeholder interviews. Semi-structured interviews with public and private stakeholders, 

such as those that produced case studies for this study, are a vital step in 

understanding the freight and logistics industries and their relationship to public 

policy and planning. 

Automated data collections. Pioneered in electronic toll systems, existing and 

proposed methods of automatically collecting and compiling vehicle movement 

data hold considerable promise. 

Trucking Data Sources 

Primary vehicle and fleet data sources for trucking include: 


Page 85

CCJ/Randall Fleet Census 

FleetSeek 

California Department of Motor Vehicles Truck Registration data 

California Energy Commission (CEC) data 

The California Highway Patrol’s MISTER (Management Information System on 

Terminals) file 

Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey, U.S. Census Bureau, 1992, 1997, 2002 

Trucking data cautions 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Traffic passing counts are useful, but do not convert to either freight flows or trips. 

Trips are not the same as freight flows–a complete trip may include empty or 

“stem” miles. 

Freight flow data do not translate into VMT, trips, passing counts, or local truck 

flows. 

Commodity data is typicaly proprietary, and commodities “disappear” into LTL, 

mixed freight, or Freight-All-Kinds (FAK) classifications. 

Freight bill and customer data is proprietary. 

Trip data usually is not viewed as proprietary. 

Primary trip generator data sources included InfoUSA and FreightLocator. 

Neither local governmental agencies nor economic development departments of counties and 

cities typically have or collect any data about trucks or truck movements. 

SACOG Region Freight Flow Data 

 

 

 

 

 

Overall freight flow estimates were derived from the FHWA Freight Analysis 

Framework (version 2), based on 2002 CFS data. 

The FAF covers the Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Truckee, CA-NV CSA (CA Part). 

Corrections were made for apparent miss-coding of commodities and modes (e.g. 

gravel moving via pipeline). 

Through freight movements were estimated by creating an origin/destination matrix 

for likely ground transportation routings through the Sacramento area (e.g. Portland 

to Los Angeles). 

Detailed Sacramento-Yolo BEA rail data were derived from the 2003 STB Carload 

Waybill Sample (confidential version provided by Caltrans). 

The source for the overall freight flow data in this section is the Freight Analysis Framework 

(FAF 2.1 ) produced by US DOT–BTS. The data file contains origin to destination flows by 

commodity, by mode of transportation with value and tonnage for each flow. There are 114 geo- 


Page 86

graphic regions plus 7 international regions and 17 international gateways defined in the data 

base. The regions are based on Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA), Consolidated Statistical 

Areas (CSA), and states and balances of states. Commodities are defined at the 2-digit Standard 

Classification of Transported Goods (SCTG) level. FAF 2.1 contains a total of 138 origin and 

destination areas with 43 commodity classes and 7 modes of transportation. The Sacramento Region 

as defined in FAF 2.1 includes in addition to Sacramento, Arden–Arcade–Truckee, CA-NV 

CSA (CA Part). 

These data sources have some serious inherent e weaknesses. Since the underlying data sources 

for the FAF rarely record routes, there are no direct data bearing on through movements transiting 

the SACOG region. The underlying sources also typically do not track empty movements, 

secondary movements from local distribution centers to retail stores or customers, local deliveries 

of construction materials, or movements of waste, scrap, and refuse. All the major databases 

are samples, so there is the possibility that actual regional totals differ significantly from the 

sample results. Finally, the most recent FAF data is form 2004. 

Modal Share Data 

Exhibit 80 gives an estimate of the tonnages hauled by each of the seven FAF modes. The FAF 

data were supplemented from other sources where available. 

Freight movements use all the modes, but trucking overshadows the others. Air cargo tends to 

be light weight, high value.“Other Intermodal” includes parcel, courier, and mail shipments. 

Exhibit 80: Sacramento Area Freight O/D Summary (2002) 

Mode Tonnage (000) Share 

Air, air & truck* 140 0.1% 

Other intermodal 2,227 1.6% 

Pipeline & unknown 6,010 4.3% 

Rail** 4,106 2.9% 

Truck 126,928 90.6% 

Truck and rail** 95 0.1% 

Water*** 619 0.4% 

Total 140,125 100% 

* Source: Sacramento County Airport System 

** Source: 2003 Carload Waybill Sample 

*** Source: US Army Corps of Engineers 

Commodity Flow Data 

Despite the weaknesses of the available commodity flow data, the FAF can be used to describe 

the proportions and patterns of major commodity flows to, from and within the SACOG region 

under the assumption that any data shortfalls affect all segment equally. 


Page 87

Exhibit 81 shows, for example, that the SACOG region is on balance a net consumer, with inbound 

flows exceeding outbound. Reported internal flows are 37% of the total, stressing the importance 

of the local and regional markets as opposed to the long-haul movements. As the local 

flow data are probably the weakest due to the volume of under-reported secondary, empty, and 

refuse or waste movements, the 37% is likely to be a significant underestimate. 

Exhibit 81: Major Commodity Flow Shares 

Outbound 

20% 

Internal 

37% 

Inbound 

43% 

As Exhibit 82 shows, over 60% of the reported commodity flows outbound from the Sacramento 

area are bound for the San Francisco Bay Area, arguably a regional rather than long-haul trip. 

The inbound flows are also mostly from the Bay Area (Exhibit 83). 

Exhibit 82: Destinations of Outbound Commodity Flows 

Other Regions 

26% 

Pacifc Northwest 

2% 

Pacific Southwest 

& Texas 

10% 

San Francisco Bay 

62% 


Page 88

Exhibit 83: Origins of Inbound Commodity Flows 

Pacific Southwest 

& Texas 

8% 

Pacifc Northwest 

3% 

San Francisco Bay 

78% 

Other Regions 

11% 

Exhibit 84 shows outbound commodity flows from the Sacramento area in terms of both tonnage 

and value. 

 

 

Outbound tonnage is dominated by heavy raw materials such as gravel and minerals; 

agricultural products including grains and animal feeds; and liquid bulks such 

as gasoline and petroleum products. 

Outbound value is dominated by consumer merchandise of several kinds. 


Page 89

Exhibit 84: Outbound Commodity Shares - 2002 

TONNAGE SHARES 

All Other 

25% 

Nonmetal min. prods.* 

14% 

Gravel 

13% 

Natural sands 

3% 

Unknown 

3% 

Animal feed 

3% 

Other foodstuffs 

4% 

Waste/scrap 

5% 

Other ag prods. 

6% 

Gasoline 

6% 

Cereal grains 

12% 

Petroleum Products, 

n.e.c. 

6% 

VALUE SHARES 

All Other 

25% 

Mixed freight 

16% 

Unknown 

3% 

Electronics 

12% 

Furniture 

3% 


3% 

Motorized vehicles*** 

3% 

Machinery 

10% 

Articles-base metal 

3% 

Pharmaceuticals 

6% 

Gasoline 

3% 

Precision instruments 

4% 


4% 

Misc. mfg. prods. 

5% 

Inbound commodity shares (Exhibit 85) are very similar to the outbound mix. 

 

 

Inbound tonnage is dominated by bulk materials, agricultural products, and liquid 

bulks. 

Inbound value is dominated by consumer goods. 


Page 90

Exhibit 85: Inbound Commodity Shares–2002 

All Other 

25% 

Gravel 

28% 


W aste/scrap 

2% 

W ood prods. 

3% 


4% 


4% 

Gasoline 

4% 

Natural sands 

6% 

Animal feed 

6% 


6% 


n.e.c. 

12% 

VALUE SHARES 

Plastics/rubber 

3% 

All Other 

25% 

Electronics 

14% 

Machinery 

12% 

Precision instruments 

3% 

Chemical prods. 

3% 


3% 


n.e.c. 

3% Misc. mfg. prods. 

4% 

Mixed freight 

5% 


11% 


7% 

Textiles/leather 

7% 


Page 91

Local commodity movement tonnage (Exhibit 86) is dominated by minerals, fuels, and chemicals. 

Local value is, again, dominated by consumer goods. 

Exhibit 86: Local Commodity Shares - 2002 


VALUE SHARES 

All Other 

24% 

Machinery 

18% 

Waste/scrap 

3% 

Mixed freight 

11% 


3% 

Transport equip. 

3% 

Gasoline 

3% 


3% 

Misc. mfg. prods. 

3% 

Articles-base metal 

4% 


4% 

Petroleum Prod., n.e.c. 

7% 

Electronics 

7% 

Unknown 

7% 

The obvious prominence of basic commodities such as sand, gravel, minerals, and petroleum 

products is due to both demand and supply factors. Demand for these basic commodities is 

driven by population (food, fuel), agriculture (agricultural products, chemicals), and construction 

(sand, gravel, steel, lumber, cement). Demand from these sources grows as the regional population 

expands and as per capita consumption grows. 


Page 92

These commodities, especially sand and gravel, have a very low unit value that cannot support 

high transportation costs. Local sources of supply have decisive advantages. Where longdistance 

movement is necessary (e.g. gasoline, agricultural chemicals) low-cost modes are used 

to reach the region (pipeline for gasoline, ships for agricultural chemicals) and trucks are used 

for local delivery. 

Sacramento Area Through Freight Estimates (2002) 

Through freight has a higher average value per ton (Exhibit 87), and includes a greater proportion 

of rail. 

Exhibit 87: Estimated Through vs. Local Freight Flows -2002 

Through Freight 

Value 

Tonnage 

Mode 

Share 

Share 

$/Ton 

($millions) 

(000) 

Truck 84,200 61% 26,797 70% $ 

3,142 

Rail 5,049 4% 9,324 24% $ 

542 

Unknown 3,582 3% 1,033 3% $ 

3,468 

Truck and rail 2,325 2% 729 2% $ 

3,190 

Other intermodal 42,190 31% 629 2% $ 

67,052 

Total 137,346 100% 38,512 100% $ 

3,566 

Inbound/Outbound/Local Freight 

Value 

Mode 

($millions) 

Share Tonnage (000) Share $/ton 

Air, air & truck 2,421 2% 29 0% $ 

82,166 

Other intermodal 14,008 14% 2,227 2% $ 

6,289 

Pipeline & unknown 2,873 3% 6,010 4% $ 

478 

Rail 2,060 2% 3,769 3% $ 

546 

Truck 75,020 77% 126,928 90% $ 

591 

Truck and rail 493 1% 1,405 1% $ 

351 

Water 76 0% 78 0% $ 

966 

Total 96,950 100% 140,447 100% $ 

690 


Page 93

As Exhibit 88 indicates, the through tonnage has a much more even mix of commodity types, 

and is less dominated by low-value goods. 

Exhibit 88: Estimated Through Tonnage by Commodity - 2002 

Machinery 

2% 


3% 

Milled grain prods. 

3% 

Printed prods. 

3% 


n.e.c. 

3% 

Chemical prods. 

3% 

Plastics/rubber 

2% 

All Other 

24% 


10% 

Wood prods. 

7% 

Base metals** 

6% 

Gravel 

6% 


6% 

Gasoline 

5% 

Mixed freight 

4% 

Basic chemicals 

3% Alcoholic beverages 

3% 


4% 

Newsprint/paper 

4% 

Truck Count Data 

Truck counts are the best available measure of truck traffic volume and impact in the SACOG 

region. While freight movement are ultimately driven by the tonnage to be hauled and the distances 

to be covered, available freight and commodity movement data tell only part of the story. 

Particularly in an urban area, a large portion of the truck movements are empty or partially 

loaded, or may contain refuse, recyclables, or other “goods” not commonly tracked in commodity 

data. 

Truck counts are either automatic, which efficiently records the impact of wheels and axles, or 

manual, which allows for distinctions between truck types but is far more costly. Cities, counties, 

and other planning jurisdictions commonly take vehicle counts, which include trucks, as required 

to assess the need for road and street improvements. Few jurisdictions have regular programs 

of vehicle or truck counts, so there is rarely an opportunity to compare counts in different 

locations at the same time, or counts at the same location over a period of years. 

Caltrans does have an ongoing program of automatic vehicle counts on state highways. Ass 

spread out as it must be, the program, allows for counts at a given location only every few years. 

Caltrans uses more recent counts at nearly locations to pro-rate and estimate counts for the missing 

locations, so there is always a mix of actual and estimated counts. The counts split out trucks 

by the number of axles: 2, 3, 4, 5 or more. For this study the 2-axle trucks are omitted, as many 

or most of such smaler vehicles are not considered “trucks” by the general public and do not 

have the same impacts or presence as larger vehicles. 


Page 94

Exhibit 89 shows the average annual daily counts of 3-5 axle trucks on the major highways serving 

the SACOG region in 2004, drawn from Caltrans counts and estimates . 

Exhibit 89: Average Daily 3-5 Axle Trucks on Major SACOG Routes in 2004 

The concentration of trucking activity in the urbanized center is clear from the counts, which are 

given in more detail in Exhibit 90 and Exhibit 91. 


Page 95

Exhibit 90: Average Daily 2004 3-5 Axle Trucks on Highways 5, 50, 70 

Route County 

Description 

AADT 

Total 

3-5 Axle 

Trucks Truck % 

5 SAC SAN JOAQUIN/SACRAMENTO COUNTY LINE 57,000 10,650 19% 

5 SAC SACRAMENTO, POCKET/MEADOWVIEW ROADS 105,000 10,647 10% 

5 SAC SACRAMENTO, JCT. RTE. 50 144,000 10,451 7% 

5 SAC SACRAMENTO, I STREET 179,000 13,180 7% 


5 SAC SACRAMENTO, JCT. RTE. 99 NORTH 93,500 8,842 9% 

5 YOL WOODLAND, EAST MAIN STREET 38,750 6,884 18% 

5 YOL WOODLAND, JCT. RTE. 113 34,000 6,767 20% 

5 YOL JCT. RTE. 505 SOUTH 28,550 6,543 23% 

50 YOL JCT. RTE. 80 EAST 92,000 3,666 4% 

50 YOL JCT. RTE. 84 113,000 3,664 3% 


50 SAC SACRAMENTO, JCT. RTE. 160 15TH/16TH STRE 254,000 3,333 1% 

50 SAC JCT. RTES. 51/99 224,000 4,105 2% 

50 SAC SACRAMENTO, 65TH STREET 200,000 4,100 2% 



50 SAC JCT. RTE. 16 183,000 3,834 2% 

50 SAC SUNRISE BOULEVARD 138,000 4,606 3% 

50 SAC NIMBUS ROAD 116,000 4,282 4% 

50 SAC FOLSOM BOULEVARD/NATOMA 102,000 3,462 3% 

50 SAC SCOTT ROAD 86,000 3,154 4% 

50 ED EAST SHINGLE SPRINGS 54,500 1,854 3% 

50 ED PLACERVILLE, FAIRGROUNDS 61,000 2,053 3% 

50 ED PLACERVILLE, JCT. RTE. 49 44,000 1,524 3% 

50 ED PLACERVILLE, POINT VIEW DRIVE 24,600 915 4% 

50 ED EAST CAMINO ROAD 19,100 816 4% 

50 ED SLY PARK ROAD 10,800 435 4% 

50 ED ICEHOUSE ROAD 12,700 371 3% 

50 ED JCT. RTE. 89 SOUTH 13,400 202 2% 

50 ED SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, JCT. RTE. 89 NORTH 26,250 305 1% 

50 ED SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, STATE LINE AVENUE, NEV 33,000 170 1% 

70 SUT JCT. RTE. 99 13,800 846 6% 

70 YUB JCT. RTE. 65 SOUTH 29,950 2,412 8% 

70 YUB YUBA RIVER BRIDGE 60,000 3,066 5% 

70 YUB MARYSVILLE, JCT. RTE. 20 24,250 1,175 5% 

70 YUB YUBA/BUTTE COUNTY LINE 10,400 819 8% 

Source: Caltrans 


Page 96

Exhibit 91: Average Daily 2004 3-5 Axle Trucks on Highways 80, 99, 113, 505 

Route County 

Description 

AADT 

Total 

3-5 Axle 

Trucks Truck % 

80 YOL RICHARDS BOULEVARD 129,000 8,087 6% 

80 YOL WEST SACRAMENTO, JCT. RTE. 50 111,000 6,825 7% 

80 YOL JCT. RTE. 84 EAST 80,000 5,178 6% 


80 SAC JCT. RTE. 51 188,000 6,301 4% 

80 SAC GREENBACK LANE 186,000 6,212 3% 

80 PLA ROSEVILLE, RIVERSIDE DRIVE 171,000 6,079 4% 

80 PLA ROSEVILLE, ATLANTIC STREET 158,000 6,538 4% 

80 PLA JCT. RTE. 65 132,500 5,681 4% 

80 PLA JCT. RTE. 193 WEST 82,000 4,575 6% 

80 PLA AUBURN, JCT. RTE. 49 74,000 3,848 5% 

80 PLA AUBURN RAVINE ROAD 57,500 3,967 7% 

80 PLA CLIPPER GAP 41,500 4,064 10% 

80 PLA COLFAX, JCT. RTE. 174 NORTH 31,500 3,942 13% 

99 SAC SJ/SAC COUNTY LINE 62,000 5,748 9% 

99 SAC JCT. RTE. 104 EAST 65,000 5,750 9% 

99 SAC ELK GROVE BOULEVARD 73,500 6,247 9% 

99 SAC SACRAMENTO, STOCKTON BOULEVARD 128,500 6,308 5% 

99 SAC SACRAMENTO, MACK ROAD 165,000 6,849 4% 

99 SAC FLORIN ROAD 180,000 8,089 4% 

99 SAC SACRAMENTO, FRUITRIDGE ROAD 207,500 7,855 4% 

99 SAC JCT. RTES. 50/51/5 138,250 5,030 5% 

99 SUT JCT. RTE. 70 NORTH 22,000 1,446 7% 

99 SUT GARDEN HIGHWAY 15,000 1,063 7% 

99 SUT TUDOR, GARDEN HIGHWAY 15,600 1,044 7% 

99 SUT JCT. RTE. 113 14,150 917 6% 

99 SUT OSWALD ROAD 16,450 1,065 6% 

99 SUT YUBA CITY, JCT. RTE. 20 27,300 1,595 6% 

99 SUT ENCINAL ROAD/LIVE OAK BOULEVARD 17,700 1,034 6% 

113 SOL JCT. RTE. 12 4,350 272 6% 

113 SOL DIXON, NORTH ADAMS STREET 10,600 436 4% 

113 SOL DIXON, WEST JCT. RTE. 80 18,100 1,742 10% 

113 SOL EAST JCT. RTE. 80 38,000 1,459 4% 

113 YOL DAVIS, RUSSELL BOULEVARD 35,250 1,370 4% 

113 YOL GIBSON ROAD 15,000 1,331 9% 

113 YOL WOODLAND, MAIN STREET 10,700 759 7% 

113 YOL COUNTY ROAD P18C 3,700 174 5% 

113 YOL KNIGHTS LANDING, JCT. RTE. 45 NORTH 8,900 418 5% 

505 YOL JCT. RTE. 128 WEST 20,750 4,532 22% 

505 YOL JCT. RTE. 16 14,850 3,353 23% 

505 YOL JCT. RTE. 5 9,700 1,249 13% 

Source: Caltrans 

As the truck count data imply, the volume of 3-5 axle trucks tends to decline in less populated 

areas. Exhibit 92 shows this “taper” graphicaly for US Highway 50, going from the junction 

with Interstate 80 on the East to the Nevada state line at South Lake Tahoe. The volume of trucks 

declines noticeably once east of Rancho Cordova at Sunrise Blvd., and again east of Folsom. The 

count drops by 60% between Rancho Cordova and Shingle Springs, and by 80% at Placerville. 


Page 97

Exhibit 92: Truck Count “Taper” on US Highway 50 (West to East) 

5,000 

4,500 

4,000 

Avg. Daily 3-5 Axle Trucks 

3,500 

3,000 

2,500 

2,000 

1,500 

1,000 

500 

- 

JCT. RTE. 80 EAST 

JCT. RTE. 84 

SACRAMENTO, JCT. RTE. 5 

SACRAMENTO, JCT. RTE. 160 15TH/16TH STRE 

JCT. RTES. 51/99 

SACRAMENTO, 65TH STREET 



JCT. RTE. 16 

SUNRISE BOULEVARD 

NIMBUS ROAD 

FOLSOM BOULEVARD/NATOMA 

SCOTT ROAD 

EAST SHINGLE SPRINGS 

PLACERVILLE, FAIRGROUNDS 

PLACERVILLE, JCT. RTE. 49 

PLACERVILLE, POINT VIEW DRIVE 

EAST CAMINO ROAD 

SLY PARK ROAD 

ICEHOUSE ROAD 

JCT. RTE. 89 SOUTH 

SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, JCT. RTE. 89 NORTH 

SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, STATE LINE AVENUE, NEV 

Exhibit 93 shows a similar “taper” from South to North on US Highway 99. The drop of in truck 

trafic as the highway leaves the “urbanized: area at the junction with Highway 70 is readily apparent. 

Exhibit 93: Truck Count “Taper” on US Highway 990 (South to North) 

9,000 

8,000 

7,000 

Avg. Daily 3-5 Axle Trucks 

6,000 

5,000 

4,000 

3,000 

2,000 

1,000 

- 

SJ/SAC COUNTY LINE 

JCT. RTE. 104 EAST 

ELK GROVE BOULEVARD 

SACRAMENTO, STOCKTON BOULEVARD 

SACRAMENTO, MACK ROAD 

FLORIN ROAD 

SACRAMENTO, FRUITRIDGE ROAD 

JCT. RTES. 50/51/5 

JCT. RTE. 70 NORTH 

GARDEN HIGHWAY 

TUDOR, GARDEN HIGHWAY 

JCT. RTE. 113 

OSWALD ROAD 

YUBA CITY, JCT. RTE. 20 

ENCINAL ROAD/LIVE OAK BOULEVARD 

Exhibit 94 illustrates how these regional flows extend out over the western highway network. 


Page 98

Exhibit 94: California State Truck Flows - 1998 

I-5 

I-80 

I-95 

I-40 

I-10 

Rail Freight Data 

Separate rail freight data were compiled from the 2003 Carload Waybill Sample (CWS). The 

CWS is the best available rail data sources, being a statically sophisticated 2.5% sample of railroad 

“waybils” (internal shipping documents) from the major railroads. The figures below were 

raised to estimated annual totals using the specified expansion factors for each record. Access to 

the confidential version of the data was authorized by Caltrans. 

Railroad traffic to and from the SACOG region is driven by local consumption and production of 

basic commodities (as opposed to through rail traffic which is driven by the production, consumption, 

imports, and exports of regions east, west, north, and south of the region). The most 

recent national freight forecasts by Global Insight, published by the American Trucking Association, 

call for growth in carload rail traffic to average 1.87% annually between 2005 and 2016, a 

rate very close to the expected population growth of the SACOG region. For this study that 

growth rate was applied to the CWS data to yield the forecasts below out to 2020. 

Exhibit 95 summarizes the inbound, outbound, and local rail tonnage in the SCAOG region (the 

Sacramento BEA). 


Page 99

Exhibit 95: Total Sacramento BEA Rail Tonnage -2003 

Commodity Carloads Tons 

Share of Cumulative 

Tons Share 

Cement 6,568 718,024 17% 17% 

Lumber 6,080 420,760 10% 28% 

Field Crops 4,068 389,394 9% 37% 

Misc. Wood Products 3,880 329,800 8% 45% 

Fresh Fruits 2,160 191,760 5% 50% 

Crushed Stone 3,520 191,240 5% 55% 

Petroleum Products 2,376 187,536 5% 59% 

Chemicals 1,625 158,036 4% 63% 

Misc. Minerals 1,880 153,040 4% 67% 

Concrete, Gypsum, & Clay Prods. 1,548 123,232 3% 70% 

Dairy Products 2,000 121,960 3% 73% 

Grain Products 1,400 119,080 3% 76% 

Beverages 1,168 115,036 3% 78% 

Misc. Mineral Products 1,424 108,740 3% 81% 

Paper 1,480 99,360 2% 83% 

Canned & Frozen Foods 1,560 92,760 2% 86% 

Plastics 840 80,040 2% 88% 

Paperboard 760 51,400 1% 89% 

Misc. Foods 756 46,460 1% 90% 

All Other 10,444 408,748 10% 100% 

Grand Total 55,537 4,106,406 100% 100% 

Rail freight tonnage in the SACOG region is dominated by basic commodities. The tables below 

gives estimated carloads and tons for 2003 and forecast carloads and tons for 2020, along with 

trainload equivalents at 75 cars per train. Outbound (Exhibit 96), the railroads move the region’s 

agricultural output and minerals from local sources. The region currently generates a little less 

than one full train of rail traffic each day (and note that those cars are not all going in the same 

direction). The average will rise to almost exactly on 75-car train daily by 2020. 

Exhibit 96: Outbound Rail Movements–2003 to 2020 

2003 2020 

Commodity 

Estimated 

Estimated 

Carloads Tons 

Carloads Tons 

Trains 

Trains 

Field Crops 3,832 366,950 51 5,246 502,401 70 

Fresh Fruits 2,160 191,760 29 2,957 262,544 39 

Crushed Stone 3,520 191,240 47 4,819 261,832 64 

Misc. Minerals 1,560 122,320 21 2,136 167,472 28 

Dairy Products 2,000 121,960 27 2,738 166,979 37 

Canned & Frozen Foods 1,480 88,160 20 2,026 120,702 27 

Grain Products 1,000 86,680 13 1,369 118,676 18 

Beverages 808 83,716 11 1,106 114,618 15 

Misc. Foods 516 34,060 7 706 46,632 9 

All Other 3,224 137,220 43 4,414 187,872 59 

Grand Total 20,100 1,424,066 268 27,519 1,949,727 367 


Page 100

Inbound (Exhibit 97), the railroads move basic commodities such as cement, lumber, petroleum 

products, and chemicals that are demanded in large amounts but not produced in the SACOG 

region. The inbound numbers are nearly double the outbound, largely due to the inbound construction 

materials: cement, lumber, wood products, gypsum, etc. 

Exhibit 97: Inbound Rail Movements–2003 to 2020 

2003 2020 

Commodity 

Estimated 

Estimated 

Carloads Tons 

Carloads Tons 

Trains 

Trains 

Cement 6,568 718,024 88 8,992 983,066 120 

Lumber 5,840 396,800 78 7,996 543,270 107 

Misc. Wood Products 3,720 317,240 50 5,093 434,342 68 

Petroleum Products 2,096 178,856 28 2,870 244,877 38 

Chemicals 1,505 146,676 20 2,061 200,818 27 

Concrete, Gypsum, & Clay Prods. 1,548 123,232 21 2,119 168,720 28 

Paper 1,480 99,360 20 2,026 136,036 27 

Plastics 840 80,040 11 1,150 109,585 15 

Misc. Mineral Products 600 55,920 8 821 76,562 11 

Paperboard 760 51,400 10 1,041 70,373 14 

Ashes 452 45,952 6 619 62,914 8 

Misc. Mineral Products 600 45,160 8 821 61,830 11 

Other 900 44,368 12 1,232 60,745 16 

Forest Barks or Gums 480 41,400 6 657 56,682 9 

Grain Products 400 32,400 5 548 44,360 7 

Beverages 360 31,320 5 493 42,881 7 

All Other 7,288 274,192 97 9,978 375,404 133 

Grand Total 35,437 2,682,340 472 48,518 3,672,464 647 

Purely local rail moves that both originated and terminated in the SACOG region (Exhibit 98) 

are also almost all heavy bulk materials, accounting for an estimated 320 carloads in 2003 rising 

to 438 carloads in 2020. 

Commodity 

Exhibit 98: Local Rail Movements–2003 to 2020 

Carloads 

2003 

Tons 

Estimated 

Trains 

Carloads 

2020 

Tons 

Estimated 

Trains 

Petroleum Products 80 4,760 1 110 6,517 1 

Waste & Scrap 80 3,680 1 110 5,038 1 

Railroad Equipment 40 3,440 1 55 4,710 1 

Canned & Frozen Foods 40 2,680 1 55 3,669 1 

Grain Products 80 1,800 1 110 2,464 1 

Grand Total 320 16,360 4 438 22,399 6 

The major source of rail traffic passing through the SACOG region is the Bay Area, for both 

eastbound and westbound trains. Exhibit 99 shows the growth in Bay Area trains estimated for 

the MTC Regional Rail study. The great majority of the traffic is expected to pass through the 

Union Pacific Central Corridor, and therefore through Sacramento. 


Page 101

Exhibit 99: Projected Bay Area Train Counts 

PROJECTED DAILY BAY AREA TRAINS 

140 

120 

100 

BNSF TR TR 

UP UPNorth 

UP UPCentral 

80 80 

60 60 

40 40 

20 20 

-- 

2003 2010 2020 2030 

Marine Cargo 

Exhibit 100 displays 1999–2004 US Army Corps of Engineers Waterborne Trade Data (the 

most recent available) for the San Francisco Bay Entrance. These data include cargoes moving 

to and from river and delta ports including Sacramento as well as cargo at Bay Area ports. 

Exhibit 100: 1999-2004 USACE SF Bay Tonnage Data 

Commodity 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 CAGR 

Crude Petroleum 17,794 19,327 22,764 20,641 25,473 24,821 6.9% 

Pet. Products 14,283 11,229 13,413 12,541 11,372 13,807 -0.7% 

Chemicals 3,093 3,423 3,677 3,795 4,054 3,566 2.9% 

Gypsum 877 811 634 716 690 940 1.4% 

Sand & gravel 104 38 158 741 1,083 1,359 67.2% 

Iron & steel scrap 785 820 933 869 1,081 1,087 6.7% 

Cement 830 947 1,206 884 1,072 1,687 15.2% 

Iron & Steel 1,313 1,009 866 379 186 529 -16.6% 

Rice 664 623 624 752 683 712 1.4% 

Veg. Oils 257 342 329 282 289 257 0.0% 

Vehicles & Parts 357 539 595 579 604 765 16.5% 

All Other 10,309 12,448 11,766 11,964 11,951 13,743 5.9% 

Total 50,666 51,556 56,965 54,143 58,538 63,273 4.5% 

Overall tonnage grew at an average of 4.5% annually in 1999–2004. Individual commodities of 

interest to the Port of Sacramento varied considerably from that average. 


Page 102

The most dramatic growth was in sand and gravel, with imports replacing domestic 

supplies. 

Cement tonnage also grew strongly, driven by both increased construction and diminished 

local supply. 

Steel imports declined strongly due to market and regulatory forces but made a partial 

recovery in 2004. 

Other bulk commodity tonnage grew slowly or even declined slightly. 

Exhibit 101 displays 1999–2004 US Army Corps of Engineers Waterborne Trade Data for the 

Port of Sacramento, the most recent available. With the exception of ammonia, all the major 

commodities have fallen off significantly. In some case the cargo has been lost to aggressive 

competition, notably from the Port of Stockton. 

Exhibit 101: USACE Port Data (000 short tons) 

Commodity 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Fertilizer 175 103 86 119 145 79 

Ammonia 56 64 12 44 57 55 

Wood Chips 205 216 160 119 81 91 

Rice 385 267 301 179 281 215 

Other 94 202 110 158 179 107 

Total 915 852 669 619 743 547 

Air Freight 

Both airfields witnessed brisk growth in their air cargo operations in the 1990s, only to see a 

sharp contraction in cargo volumes between 2000 and 2002. (Exhibit 102) Since then, the 

amount of air cargo handled by the two airports has increased at an average annual rate of just 

0.69percent, even while the surounding region’s economy expanded and its population grew. 

While inbound air cargo volumes did increase by 13 percent between 2002 and 2005, outbound 

volumes declined by 9 percent. This trend, which the region shares with California as a whole, 

appears to be indicative of the diminishing role of goods-producing companies in the local economy. 


Page 103

Exhibit 102: Air Cargo at SMF and MHR–Metric Tons 

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

SMF: 

Freight 46,326 46,120 47,686 60,390 60,330 58,501 61,603 

Mail 14,328 15,363 12,523 10,268 10,915 8,965 8,621 

SMF Total 60,654 61,483 60,209 70,658 71,245 67,466 70,224 

MHR: 

Freight 71,015 67,870 60,015 56,069 54,545 57,750 59,136 

Mail 25,789 99,658 50,701 0 0 0 0 

MHR Total 96,804 167,528 110,716 56,069 54,545 57,750 59,136 

SMF/MHR Combined: 

Freight 117,341 113,990 107,701 116,459 114,875 116,251 120,739 

Mail 40,117 115,021 63,224 10,268 10,915 8,965 8,621 

System Cargo Total 157,458 229,011 170,925 126,727 125,790 125,216 129,360 

At SMF and MHR 87 percent of all air cargo tonnage in 2005 iii was handled by three companies 

–FedEx, UPS, and DHL/Airborne Express iv –which collectively dominate the express delivery 

market in the United States. (Exhibit 103)Each of these “integrated cariers” v has flights arriving 

in the early morning hours bearing tens of thousands of envelopes, small parcels, and freight 

shipments scheduled for guaranteed delivery just hours later to customers throughout the Sacramento 

region. By late afternoon, many of these same trucks are racing back to the airports with 

items collected throughout the region to be shipped out on early evening flights. 

iii 

Unless otherwise specified, all years cited in this chapter are Calendar Years. 

iv 

DHL acquired Airborne Express in 2003, a year after Deutsche Post World Net completed its acquisition of 

DHL. Sacramento County Airports System operations reports continue to report Airborne Express and DHL separately, 

however. 

v 

Integrated carriers manage all aspects of a shipment, from pick-up to delivery. By contrast, “combination cariers” 

transport both cargo and pasengers. Freight is generaly profered to combination carriers by freightforwarders 

or other logistical consultants working on behalf of the shipper to obtain the best rates and arrangements. 

There are, in addition, dedicated cargo airlines whose role in domestic U.S. air cargo market has been steadily 

diminishing. 


Page 104

Exhibit 103: Carrier Shares of Sacramento Area Air Cargo 

PAX, 11% 

Others , 2% 

DHL, 14% 

FedEx, 42% 

UPS, 31% 

Although Mather Airport is designated as the region’s air cargo hub, it has been handling somewhat 

less air cargo than Sacramento International. The Rancho Cordova airport currently hosts 

UPS and DHL as its principal air cargo tenants. Last year, UPS handled 17,955 tons of outbound 

and 22,348 tons of inbound cargo. DHL, along with its Airborne Express subsidiary, handled 

9,373 tons of outbound and 9,224 tons of inbound cargo. (A smaller player at MHR, Emery 

Worldwide, landed 37 tons and departed with 198 tons of cargo.) Altogether, 53.7 percent of the 

total air cargo tonnage at MHR last year was inbound. By contrast, in 2002, 51.3 percent of the 

air cargo at MHR was heading outbound. The large Mather peak and drop in 1999-2002 is due to 

the short-lived air mail contract held by Kittyhawk, which was subsequently lost to FedEx. 

At Sacramento International, which serves both passenger airlines and all-cargo aircraft, 80 percent 

of the cargo tonnage handled in 2005 arrived or departed aboard all-cargo planes. FedEx 

alone handled nearly 76 percent of the air cargo tonnage that moved through SMF last year. For 

an airport whose primary mission is to serve the airline passenger (PAX) market, the freighter 

share of air cargo is unusually high. In the case of SMF, the substantially lower share enjoyed by 

passenger airlines is largely attributable to the fact that the preponderance of passenger flights at 

SMF involve destinations within California and adjacent states, a geographic market in which 

overnight trucking operations offer an appreciably cheaper transportation alternative. At Mather 

Airport, UPS and DHL handled 99.6 percent of all air cargo tonnage in 2005. In addition, the 

Boeing 737 planes that predominate at SMF are not configured for containerized air cargo. 


Page 105

Air Cargo Forecasts 

Forecasting air cargo volumes requires a complicated assessment incorporating a wide range of 

economic, demographic, spatial, industry-specific and other variables, not to mention the odd 

imponderable. vi In short, lots of things can and do happen to defeat the best laid forecasting 

methodology. 

Few experiences are more dispiriting for aviation industry analysts than reviewing air cargo forecasts 

prepared in 1999-2001. In contrast to the almost unrestrained ebullience of aviation forecasters 

at that time (who had just witnessed a decade in which the air cargo industry had truly 

soared), contemporary industry analysts are almost uniformly gloomy and reserved in their 

prophecies. 

In May 2001 MergeGlobal predicted that domestic U.S. air cargo would grow at a 6.1 percent 

per year pace through 2005. At the time, this forecast was widely regarded as a thoroughly noncontroversial 

call by a well-respected firm. (The Virginia-based consulting firm’s annual air 

cargo forecasts have been among the most closely watched indicators in the industry.) Yet, by 

May 2003, MergeGlobal was obliged to concede that it had been blindsided by reality. Instead of 

hearty growth, there had been a 7.6 percent drop in domestic air cargo tonnage since 2000. 

In retrospect, of course, the factors behind this turnabout are obvious. There was, first, the abrupt 

unraveling of the dot.com boom in the winter of 2000-01. That boom had played a leading role in 

the rapid growth of the air cargo industry during the 1990s, a decade in which America enjoyed 

its longest period of economic expansion since World War II. The remarkable economic hit that 

the electronics and telecommunications industries took starting in late 2000 deprived the air 

cargo industry of a good part of its clientele. 

Apart from being haunted by the specter of terrorists spiriting a bomb into the belly of a passenger 

airliner, aviation industry analysts are most greatly troubled by the debilitating run-up in jet 

fuel prices in the past three years. During the last week of June 2006, the jet fuel benchmark at 

Los Angeles International Airport was 219.15 cents per gallon, up some 185 percent since the 

same week in 2003. In the short-term, the surcharges air carriers have been obliged to impose on 

shippers have prompted increasing numbers of shippers to divert cargos from planes to less 

costly surface modes of transport. To compound the effect of purely economically-inspired modal 

shifting, many shippers reacted to 9/11 by permanently grounding many of their shipments. 

The most conspicuous of these was the U.S. Postal Service. There is a much greater long-term 

worry, however, that permanently high fuel costs and eventual fuel shortages may cause a widespread 

reappraisal of existing logistical strategies, a shortening of supply chains, and a diminished 

role for air cargo. 

vi 

Prior to use in an airport master plan, proposed forecasts must be submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration 

for review and approval. Once approved, the forecasts may be used to provide an initial timetable for facility 

improvements, as a basis for the development of alternatives to meet the projected demand, and as a basis for environmental 

analyses and economic and financial plans. (FAA Advisory Circular No. 150/5070-6B, July 2005.) 

. 


Page 106

Adding to the air cargo industry’s woes was, according to MergeGlobal’s 2003 forecast, “The 

steady market share gains of defered ‘air freight’ trafic that moves purely by truck.” Stil, MergeGlobal’s 

prognosticators remained positive: “The outlook is for 4.8 percent growth this year 

and an average growth rate of 5.4 percent through 2007.” By May 2004, however, that tone of 

optimism was almost entirely gone: “The efects of modal substitution will limit total [domestic 

air cargo] growth to 1.8 percent per year between 2003 and 2008. By May 2005, MergeGlobal’s 

forecast turned only slightly more buoyant: “The [domestic] air freight market, which is driven 

mainly by United States domestic expres trafic, has matured…we expect total [domestic air 

cargo] to grow at 2.1 percent annually between 2004 and 2009.” 

The Federal Aviation Administration’s annual reviews and forecasts of the aviation industry 

traced much the same progression from high expectations to increasingly conservative estimations 

as the new century unfolded. Forecasts for growth in the domestic air cargo market dwindled 

from around 5 percent average annual growth rates to fewer than three percent in the most 

FAA’s recent outlook to 2017. 

As the new century began, the FAA’s annual review of the aviation industry was headlined: The 

1990s: A Very Good Decade For Aviation. The report went on to observe how air cargo demand 

had grown at a faster pace than passenger demand during the 1990s. U.S. air carrier freight revenue 

ton-miles (RTMs) grew by 5.7 percent annually over the 10-year period, 4.6 percent in domestic 

markets and 6.9 percent in international markets. The Southeast Asian financial crisis had 

had a negative impacted on air cargo demand in 1998 and 1999, but, in discounting that period of 

slower growth, the FAA concluded that “worldwide air cargo demand grew at an average annual 

rate of 8.9 percent, while U.S. air cargo demand increased at an annual rate of 7.7 percent.” 

By contrast, the FAA’s annual review in 2002 took the tone of a dirge: “Nothing in the past has 

prepared aviation forecasters to predict the future direction of aviation demand with any degree 

of certainty.” The FAA looked for domestic freight/express RTMs to decline by 2.1 percent in 

2002 as a result of continued weakness in the economy and acceleration in the modal shift from 

air to ground due to increased air transportation costs to meet new FAA security restrictions. 

Domestic freight/ express RTMs were forecast to increase by just 3.0 percent in 2003 based on a 

continuation of the modal shift and economic recovery. Longer term, the FAA foresaw growth in 

domestic freight/express averaging 4.6 percent annually over the 2004-2013 period. Significantly 

slower growth was forecast for air mail due to new security restrictions on the transport of mail 

on passenger aircraft and a continued modal shift from air to ground by the U.S. Postal Service. 

It also appears that the “anthrax scare”accelerated the move to electronic alternatives for regular 

mail (fax, email, direct bill payment, etc.), which cut into the volume of mail moved by air. 

Aviation industry analysts in California have similarly seen their own forecasting efforts trashed 

by events. Consider the Regional Airport System Plan devised by the Metropolitan Transportation 

Commission in the San Francisco Bay Area. Last revised in 2000, the plan expected to see 

international cargo volumes at San Francisco International grow by over 400 percent by 2020, 

while domestic cargos increased by 55 percent. Oakland International (OAK) and Mineta San 

Jose International were each expected to see 187 percent increases in air cargo tonnage. In fact, 

air cargo tonnage figures at Bay Area airports fell rapidly during the first part of the new century. 

Far from growing at a brisk clip, SFO’s international cargo tonnage in 2005 was actualy 25 per- 


Page 107

cent below its level in 2000. The same patern was folowed on the domestic side of the airport’s 

air cargo ledger. Indeed, since 2002, air cargo volumes at al three of the Bay Area’s major airports 

have shown little sign of resuming the fast-paced growth rates exhibited in the 1990s, rates 

that manifestly informed and influenced the air cargo industry’s confident forecasts around the 

turn of the century. 

In its most recent (February 28, 2006) assessment of the domestic air cargo market, the FAA has 

concluded that (a) the domestic air cargo market has matured, and (b) the modal-shift has gone as 

far as it can go. In theFAA’s estimation, U.S. real GDP wil increase from $11 trilion in 2005 to 

$16 trillion in 2017, an average annual rate of 3.1 percent. Accordingly, it forecasts that domestic 

air cargo RTMs will increase 3.2 percent a year through 2017. 

That forecast rests on at least two optimistic assumptions, though. First, in the FAA’s view: “ The 

average annual growth rate for the price of oil over the entire 12-year forecast period is 1.5 percent.” 

Second, that that the practice of modal-shifting has essentially maxed out. Because of the 

huge run-up in jet fuel costs, it is highly probably that the full impact of modal-shifting on the air 

cargo industry has yet to be felt. 

The latest industry forecast, devised by BACK Aviation Solutions for the May 2006 edition of 

Air Cargo World expects that the domestic market for air cargo will grow by only 1.4 percent per 

year through 2015. In analyzing the contemporary air cargo market, the forecast noted: “The intra-North 

America freight market growth has been significantly affected over the past five years 

by changing shipper strategies. Since the downturn in 2001, shippers have slowly shifted to other 

modes of transportation with longer transit times (such as deferred trucking) in a sacrifice of service 

for reduced cost. As a result, intra-North America air freight traffic growth has stagnated 

while ceding growth to segments in the domestic trucking segment.” 

That assessment is echoed again by the Federal Aviation Administration. In 2005, according to 

the FAA’s annual review, domestic air cargo decreased 1.6 percent. As the FAA’s “Review of 

2005” observed, this decrease “reflects a continuation of the modal shift from air to ground 

shipments and the impact of air fuel surcharges.” 

MergeGlobal similarly concludes in its 2005 World Air Freight Forecast that “the intra-North 

America air freight market, which is driven mainly by United States domestic express traffic, has 

matured...In particular, the change in shippers' spending on domestic air cargo away from overnight/express 

products to deferred services and consequent lengthening of transit time windows 

will allow freight forwarders and integrated carriers to substitute short and medium haul air legs 

with cheaper truck capacity. Accordingly, we expect total intra-North America air freight ton 

kilometers to grow at 2.1 percent annualy between 2004 and 2009.” 

Sharing that assessment, Robert Dahl, the founder of the Seattle-based Air Cargo management 

Group, told the Airports Council International-North America’s 2006 Air Cargo Symposium on 

March 29 that the U.S. domestic air cargo market would grow “much les” than the 3-5 percent 

growth he was forecasting for the global air cargo market. 


Page 108

Air Cargo Outlook at SMF and MHR 

What does the future hold for these two airports? As is true of virtually all but the most recent 

aviation industry forecasts, the air cargo forecasts contained in the draft Master Plans for both 

SMF and MHR are in need of revision. Both forecasts were made in the high-growth period of 

1999-2002, when the industry and its observers were consistently optimistic as described above. 

The forecast for the SMF Master Plan was prepared in March 2001. The forecast for the MHR 

Master Plan was last updated in May 2002, and did not foresee the loss of the Kitty Hawk mail 

business. SCAS has engaged Leigh-Fisher Associates to revisit the MHR forecast. 

The 2001 SMF Master Plan forecast anticipates that the airport would handle 107,535 metric 

tons vii of cargo in 2005, before growing out to approximately 190,075 tons by 2020. (Exhibit 

104) Cargo tonnage at SMF actually declined by 0.2 percent between 2002 and 2005 despite 

healthy regional economic expansion and population growth. Sacramento County Airport System 

(SCAS) records show that SMF actually handled 70,224 tons of air cargo in 2005, only 65.3 percent 

of what had been forecast. To achieve the Master Plan forecast for 2020, air cargo volumes 

at SMF would have to rise at 6.9 percent annually for the next 15 years, considerably faster than 

the 3.8 percent average annual growth rate the Master Plan had forecast. viii 

Exhibit 104: SMF Actual vs. Master Plan Forecasts, Metric Tons 

120,000 

100,000 

80,000 

60,000 

40,000 

20,000 

0 

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

Actual 

MP Forecast 

The MHR Master Plan forecast (Exhibit 105), prepared in May 2002, offers a Base Range estimate 

and a High Range estimate. In the Base Range scenario, MHR is expected to handle 

135,000 tons in 2006 and 225,000 tons by 2021. The High Range scenario expects that MHR 

will handle 159,000 tons of air cargo in 2006, before growing out to 324,000 tons in 2021. 

vii Unless otherwise noted, all cargo weights will be expressed in metric tons (2,204.6 pounds). 

viii 

The SMF Master Plan forecast expected to see freight tonnage increase by average annual growth rates of 8.3 

percent between 1999 and 2010 before slowing to 3.8 percent between 2010 and 2020. It likewise expected to see air 

mail tonnage grow by 4.1 percent per year between 1999 and 2010 and by 2.7 percent between 2010 and 2020. 


Page 109

SCAS records show that MHR handled 59,136 tons of air cargo in 2005 and has seen a 1.8 percent 

average annual growth rate in its cargo volumes between 2002 and 2005. Data for the first 

four months of 2006 reveal that air cargo tonnage at MHR is running 3.8 percent behind the 

identical period a year earlier. In all probability, MHR may handle upwards of 60,000 tons of air 

cargo this year, about 44 percent of the Base Range forecast and 38 percent of the High Range 

estimate. (Exhibit 105) Realizing the tonnage levels indicated by the Master Plan forecasts for 

2021 would require average annual growth rates of either 8.7 percent or 11.3 percent through 

2021. 

Exhibit 105: MHR Actual vs. Master Plan Forecasts, Metric Tons 

180,000 

160,000 

140,000 

120,000 

100,000 

80,000 

60,000 

40,000 

20,000 

0 

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

Actual MP Base Range MP High Range 

Breaking loose from the post-2002 pattern of slow, incremental growth in air cargo tonnages will 

necessitate one or both of the following developments: 

 

 

a greater role for SMF and/or MHR within the national distribution systems maintained 

by one or more of the major integrated carriers, namely FedEx, UPS or 

DHL; or 

initiation of air cargo service by a new carrier, perhaps one offering regular airfreighter 

service to one or more overseas destinations. 

Neither is an entirely outlandish long-term prospect. There is, indeed, a fairly high likelihood that 

SMF will see the inauguration of direct or even non-stop passenger service to Europe by 2015. 

Indigenous economic and population growth will ineluctably expand the regional market for international 

passenger service, which is why SMF will eventually offer transoceanic flights. A 

two-million member market can be denied, where a three-million member market is more difficult 

to ignore. The start of that service would provide a small but important up-tick in air cargo at 

SMF as Central Valley shippers avail themselves of a new transportation route to presumably 

still lucrative European markets. The aircraft most apt to figure in future passenger service between 

SMF and Europe is the new Boeing 787, which has a cargo capacity of 16 metric tons. 

Daily roundtrips to a European destination could add as much as 12,000 tons of cargo at SMF, 

which last year handled just over 70,000 tons. 


Page 110

There is less reason for optimism when it comes to Mather’s prospects for either becoming a new 

regional air cargo hub or for establishing a regularly scheduled air-freighter link to the Far East. 

MHR’s aspirations fortranspacific service depend less on the Sacramento market than on developments 

in the Bay Area. It appears unlikely that air carriers will desert the Bay Area, which will 

remainNorthern California’s principal market for air cargo services, in favor of a site on the periphery. 

For similar reasons, it is also unlikely that either airport would chosen to host a major 

regional sort facility (on the scale of FedEx or UPS at Oakland) for a major integrated carrier. 

Although the Sacramento County Airport System received a consultant’s report in January 2005 

which encouraged hopes of a freighter service between MHR and Macao, a more compelling 

case has to be developed to explain why a carrier would find service into MHR economically 

attractive or why a carrier would necessarily favor MHR over other alternatives (Stockton’s Municipal 

Airport being an obvious one). 

The case for attracting transpacific freighter service to MHR rests principally on the view that 

Bay Area airports have grown too congested to cope with projected increases in the current volume 

of air cargo. Notwithstanding the claim that the catchment area served by the Sacramento 

airports is the second largest in California (exceeded only by that served by LAX), Bay Area industry 

and consumers are clearly the dominant factor in the air cargo in Northern California and 

the Bay Area market will remain the primary focus for air cargo services in this region for the 

foreseeable future. 

In the context of efforts to lure additional air cargo flights to Sacramento, including a much 

sought-after air-freighter service linking MHR to the Far East, the ability of the Sacramento area 

to generate adequate volumes of “backhaul” cargo is apt to be a critical issue. The ability to attract 

a new scheduled air-freighter service will hinge on the carier’s prospects for earning an appropriate 

level of revenue from outbound as well as inbound shipments. Paradoxically, the widening 

gap between outbound and inbound cargo tonnages says more about the prospects for attracting 

additional air cargo service to Sacramento than it does about the vitality of the region’s 

economy. Items with very high value-to-weight ratios may comprise a disproportionate share of 

outbound shipments, whereas inbound cargos may be dominated by heavier, less valuable goods. 

But air cargo carriers do not charge rates based on the value of a shipment but rather on its 

weight and/or the amount of space it occupies on the aircraft. 

There may be a lingering misapprehension that California’s airports, like its seaports, are idealy 

situated to serve as key entrepôts or gateways for the burgeoning transpacific trade. As Jon 

Haveman and David Hummels showed in a 2004 study for the Public Policy Institute of California, 

that is rapidly ceasing to be the case. ix Haveman and Hummels employed a technique 

known as “shift-share decomposition” to explicate trade data indicating a steady decline since 

the mid-1990s in the percentage of airborne trade between the U.S. and the Far East directed 

through a California airport. They found that the decline in California’s value share comes from 

changes in the use of California’s airports, primarily resulting from reduced imports. Just under 

ix See “California's Global Gateways: Trends and Isues,” April 2004, Public Policy Institute of California, San 

Francisco, especially pp. 51-54.. 


Page 111

half the decline was due to reductions in imports of electronic components and accessories from 

Japan through California. At the same time, Savannah and New York experienced significant increases 

in imports of these same products. Similarly, a decline in imports of integrated circuits 

through California’s airports occured during this time. This was coincident with a dramatic increase, 

equal to about half of the California decline, in their flow into the Savannah airport. Similar 

changes occurred in computer and office equipment trade with Japan. In particular, imports of 

hard drives and laptops have shifted dramaticaly from California’s airports to those in Chicago 

and New York. 

On the export side, the reduction in demand shares for California airport services largely reflects 

a change in the export origin point for integrated circuits bound for the Philippines, Malaysia, 

Singapore, and Japan. Many high-tech exports now originate in Dallas, Boston, and New York 

rather than California. 

The future of California’s airports in international trade wil be increasingly a mater of serving 

markets in the geographic area immediately surrounding the airports. Forecasts that the volume 

of international cargo passing through SFO would increase by 400 percent between 2000 and 

2020 were largely predicated on the assumption that SFO would be a transshipment point for a 

substantial amount of cargo moving between the Far East and other regions of the United States. 

That expectation, as we have seen, looks to be waning. Far from continuing to expand at impressive 

rates, the volume of international air cargo moving through SFO has actually fallen off. 

(Exhibit 106 and Exhibit 107) 

Exhibit 106: International Air Cargo at SFO, Metric Tons 

500,000 

400,000 

300,000 

200,000 

100,000 

0 

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

Air Mail 

Air Freight 


Page 112

Exhibit 107: Domestic Air Cargo at SFO, Metric Tons 

500,000 

400,000 

300,000 

200,000 

100,000 

0 

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

Air Mail 

Air Freight 

One reason, clearly, was the devastating impact of the dot.com bust on the Bay Area’s high-tech 

industries, by far the dominant customer for air cargo services on both domestic and international 

flights at SFO. Yet there have been other factors which would indicate that the demand for international 

air cargo in the Bay Area may not threaten to overtake the capacity of the Bay Area’s 

airports as quickly as was once thought. The pressure to develop air cargo capacity at alternative 

airports in Northern California to supplement existing Bay Area airports may not be as acute as 

some forecasts imply. 

Developments in aircraft capabilities and changes in the diplomatic climate have fundamentally 

eroded the strategic location Northern California airports historically played in the transpacific 

air cargo trade. Especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union permitted civilian airliners to fly 

through once-restricted air space over Siberia, the preferred routes for air freighters plying the 

skies between the Far East and North America have converged on Anchorage, which has supplanted 

SFO and LAX as the foremost transshipment point for transpacific airborne cargoes. Anchorage 

enjoys a more cost-effective location than California because it sits along the most direct 

path betweenthe Far East’s principal economies and destination airports throughout the Midwest 

and East Coast. In 2005, the Anchorage airport handled more freight than did any other U.S. airport 

with the exception of Memphis, home to the main FedEx distribution center. Despite its own 

sparsely populated catchment area, Anchorage handled as much cargo tonnage as LAX and SFO 

combined in 2005. By contrast, international cargo volumes at SFO declined between 2000 and 

2005 by exactly one-third, while cargo traffic through Anchorage grew by 21.8 percent. 

The latest generations of widebody jet aircraft increasingly feature long-range capabilities that 

enable air carriers to fly non-stop from the Midwest or the East Coast to their final destinations 

in Asia. The Boeing 777-200LR, for example, has a maximum range of 10,180 miles or more 

than 2,000 miles greater than the distance from New York to Hong Kong. x 

x FAA regulators are reportedly preparing to issue a new set of rules that will enable jetliners with two engines to 

fly the same long-distance routes as planes with three or four engines. The rules will benefit Boeing's twin-engine 


Page 113

To the extent that California’s airports are apt to be used by air cargo cariers largely to meet the 

requirements of their individual catchment areas, MHR’s prospects for atracting transpacific 

freighter service wil depend fundamentaly on the Sacramento region’s ability to generate suficient 

indigenous demand for air cargo along a transpacific route. That may happen in the fullness 

of time as the region’s population continues to swel, but it does not appear to be a reasonable 

expectation to harbor within the planning horizon of this analysis. One notable factor in explaining 

why an otherwise vibrant regional economy is not exhibiting stronger demand for air cargo 

services is the relative paucity of actual goods-producing companies in the region. This appears 

to be especially true with respect to companies producing goods for sale outside of the region. 

The apparent absence of a robust goods-producing segment of the regional economy will make 

the task of luring additional air cargo carriers to MHR more difficult. The ability to generate adequate 

levels of back-haul is a foremost consideration in determining which airports are better positioned 

to attract new air cargo service. 

As for Mather’s prospects for benefiting from an expectation that Bay Area airports wil soon be 

swamped by air cargo, the fact remains that Mather will always be a hundred miles from San 

Francisco. Given the time-sensitive nature of much of the shipments they carry, carriers like 

FedEx, UPS, and DHL must operate within close proximity to their major markets. In Northern 

California, that practical necessity translates into quick access to major clusters of customers. 

These clusters are found in downtown San Francisco, Silicon Valley, San Mateo County on the 

Peninsula, Marin and Sonoma Counties to the north, and Alameda and Contra Costa Counties in 

the East Bay. The market strategies of these integrated carriers make it absolutely imperative that 

they maintain early delivery schedules and late pick-up times. Further restricting their operational 

options is that the vast majority of their cargoes are routed through their respective national 

hubs, located in Memphis, Louisville and Wilmington (just northeast of Cincinnati), Ohio 

–in time zones two to three hours ahead of the West Coast. 

FedEx has a large facility at Oakland International to serve the regional market. Although the 

primary UPS West Coast hub is located at Ontario International Airport in Southern California, it 

does maintain a significant facility at Oakland International to serve the Bay Area market. Similarly, 

DHL, which last year established its Western regional hub in Riverside County at the former 

March Air Force Base, also has a facility at Oakland to serve its Bay Area market. Although 

Oakland International’s new Master Plan indicates that it does not intend to aggressively develop 

its air cargo capabilities, it is unlikely that either UPS or FedEx or DHL would relocate to an airport 

that is much further away from their large Bay Area markets. 

As opposed to the all-cargo carriers, combination carriers respond to the demands of passengers, 

not cargo shippers. So while SMF may see an increasing amount of cargo “lift” become available 

777 and its new 787, both of which were designed to fly passengers and cargos directly to their destinations without 

going through congested hub airports. At present, two-engine planes must stay within three and a half hours of an 

emergency-landing strip while crossing oceans or polar terrain. The regulations are expected to allow twin-engine 

jetliners to fly routes where the nearest airport is as much as 5 1/2 hours away. That would open up the vast majority 

of commercial routes world-wide for the 777 as well as Boeing's next-generation 787, expected to go into service 

in mid-2008. 


Page 114

in the bellies of passenger aircraft, it is most unlikely MHR will not be dealing with any combination 

carriers in the foreseeable future. That would leave the non-integrated cargo carriers as the 

likeliest bet for MHR except for one important factor. These carriers depend extensively on 

freight-forwarders to generate most of their busines, and Northern California’s freightforwarders 

are heavily concentrated in the vicinity of SFO. Persuading them to redeploy even a 

small portion of their assets and their attention to MHR is hardly a challenge to be taken lightly, 

as the frustrating experience of Los Angeles World Airports in seeking to lure freight-forwarders 

from LAX to Ontario International Airport would surely indicate. And Ontario is closer to LAX 

than MHR is to SFO. 

One further consideration is that there may be better alternatives to SFO and OAK. NASA, 

which operates Moffett Federal Airfield, proposed in 1996 to allow commercial air cargo operations 

into Moffett Airfield as part of the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) project. In the very 

long-run, an even more intriguing alternative may present itself should the Air Force determine 

that Travis AFB in Fairfield would permit a joint use agreement that would permit restricted civilian 

air cargo operations. 

Other, arguably more immediate obstacles exist to stymie the possibility of MHR ultimately 

emerging as, in essence, a fourth Bay Area airport. It would first have to convince the FAA to 

upgrade its landing-approach system by installing equipment making landing possible even under 

conditions of extremely poor visibility (CAT 3). At present, fog at MHR forces several UPS 

and DHL air-freighters to divert to SMF every year. Yet even were such equipment up and running 

at MHR, there remains the obvious question of what is to be gained by routing flights serving 

a largely Bay Area air cargo market to an airport in Sacramento. If traffic congestion on Bay 

Area freeways disadvantages shippers trying to move cargos expeditiously to SFO or OAK, it is 

not clear what particular solution MHR brings to the table. If anything, Stockton’s Metropolitan 

Airport, an under-utilized air field with superior highway access to Silicon Valley, would appear 

to offer a better location. In addition to its closer proximity to markets in the San Joaquin Valley, 

Stockton also boasts an asset MHR lacks: an on-site cold-storage facility of the sort that is essential 

to airborne trade in perishable agricultural products. 

In general, linking expectations of air cargo growth at SMF and MHR to parallel expectations of 

congestion and capacity shortfalls at SFO and OAK is not a reliable planning practice. In the 

consultant team’s experience, motivated planners and managers are remarkably adept at squeezing 

more growth from airport, seaports, rail yards, and other facilities that should have “maxed 

out” years before. To provide a strong foundation for regional planning, air cargo forecasts 

should be based on the traffic generating capabilities of the regional catchment area, not on the 

presumed failure of other airports to accommodate their own growth. 

Based on existing trends it appears that Sacramento wil remain a net “importer” of airborne 

goods. Future economic expansion and population growth will, of course, stimulate higher demand 

for goods shipped by air, but air cargo volumes will increase more slowly than the regional 

economy. Based on analysis of the Sacramento regional economy and, more particularly, its relatively 

low propensity for generating demand for air cargo services, the volume of air cargo and 

associated truck traffic at SMF and MHR should increase by an average annual rate of around 


Page 115

1.8 percent through 2016. Increases in jet fuel prices will probably constrain further growth to 

1.2 percent per year from 2016 through 2032, and to 0.8 percent from 2032 to 2050. 

The air cargo market is volatile, and these forecasts should be refined as more information become 

available, notably the forthcoming Leigh-Fisher forecast update. 


Page 116

VIII. Goods Movement Decision Factors 

Freight Demand 

The demand for freight transportation is based on the need to move goods. 

Population. Basic human needs for food, shelter, clothing, fuel, and consumer 

goods are met through goods movement. As population increases, goods movement 

requirements will increase, regardless of what industries or other economic 

activity might take place in the area. 

Economic Activity. While population drives the ultimate consumption of goods 

and services, economic activity supplies them. The extent and the nature of economic 

activity affect the volume and nature of freight activity. The transportation 

requirements of heavy industry, wholesale grocery distribution, and the construction 

industry are obvious. The trucking requirements of financial services (delivery 

of documents, office furniture and supplies), entertainment (delivery of equipment, 

distribution of CDs, movement of theatrical scenery), and medicine (hospital supplies, 

office equipment, pharmaceuticals) are smaller and less obvious, but no less 

vital or real. 

 

 

 

Resources. Local resources dictate either the need to move local products to other 

regions, or the need to obtain products that cannot be produced locally. For example, 

the urbanization of Southern California has increased the trucking activity 

needed to obtain fresh produce, milk, and other farm products that used to be produced 

within the region. The presence of petroleum deposits and refineries in 

Southern California creates a need to move petroleum products to other regions. 

Land use. There is an association between land use and goods movement activities. 

Industrial uses are expected to display heavy freight traffic, while residential 

areas would have little or none. Land use choices determine long-run goods 

movement patterns. 

Modal options. Where realistic modal options exist, some shippers and consignees 

will find it convenient and economic to use them, decreasing the demand for trucking. 

Where no usable options exist, all freight movement demands will be met by 

trucking. 

Shipment characteristics. In addition to the fundamental relationship between 

shipment characteristics and transportation requirements, shipment characteristics 

change over time. A casual comparison will reveal that consumer goods have become 

smaller and lighter as technologies and materials have improved. To deliver 

music to the consumer market, compact discs require less transportation than longplaying 

records, and downloading MP3 files requires less transportation yet. The 

growth of mail order and Internet shopping has bypassed truck movements to retail 

stores, but boosted the use of parcel and LTL trucking for purchases that might have 

otherwise have been taken home in the customer’s auto. 


Page 117

Supply Chains 

“Supply chain” is the label for the multitude of functions and activities necessary to order, transport, 

receive, process, and deliver goods. An appreciation for the basic steps in supply chain 

management (Exhibit 108 below) is useful for understanding goods movement. 

Exhibit 108: Supply Chain Schematic 

Generalized Supply Chain Schematic 

Order 

processing 

Purchasing 

Raw material 

supply 

Finished 

goods 

Logistics 

Customer 

service 

Information flow 

In Exhibit 108, logistics is shown as the link between the finished goods and the customer. For a 

manufacturing firm that may include: 

 

 

 

 

 

storage of finished goods in on-site factory inventory; 

shipment of goods in large lots to regional distribution centers; 

inventory management and “order picking” at the regional distribution centers; 

management of a delivery fleet or selection of commercial carriers for delivery to 

retail stores; and 

handling “reverse flow” movements of empty palets, returned merchandise, etc. 

While the logistics tasks under a single manager can range from straight forward to complex, the 

complete supply chain for even a relatively simple product can be staggering in its scope. 

Exhibit 109 displays a conceptual complete supply chain for a soft drink, in this case cola in an 

aluminum can. Soft drinks are usually mixed, packaged, and delivered by regional bottling 

plants, many of which produce multiple flavors and brands. To deliver a can of cola to a retail 

outlet on the left side of Exhibit 109 requires that all the product ingredients and all of the packaging 

supplies be brought together at the bottling plant in the correct proportions. This outcome 

requires the efforts of multiple vendors, ranging from the municipal water supply to a pallet pool. 

The supply chains of these vendors reach back through multiple steps to basic raw materials production 

in farms, oil fields, and mines. 


Page 118

Exhibit 109: Cola Supply Chain Example 

CUSTOMERS 

LOCAL BOTTLING PLANT 

VENDORS 

VENDOR SUPPLY CHAINS 

Gas Products 

Plant 

Petrochemical 

Plant 

Carbonated 

Water 

Municipal 

Water Supply 

Municipal 

Reservoir 

Regional 

Watershed 

Regional Sub- 

Distributor 

Supermarkets 

Liquor & Convenience 

Stores 

Restaurants 

Vending Machine Cos. 

Club Stores 

Discount Stores 

Sports Arenas 

Snack Bars 

Product 

Packaging 

High- 

Fructose 

Corn Syrup 

Food 

coloring 

Phosphoric 

Acid 

Corn 

Products 

Plant 

Food 

Products 

Supplier 

Chemical 

Distributor 

Regional Grain 

Elevator 

Local Grain 

Elevator 

Farm 

Chemical Plant Refinery Oil Field 

Phosphoric 

Acid Plant 

Phosphate 

Rock Quarry 

Caffeine Starbucks Port of Tacoma Guatemala 

Natural & 

Artificial 

Flavoring 

Aluminum 

Can 

Regional DC 

Can Plant 

Coca Cola Plant 

Aluminum Plant 

Port of 

Savannah 

Aluminum 

Smelter 

Pull tab Ink Chemical Plant 

Shrink Wrap 

Six-Pack 

Rings 

Cardboard 

Trays 

Plastics 

Supplier 

Cardboard 

Products 

Supplier 

Petrochemical 

Plant 

Linerboard 

Plant 

Pallets Pallet Pool Pallet Mfg. Lumber Mill 

Coffee 

Plantation 

Caribbean Port 

Import/Export 

Ports 

Caribbean 

Plantations ?? 

Bauxite Mine 

Oil Refinery Export Port Oil Field 

Forest 

The diagram in Exhibit 109 can also be read as addition of value moving from right to left. The 

ingredients in a can of cola are nearly worthless as they first come from the farms, oil fields, and 

mines. The value in the cold can of soda in a vending machine is created through refining and 

combining resources (manufacturing and processing) and moving them to the right place (transportation 

and logistics). 

Freight Customer Requirements 

Carriers and intermediaries–including steamship lines, railroads, truckers, forwarders, transloaders, 

etc.–are no longer in the business of selling the services they care to produce. They 

must respond to what the customer wants to buy, and operate accordingly. Deregulation in the 

U.S. has allowed carriers to be more responsive. At the same time, deregulation has dramatically 

increased competition and forced carriers to become more responsive or lose business. 

Logistics requirements are ultimately driven by market conditions for the goods or service being 

delivered. 

 

In highly competitive markets with slim profit margins (e.g. retail supermarkets), 

participants are under intense pressure to minimize logistics costs while maintaining 

competitive service levels. 


Page 119

Where profit margins are higher but competition is still stiff (e.g. retail computers), 

logistics performance is crucial but costs are of lesser concern. 

Where time-to-market is critical (e.g. high-fashion apparel), speed becomes foremost. 

Where product values are very low and predictable delivery is more important than 

speed (e.g. sand and gravel), logistics costs are driven down but reliability must be 

maintained. 

Where the implications for service failure are severe (e.g. “shut down” loads of 

parts for assembly lines), no logistics cost will be spared to deliver on time. 

Logistics and transportation customers require improved reliability (better), shorter order cycle 

times (faster), and lower unit logistics costs (cheaper). Firms are willing to have less visibility 

into the actual logistics operation, and may even want to reduce management involvement in 

day-to-day logistics. Customers want results, not explanations of operations and service difficulties. 

Customers want to choose from among outcomes, not methods. At the same time, the market 

recognizes that choosing among options and managing carriers are both getting more complex 

than can be managed in-house, and are looking to carriers and logistics management companies 

for outsourced support. 

Customers for logistics services have a very wide range of requirements and varying levels of 

sophistication. Most examples and current literature emphasize aspects of logistics and supply 

chain management that are far more sophisticated than the majority of current shipping and order 

fulfillment practices. For years to come there will be a very large segment of the market that 

simply wants “beter, faster, cheaper” from primary service operators/providers. 

In practical terms, “beter, faster, cheaper” translates into a set of stringent customer demands for 

high-quality service: 

 

 

 

To provide “beter” freight transportation, cariers and intermediaries alike must offer 

national or even global reach, e-commerce capabilities, high reliability, and 

strong customer service. 

To provide “faster” transportation, cariers must invest in new equipment, new terminals, 

and new operating systems. 

To provide “cheaper” transportation, cariers must continuously reduce expenses 

and compete strenuously for new business, while intermediaries attempt to exploit 

the cost-saving potential of shipment consolidation and increased bargaining leverage 

with customers and carriers. 

Modal Choice 

The relationship between cost and service characteristics is a fundamental concern. In almost 

every industry, continued competition and pressure on profit margins has brought increased attention 

to transportation costs. Logistics professionals are therefore concerned with obtaining 

the required services at the lowest possible cost and modal choice is a major tool. Exhibit 110 


Page 120

elow illustrates the range of modal choices available and the conceptual tradeoffs between cost 

and service. 

Exhibit 110: Conceptual Modal Tradeoffs 

High 

Price 

Conceptual 

Small Package - 

Surface/Air 

LTL 

Truckload 

Intermodal Intermodal 

Low 

Rail 

Carload 

Barge/Coastal 

Pipeline 

Low 

Service (Speed/Reliability/Flexibility) 

High 

Two fundamental criteria for modal selection are shipment size and expected travel and arrival 

times. Virtually all shipments have an expected time of arrival (ETA). When the shipment is 

urgent, the ETA will be very specific and the selection of mode and carrier will be governed by 

the need to achieve that ETA. When the shipment is not urgent, the ETA will be more flexible, 

perhaps including a 2 to 3 day range acceptable to the shipper and the consignee. This relationship 

is illustrated in Exhibit 111 below, which plots the service performance type as a function of 

shipment size and specified time of delivery. 


Page 121

Time 

Exhibit 111: Mode Selection 

Air Charter 

Courier/Same Day 

No time/Day Specific 

Express 

Ground 

Dedicated Truckload 

Express Freight 

Premium Truckload 

Premium LTL 

Day Specific Freight 

Standard Truckload 

Freight Forwarder 

Express Package 

Day Specific 

Package 

Express Letter 

Railroad 

Postal Package 

Postal Letter 

Shipments Packages Letters 

+2200 lbs 2200 to 150 lbs +150 to 11 lbs +11 lbs 

Weight 

Source: MergeGlobal, Inc. and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Research 

Source: MergeGlobal, Inc. and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Research 

For instance, standard truckload service would be suitable for shipments greater than 2,200 

pounds, moving over the road, with the delivery day but not the time of day specified. “Standard 

truckload” is therefore positioned on the matrix below “premium truckload” but above “freight 

forwarder”. In contrast, premium truckload would include a specified time of delivery on a specific 

day and perhaps a faster transit time. 


Page 122

Distance is also a major factor in modal choice, as illustrated in Exhibit 112 below. Trucks 

dominate shorter distance movements, while longer distances favor the line-haul economics of 

other modes. 

 

 

 

Truckload is the low-cost mode for short trips, 600 miles or less. 

Rail carload service is cost-effective for longer trips, 750 miles or more. 

Intermodal service provides a compromise choice. 

Exhibit 112: Unit Cost vs. Length of Haul 

$ Cost 

Per Ton 

Conceptual 

Truckload 

Intermodal 

Rail Carload 

Rail Unit 

Train 

Breakeven Zone 

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 

Distance in Miles 

Potential Diversion of Highway Trips 

One issue where logistics choices and modal choices come together is the potential for diversion 

of over-the-road (OTR) truck trips to other modes. To the extent that OTR truck trips can be 

shifted to rail or waterborne trips, the region can free up scarce highway capacity, reduce emissions, 

and optimize the productivity of rail corridors and waterways. 

Port of Oakland Services 

The possibility of shifting truck moves to rail or barge has been raised with particular application 

to international container movements to and from the Port of Oakland. The distance from Oakland 

to various parts of the SACOG region is roughly 70–100 miles, far below the conceptual 

breakeven zone shown in Exhibit 112. Studies to date have concluded that rail intermodal service 

or barge service to Central Valley locations (chiefly Sacramento or Stockton) is operationally 

feasible but not commercially viable due to the short length of haul and the high transfer 

costs at each end of the trip. 


Page 123

The concept of rail service has been embodied as the California Inter-Regional Intermodal System 

(CIRIS) and has been the subject of multiple studies. The two most comprehensive studies 

are the October 2003 Inland Port Feasibility Study sponsored by the San Joaquin Council of 

Governments (SJCOG), and the July 2006 CIRIS Implementation Plan, also sponsored by 

SJCOG. The key findings of these studies were: 

 

 

 

There exists a market for rail intermodal service to the Port of Oakland, primarily in 

the Stockton, Modesto, and Fresno areas, with sufficient volume so as to support 

daily train service. 

A rail intermodal service cannot compete head-on with trucking, and would require 

a permanent operating subsidy. 

The critical issue facing regional rail service in California is rail line capacity. Railroads 

would not be willing to discuss regional shuttle services without an overall 

public-private program to increase rail capacity. 

To implement a rail intermodal shuttle will therefore be a multi-step process requiring significant 

public sector initiative and funding. The CIRIS project has received a small amount of federal 

funding through the Port of Oakland and has been incorporated in the draft State Goods Movement 

Action Plan. 

The potential for Sacramento area participation in CIRIS is discussed in the report as an eventual 

long-term development. 

There is presently no intermodal rail terminal in the SACOG region, and drayage to and from 

Stockton-area terminals would be non-competitive when trucks can reach Oakland directly on 

I80. Combining rail intermodal service to Sacramento with service to Stockton and points south 

may be feasible but would require considerable ingenuity. 

As noted in the discussion of the Port of Sacramento, there has been interest in barge service between 

the Port of Oakland and Sacramento, Stockton, or both. Despite continued speculation 

and interest the barge option has not received any detailed analysis in recent years. The available 

studies conclude that a barge service would also require an operating subsidy. There are also issues 

of scale economies and port capability issues to be addressed in barge concepts. 

Rail-Truck Transloading Opportunities 

The most promising near-term opportunity to shift long-haul truck traffic to rail is rail-truck 

transloading. Rail cars such as those in Exhibit 113 carry 70 to 125 tons of freight, the equivalent 

of 3–5 truckloads. Using rail carload service for the long-haul trip into the SACOG region 

and distributing the goods locally by truck takes long-haul truck moves off the highway. Local 

delivery moves will still be made by truck, so there may be little difference in local street traffic. 


Page 124

Exhibit 113: 100-ton Capacity Rail Car 

Rail-truck transloading is particularly effective for lumber, stone, structural steel, wallboard, and 

other building materials. Inbound agricultural chemicals, fertilizers, and minerals can also be 

successfully transloaded. There is less potential for outbound truck-rail transloading but it is still 

possible. 


Page 125

IX. Logistics Trends 

Overview 

Worldwide logistics trends have created an intensely competitive global environment in which 

Northern California shippers, receivers, carriers, and intermediaries participate. From the myriad 

shifts taking place in the logistics field, the study team has isolated several major trends with implications 

for SACOG and regional goods movement. 

“Logistics” refers to the management of goods whether at rest (warehousing) or enroute (order 

fulfillment, transportation), including the movement of associated data and information. The 

term “supply chain” refers to al theparties and steps involved in moving and storing goods for 

any one producer/distributor/shipper/receiver. 

Inventory Reductions and “Just in Time” 

One supply chain management characteristic dominates the current trends: information and precise 

transport performance are allowing customers to reduce inventory in transit or at destination. 

Dollar value of inventory as a percentage of national GDP has been declining since the early 

1980s. Reductions in finished goods and in-process inventory have been accomplished by precise 

engineering of transport modes and instant data availability. Stock-outs are avoided often by 

moving small amounts of product via expedited services (at a transportation cost premium). 

These practices have led to smaller shipments (less than 75-100 pounds), moving shorter distances 

(in local metropolitan areas). 

“Just in Time” (JIT) refers to a drastic case of inventory reduction, where inbound shipments are 

timed to arrive just when they are needed and on-site inventory is minimized. The classic application 

is an automotive assembly line with a one-day supply of parts on hand and daily shipments 

of parts delivered directly to the assembly floor. JIT practices have received widespread 

attention in the industry and popular press, but true JIT operations are relatively rare as they require 

intensive management and leave production vulnerable to minor outages. “JIT” has, rather, 

become shorthand for high shipment reliability standards and low inventories, whether or not the 

operation is truly managed “Just in Time”. 

National inventory levels have risen in dollar terms while declining relative to the overall level 

of output and sales. Better information systems and intensive inventory management practices 

have both contributed to this trend. In 2002 the cost of inventory including warehousing was 

down to 2.8% of GDP compared to 8.3% in 1981. During the same period, GDP increased 335% 

while the value of all business inventories has increased 194%. The steady decline in both relative 

cost of transportation and relative cost of inventory as a percent of GDP is shown in Exhibit 

114 on the following page. 


Page 127

Exhibit 114: Logistics Costs as a Percent of GDP 

%of GDP 

15 

ADMINISTRATION 

INVENTORY 

TRANSPORTATION 

TOTAL LOGISTICS 

10 

5 

0 

1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 

Source: Council of Logistics Management, “State of Logistics Report: 2003” 

The reduction is attributable to improved practices in supply chain management such as just-intime 

inventory, transloading, dedicated motor carriage and regional distribution methods. In particular, 

the increase in transportation and inventory efficiency is testament to aggressive management 

of logistics since federal motor carrier and rail intermodal deregulation in 1980. 

Tightly managed inbound logistics and low inventories, whether truly JIT or not, have implications 

for SACOG goods movement and trucking. In particular, JIT-like scheduling effectively 

transfers a portion of the inbound inventory to the streets. In order for a trucker to make a tight 

delivery appointment with near 100% certainty, the driver will arrive early and wait in the near 

vicinity of the destination. Often drivers will actually arrive in the area the night before to make 

sure of meeting morning appointments. Thus, a substantial portion of the inventory will be waiting 

in loaded trucks on nearby streets, in truck stops, or in legal or illegal off-street parking. 

Truckers cannot risk morning rush hour traffic, and so will typically either spend the night 

parked nearby or make an early morning trip from a regional truck stop. 

Exhibit 115 illustrates the impact of transportation efficiency and reliability on the location of 

inventory. With efficient and reliable linkages more inventory can be kept as materials or semifinished 

products (i.e. flour instead of bread) since retail outlets can be easily and predictably 

resupplied. If logistics are less efficient or reliable more finished goods must be kept at the retail 

level (i.e. bread rather than flour) to maintain supply. 


Page 128

Exhibit 115: Supply Chain and Inventory Relationships 

E F F IC IE N T L O G IS T IC S A L L O W S S U P P L Y C H A IN S T O K E E P 

IN V E N T O R Y L O W , A N D S H IF T I N V E N T O R Y ”BACKW ARDS” 

T O L O W - C O S T M A T E R IA L S A N D S I T E S 

I N E F F I C IE N T L O G IS T I C S F O R C E S S U P P L Y C H A I N S T O 

I N C R E A S E I N V E N T O R Y , A N D S H IF T IN V E N T O R Y ”F O R W A R D S ” 

T O H IG H - C O S T F IN IS H E D G O O D S A N D R E T A IL S IT E S 

Cycle Time Reduction 

“Beter, faster, cheaper” has come to summarize the logistics demands of major purchasers. 

From the carier perspective, “faster” means reduced cycle time from product manufacturing to 

retail delivery. Generally speaking faster is better, since reduced cycle time translates into lower 

costs of keeping inventory, faster returns on production costs, and increased responsiveness to 

market shifts. For all carriers and intermediaries, there has been continual pressure to complete 

the delivery or freight handling faster, with less tolerance of delay or uncertainty. 

For the entire supply chain to yield faster cycle times, each link must be highly reliable. Customers 

do not want their deliveries either early or late, so carriers and others in the supply chain 

must carefully control their activities to give the customer the reliable service demanded. 

Ironically, one common method of achieving reliable, on-time reliability is to create “slack” in 

the trucker’s schedule. For example, to meet narow, early morning import delivery “windows” 

at inland locations such as the SACOG region, drayage firms must often pull import loads from 

marine terminals the day before and store them in a secure lot overnight, either near the port or in 

the SACOG area. For late afternoon export shipments from the SACOG area, truckers must park 

their over night until the marine terminal opens the next morning. 

Outsourcing 

Outsourcing refers to the practice of having selected goods and/or services that were previously 

produced within an organization supplied from the outside instead. The objective is to harness 

the expertise and synergy of external supply chain partners to achieve success, while sticking internally 

to the firm’s core competencies. The basic philosophy is the same as the ancient longstanding 

principal of “inherent advantage,” which implies that the systems wil perform best 

when each party does what it does best. 


Page 129

Outsourcing trucking services is an increasingly common practice. Private trucking operations 

have been on the decline as fleets are sold or turned over to contract operators. Shippers and receivers 

are more likely to rely on a select group of “core cariers” rather than expand or maintain 

their own truck fleet. A collateral development is the shift of responsibility for timely pickup and 

delivery. Formerly, consignees might be expected to stage or store incoming loaded trailers or 

containers on their own property until they were ready to unload them. Now, the outside trucking 

firms are expected to deliver loaded trailers and containers just when desired, and to manage 

the storage functions off-site. This trend contributes to the demand for off-street truck parking. 

Globalization 

“Globalization” is a frequently heard buzzword, but it does have some application to SACOG 

industries and goods movement. “Globalization” describes the increasing tendency of U.S. and 

foreign firms to obtain inputs and sell their products worldwide, searching the globe for the best 

opportunities. From the perspective of inbound and outbound logistics, this trend implies increasing 

complexity as domestic distribution centers draw goods from multiple foreign sources. 

Globalization has also contributed to the growth in trade, as more domestic producers are exporting 

their output and obtaining inputs from abroad rather than from domestic sources. Supply 

lines are getting longer, and longer supply chains tend to build in buffers to cope with uneven 

arrival times and other fluctuations in the flow of goods. 

Implications 

The implications of logistics trends on the economy of the SACOG region depend on the individual 

industry. Overall, they imply proportionately more trucks, proportionately more small 

and medium duty trucks, more trucks during the working hours, and more truck distribution of 

consumer goods brought to the region by rail and ocean from long distances. As that occurs, the 

last leg of the overall supply chain, from the distribution center to either the retailer or the consumer, 

will be pressured to perform to tighter standards. Such pressure will proportionately increase 

the number of truck trips on the highways and the proportion of those trips conducted by 

local, smaller trucks. 

The cost of land in the Bay Area is forcing distribution centers and some local manufacturing of 

light goods to Central and Northern California sites. As that occurs, the final leg of the distribution 

of consumer goods will be longer in miles than previously. This means there will be a confluence 

of three trends: more smaller shipments, in more smaller trucks, with truck trips being 

longer in miles. All three result in a greater demand for highway capacity with no alternative 

mode being cost or service competitive. 


Page 130

X. Regional Goods Movement Issues & Needs 

Survey of Jurisdictions 

An important part of the Sacramento regional goods movement study has been an outreach effort 

to affected jurisdictions and organizations through written surveys and oral interviews of city 

staff and other associated persons/organizations. 

A writen survey was sent to the city manager’s ofice of each SACOG jurisdiction for the purposes 

of identifying critical trucking and rail issues in each jurisdiction. The survey form is included 

in Appendix B. It includes questions relating to severity of trucking impacts, trucking 

intrusion in residential neighborhoods, arterial roadways and rail as well as intersections with 

trucking related problems, types of truck traffic generators, truck ordinance information, truck 

route information, rail grade crossing and other related impacts. Jurisdictions were asked to involve 

public works, planning, and administrative staff as needed to provide information for the 

survey. The survey returns were comprehensive and informative. Overall, 86% or 24 of the 28 

jurisdictions surveyed returned the survey as of June 23rd, 2006. 

Each jurisdiction rates problems differently, so it is not possible to directly compare survey responses 

to determine where the most severe trucking problems are located. For example, a jurisdiction 

which is primarily residential may view a few trucks on a local residential street as a severe 

problem, whereas a more industrial jurisdiction may only view relatively larger trucking 

impacts as severe. Therefore, when reviewing the survey data it is important to keep in mind the 

relative differences in many of the SACOG jurisdictions. The survey results provide valuable 

insight, however, into the perception of trucking and other goods movement related problems at 

the jurisdictional level, and the comparative ranking of problems throughout the region. 

One question required the cities to rank 13 key trucking-related impacts in their jurisdiction, on a 

scale of one to five, one indicating no problem and five indicating a severe problem. The 13 

categories of impacts in the question include: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Congestion Due to Trucks 

Neighborhood Intrusion by Trucks 

Truck Parking 

Truck Traffic Safety 

Street Deterioration Due to Trucks 

Hazardous Materials Hauling 

Truck Noise 

Truck Air Pollution 

Nighttime Truck Operations 

Construction Trucks 


Page 131

Long Haul Trucks 

Short Haul, Local Delivery Trucks 

Other 

Overall, the survey returns indicated that the trucking issue ranked as the worst problem by jurisdictions 

is street deterioration due to trucks traveling over arterial streets. (Exhibit 116) This issue 

has also been ranked highest in other trucking studies. The average (based on the average of 

all survey responses) ranking for this issue is 3.7 or moderate to severe on a scale of 1-5. The 

next highest ranked issues in order are as follows: 

Exhibit 116: Jurisdiction Survey Issue Ranking 

Issue 

Average Ranking 

out of 5 

Street Deterioration Due to Trucks 3.7 

Construction Trucks 3.3 

Truck Parking 3.3 

Truck Noise 3.1 

Truck Congestion 3.0 

Long Haul Trucks 3.0 

Truck Air Pollution 2.9 

Neighborhood Intrusion by Trucks 2.8 

Short Haul, Local Delivery Trucks 2.6 

Truck Traffic Safety 2.5 

Nighttime Truck Operations 2.3 

Hazardous Materials Hauling 2.2 

On average the cities ranked construction trucks, truck parking, and truck noise as their next biggest 

concern. This is likely a reflection of the region’s considerable growth that has occured 

with new construction all over the Sacramento Valley. Lincoln, Roseville and Elk Grove are 

three of the fastest growing cities in the nation with Lincoln being the fastest growing city in 

California for 2005. 

Other issues raised by the jurisdictions in the surveys include problems with trucks using back 

roads to by pass I80, Highway 65, Highway 50 and other major corridors in the region. When 

these trucks use the back roads through residential areas, it creates problems with street deterioration 

and congestion on connector arterials and intersections in rural areas. (While truckers 

sometimes use back roads to avoid scales, the practice is most often due to congestion on the 

main routes.) 

Other issues noted include congestion that occurs on at-grade crossings for railroad tracks when 

trucks cause additional traffic queues. Some jurisdictions had issues with the aggregate number 

of trucks and logging trucks. 

Exhibit 117 summarizes the responses from each jurisdiction that submitted a completed survey. 


Page 132

Exhibit 117: SACOG Goods Movement Study Survey Results 

Jurisdiction 

Citrus Heights 

Davis 

El Dorado County 

Elk Grove 

Folsom 

Most Severe 

Trucking Impact 

Congestion, street 

deterioration due 

to trucks, HazMat 

Hauling, Truck 

Noise 

Street Deterioration 

due to trucks 

and construction 

truck issues. 

Congestion due to 

trucks, Truck Traffic 

Safety, Street 

Deterioration from 

trucks 

Street deterioration 

due to trucks and 

construction trucks 


due to trucks, 

short haul, local 

Reported Level of 

Impact 

Moderate to Severe 

Truck Impacted Arterial 

Streets & Intersections 

All main arterials in 

city receive cross-town 

truck traffic. 

Other Trucking Related 

Issues 

Cut-through traffic in 

residential areas, offstreet 

access and 

on-street loading 

Rail related Impacts 

None noted 

Moderate None Noted Nothing significant Occasional malfunction 

of at-grade 

crossing guard facilities; 

delays due 

to freight trains operated 

by CA Northern 

Moderate None Noted Nothing significant None noted 

Moderate overall 

with street deterioration 

from construction 

trucks being 

severe 

Moderate 

Ingress/Egress Safety 

issues with truck terminals 

of all kinds. 

Pavement and Shoulder 

Damage. Problems 

with streets with 

weight limitations for 

STAA trucks only. 

Trucks require special 

routes that the City 

doesn’t plan for. 

Oversize (STAA) 

trucks, noise due to 

engine brakes, truck 

Parking/storage of 

trucks on roadsides. 

Cut-through truck 

traffic near major 

development areas 

(Watermen Rd/Elk 

Grove Blvd intersection) 

Neighborhood cutthrough 

and overnight 

parking issues. 

Noise issues - the 

trains blow the horn 

when they approach 

crossings and the 

two RR tracks in the 

city are surrounded 

by residential. Lots 

of phone complaints! 

Many trains 

coming through Elk 

Grove create congestion 

at crossings. 

Congestion, noise 

and grade crossing 

safety at Folsom 


Page 133

Jurisdiction 

Most Severe 



Impact 




Issues 

delivery trucks 

route compliance, 

through truck traffic 

with no origin or destination 

in Folsom 

Galt None Reported None Reported None Noted Occasional complaints 

regarding 

parking of trucks and 

trailers 

Live Oak 

Lincoln 


due to trucks 

Congestion due to 

trucks, Street Deterioration 

and construction 

trucking 

congestion. 

Moderate (with 

one area severe– 

street deterioration) 


Principle problem intersection 

is State 

Route 99 and Pennington 

Road. Trucks 

hauling goods through 

Live Oak back up traffic 

for two or three 

blocks at various time 

of the day 

Significant traffic congestion 

on arterials 

with Hwy 65 north and 

southbound construction 

traffic. Blocked 

Intersections especially 

at Hwy 65 downtown 

streets. 

Large trucks parking 

in residential areas. 

Not enough travel 

lanes for flow 

through truck traffic 

on state highways 

through Live Oak. 

Trucks take up significant 

capacity due 

to size, length and 

number of trucks at 

intersections. Traffic 

signals downtown 

are at approx 400 

second intervals due 

to cross traffic with 

trucks. These problems 

increase residential 

cut through 


LRT extension 

crossings. 

Experiencing increased 

traffic congestion 

at crossings. 

Sight stopping 

distance restrictions 

are also of concern 

at grade crossings. 

Railroad horn noise 

and unsafe pedestrian 

crossings are 

concern. 

The close proximity 

of the rail lane to SR 

99 through Life Oak 

creates limited 

space for vehicles 

on at grade crossing 

streets between the 

highway and rail 

line. 

UP’s main lines run 

through the center 

of town creating and 

adding congestion 

problems, noise and 

safety issues. 

UP runs parallel to I- 

65 and the intersections 

of the RR and 

local streets at 

grade requires 

trains to sound 


Page 134

Jurisdiction 

Most Severe 



Impact 




Issues 


Marysville 

Placer County 

Placer County 

Placerville 

Congestion from 

trucks, street deterioration 

from 

trucks and construction 

trucks 

Truck Parking and 

trucks using back 

roads to avoid 

congestion. 


Truck Noise 


Moderate 

Moderate to severe 

State Highway 65 and 

70 both bisect the City 

of Marysville and there 

is heavy truck traffic 

through the downtown 

area because of this. 

Caltrans signal timing 

and increased congestion 

cause gridlock at 

intersections. 

Trucks divert to rural 

arterials to avoid congestion 

on SR 65, I80 

and SR49. The rural 

arterials are not designed 

for this. 

Hwy 49 passes 

through residential areas 

and downtown– 

trucks cause congestion, 

noise and disruption 

with deliveries; often 

stopping traffic in 

both directions. 

traffic to avoid delays 

at intersections. 

Construction truck 

traffic is bad. Excessive 

amounts of 

rock trucks and lumber 

trucks pass 

through the City 

coming from the 

rock quarries in the 

county and forests to 

the north of the City. 

Bridge weight limits 

–county wide issue. 

Height limits on I80. 

Most rural arterials 

lack geometric or 

structured design for 

heavy vehicles. 

Thru traffic problems 

congestion at Spring 

Street and Hwy 50. 

Placerville is an old 

historic city with 

many existing 

streets and intersections 

being inadequate 

to accommodate 

large traffic 

(turning radius, etc). 

Trucks divert to Main 

and that’s realy bad. 

horns, frequently 

passing through the 

City causing noise 

issues. 

Poor pedestrian access 

at 6 th , 7 th and 

10 th street crossings 

–depressed crossing 

of levees by rail 

lines compromises 

flood protection. 

Several RR overpasses 

limit access 

to areas due to 

height/width restrictions. 

None Reported 

No rail problems 

cited. 


Page 135

Jurisdiction 

Most Severe 



Impact 




Issues 


Rancho Cordova 

Rocklin 

Rocklin 

Roseville 

Sacramento (City) 

Truck parking, 

neighborhood intrusion 

by trucks 

and street deterioration 

due to 

trucks. 


Due to Trucks 

and Construction 

Trucks 

Construction trucks 

and long haul truck 

(not staying on 

STAA routes). 


Due to Trucks 


Moderate 


Moderate 

Bradshaw, Sunrise 

and Douglas all have 

congestion and road 

failures. The worst intersections 

are Folsom 

and Sunrise and White 

Rock and Sunrise. 

Bridges on Sunset 

Blvd. near Pacific St. 

and on China Garden 

Road near Aguilar 

Road. Overpass under 

I80 on Rocklin 

Road is too low (14’- 

8”). Intersection of 

Rocklin road & Pacific 

Street. 

Problems with a few 

small residential railroad 

and creek overcrossings 

and with 

overnight truck parking. 

Congestion at certain 

arterials, intersections 

and interchanges 

caused by slow starts. 

U-turns near U-haul 

dealer. 

On-street parking is 

an issue with long 

haul trucks cutting 

through Zinfandel 

and White Rock to 

Sunrise. 

Extensive pavement 

damage on Pacific 

Street, Sunset Blvd., 

Park Drive and 

Granite Drive. Granite 

Drive @ Rocklin 

Road and Granite 

Drive @ Sierra 

Meadows Drive 

trucks hit sidewalks 

on regular basis– 

roads narrow for 

turning radius. Also 

at Rocklin Rd. @ 

Pacific Street 

Old pavement and 

truck volumes on 

Denio’s loops causing 

deterioration. 

Inadequate short 

term truck parking 

near residential areas. 

Residential 

complaints of trucks 

near neighborhoods. 

Light rail along Folsom 

Blvd. causes 

coordination problems 

as well as long 

backups at the side 

streets. 

Train blocks roadway 

for 8-20 minutes 

weekly at Pacific/Sierra 

Meadows. 

This is the 

only entrance/exit to 

Yankee Mill Subdivision. 

Midas & Pacific 

has two separate 

crossings with 

100’ of each other; it 

causes congestion 

on Midas and Pacific. 

Also train 

horns. 

UPRR rail yard 

downtown area 

causes major backups 

when trains are 

stopped on the 

tracks at: Yosemite/Atlantic 

and Tiger/Atlantic. 

Pre-emption delays 

movement across 

rail-inadequate 

storage effects other 

movements. 


Page 136

Jurisdiction 

Most Severe 



Impact 




Issues 


Sacramento 

County DOT 

Sacramento 

County DOT 

Truck Noise is the 

biggest problem 

followed by 

Neighborhood Intrusion, 


from 

Trucks, Truck Air 

Pollution, Nighttime 

Truck Operations 

and Long 

Haul Truck issues. 


Problems 

No arterial street problems 

but there are 

pothole problems at 

intersections due to 

heavy trucks. 

Community pressure 

to ban trucks due to 

trucks passing 

through city streets 

going from I5 to US 

80. Perception that 

trucks by-pass the 

scales on I80 near 

Antelope Road by 

going to I5 through 

arterials. 

Noise issues. Need 

quiet zones and 

funding for overcrossings. 

Sutter County 

Town of Loomis 

Neighborhood Intrusion 

by trucks, 

truck parking, truck 

traffic safety, street 

deterioration due 

to trucks, hazardous 

materials hauling, 

truck noise, construction 

trucks 

and long haul 

trucks. 

Long Haul Trucks, 

Truck Parking, 


Due to Trucks 

and Truck Air Pollution. 

Moderate - Severe 

No problem to 

Moderate 

SR 20/99 Geometrics/Pavement 

Damage 

on arterials and at 

intersections. 

Junction of Switzer 

Road with King road 

and Taylor (Industrial) 

and school traffic. 

Also, narrow roadway 

turning radius for 

trucks has caused 

problems at traffic 

lights. 

West Sacramento Street Deteriora- Moderate Jefferson and Harbor 

Independent trucker 

over-night parking 

STAA Vehicles off 

Interstate routes 

without permits. 

Truckers cutting 

through town arterials 

when I80 is 

blocked up. 

Cut through trucks in 

residential neighbor- 

City of Live Oak and 

Lomo Crossing on 

SR 99 north of Yuba 

City has congestion 

at the at-grade 

crossings and 

crossing safety issues. 

Sierra College Blvd. 

needs an overpass 

at RR Tracks. 

At grade crossings 

at 15 th , Jefferson 


Page 137

Jurisdiction 

Most Severe 



Impact 




Issues 


West Sacramento 

Wheatland 

Winter (phone and 

email interview) 

Woodland 

Woodland 

tion Due to Trucks 

Congestion, Truck 

Traffic Safety, 

Hazardous Material, 

truck noise, 

pollution, long and 

short haul trucking 

problems from delivery 

trucks. 

Truck parking 

problems 



due to trucks 

was severe. Truck 

noise and nighttime 

truck operations 

were a close 

second. 


Low 


at US-50 has heavy 

truck traffic competing 

with heavy auto traffic. 

Jefferson at West 

Capitol–excessive 

truck volumes with 

tight turning radius. 

All Arterials connecting 

to Highway 65 are a 

problem with arterials 

and intersections. 

Problem with truck delivery 

ops for grocery 

stores, restaurants 

and local vendor ops. 

Two low overpasses at 

I5 & Beamer Street 

(14’ 11”) and I5 & Pioneer 

Avenue (15’ 6”). 

Manufactured homes 

must go around them. 

hoods, on street 

loading in commercial 

and industrial 

areas, trucks using 

roads without proper 

permits. City has 

the port, industrial 

areas and active development 

issues. 

Highway 65 narrows 

in Wheatland; no 

signals on some 

roads creates problems 

with trucks pulling 

out on the Highway 

and nearby atgrade 

crossings for 

rail. 

Parking trucks on 

major streets that 

are so small when 

trucks are making 

deliveries a challenge 

for locals. 

Truck traffic moving 

between Hwy 113 

and I5, Main St, 

Road 102 and Gibson 

road all experience 

problems on 

arterials due to truck 

traffic. These also 

experience problems 

at intersections with 

slow trucks not allowing 

time for cars 

and Industrial. Serious 

congestion 

occurs when train 

crossings occur at 

peak hours… especially 

if the trains 

are doing switching 

operations. 

Rail parallels highway 

65 and all connecting 

arterials are 

impacted. 

None Reported 

Trains moving 

through town both 

north and south during 

rush hour. Two 

major corridors are 

effected: Main St. 

and East St. Intersections 

effected 

include almost all of 

those that intersect 

with East Street. 


Page 138

Jurisdiction 

Most Severe 



Impact 




Issues 


Yuba City 

Yuba County 

Neighborhood intrusion 

by trucks 

and street deterioration 

due to trucks 

Congestion Due to 

trucks, truck traffic 

safety, street deterioration 

due to 

trucks, construction 

trucks and aggregate 

truck problems. 

Moderate 


All signals on Highway 

20 and Highway 99 @ 

Bridge Highway 20. 

Stacking up delayed 

traffic especially crossings 

involving Highway 

99 and Highway 20 

Major truck routes 

have higher than average 

percentage of 

truck ADT causing 

greater congestion, 

accidents and safety 

issues. 

to get through. 

Nothing unusual– 

already mentioned 

Hwys. between 

McGowan and Forty 

Mile Road has a 

weight restricted 

bridge causing diversion 

of truck 

route traffic onto 

county roads (Hammonton, 

Smartville, 

North Beale, Lindhurst, 

McGowan, 

Plumas). Olivehurst 

Ave @ SR70 underpass 

has height limitation 

causing truck 

diversion. 

UPRR in removal 

process. 

Communities of 

Linda and Olivehurst 

experience 

significant rail noise, 

rail crossing at 

McGowan Pkwy will 

need to be addressed 

as traffic 

increases with all 

the new homes under 

construction. 


Page 139

Truck Planning Requirements 

The trucking issues facing the SACOG region have much in common with issues in other growing 

regions around the country. Congestion is pervasive in urban areas–the more urban, the 

more congested. Coexistence is a problem everywhere a truck must operate next to a home–the 

more homes and trucks, the bigger the problem. The SACOG region is unique, however, in the 

ways in which these issues are manifest on streets and highways. 

Trucks make different demands on the regional street and highway infrastructure than passenger 

vehicles. The general difference in size and weight is obvious (although a full school bus is a 

very heavy vehicle). Likewise, larger trucks need a wider turning radius. However, other differences 

are subtler: 

 

 

 

 

Truck drivers are usually much more sensitive to time than to distance, as time is a 

factor in their effective pay rate, in how much they can accomplish in a legal working 

day, and in customer satisfaction. 

Trucking operators are very sensitive to reliability and predictability due to the series 

of delivery and pickup appointments they have to meet. Long-haul drivers who 

are delayed must frequently call their destination to reschedule, or risk a long wait 

for the next available time slot. In the highly competitive trucking business, trucking 

firms who repeatedly miss appointments risk losing the account. 

Besides stronger pavement and wider turning radii, large trucks require gentler 

grades, longer left turn pockets, different signal timing, larger parking spaces, and 

longer on-ramp acceleration times. 

A given stretch of highway may have very different roles within different trucking 

networks. Long-haul truckload carriers may see a freeway as an established access 

route to a specific large client, while local delivery drivers see it as an alternative to 

surface street connections between service territories. 

These distinctions contribute to the differences between truck and passenger planning requirements. 

Much of the city street, arterial, and rural road infrastructure in the SACOG region dates from 

California’s great building booms of the 1950s and 1960s. In that era, semis were far les common, 

more truck shipments were handled by LTL carriers, and semi-trailers were 35–40 feet 

long. Beginning in 1982 with the Surface Transportation Assistance Act, semi-trailers grew first 

to 48 feet and are now normally 53 feet long. 

Truck combinations of this size cannot operate efficiently over streets and through intersections 

designed for much smaller vehicles. The familiar sights of large semis making wide turns over 

multiple lanes taking multiple tries to turn and park are the inevitable result. 

Although as noted elsewhere the medium-duty truck categories are growing faster the large Class 

6–8 vehicles now carry the great majority of truck freight and will continue to do so for the in- 


Page 140

definite future. It is common to see 53-foot semis at neighborhood convenience stores as well as 

at major distribution centers. 

Accommodating these larger trucks is a significant challenge to traffic engineers, urban planners, 

and public works directors. There is an emerging body of best practices in urban goods movement 

planning ranging from high-tech parking meters to street reconfiguration. Outstanding 

work on urban trucking problems has been done by the City of Los Angeles Department of 

Transportation. 

Truck Routes 

The current truck routes in the SACOG region are the result of state, county, and city actions that 

have not been coordinated or reconciled. 

State truck routes are of three types (Exhibit 118). 

 

 

 

Federal STAA: In 1982, the federal government passed the Surface Transportation 

Assistance Act (STAA). This act required states to allow larger trucks on the "National 

Network," which is comprised of the Interstate system plus the non-Interstate 

Federal-aid Primary System. "Larger trucks" includes (1) doubles with 28.5-foot 

trailers, (2) singles with 48-foot semi-trailers and unlimited kingpin-to-rear axle 

(KPRA) distance, (3) unlimited length for both vehicle combinations, and (3) 

widths up to 102 inches. 

AB 866: In 1983, California passed Assembly Bill (AB) 866 to implement the 

STAA provisions. AB 866 also increased the "California Legal" vehicle length from 

60 to 65 feet and its width from 8.0 to 8.5 feet. Caltrans then evaluated State highways, 

and classified as "Terminal Access" those State highways with geometric 

standards high enough to accommodate STAA trucks. 

SB 2232: In 1986, California passed Senate Bill 2232 which increased the maximum 

KPRA length from 38 feet to 40 feet for trailers with two or more axles. SB 

2232 also directed Caltrans to determine which State highways could not safely accommodate 

trucks with a 40-foot KPRA length. Those route segments that cannot 

accommodate a 40-foot KPRA were designated "Advisory." 

City and county truck routes and restrictions are governed by a wide variety of ordinances. 


Page 141

Exhibit 118: California State Truck Route Types 

Posted truck routes and streets restricted to trucks are two sides of the same coin: a system of 

permissible and non-permissible routings that truckers must know in order to obey. Truckers 


Page 142

typically use and obey posted truck routes as much as possible, but they encounter three kinds of 

problems: 

 

 

 

Inadequate truck routes make it difficult for truckers to serve customers while obeying 

the restrictions. 

Inadequate signage makes it difficult for the trucker to stay on a truck route or 

avoid restricted streets. 

Discontinuous truck routes, especially lack of connectivity between truck routes in 

adjacent jurisdictions or between truck routes and freeway ramps, makes it impossible 

for the trucker to follow an approved route. 

Well-chosen and well-marked truck routes are a critical tool in allowing efficient trucking to coexist 

with sensitive communities. A regional perspective on truck routes would eliminate some 

of these problems, as would standard signage and periodic field surveys to ensure that signage is 

current and visible. 

Exhibit 119 through Exhibit 126 display truck route information for each of the six SACOG 

counties. The maps include: 

 

 

 

 

City and county routes reported in study surveys 

California Legal Advisory Routes 

California Legal Routes 

STAA routes 

The maps show only the California State routes and those reported by cities and counties in the 

survey, so not all routes are shown. A review of the maps, however, suggests that a comprehensive 

study would reveal significant discontinuities between jurisdictions and gaps between key 

service points (e.g. origins and destinations). 


Page 143

Exhibit 119: Sacramento County Truck Routes 


Page 144

Exhibit 120: Yolo County Truck Routes 


Page 145

Exhibit 121: Yuba County Truck Routes 


Page 146

Exhibit 122: Sutter County Truck Routes 


Page 147

Exhibit 123: Placer County Truck Routes 


Page 148

Exhibit 124: El Dorado County Truck Routes 


Page 149

Exhibit 125: City of Roseville Truck Routes 


Page 150

Exhibit 126: City of Woodland Truck Routes 


Page 151

Exhibit 127, Exhibit 128, and Exhibit 129 give three different views of truck routes in the Sacramento 

metropolitan area. 

 

 

 

Exhibit 127 shows the state maps and those reported in the survey. 

Exhibit 128, obtained from Caltrans shows the state and local STAA routes. 

Exhibit 129 shows the city routes, as well as routes with weigh restrictions. 

As is apparent, the system quickly becomes complex, and difficult for a trucker to navigate without 

up-to-date maps and adequate signage. 


Page 152

Exhibit 127: Sacramento Metro Area Truck Routes 


Page 153

Exhibit 128: Sacramento Area STAA Map 


Page 154

Exhibit 129: Sacramento City Truck Routes 


Page 155

Rationalizing truck route networks 

Updating Thomas Bros. Guides. The Thomas Bros. map books are almost universally used by 

truck drivers and dispatchers to provide routing instructions, particularly in unfamiliar territory. 

The freeways, highways, and “primary” roads shown in the Thomas Bros. Guides are asumed to 

be permissible truck routes unless some other information is available. The problems occur when 

the “primary roads” shown in the guidesare not preferred truck routes or actually have truck 

routing prohibitions. 

The counties and the cities have three practical choices: 

 

 

 

Accepting the Thomas Bros. “primary roads” designations as the local truck route 

system. This alternative has the advantage of quick implementation and a minimum 

of negotiation. 

Providing alternative or additional designation information to Thomas Bros. For future 

guide editions. The Thomas Bros. maps are based on locally provided information. 

New editions are printed every year, but through updates are less frequent. 

This option would have the advantage of making Thomas Bros, conform to local 

preferences and letting the Thomas Bros. distribution system (Rand McNally) inform 

the trucking industry. It could, however, take a long time to get corrected information 

in the hands of dispatchers and drivers. 

Distributing independent information or corrections to Thomas Bros. guides. As an 

alternative or complement to the options described above, regional authorities may 

wish to consider distributing updated pages to the Thomas Bros. guide, a list of exceptions, 

or other supplementary information. This could be made available inexpensively 

on websites, but direct distribution of hardcopy could be costly. 

Marking and publicizing preferred truck routes. There is a legitimate need to direct truckers 

unfamiliar with the area (or those with bad routing habits) toward designated, preferred, or permissible 

trucks routes. Marking truck routes is costly and those living or working on truck routes 

are usually concerned that signage could swell the truck traffic on their streets. Almost all the 

community demand for signage is usually negative, i.e. requests to mark truck prohibitions or 

limitations. The planning agencies will therefore have to strike a balance in signage policies, and 

to refine and adjust this balance over time. At the outset, it would appear that signage is appropriate 

where: 

 

 

 

 

 

The cities or counties have a preferred route among multiple permissible routes. 

Finding the preferred or permissible route is confusing due to intersection configurations, 

sight lines, conflicting signage, or other considerations. 

Truck drivers are frequently making routing mistakes or there is reason to suspect 

drivers are deliberately violating routing restrictions. 

Thomas Bros. Guides or other often-used sources suggest routings that the local jurisdictions 

would like to discourage. 

Changes to road conditions, land uses, or rules have significantly changed popular 

truck routes. 


Page 156

Standard signage, symbols, and language would help achieve consistency and comprehensibility 

across city and county boundaries. 

Truck Parking 

Due to a shortage of legal parking for tractors and trailers in their cities and nearby, many Northern 

California communities are experiencing what they regard as excessive tractor and trailer 

parking in residential zones and illegal parking of tractors and trailers in commercial and industrial 

zones: 

 

 

 

Overnight parking in residential areas generates the most complaints. 

Illegal overnight parking of trailers, with or without tractors, is a persistent problem 

in areas adjacent to industrial zones, and is perceived as a nuisance, a noise problem, 

and a security problem. 

Legal or illegal parking of tractors and/or trailers close to intersections and driveways 

obscures vision and is perceived as a safety problem by both truckers and 

non-truckers alike. 

In addition, an unnecessarily large number of trucks may be on the roads during rush hours, particularly 

in the morning, due to their inability to arrive early and legally park before a delivery 

appointment. 

Exhibit 130 lays out the typical relationship between parking status, location, and significance to 

the community. The major objections are usually parking of large commercial trucks on public 

streets in residential areas, on school lots (when school is out), and blocking commercial driveways 

when loading or unloading. 

PARKING STATUS 

LEGAL 

QUESTIONABLE 

Exhibit 130: Parking Location Issues - Conceptual 

NO PROBLEM 

COMPANY LOT 

IN INDUSTRIAL 

AREA 

VACANT LOT IN 

INDUSTRIAL 

AREA 

ILLEGAL ? 

SIGNIFICANCE/PRIORITY 

MINOR 

NUISANCE 

DRIVER’S 

PROPERTY IN 

RESIDENTIAL 

AREA 

RURAL 

ROADSIDES 

URBAN DOUBLE 

PARKING 

MAJOR 

NUISANCE 

PUBLIC STREET 

IN RESIDENTIAL 

AREA 

PUBLIC 

SCHOOL 

PARKING LOT 

BLOCKING 

COMMERCIAL 

DRIVEWAYS 

Trucks, tractors, and trailers that are not in use still need parking space. The need for truck parking 

outside of trucking terminals can usually be traced to one or more of four reasons. 


Page 157

Owner-Operators. Owner-operators need a place near their home to park their tractor and a 

trailer (if they have one) overnight. Owner-operators can include those driving under contract 

for for-hire truckload (TL) or private carrier firms, those driving locally for drayage companies, 

and others. This factor probably accounts for much of the residential area parking. (Exhibit 131) 

Owner-operators and the smallest fleet operators may use public streets, vacant lots, their own 

driveways, or other informal (and sometimes illegal) arrangements. Off-duty parking for owneroperators 

and small private fleet operators is a significant problem in some areas . 

Exhibit 131: Truck Parking in Residential Areas 

Short-term waiting. Out-of-town truckers making scheduled delivery or pickup appointments 

(especially those serving critical production schedules) typically arrive early and need a place to 

park while waiting. This is critical if truckers try to stay off the highways during rush hours (e.g. 

arriving by 7 AM for an 8 AM appointment, and then waiting until after 9 AM before getting on 

the freeway again) or to avoid erratic traffic congestion. Some very large customers may have 

enough room off the street, but more commonly the trucker must park somewhere else nearby. 

Older industrial and commercial areas rarely have enough off-street parking for trucks. This is 

the reason for large queues of trucks waiting on streets adjacent to major shippers and receivers, 

especially first thing in the morning, and for the number of trucks caught in morning commute 

traffic. Truck drivers also must frequently park on the street when patronizing restaurants, running 

errands at stores, going to the bank or ATM, or any of the other myriad chores that other 

accomplish in the car they drive to work. Large truck stops are not usually used because this 

function demands short-term space close to customers or other destinations, i.e. street parking. 

(Exhibit 132) 


Page 158

Exhibit 132: On-Street Truck Parking 

Overnight parking. Long-haul truckload carriers (either owner-operators or company drivers 

for truckload firms) typically need a place to park and sleep before a morning appointment, since 

they often arrive the previous night. They may also need a place to park and sleep or rest while 

waiting for an outbound load. Truck stops with large parking lots and other facilities are set up 

for this. This need usually accounts for the tractor/trailer combinations found with the driver 

resting in a sleeper bunk or in a motel nearby. Large fleet operators that dispatch trucks from 

central locations may need 100 acres or more, especially during holidays and other times when 

business is at a standstill. Many smaller vans and trucks used in service applications are parked 

at home by the driver, since the truck is both the “ride to work” and the work vehicle itself. This 

is particularly true of franchise businesses such as RotoRooter or Snap-on Tools, where each 

driver is effectively a one-man fleet. Most private fleets are based at the owner/customer’s facilities 

and may have no parking space for the nights and weekends when the trucks are not in use. 

Trailer drop lots. Owner-operators, intermodal draymen, and truckload carriers without local 

lots or yards often need a place to drop a trailer (usually empty) for pickup hours or even days 

later. Well-organized truckers will use a regular location at a truck stop or other secure facility 

for this function, but in the absence of that option many will use vacant lots or street parking. 

This need accounts for many of the empty trailers found parked in industrial areas, shopping center 

parking lots, and other locations convenient for drivers. Long-haul truckload carriers may 

have relatively little need for off-duty parking since very few vehicles will be at a domicile yard 

at any given time. These firms often use space at truck stops and regional “drop lots” (Exhibit 

133 ) for trailer and tractor parking away from the home domicile. 


Page 159

Exhibit 133: Trailer Drop Lot 

A particularly thorny problem arises when owner-operators or other small truck fleet operators 

such as plumbers or landscapers have established their business at their residence in a rural area 

with large lot sizes, only to find a new upscale subdivision being built next door. What was acceptable 

in the rural area quickly becomes objectionable to the new neighbors. 

Potential approaches to the truck parking problem include: 

 

 

 

 

 

Municipal or county ordinances to control the worst offences. 

Stepped-up enforcement and compliant hotlines. 

Permit systems. 

Zoning changes. 

Development of truck parking lots 

Congestion 

Congestion reduces trucking productivity and reliability, and forces trucks into close contact with 

passenger vehicles. 

Commuters experience congestion primarily in the morning and evening hours; truck drivers 

may experience congestion all day long. Depending on who they work for, truck drivers are paid 

by the mile (e.g. long-haul commercial truckload), by the hour (e.g. local retail delivery), or by 

the trip (e.g. marine container drayage). Increased congestion and slower average speeds reduce 

the work that a driver can accomplish in his limited legal driving hours. If he is paid by the mile 

or the trip, his income declines, and trucking firms find it more difficult to recruit drivers. If the 

driver is paid by the hours, the fleet operator must hire more drivers or pay them for more hours 

to accomplish the same work. In either case, overall labor costs rise as working conditions deteriorate. 

Congestion also reduces the productivity of the truck itself, diminishing the earning 

power of a costly asset. 

Congestion significantly increases emissions from diesel trucks. Driving time is divided for this 

purpose into four categories: 


Page 160

Idling–stopping with the engine running. 

Creep–stop and go at very low average speed in queues or traffic jams 

Transient–changing speeds over a wider range, e.g. in a mix of traffic. 

Cruising–moving at steady freeway speeds. 

The CARB Highway Heavy Duty Diesel Truck (HHDDT) Test cycle (Exhibit 134) at 17% idle, 

26% creep and transient, and 58% cruise may be close to actual urban trucking patterns. A UC 

Riverside series of tests using a Freightliner tractor with a 2000 Caterpillar C-15 engine yielded 

the following emissions averages for the CARB HHDDT cycle. The tests measured elemental 

carbon (EC) and organic carbon (OC), the two types of diesel particulate matter. 

Exhibit 134: UC Riverside HHDDT Road Test Results 

Measure Idle Creep Transient Cruise 

EC mg/min 1.88 15.35 75.81 50.56 

OC mg/min 40.98 12.39 44.76 26.97 

EC+OC mg/min 42.86 27.74 120.57 77.53 

Avg MPH 0 1.8 15.4 39.9 

As Exhibit 134 suggests, idling and creeping produce greater emissions per hour and per mile 

than transient or cruising conditions. Congestion thus puts more pollutants in the air for any 

given transportation task. 

Congestion’s impact on reliability and predictability is les obvious but can be equaly important. 

Freight movements of al kinds must be reliable and predictable. While much is made of “just in 

time” deliveries of critical asembly line parts, timely delivery of ready-mix concrete to a construction 

site is equally critical to the people involved. Highway delay is typically split into two 

components in planning models. 

 

 

Recurrent delay, which is the expected routine result of demand exceeding freeflow 

capacity. 

Non-recurrent delay, which is the result of accidents, other incidents, and unexpected 

excesses of demand over free-flow capacity. 

Truck fleet drivers, dispatchers and managers learn to schedule for recurrent delay through experience. 

Coping with increased, non-recurrent delay, however, forces fleet operators to choose 

between padded schedules and excess fleet capacity on one hand, or missed appointments, angry 

customers, and lost business on the other. 

By forcing trucks and autos into close, stressful proximity, congestion also exacerbates animosity 

toward trucking. Auto drivers perceive large trucks as obstacles and nuisances. The passenger 

car equivalency of large trucks rises from 1–2 under normal uncongested conditions to as high 

as 4 on a congested freeway. In other words, every semi in congested rush hour traffic has the 

same impact as up to 4 autos. 


Page 161

Circuity 

Legacy highway and street systems are almost inevitably ill-suited for at least some emerging 

development and traffic patterns. The problems are magnified by geographic barriers. 

The most obvious problem with a geographic barrier in the SACOG region is the American 

River east of Sacramento. East of Interstate 80, the American River is bridged at (Exhibit 135): 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fair Oaks Blvd. (H St./J St.), a 4-lane surface street passing through commercial/residential 

areas. 

Howe Ave., a 4-lane arterial with a US50 interchange passing through commercial 

residential areas. 

Watt Ave., a major commercial/residential 4-lane arterial with US50 and I80 interchanges. 

Sunrise Blvd./Sunrise Ave., a 6-lane arterial through commercial/residential areas 

linking US50 and I80. 

Hazel Ave., a 4-lane arterial through residential areas. 

Folsom Blvd./Folsom Auburn Road, a 4-lane arterial through mixed urban and rural 

areas. 

The next link between I80 and US50 is SR 49 at Auburn. 

Exhibit 135: American River Crossings 

Watt Ave., the shortest direct north-south route linking I80 and US50, is 8.5 miles of surface 

streets through commercial and residential neighborhoods. At an average speed of 25 mph the 


Page 162

Watt Ave. route would take about 20 minutes. The 15.3 mile trip down I80 and back on US50 

between the two Watt Ave. exits at an average of 45 mph takes about the same time but adds 6.8 

VMT every time a truck follows the two sides of the triangle. 

When most of the legacy highway system was put in place 30–40 years ago there was relatively 

little need for large trucks to link I80 and US50. With the expansion of urbanized development, 

business, and industry along both routes, however, the need for trucks to link them has increased 

enormously. At the same time commercial and residential development between the American 

River and I80 has slowed the through traffic on north-south arterials and increased the sensitivity 

of adjoining land uses. A truck moving along Sunrise Ave./Blvd. between the industrial area east 

of Rancho Cordova and a customer in Roseville will drive past 10 miles of homes, offices, shopping 

centers, and schools on what was once a rural road. 

These and other missing links in the highway network result in more trucks on surface arterials 

and more trucks through major interchanges such as I80/US50 in Sacramento. 

Route Selection Decisions 

Day-to-day or planned trucker choices of streets and highways are dictated by a combination of 

dispatcher direction and driver choice. Understanding the factors behind these choices are a key 

step to understanding truck movements and a significant input to regional planning. For example: 

 

 

 

 

 

Local and regional drivers will typically incur extra miles to save time. Independent 

owner-operators are paid by the trip or the work accomplished, not by the miles 

traveled. Pickup and delivery drivers may be paid by the hour or the shift, and will 

maximize their odds of returning to the home base on time. 

Long-haul drivers are typicaly paid by the “route mile”, with a set mileage allowed 

for a given trip. “Out of route miles” must be specificaly authorized for the driver 

to be paid for detours, repair or service trips, or equipment repositioning. The 

driver incurs “unpaid miles” for other detours or side trips and the equipment provider 

incurs mileage-based costs such as fuel usage. 

Drivers and dispatchers are acutely aware of traffic and safety conditions on the 

routes they regularly travel. Previous studies found instances where company drivers 

were prohibited from using specific highways considered dangerous by carrier 

management (e.g. SR32 west of Modesto). 

Drivers of larger trucks and semi-trailer combinations often choose routes according 

to the turning geometry and side clearances, with mileage a secondary consideration. 

There are documented instances of multiple truckers traveling several 

miles daily over surface roads to make a left turn into a major destination when the 

right turn from the adjacent off ramp or lane of travel was too tight. 

Drivers and dispatchers may similarly avoid routes with steep grades before stoplights, 

short left-turn pockets, poorly timed signals, or other barriers to safe and efficient 

operation. (Many such barriers in downtown Los Angeles were documented 


Page 163

in Improving Truck Movement in Urban Industrial Districts, prepared in 1999 by 

LADOT.) 

On the national scale, long-haul drivers favor longer southern cross-country routes 

(e.g. Interstate 10 versus Interstate 40 versus Interstate 80) in the winter to avoid 

driving in the snow. 

In common with the idling and parking issues, the basic near-term approach to improving truck 

routing practices and reducing unwanted neighborhood incursion includes refining rules as 

needed, educating the industry and the public, and deliberate enforcement planning. 

Truck Safety & Accidents 

The Highway Safety Act of 1966 gave rise to California's Statewide Integrated Traffic Records 

System (SWITRS). California Highway Patrol's Information Management Division took the lead 

in developing SWITRS as a means to collect and process data elements from a collision scene. 

Truck-involved collision data from 2002 through 2005 were obtained from SWITRS. A total of 

3,084 truck-involved collisions located on the major freeways (I5, I80, US50 and US99) within 

the SACOG region were analyzed. Collision analysis typically includes a review of rates per 

million entering vehicles or some other unit of measure. This is because more collisions occur 

where there is more traffic flow, but the rate may still be lower for a higher volume location. 

This technique, although preferred, is not feasible for truck collisions due to the scarcity of truck 

volume data. In the future, it would be appropriate to develop truck-involved collision rates 

when more truck volume data is available. It is important to note that the reported collisions include 

a truck as one of the involved parties. It does not imply which party, truck or auto, was at 

fault. In fact, in many instances, the collision was not determined to be the primary fault of the 

truck driver. 

The following is a summary of the truck-involved collision characteristics along the four freeways 

(I5, I80, US 50 and US 99) located within the SACOG region. 

Collision Location 

 

 

 

 

36 percent of the reported collisions occurred along I80 

23 percent of the reported collisions occurred along US99 

22 percent of the reported collisions occurred along US50 

19 percent of the reported collisions occurred along I5 

Collision Severity 

 

 

 

74 percent of the reported collisions were property damage only 

25 percent of the reported collisions involved non-fatal injuries 

1 percent of the reported collisions involved fatal injuries 


Page 164

Collision Type 

 

 

 

 

 

45 percent of the reported collisions were sideswipe type collisions 

30 percent of the reported collisions were rear-end type collisions 

13 percent of the reported collisions involved hitting an object other than a moving 

vehicle 

5 percent of the reported collisions were broadside type collisions 

7 percent of the reported collisions involved head-on collisions, overturned vehicles, 

pedestrians, or the collision type was not stated 

Road Condition 

 

 

 

 

93 percent of the reported collisions had no unusual condition 

3 percent of the reported collisions were in a construction or repair zone 

3 percent of the reported collisions involved other unusual conditions such as potholes, 

loose material on roadway, obstruction on roadway, or reduced roadway 

width 

1 percent of the reported collisions involved other conditions, or the conditions 

were not stated 

Lighting 

 

 

 

 

77 percent of the reported collisions occurred during daylight 

11 percent of the reported collisions occurred at night at a location without street 

lights 

9 percent of the reported collisions occurred at night at a location with street lights 

3 percent of the reported collisions occurred at dusk or dawn 

Weather Conditions 

 

 

 

 

 

76 percent of the reported collisions occurred in clear weather conditions 

16 percent of the reported collisions occurred in cloudy weather conditions 

4 percent of the reported collisions occurred in rainy weather conditions 

2 percent of the reported collisions occurred in snowy weather conditions 

2 percent of the reported collisions occurred in foggy, windy, other weather conditions, 

or were not stated 

Traffic Movement 

 

 

 

59 percent of the reported collisions involved vehicles moving straight 

14 percent of the reported collisions involved vehicles changing lanes 

6 percent of the reported collisions involved vehicles stopped in the roadway 


Page 165

5 percent of the reported collisions involved vehicles slowing/stopping in the roadway 

3 percent of the reported collisions involved vehicles running off the roadway 

2 percent of the reported collisions involved parked vehicles 

11 percent of the reported collisions involved other movements such as backing-up, 

entering traffic, merging, running off the road, and u-turns. In some cases the 

movement was not stated at all 

Violation Category 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29 percent of the reported collisions involved vehicles making unsafe lane changes 

29 percent of the reported collisions involved vehicles with unsafe speed 

17 percent of the reported collisions involved improper turning 

4 percent of the reported collisions involved a reason other than the driver 

3 percent of the reported collisions involved driving under the influence 

18 percent of the reported collisions involved other violations such as following too 

closely, falling asleep, driving on the wrong side of the road, improper passing, 

right-of-way violations, or unsafe starting or backing 

These data indicate that many truck-involved collisions result from vehicles moving out of their 

lane or from one lane to another (45 percent sideswipe plus 5 percent broadside and 13 percent 

hitting an object); a vast majority do not involve unusual roadway pavement conditions, weather 

or darkness; 29 percent involved unsafe speeds; and 29 percent involved unsafe lane changes. 

These trends typically indicate the need to review speed limits/control, geometric design standards, 

lane widths, sight distances and other factors where a relatively larger number of collisions 

occur. 

Major Locations 

The SWITRS data also gives the detailed locations of the collisions. A review of the collision 

location data revealed a few locations that appear to have a larger number of truck-involved collisions. 

Data analysis shows that many of the higher volume collision locations are at or near the 

intersection of two freeways. Locations with a larger number of collisions are: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I5 near US50 

US50 near I5 

US50 between 65th Street and State College 

I80 between SR244 and Madison Ave. 

I80 between Antelope Rd and Riverside Ave/Auburn Blvd. 

I80 between Douglas Blvd and Atlantic St. 

I80 between SR174 and Magra Rd. 


Page 166

I80 between Drum Forebay Rd and Blue Canyon Rd. 

US99 between Mack Rd and Florin Rd 

US99 between Fruitridge Rd and 12th Ave (highest collision location) 

US99 between 12th Ave and I5/El Centro Rd. 

These and other accident locations are shown in Exhibit 136 through Exhibit 141. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Truck-involved accidents in El Dorado County (Exhibit 136) were highest along the 

two-lane stretch of US50 east of Placerville and along the more heavily traveled 

portion of US50 crossing the El Dorado/Sacramento County border. 

In Placer County (Exhibit 137), truck-involved accidents occurred at various points 

along I80, with the highest numbers between SR174 and Magra Road, and between 

Drum Forebay and Blue Canyon Roads. 

Sacramento County (Exhibit 138) had the greatest numbers of truck-involved accidents, 

concentrated at and near the major freeway interchanges. There is also a 

very high incidence of truck-involved accidents on US99, between Fruitridge Blvd. 

and 12 th Avenue where the freeway narrows from five lanes on the north to three 

lanes on the south. 

Truck-involved accidents in Sutter County were relatively light (Exhibit 139), and 

clustered on stretches of US99. 

Yolo County truck-involved accidents (Exhibit 140) were grouped on I5 east of 

Woodland and on I80 near West Sacramento. 

The data obtained did not show significant truck-involved accidents for Yuba 

County highways. (Exhibit 141) 


Page 167

Exhibit 136: El Dorado County Truck-Involved Collisions 


Page 168

Exhibit 137: Placer County Truck-Involved Collisions 


Page 169

Exhibit 138: Sacramento County Truck-Involved Collisions 


Page 170

Exhibit 139: Sutter County Truck-Involved Collisions 


Page 171

Exhibit 140: Yolo County Truck-Involved Collisions 


Page 172

Exhibit 141: Yuba County Truck-Involved Collisions 


Page 173

Truck Traffic Generators 

The survey asked each jurisdiction to rate various types of truck, traffic generators, and describe 

the nature of the problems associated with each of them in their jurisdiction. The results are 

shown in Exhibit 142. The various types of problems that were reported include: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ingress/Egress Safety 

Pavement/Shoulder Damage 

Dirt/Gravel/Debris in Roadway 

Seasonal Increase in Truck Activity (Ingress/Egress Safety) 

Cut Through (Residential) Traffic 

Traffic Congestion 

On-street/Overnight Parking 

Narrow Roads small turning radius on roadways make trucks go on to sidewalks 

causing sidewalk damage. 

The most reported problems were with Pavement Impacts/Shoulder Damage and Ingress/Egress 

Safety. Followed by blocking traffic at entrances, exits or trucks blocking traffic flow during 

congestion and during pick-up and delivery of goods. 

Galt mentioned that there are occasional complaints regarding dirty streets, truck parking and 

traffic congestion where major active construction sites are located. 

Exhibit 142: Reported Truck Traffic Generators 

Facility Type 

Present in your 

jurisdiction? 

Creates 

Problems? 

Jurisdiction Reporting Problems 

Truck Terminals 8 8 

Elk Grove, Sacramento County, West Sacramento, Sutter 

County, Woodland, Rocklin, Placer County, Yuba City 

Truck Sales/Repair 3 3 Sutter County, Town of Loomis, Woodland 

Warehousing/ 

Distribution 

10 10 

Folsom, Elk Grove, Sacramento County, Lincoln, West Sacramento, 

Placerville, Town of Loomis, Woodland, Placer 

County, Sacramento 

Light Manufacturing 6 6 

Folsom, Elk Grove, Wheatland, Town of Loomis, Woodland, 

Rocklin 

Heavy Manufacturing 4 4 Elk Grove, Sacramento County, Woodland, Sacramento, 

Food Processing 7 7 

Folsom, Elk Grove, West Sacramento, Sutter County, 

Woodland, Sacramento, Live Oak 

Agriculture 8 8 

Elk Grove, Sacramento County, Wheatland, Sutter County, 

Woodland, Yuba City, Sacramento, Live Oak 


Page 174

Facility Type 


jurisdiction? 

Creates 

Problems? 

Jurisdiction Reporting Problems 

Sand & Gravel 13 13 

Folsom, Elk Grove, Lincoln, Yuba, Sutter County, Town of 

Loomis, Woodland, Rocklin, Roseville, Placer County, Yuba 

County, Rancho Cordova, Sacramento 

Parcel Carriers 

(e.g., FedEx, UPS) 

7 7 

Elk Grove, Wheatland, West Sacramento, Placerville, 

Woodland, Rocklin, Sacramento 

Postal Service Centers 

Mail Order Businesses 

4 4 Elk Grove, Wheatland, West Sacramento, Woodland 

1 1 Elk Grove 

Moving and Storage 3 3 Elk Grove, Woodland, Sacramento 

Port or Barge Terminals 

Recycling or Scrap 

Operations 

Garbage Dumps or 

Transfers 

1 1 Elk Grove 

5 5 Elk Grove, Yuba, Yuba County, Rancho Cordova, Marysville 

5 5 Sacramento County, Lincoln, Yuba, Yuba County, Marysville 

Utility Service Yard 2 2 Town of Loomis, Sacramento 

Corporation or Highway 

Maintenance 

Yards 

Major Active Construction 

Sites 

3 3 Elk Grove, Wheatland, Sacramento 

17 17 

Folsom, Elk Grove, Galt, Wheatland, Lincoln, Yuba, West 

Sacramento, Sutter County, Placerville, Woodland, Rocklin, 

Roseville, Placer County, Yuba County, Rancho Cordova, 

Yuba City, Live Oak 

Nurseries 3 3 Elk Grove, Town of Loomis, Yuba City, 

Grain/Feed Storage/Sales 

3 3 Elk Grove, Sutter County, Placerville 

Survey results are only reflected here if the jurisdiction answered YES to both questions. The Cities of Davis and 

Winter had no problems in their district. 

The table above provides a broad look at the region, with construction coming out on top as the 

biggest traffic generator in the region by far, with 74% of those responding to these questions 

indicating that construction at major construction sites are a huge traffic generator. The second 

largest impact is less with only 57 % stating sand and gravel. The third largest truck traffic generator 

appears to be warehousing and distribution with only 43% and all others were less than 

that. 

Rail Survey Issues 

The region has jurisdictional areas where rail is a significant issue. 


Page 175

The city of Lincoln and West Sacramento stated that they experience significant rail 

issues stating that there have been both congestion and noise issues associated with 

railroad operations. 

West Sacramento experiences significant issues with at-grade crossings at 15 th 

Street & Jefferson and Stone Blvd. and Jefferson having significant problematic 

stoppages and train whistle noise complaints. The City is working with the Federal 

Railroad Administration to have those two sites designated as “Quiet Zones.” 

There is an unfortunate tradeoff between rail horn noise and safety. In some cases, efforts to keep 

trains from blowing horns at crossings has led to an upswing in accidents and deaths. 

Rail Grade Crossings 

The places where rail freight movements and regional/community concerns are most likely to 

meet are at grade crossing between railroads and surface streets. Vehicular and pedestrian delays 

and safety concerns at rail grade crossings are a perennial problem and will be exacerbated as 

both rail freight movements and vehicular traffic continue to grow. 

Separating rail grade crossing is inherently costly and often disruptive to the community nearby. 

Railroads cannot climb steep grades and it is very difficult to rebuild right-of-way while trains 

are operating, so separating grade crossings usually entails depressing the surface street. Grade 

separations are typically multi-million dollar projects. 

Railroads prefer grade separations for safety, liability, and maintenance concerns. Since trains 

already have the unquestioned right-of-way and do not stop at grade crossings, separating the 

crossing has little benefit for rail operations. Railroads therefore have little incentive to pay for a 

grade crossing separation project, and the public sector usually funds it. 

The FAST program in the Seattle area is a well-known and highly regarded long-term program of 

grade crossing separations and improvements sponsored by a coalition of local cities and agencies, 

and would be a model for any SACOG area program. 

Rail Capacity 

Capacity and Growth. Over most of the last 50 years the railroads have had excess capacity due 

to over building before WWII and steady productivity increases. Railroads responded by rationalizing 

their networks, shedding excess capacity, and concentrating traffic on fewer routes. 

In the last decade the situation has reversed. Railroad rationalization and capacity have bottomed 

out. In the face of steady freight growth, particularly in international and domestic intermodal 

business, railroads are now increasing traffic and capacity on the remaining routes. 

For the SACOG region this new era of rail freight growth translates into more trains into, out of, 

and through the region on existing lines. Union Pacific is now more likely to upgrade its two 

north-south lines through Sacramento than to abandon one of them. Rosevile has been a “railroad 

town” for a century, and the railroad is unlikely to diminish its presence in the future. 


Page 176

The regional rail network has limited reserve capacity, and there are a few serious limitations on 

the ability of the rail network to expand service. 

 

 

Geography. Rail lines require private right-of-way, and cannot efficiently negotiate 

the tighter curves or steeper grades common to freeways or highways. The possible 

routes for new or expanded rail lines are thus tightly constrained. 

Regional Network Age. The rail network pre-dates most of the present regional 

industrial configuration, and can be adapted or extended only with great difficulty. 

Railroad line capacity is not an exact science: 

 

 

 

 

Diferent “rules of thumb” result in diferent capacity estimates. 

Resourceful, dedicated managers can often operate their facilities at volumes beyond 

their estimated capacities. 

Poorly designed or indifferently managed facilities will become congested before 

their estimated capacity is reached. 

There is no simple measure of capacity, since railroad traffic is a mix of commodities 

and train types moving with different speeds and priorities. 

The major factors in railroad line capacity are the following: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number of tracks–double track generally allows trains to pass in opposite directions 

without stopping. Railroads can increase capacity by going from single track 

to double track, where they have the space. Restoration of the former double track 

over Donner Pass may be likely in the long run. 

Number and length of sidings–longer sidings on single or multiple track lines allow 

for longer trains and increase the likelihood that trains can avoid stopping when 

meeting or passing other trains. Railroads can increase capacity by lengthening existing 

sidings, where they have the space. 

Number of crossovers and other connections–crossovers allow trains to use 

other tracks but also force trains to slow down. 

Type of signaling–Centralized Traffic Control (CTC) is generally expected to 

yield the highest capacity but is not justified on low-volume routes. Most lines in 

the SACOG region already have CTC. There are many types and variations of signaling 

systems. 

Speed limits–speed limits are determined both by track and route conditions and 

by the environment, including the presence of grade crossings, passenger stations, 

etc. Maintaining track standards for higher speeds is costly, and must be justified by 

capacity increase and traffic demand. Higher speeds though communities raise 

noise and safety concerns. 

Grade and curvature–to overcome steeper grades and tighter curves, trains require 

more power at any given tonnage and speed. As trains must slow down 

around tight curves or when descending steep grades, the number of trains that can 

pass through in a given time declines. 


Page 177

Traffic mix–higher speed intermodal traffic will yield more trains, but lower 

speed unit trains of bulk commodities will yield more tonnage. 

Pasenger Rail “Conflicts”. In addition to the freight operations, a number of daily passenger 

trains are operated in the region by Amtrak and the Capital Corridor. This passenger traffic limits 

the ability of some rail routes to host increasing numbers of freight trains in the future. 

Part of the problem is that freight and passenger operations are not easily integrated. Passenger 

service is designed to move large numbers of people and trains on tightly controlled schedules 

during specific time periods, especially during commuting hours. This usually entails a number 

of stops and starts at intermediate stations. Freight service, on the other hand, generally operates 

nonstop from the origin point to destination, without the starts and stops associated with passenger 

operations, but on the same tracks. Passenger trains thus frequently require larger operating 

“windows” than freight trains. 

The following regional passenger services are now in operation. 

 

 

 

Amtrak Capitals. 11 trains per day in each direction on the UP route between San 

Jose and Sacramento. Due to be increased in Fall 2006. 

Amtrak California Zephyr. One daily train in each direction on the UP route between 

Oakland and Sacramento (then to/from Chicago). 

Amtrak Coast Starlight. One daily train in each direction between Los Angeles 

and Seattle, operating in the SACOG on the UP routes between Davis and Live 

Oak. 

Lessons from the Case Studies 

By far the most common complaint among the businesses and institutions interviewed for the 

SACOG Goods Movement Study involved the issue of transporting goods between the Interstate 

80 and Highway 50 corridors. Likewise, for businesses in the Highway 50 corridor, improved 

access to southbound Highway 99 is frequently cited as a high priority. 

Truckers also complained about multiple jurisdictions imposing incompatible rules and regulations 

about the size and weight of vehicles that could legally travel on routes that pass through 

several jurisdictions. 

Truckers display a remarkable talent for resourcefulness and adaptability in coping with the challenges 

they face while negotiating the region’s streets and highways. When provided sufficient 

discretion, local delivery truck drivers will normally find the most convenient, quickest routes to 

their assigned destinations. Ironically, drivers whose routes are determined by computer programs 

sometimes find that strict adherence to these routes is not conducive to efficient, timely 

delivery. Construction crews laying light-rail tracks in downtown Sacramento or trains blocking 

grade crossings in midtown are sometimes not factored in to such programs. 

A good deal of information related to traffic conditions is shared at the street level. For example, 

drivers of delivery trucks and vans calling on the Meridian Plaza building that houses the offices 


Page 178

of SACOG seem to share advance knowledge of major trade shows at the Sacramento Convention 

Center which typically bring a large influx of tractor-trailer rigs. Delivery truck drivers– 

and even the valet parkingatendants at Spataro’s restaurant –have learned how best to cope under 

the circumstances. Drivers know when the ideal time is to make deliveries at certain locations, 

just as they know when to avoid certain intersections or streets during specific hours. 

In some locations, deliveries generally occur late at night or in the very early morning in order to 

avoid congestion or to comply with local trafic laws. The stores in the Westfield Corporation’s 

Downtown Plaza, for example, are primarily stocked with goods that mostly arrive between four 

and seven in the morning. This “solution” is necessary because of the heavy volume of traffic on 

adjacent street during the day and because of aggressive policing of parking regulations. Major 

deliveries at the two Macy’s stores in the mal involve 27-foot trailers hauled in tandem from a 

regional distribution center in Hayward. With Macy’s loading docks located in a basement parking 

area, only one trailer at a time can be moved. The other must be left on the street. As the 

trailer would be ticketed during normal business hours, deliveries are restricted to the very early 

morning. 

Several of the case studies revealed that deliveries originating from distribution centers outside 

of the SACOG region arrive during the night. IKEA, for example, turns around delivery trucks 

serving its new West Sacramento store within two to three hours in the early morning hours so 

that they never have to deal with rush-hour congestion on regional freeways. The goal of avoiding 

having to idle in rush hour traffic sometimes has ironic consequences. The Whole Foods 

Market in Sacramento is partially supplied by a truck arriving every morning by six from a distribution 

center in the Bay Area. But actual unloading of the truck does not begin until 7:30 a.m. 

In general, we were impressed with the resourcefulness and ingenuity of truckers to minimize the 

hurdles they face in making timely deliveries and pick-ups. Indeed, street-level intelligence often 

trumps computer-generated routing systems. 


Page 179

XI. Goods Movement Economic Impacts 

Regional Population and Employment 

The SACOG region is experiencing unprecedented population growth. Projections of this 

growth and the effect on transportation and air quality were the impetus of SACOG, in partnership 

with Valley Vision, to initiate the Blueprint Transportation and Land Use Study. The effort 

brought together various stakeholders in the region to further evaluate and attempt to guide how 

the region grows over the next 50 years. The three-year effort resulted in the adoption of the 

Preferred Blueprint Scenario in December 2004. This scenario supports smart growth principles, 

including more housing choices, infill, redevelopment, and a balance of jobs and housing in 

areas of the region. 

The SACOG 2006 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) incorporates a long-range transportation 

vision for the region that addresses issues of quality of life, access and mobility, air quality, 

travel choices, economic vitality, equity, transportation and land use, funding and revenue, health 

and safety, and environmental sustainability. The basis for much of the program development is 

the projection of the region’s population and employment growth. 

The region’s curent population of 2.15 milion is expected to grow by 788,000 by 2027, an increase 

of 37 percent. 11 SACOG has projected the population, housing, and employment for the 

six-county region (excluding the Tahoe Basin) and identified areas expected to experience the 

largest absolute growth. Although the region has seen significant infill development recently, the 

majority of growth continues to be outside the existing urban boundaries. These areas include 

Rancho Cordova, El Dorado Hills, South Sacramento County, North Natomas, West Sacramento, 

Roseville, Rocklin, and Lincoln. 

Employment projections through 2027 mirror this expected growth, with a large number of new 

jobs expected to locate in similar areas. Overall, the region is expected to experience employment 

growth of 400,000 new jobs, an increase of 39 percent. Only 10 percent of this job growth 

is expected to locate in downtown Sacramento. (Exhibit 143) 

11 SACOG 2006 Metropolitan Transportation Plan. March 2006 


Page 181

Exhibit 143: Employment Growth Projections by Area 

2005 2027 

Increase 

% Increase 

2005 - 2027 2005 - 2027 

County 

El Dorado 51,644 71,205 19,561 38% 

Placer 156,237 238,067 81,830 52% 

Sacramento 657,100 869,975 212,875 32% 

Sutter 33,506 49,433 15,927 48% 

Yolo 136,347 191,037 54,690 40% 

Yuba 22,988 47,294 24,306 106% 

Subtotal 1,057,822 1,467,011 409,189 39% 

Community 

West Sacramento 29,479 84,356 54,877 186% 

Rancho Cordova 91,550 146,055 54,505 60% 

Roseville 66,290 117,095 50,805 77% 

Downtown Sacramento 113,421 159,479 46,058 41% 

East Sacramento 58,148 80,767 22,619 39% 

Subtotal 358,888 587,752 228,864 64% 

Source: Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2006 Metropolitan Transportation Plan 

The distribution of population and job growth in the region is the most important issue for transportation. 

In terms of regional goods movement, population and employment growth will drive 

the need for movement of construction materials, manufacturing components, consumer goods, 

and other transportation support services to businesses. The following sections will address the 

employment and other economic factors specific to the goods movement and logistics sectors. 

Before addressing employment sectors related to goods movement, it is important to understand 

the overall employment picture for the region. The SACOG region has experienced solid job 

growth in most sectors; however, some sectors have been identified as opportunity industry sectors 

based on sustained growth patterns or a clustering of related industries. 

As shown in Exhibit 144, government and public sector employment has long been the dominant 

sector of employment in the region. However, as the region continues to grow other sectors are 

experiencing significant growth that is reflective of the economic diversification in the region. 


Page 182

Exhibit 144: SACOG Total Employment by Sector 

Industry 

Employment by Sector 

Average Annual 

Growth 

1995 2000 2004 1995-00 2000-04 

Goods Producing 80,200 111,400 123,900 6.8% 2.7% 

Natural Resources and Mining [1] 1,100 1,400 1,000 4.9% -8.1% 

Construction 32,500 55,000 72,900 11.1% 7.3% 

Manufacturing 46,600 55,000 50,000 3.4% -2.4% 

Service Providing 614,600 723,300 771,100 3.3% 1.6% 

Trade, Transportation and Utilities 122,500 145,400 154,000 3.5% 1.4% 

Wholesale Trade 22,300 26,100 27,700 3.2% 1.5% 

Retail Trade 80,000 95,000 102,500 3.5% 1.9% 

Transportation, Warehousing & Utilities 20,300 24,500 24,000 3.8% -0.5% 

Information 18,200 19,000 21,300 0.9% 2.9% 

Financial Activities 42,000 53,500 61,600 5.0% 3.6% 

Professional and Business Services 76,900 108,300 100,300 7.1% -1.9% 

Educational and Health Services 66,900 74,400 89,500 2.1% 4.7% 

Leisure and Hospitality 65,400 73,300 82,900 2.3% 3.1% 

Other Services 22,700 27,900 29,700 4.2% 1.6% 

Government 200,000 221,500 231,800 2.1% 1.1% 

Federal Government 24,100 17,000 13,900 -6.7% -4.9% 

State and Local Government 175,900 204,400 218,000 3.0% 1.6% 

Total 694,800 834,700 895,000 3.7% 1.8% 

Source: EDD-Quarterly Census of Employment & Wages 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Government will continue to play a significant role in the region’s economy, given 

Sacramento’s role as the state capital and the high levels of employment in the region. 

Construction has been driven by the region’s ability to accommodate population 

growth for the state. The region is home to several specialty trade contractor firms 

that support the local construction industry; there may be some exports to other regions. 

Financial Activities is becoming a highly specialized industry for the region, especially 

for activities related to credit intermediation. 

Leisure and Hospitality employment levels are consistent with the statewide average. 

As the state capital, Sacramento hosts conventions and visitors associated with 

state business. In addition, the region has many tourist destinations and leisure attractions. 

Education and Health Services is a rapidly growing industry both for California and 

the region. The region’s employment in this industry continues to grow in relation 

to the population growth and demand. 

Professional and Business Services has been the fastest growing industry for California 

and the region. The region is experiencing the highest levels of growth in 


Page 183

Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services, as well as Administrative and Support 

and Waste Services. 

Manufacturing is a declining industry statewide. However, the region has historically 

provided computer-related firms with a low-cost land alternative to the Bay 

Area. 

Regional employment is dominated by service-providing industries totaling 86 percent of all employment. 

In that category, government accounts for 26 percent of service-providing employment, 

followed by trade, transportation and utilities with 154,000 jobs, or 17 percent of all service-providing 

jobs in the region. (Exhibit 144) 

Employment by sector for each county in the region further illustrates the heavy concentration in 

service-providing industries. Sacramento County is the employment center for the region, with 

64 percent of all jobs located there. (Exhibit 145) Although Sacramento County accounted for 

most of the job growth from 1990–2004, jobs in Placer County more than doubled, going from 

61,200 jobs in 1990 to 134,000 jobs in 2004. El Dorado and Sutter Counties also experienced 

moderate growth. The geography of the region’s job growth is reflective of the trends in population 

and housing growth, which in turn attracts businesses that provide support services and employers 

seeking a concentration of labor supply. 


Page 184

Exhibit 145: Total Employment by SACOG County and Sector, 2004 

Industry El Dorado Placer Sacramento Sutter Yolo Yuba Total 

Farm 300 700 2,500 3,600 3,900 1,100 12,100 

Goods Producing 7,500 26,500 73,000 3,300 11,200 2,400 123,900 

Natural Resources and Mining 200 100 200 200 200 100 1,000 

Construction 5,200 17,200 43,100 1,500 4,900 1,000 72,900 

Manufacturing 2,100 9,200 29,700 1,600 6,100 1,300 50,000 

Service Providing 42,700 106,900 507,200 19,200 81,300 13,800 771,100 

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities 7,500 25,500 94,100 5,400 19,100 2,400 154,000 

Wholesale Trade 900 3,100 17,600 700 4,800 600 27,700 

Retail Trade 6,000 19,600 64,600 4,200 6,700 1,400 102,500 

Transportation, Warehousing & Utilities 700 2,800 11,900 500 7,600 500 24,000 

Information 600 2,800 16,300 200 1,200 200 21,300 

Financial Activities 3,500 9,800 43,500 1,000 3,300 500 61,600 

Professional and Business Services 6,900 14,300 68,400 1,900 7,900 900 100,300 

Educational and Health Services 5,300 13,100 60,000 3,300 6,100 1,700 89,500 

Leisure and Hospitality 8,300 16,700 48,000 2,100 6,500 1,300 82,900 

Other Services 1,700 3,700 21,100 900 1,900 400 29,700 

Government 8,900 21,000 155,800 4,400 35,300 6,400 231,800 

Federal Government 800 700 7,300 200 3,600 1,300 13,900 

State and Local Government 8,100 20,400 148,500 4,200 31,700 5,100 218,000 

Total 50,500 134,100 582,700 26,100 96,400 17,300 907,100 

Source: CA Employment Development Department - Industry Employment & Labor Force by Annual Average, March 2005 Benchmark. 


Page 185

Additional information on employment forecasts is presented in Exhibit 146 through Exhibit 

148. 

Exhibit 146: Projected Employment by Industry (2004-2030) 

Industry 

Number of Employees 

2004 2012 2015 2025 2030 

Farm 12,100 12,800 12,500 9,400 9,000 

Natural Resources and Mining 1,000 800 600 300 300 

Construction 72,900 78,700 82,100 92,500 97,000 

Manufacturing 50,000 57,400 55,200 48,400 48,100 

Wholesale Trade 27,700 33,000 33,800 35,600 36,900 

Retail Trade 102,500 126,600 131,100 146,200 153,200 

Transp., Warehousing and Utilities 24,000 31,800 33,000 37,500 39,400 

Information 21,300 29,200 30,500 32,800 34,000 

Financial Activities 61,600 70,900 73,500 82,300 86,300 

Professional and Business Services 100,300 145,400 154,200 177,100 186,200 

Educational and Health Services 89,500 120,200 128,200 160,700 172,100 

Leisure and Hospitality 82,900 101,800 106,500 121,200 127,500 

Other Services 29,700 38,300 40,100 47,600 50,500 

Government 231,800 267,000 276,800 309,500 324,900 

Total Employment 907,300 1,113,900 1,158,100 1,301,100 1,365,400 

Sources: CA Employment Development Department, Industry Employment & Labor Force by Annual Average, March 2005 Benchmark, 

and SACOG Projections of Employment, Population, Households, and Household Income in the SACOG Region for 2000-2005. 


Page 186

Exhibit 147: Projected Employment by Industry (2004-2030) 

Projected Employment Projected Employment Projected Employment 

Change (2004-2015) Change (2015-2030) Change (2004-2030) 

Industry Number Avg. Annual Number Avg. Annual Number Avg. Annual 

Growth Growth Growth 

Farm 400 0.30% -3,500 -3.20% -3,100 -1.10% 

Natural Resources and Mining -400 -4.50% -300 -6.70% -700 -4.40% 

Construction 9,200 1.10% 14,900 1.70% 24,100 1.10% 

Manufacturing 5,200 0.90% -7,100 -1.40% -1,900 -0.10% 

Wholesale Trade 6,100 1.80% 3,100 0.90% 9,200 1.10% 

Retail Trade 28,600 2.30% 22,100 1.60% 50,700 1.50% 

Transp., Warehousing and Utilities 9,000 2.90% 6,400 1.80% 15,400 1.90% 

Information 9,200 3.30% 3,500 1.10% 12,700 1.70% 

Financial Activities 11,900 1.60% 12,800 1.60% 24,700 1.30% 

Professional and Business Services 53,900 4.00% 32,000 1.90% 85,900 2.30% 

Educational and Health Services 38,700 3.30% 43,900 3.00% 82,600 2.50% 

Leisure and Hospitality 23,600 2.30% 21,000 1.80% 44,600 1.60% 

Other Services 10,400 2.80% 10,400 2.30% 20,800 2.00% 

Government 45,000 1.60% 48,100 1.60% 93,100 1.30% 

Total Employment 250,800 2.20% 207,300 1.70% 458,100 1.50% 

Sources: CA Employment Development Department, Industry Employment & Labor Force by Annual Average, March 2005 Benchmark, 

and SACOG Projections of Employment, Population, Households, and Household Income in the SACOG Region for 2000-2005. 

Exhibit 148: Industry Employment as Percentage of Total Employment 

Employment 

Distribution by Industry 

Industry 1995 2000 2004 

Goods Producing 11.5% 13.3% 13.8% 

Natural Resources and Mining 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 

Construction 4.7% 6.6% 8.1% 

Manufacturing 6.7% 6.6% 5.6% 

Service Providing 88.5% 86.7% 86.2% 

Trade, Transportation and Utilities 17.6% 17.4% 17.2% 

Wholesale Trade 3.2% 3.1% 3.1% 

Retail Trade 11.5% 11.4% 11.5% 

Transportation, Warehousing & Utilities 2.9% 2.9% 2.7% 

Information 2.6% 2.3% 2.4% 

Financial Activities 6.0% 6.4% 6.9% 

Professional and Business Services 11.1% 13.0% 11.2% 

Educational and Health Services 9.6% 8.9% 10.0% 

Leisure and Hospitality 9.4% 8.8% 9.3% 

Other Services 3.3% 3.3% 3.3% 

Government 28.8% 26.5% 25.9% 

Federal Government 3.5% 2.0% 1.6% 

State and Local Government 25.3% 24.5% 24.4% 

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 

Source: EDD-Quarterly Census of Employment & Wages 


Page 187

Logistics Sector 

The logistics sector (Exhibit 149) is made up of a variety of industry groups that involve the 

shipping, receiving, processing, and storage of goods. These activities do not always fit into the 

specific definition of “logistics.” In addition, many firms do not always have goods movement 

and logistics as their primary business function, and these internal activities do not get classified 

in this category (e.g., construction and manufacturing). The following are sectors that have 

goods movement and logistics as their primary business activity and the associated NAICS code: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Truck Transportation–NAICS 484. Firms that move goods in a region or crosscountry. 

Includes companies that move full container loads of merchandise or collect 

partial container loads for further distribution. 

Support Services for Transportation–NAICS 488. Includes operations that support 

transportation functions, such as freight forwarding, loading and unloading of 

ships and rail cars, motor vehicle towing, packaging and labeling, and air traffic 

control. 

Non-Local Couriers–NAICS 492110. Firms that move packages locally and 

worldwide (e.g., UPS, Federal Express). Includes pick up of packages, transport to 

sorting facility for further shipment by rail, truck, or air. 

General Warehousing and Storage–NAICS 493. Warehousing and storage facilities 

that hold goods for further handling (e.g., food products, agricultural products). 

Air Transportation–NAICS 481. Activities that include passenger service, cargo 

service, or a combination. 

Rail Transportation–NAICS 482. Firms that move goods long distance by rail 

(e.g., Union Pacific, BNSF). 

Water Transportation–NAICS 483. Includes shipping lines that operate out of 

ports, primarily involved with movement of shipping containers to overseas markets. 

In addition to the above transportation modes, wholesale activities comprise a major sector of the 

goods movement industry: 

 

 

Wholesale Trade–NAICS 42. Firms with primary activities in purchasing, selling, 

storing, and transporting goods that are ultimately used or sold by other firms. 


Page 188

Exhibit 149: Logistics Sector Employment by County, 2004 

Sector El Dorado Placer Sacramento Sutter Yolo Yuba Total 

Postal Services 247 518 1,101 118 3,274 263 5,521 

Truck Transportation 89 490 3,490 260 1,874 88 6,291 

Freight Trucking 

Generalized Freight Trucking 46 200 2,261 52 1,182 23 3,764 

Specialized Freight Trucking 44 291 1,228 207 692 65 2,527 

Other Specialized Trucking, Local 36 267 738 182 449 45 1,717 

Subtotal 126 758 4,227 441 2,323 133 8,008 

Support Activities 

Support Activities for Transportation 87 1,084 279 - 334 15 1,799 

Support Activities, Road Transportation 45 91 450 - 94 - 680 

Support Activities, Air Transportation 10 130 456 - 112 15 723 

Subtotal 142 1,305 1,185 0 540 30 3,202 

Warehousing and Storage - 148 1,675 83 3,155 - 5,061 

Wholesale Trade 

Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods 462 1,917 10,299 834 1,618 87 15,217 

Merchant Wholesalers, Non-Durable Goods 304 957 5,518 207 3,014 62 10,062 

Subtotal 766 2,874 15,817 1,041 4,632 149 25,279 

TOTAL/AVERAGE 1,370 6,093 27,495 1,943 15,798 663 53,362 

Source: California Employment Development Department, Quarterly Census of Employment & Wages. 


Page 189

These sectors combined accounted for 53,000 jobs in the region in 2004, or 5.8 percent of the 

region’s total employment.Employment in the wholesale sector accounts for 45 percent of the 

logistics sector total, with truck transportation the next larger group with more than 6,000 employees 

or approximately 11 percent. (Exhibit 150) 

Exhibit 150: Logistics Sector Employment, 2004 

SACOG Region 

Logistics Sector Employment, 2004 

Merchant Wholesalers, Non- 

Durable Goods 

Merchant Wholesalers, Durable 

Goods 

Warehousing and Storage 

Support Activities, Air 

Transportation 

Support Activities, Road 


Sector 

Support Activities for 


Other Specialized Trucking, Local 

Specialized Freight Trucking 

Generalized Freight Trucking 

Truck Transportation 

Postal Services 

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 

Exhibit 151 compares each county’s share of logistics employment with the share of total employment. 

In most cases, the shares are comparable. Two points are apparent, however. 

 

 

Logistics employment in Sacramento County is a relatively low share of the total, 

due most likely to the higher share of government and “ofice” sector employment 

in Sacramento itself. 

Logistics employment in Yolo County is a much higher share, reflecting the concentration 

of logistics activity in West Sacramento and adjacent areas. 


Page 190

Exhibit 151: County Shares of Logistics Employment 

70% 

60% 

50% 

Total Employment 

Logistics Employment 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

El Dorado Placer Sacramento Sutter Yolo Yuba 

Exhibit 152: Average Annual Payroll in Logistics Sectors, 2004 

Annual Payroll (000) 

Industry 

El Dorado 

Placer Sacramento Sutter Yolo Yuba Total 

Wholesale Trade/NAICS 42 $38,885 $149,407 $895,019 $56,185 $210,904 $5,598 $1,355,998 

Transportation & Warehousing/NAICS 

48-49 $13,748 $62,725 $377,838 $11,763 $264,238 $8,209 $738,521 

Total $52,633 $212,132 $1,272,857 $67,948 $475,142 $13,807 $2,094,519 

Source: CA Employment Development Department - Quarterly Census of Employment Wages 

Logistics sector employment in the region yields annual payrolls of $2.1 billion. (Exhibit 152) 

Within the logistics sectors, the average annual wage and salary was relatively strong, ranging 

from $30,000 for support activities to $47,000 for positions in wholesale. (Exhibit 153 and 

Exhibit 154) The average wage for all sectors was $37,000. 


Page 191

Exhibit 153: Regional Employment, Weekly Salary, and Annual Salary, 2004 

Sector 

Total Regional 

Employment 

Average 

Weekly Salary 

Average 

Annual Salary 

Postal Services 5,521 $892 $46,358 

Truck Transportation 6,291 $631 $32,803 

Freight Trucking 

Generalized Freight Trucking 3,764 $608 $31,607 

Specialized Freight Trucking 2,527 $649 $33,731 

Other Specialized Trucking, Local 1,717 $668 $34,753 

Subtotal 8,008 $1,925 $33,364 

Support Activities 

Support Activities for Transportation 

1,799 $692 $35,994 

Support Activities, Road Transportation 

680 $572 $29,744 

Support Activities, Air Transportation 

723 $713 $37,066 

Subtotal 3,202 $1,977 $34,268 

Warehousing and Storage 5,061 $686 $35,646 

Wholesale Trade 


Goods 15,217 $896 $46,601 


Durable Goods 10,062 $849 $44,139 

Subtotal 25,279 $1,745 $45,370 

TOTAL/AVERAGE 53,362 $714 $37,131 

Source: California Employment Development Department, Quarterly Census of Employment & Wages 


Page 192

Exhibit 154: Logistics Sector Average Annual Wages, 2004 


Logistics Sector 

Average Annual Wages, 2004 

$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 $50,000 

Postal Services 

Truck Transportation 

Generalized Freight Trucking 

Specialized Freight Trucking 

Other Specialized Trucking, Local 

Sector 

Support Activities for 


Support Activities, Road 


Support Activities, Air 


Warehousing and Storage 


Goods 


Durable Goods 

According to a report prepared for the Southern California Association of Governments–“Logistics 

& Distribution: An Answer to Regional Upward Social Mobility”by John Husing–the 

growth of the logistics sector may be replacing jobs lost in manufacturing and other sectors requiring 

unskilled or marginally educated workers. The study also asserts that strong pay scales 

are possible in the logistics sector because of capital and information intensive requirements of 

the sector resulting from “just-in-time” systems being adopted by manufacturers and retailers. 

This broad range of skill requirements in the sector allow employees to grow in the sector with 

on-the-job learning and opportunities for advancement. 

A key question facing the SACOG region is whether and how to encourage the growth of the logistics 

industry. Growth in logistics busineses beyond those required to support the region’s own 

production and consumption will add the kinds of jobs described in the Husing report. This may 

be an attractive strategy where the region faces concerns about loss of jobs in agriculture and resources, 

which were traditional sources of entry-level employment. Growth in logistics business 

using the SACOG region as a hub, however, will also result in increased consolidation, distribution 

and transloading movements. 

In addition to the direct employment from the logistics group, many goods-producing industries 

rely on these sectors to transport finished goods and raw materials. These sectors include manufacturing, 

construction, and natural resources and mining. In the SACOG region, the goods- 


Page 193

producing sectors represent 14 percent of the region’s total employment. The region has become 

highly specialized 12 in construction, driven by the area’s population growth. (Exhibit 155) 

Exhibit 155: Employment in Selected Sectors, Sacramento Region: 1990–2003 

Specialization 1990-2003 Job Growth 

Avg Ann. 

Sector 1990 2003 Absolute Percent Growth 

Government 1.75 1.51 30,300 18.8% 1.3% 

State & Local Government 1.73 1.61 50,300 38.1% 2.5% 

Construction 1.35 1.48 22,100 57.1% 3.5% 

Construction of Buildings 1.33 1.26 2,100 21.2% 1.5% 

Heavy & Civil Engineering Construction 1.44 1.35 (100) -1.6% -0.1% 

Specialty Trade Contractors 1.34 1.57 20,100 88.5% 5.0% 

Financial Activities 1.04 1.22 18,400 48.3% 3.1% 

Finance and Insurance 1.08 1.36 15,700 56.7% 3.5% 

Leisure and Hospitality 0.99 0.97 22,100 45.5% 2.9% 

Education and Health Services [1] 1.00 0.93 25,200 50.8% 3.2% 

Professional and Business Services 0.74 0.80 38,400 76.8% 4.5% 

Manufacturing 0.40 0.49 5,000 14.5% 1.0% 

Sources: EDD (2005) and Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (2005). 

"exec_summary" 

Although manufacturing does not represent an area of specialization, the region continues to 

serve as a lower cost alternative to the Bay Area. Employment in traditional manufacturing has 

declined; however, technology-related manufacturing represents an area of opportunity for the 

region. According to a ranking by level of employment concentration (compared to California as 

a whole), Computer, Semiconductor and Electronic Manufacturing is highly ranked as an opportunity 

cluster based on employment concentration. (Exhibit 156) 

12 Specialization refers to the region’s relative concentration of employment for a particular industry, as compared to California as a 

whole. For example, specialization of 1.5 in Construction means that the share of employment for Construction in the region is 20 

percent greater than the share of employment for Construction at the state level, implying that the region exports some of this activity 

to other areas. 


Page 194

Exhibit 156: Clusters of Opportunity by Employment Concentration 

Industry Clusters of Opportunity (1990-2002) [1] 

Employment 

(2002) 

Rank by 

Concentration 

Computer, Semiconductor & Electronic Manufacturing 220,823 1 

Information Services, Telecommunications & Software 199,031 2 

Education & Training 72,485 3 

Visitor Services 119,367 4 

Social Services Not available 5 

Management, Creative & Business Services 277,918 6 

Biomedical & Health 330,434 7 

Finance & Insurance Services 189,858 8 

Construction 207,098 9 

Industrial Machinery 11,430 10 

"sac_clusters_conc" 

[1] California Regional Economies Project. Sponsor: California Workforce Investment Board, in cooperation 

with the California Economic Strategy Panel 

The trend in manufacturing to reduce inventory and rely on just-in-time delivery of goods and 

materials demands a transportation network that is fast and reliable. The importance of regional 

transportation facilities and service is critical to the success of these industries. 

Value of Goods Produced in Region 

Although the region has experienced declines in the farming and natural resource employment 

sectors that are not likely to be reversed, an appreciable amount of agricultural commodities are 

still produced in the region. As shown in Exhibit 157, approximately $1.2 billion in agricultural 

commodities was produced in the region in 2004. 

Exhibit 157: SCAOG Region Leading Agricultural Commodities 

Value of 

Production 

County ($1,000) Leading Commodities 

SACOG Region Leading Agricultural Commodities 

By Total Value of Production, 2004 a/ 

El Dorado $25,874 Cattle and Calves, Wine Grapes, Apples, Christmas Trees and Cut Greens, Range Pasture 

Placer $60,434 Milling Rice, Nursery Products, Cattle and Calves, Livestock, Irrigated and Range Pasture 

Sacramento $325,527 Wine Grapes, Market Milk, Nursery Stock, Bartlett Pears, Poultry 

Sutter $299,556 Rice, Walnuts, Peaches, Almonds, Tomatoes 

Yolo $338,128 Processing Tomatoes, Milling Rice, Alfalfa Hay, Wine Grapes, Almonds 

Yuba $125,366 Rice, Clingstone Peaches, Walnuts, Cattle and Calves, Milk 

Total $1,174,885 

a/ Totals vary slightly from those published by counties due to classification differences between county and state reports. 

Source: Department of Food and Agriculture, CA Agricultural Statistics Service 


Page 195

The SACOG region is home to more than 1,700 manufacturing establishments producing valueadded 

products totaling more than $6.7 billion in 2002. (Exhibit 158) 

Exhibit 158: SACOG Region Manufacturing Employment, Payroll, Value Added 

SACOG Region Manufacturers: Employment, Payroll, Value Added, 

Total Capital Expensitures - 2002 Economic Census 

Value Added by Total Capital 

Number of Manufacture Expenditures 

County Establishments ($ mill.) ($ mill.) 

El Dorado 181 $627.8 a/ 

Placer 299 $1,497.4 a/ 

Sacramento 975 $3,443.8 $196.4 

Sutter 76 $394.5 $21.7 

Yolo 176 $627.4 $28.5 

Yuba 46 $126.8 $3.2 

Total 1,753 $6,717.7 $249.8 

a/ Withheld to avoid disclosing data of individual companies. 

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 


Page 196

XII. Land Use and Real Estate Issues 

Industrial Real Estate Trends 

Real estate demand for industrial uses in the region continues to grow, with vacancy rates dropping 

to an average of 8 percent in 2005. The region’s industrial market now totals more than 152 

million square feet with another 1.2 million square feet under construction. 

The areas with highest average annual growth rates include Roseville/Rocklin/Lincoln, Natomas/Northgate, 

Folsom/El Dorado Hills, and Elk Grove/Laguna/Galt. The higher growth rates in 

these areas follow the population and other commercial growth evidenced here as well. 

The Rancho Cordova/Highway 50 area is losing a share of this market, with a 3.5-percent decline 

between 2000 and 2005, possibly because of land use pressures. 

The West Sacramento and Power Inn areas also showed significant growth; however, the Power 

Inn area continues to dominate the market with 26 million square feet of rentable space, or 17 

percent of the market share. (Exhibit 159) 

Exhibit 159: Net Rentable Industrial Square Feet (in 1,000's 

Average Annual Growth 

Area 1990 1995 2000 2005 90-94 95-99 00-05 Total 

Power Inn Area 17,580 20,580 23,970 26,070 2.3% 1.8% 1.7% 2.7% 

Roseville/Rocklin/Lincoln 9,470 11,360 17,100 18,330 3.9% 7.8% 1.4% 4.5% 

West Sacramento 11,880 13,830 15,980 17,700 3.1% 2.4% 2.1% 2.7% 

Rancho Cordova/Hwy 50 17,160 19,360 20,820 17,450 2.6% 1.1% -3.5% 0.1% 

Woodland/Davis 10,010 11,540 16,050 16,240 2.1% 6.4% 0.2% 3.3% 

Natomas/Northgate 7,300 7,810 10,440 13,820 1.8% 5.3% 5.8% 4.3% 

I-80/ Roseville Road [1] 6,790 7,750 9,100 9,570 3.2% 0.7% 1.0% 2.3% 

Northeast Sacramento 6,230 6,430 6,880 7,250 1.1% 0.9% 1.1% 1.0% 

Richards Blvd. 5,930 5,900 6,020 6,030 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 

Downtown/Midtown/East Sac. 5,420 5,990 6,190 5,990 2.3% 0.4% -0.7% 0.7% 

Elk Grove/Laguna/Galt 1,680 2,150 4,150 5,650 5.7% 12.3% 6.4% 8.4% 

South Sacramento 4,030 4,760 4,920 5,000 3.5% 0.8% 0.3% 1.4% 

Folsom/El Dorado Hills 2,110 2,520 3,540 3,820 2.6% 8.8% 1.5% 4.0% 

Total 105,590 119,980 145,160 152,930 2.50% 3.10% 1.00% 2.50% 

Source: CB Richard Ellis 

A trend analysis of vacancy rates by submarket area indicates that the Elk Grove/Laguna/Galt, 

Woodland/Davis, and Roseville/Rocklin/Lincoln areas continue to have the higher vacancy rates 

in the region. However, vacancies have dropped considerably in the past five years in these 

submarkets. The Richards Boulevard and Folsom/El Dorado Hills areas exhibited the lowest vacancy 

rates in the region in 2005. (Exhibit 160) 


Page 197

Exhibit 160: Industrial Vacancy Rates by Submarket 

Average Vacancy Rate 

Area 1990 1995 2000 2005 90-94 95-99 00-05 Total 

Roseville/Rocklin/Lincoln [1] 8% 4% 6% 11% 7.0% 5.0% 12.0% 8.0% 

Elk Grove/Laguna/Galt 21% 8% 16% 12% 15.0% 12.0% 13.0% 13.0% 

Power Inn Area 16% 13% 16% 10% 14.0% 11.0% 12.0% 12.0% 

Woodland/Davis 4% 5% 6% 11% 6.0% 3.0% 10.0% 6.0% 

West Sacramento 6% 4% 6% 7% 8.0% 4.0% 8.0% 7.0% 

Natomas/Northgate 24% 9% 6% 10% 19.0% 8.0% 8.0% 11.0% 

Rancho Cordova/Hwy 50 11% 6% 4% 7% 10.0% 4.0% 6.0% 7.0% 

Richards Blvd. 7% 15% 3% 4% 9.0% 7.0% 6.0% 7.0% 

Folsom/El Dorado Hills 7% 5% 1% 3% 5.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 

Northeast Sacramento 7% 3% 3% 5% 9.0% 5.0% 4.0% 6.0% 

Downtown/Midtown/East Sac. 4% 3% 2% 8% 4.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 

South Sacramento 9% 4% 2% 8% 6.0% 4.0% 3.0% 4.0% 

I-80/Roseville Road [1] 10% 7% 6% 5% 11.0% 5.0% 4.0% 6.0% 

Total Sacramento Region 10% 7% 7% 8% 10.0% 6.0% 8.0% 8.0% 


[1] CB Richard Ellis included McClellan in the I-80 submarket in the data for the years 1990 through 1999. 

After 1999, McClellan was removed and Roseville Road was included. 

Net absorption of all industrial space in the region totaled 4.8 million square feet in 2005. The 

areas with heavier absorption were Power Inn and Roseville/Rocklin/Lincoln. The areas of 

Richard Boulevard, North Sacramento, and South Sacramento showed negative absorption in 

2005, as shown in Exhibit 161. 

Exhibit 161: Industrial Net Absorption (in 1,000 square feet) 

Average Annual Absorption [1] 

Area 1990 1995 2000 2005 90-94 95-99 00-05 Total 

Power Inn Area 5,140 1,050 360 1,060 1,500 600 500 800 

Rancho Cordova/Hwy 50 3,440 1,070 220 220 1,000 500 300 600 

Woodland/Davis 2,620 400 1,340 620 700 700 300 600 

Roseville/Rocklin/Lincoln -10 250 920 1,820 400 700 400 500 

I-80/Roseville Road [2] 2,310 110 1,040 160 700 100 400 400 

Natomas/Northgate -10 130 1,270 360 300 300 600 400 

West Sacramento 660 750 570 440 400 400 400 400 

Richards Blvd. 1,290 -370 380 -20 200 100 100 100 

Elk Grove/Laguna/Galt -590 230 290 230 100 200 200 200 

South Sacramento 690 160 60 -30 300 100 0 100 

Folsom/El Dorado Hills 40 170 0 20 100 300 0 100 

Downtown/Midtown/East Sac. 410 120 140 30 200 100 0 100 

Northeast Sacramento -70 330 190 -80 0 100 100 100 

Total Sacramento Region 2,420 1,520 2,890 4,820 1,600 1,500 2,100 1,700 


[1] Rounded to the nearest hundred thousand. 

[2] CB Richard Ellis included McClellan in the I-80 submarket in the data for the years 1990 through 1999. After 1999, McClellan was removed and 

Roseville Road was included. 

Further analysis of these regional trends may be an appropriate subject for Phase 2 of the Goods 

Movement Study or other follow-up efforts. 

Absorption of industrial properties in the region has been strong, particularly with demand for 

warehouse/distribution space. Overall demand for warehouse/distribution in the region generated 

a 20.6-percent average annual growth between 2001 and 2005. General industrial properties 


Page 198

also were in steady demand with a 14.9-percent average annual growth rate for the same period. 

(Exhibit 162) 

Exhibit 162: Sacramento Region Trends 

Average 

Item 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Annual 

Absorption 

Supply Indicators 

Total Inventory (sq. ft.) 

Warehouse Distribution 69,000,000 70,000,000 69,000,000 71,000,000 72,000,000 

General Industrial 30,000,000 36,000,000 36,000,000 36,000,000 38,000,000 

R&D/Flex 12,000,000 13,000,000 13,000,000 13,000,000 14,000,000 

Total 111,000,000 119,000,000 118,000,000 120,000,000 124,000,000 

Average Asking Rent (NNN, per month) 

Warehouse Distribution n/a $0.32 $0.33 $0.33 $0.35 

General Industrial n/a $0.48 $0.48 $0.57 $0.63 

R&D/Flex n/a $0.88 $0.88 $0.75 $0.76 

Demand Indicators 

Net Absorption (sq. ft.) 

Warehouse Distribution 1,033,000 -995,000 133,000 640,000 2,632,000 20.60% 

General Industrial 421,000 1,674,000 237,000 377,000 743,000 12.00% 

R&D/Flex 403,000 -179,000 255,000 310,000 346,000 -3.00% 

Total 1,857,000 500,000 625,000 1,326,000 3,722,000 14.90% 

Vacancy [1] 

Warehouse Distribution 13% 15% 16% 17% 13% 

General Industrial 6% 17% 17% 18% 16% 

R&D/Flex 10% 20% 20% 17% 15% 

Total 11% 16% 17% 17% 14% 

Source: Grubb & Ellis 

[1] Grubb & Ellis defines vacancy as both direct vacancy and vacant sublease space. 

It is interesting to note that employment growth for this sector during this period showed a 0.5- 

percent decline, indicating that the estimated space demand for this use may be understated at 

10,000 square feet per employee. This result confirms industry experience that fewer employees 

are required for warehouse/distribution activities as processes become more automated and 

mechanized handling equipment replaces manual handling, as suggested by the example in 

Exhibit 163. 


Page 199

Exhibit 163: IKEA Distribution Center Example 

EPS work in evaluating modern warehouse distribution facilities indicates that facilities are getting 

much larger (500,000 to 1,000,000 square feet) and more highly automated. Previous rules 

of thumb were 750 to 1,000 square feet per employee for "industrial" uses including manufacturing 

and assembly. Case study work in Stockton and Woodland in other projects points toward 

much lower employment densities than smaller, older, and less automated logistics facilities. 

Space demand for warehouse/distribution in the market area through 2030 has been estimated 

using employment projections for the region. It is further assumed that this use requires 10,000 

square feet per employee and generates a need for land with a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.40. As 

suggested in Exhibit 164, FARs of .40 and above are common for new warehouses and distribution 

centers. 

Exhibit 164: West Sacramento Distribution Centers 


Page 200

Based on this calculation, the demand for additional warehouse/distribution through 2030 would 

total more than 29 million square feet, with land requirements of approximately 1,700 acres. 

(Exhibit 165) 

Exhibit 165: Estimated Space Demand 2004-2030: Warehouse/Distribution 

Estimated Total Percentage of Number of 

Employment Employees Using Employees Using 

Estimated Gross 

Growth Warehouse/Distribution Warehouse/Distribution Space Demand 

Industry (2004-2030) Space Space Sq. ft. Acres [1] 

Assumptions 


10,000 sq. ft. 

per employee 

0.40 FAR 

Agriculture/Mining -3,800 0.90% -34 -342,000 -20 

Construction 24,100 1.00% 241 2,410,000 138 

Manufacturing -1,900 4.80% -91 -912,000 -52 

TPU 15,400 4.80% 739 7,392,000 424 

Wholesale Trade 9,200 5.00% 460 4,600,000 264 

Retail Trade 50,700 0.80% 406 4,056,000 233 

Services 189,300 0.50% 947 9,465,000 543 

Government 93,100 0.30% 279 2,793,000 160 

Total Adjusted Market Area 

(Rounded) [2] 

376,100 1.30% 2,946 29,462,000 1,691 

Sources: SACOG Projections of Employment, Population, Households, and Household Income in the SACOG Region for 2000-2050 and EPS. 

[1] Reflects net developable acreage, with an FAR of 0.40. 

Average lease rates for industrial properties in the SACOG region have shown significant recent 

increases. Distribution properties that have more than 50,000 square feet are approximately 

$0.35 per square foot, triple-net 13 (NNN); flex/R&D space is approximately $0.76 per square 

foot, NNN; and general industrial space averages $0.63 per square foot, NNN. Future increases 

can be expected as land prices and building costs continue to rise. (Exhibit 166) 

Area 

Exhibit 166: Industrial Lease Rates by Submarket 

Average Vacancy Rate 

WH/Dist. R&D 

(1999-2005) (1999-2005) 

Downtown $0.31 $0.25 $0.25 $0.29 $0.51 $0.65 $0.65 $0.56 -0.9% 1.3% 

Northgate/Natomas $0.32 $0.32 $0.32 $0.38 $0.63 $0.71 $0.71 $0.67 2.5% 0.9% 

West Sacramento $0.31 $0.33 $0.33 $0.32 $0.65 $0.73 $0.73 $0.65 0.5% 0.0% 

South Sacramento $0.36 $0.29 $0.29 $0.32 $0.48 $0.68 $0.68 $0.67 -1.7% 4.9% 

Power Inn/South Watt $0.23 $0.23 $0.25 $0.30 $0.60 $0.65 $0.64 $0.75 3.9% 3.2% 

Highway 50/Sunrise $0.40 $0.35 $0.35 $0.38 $0.66 $0.70 $0.70 $0.75 -0.7% 1.8% 

Folsom/El Dorado $0.39 $0.50 $0.50 $0.50 $0.78 $1.10 $1.10 $1.20 3.6% 6.3% 

I-80/McClellan $0.35 $0.27 $0.27 $0.37 $0.58 $0.65 $0.60 $0.66 0.8% 1.9% 

Woodland $0.28 $0.23 $0.23 $0.25 $0.70 $0.70 $0.70 $0.65 -1.6% -1.1% 

Total Sacramento Region [1] $0.30 - $0.31 $0.35 $0.65 $0.72 - $0.76 2.2% 2.3% 

Source: Grubb & Ellis Industrial Market Trends, Sacramento. 

[1] Total Sacramento Region data not available for 2001. 

Warehouse/Distribution 

R&D/Flex 

1999 2001 2003 2005 1999 2001 2003 2005 

13 Triple-net: A lease in which the lessee pays rent to the lessor, as well as all taxes, insurance, and maintenance expenses that arise from the use 

of the property. In other words, net of taxes, net of insurance, and net of maintenance. 


Page 201

SACOG region warehouse and distribution lease rates are well below the average for that market 

area, which includes the counties of San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and the I80/880 corridor. 

(Exhibit 167) Average asking rates in these areas vary significantly; however, the most 

comparable market areas have average rates of $0.40 per square foot, NNN. 

Exhibit 167: Bay Area Warehouse Market Summary, 1Q06 

Building Available Vacancy Avg. Asking 

Submarket Base Space Rate Rate (NNN) 

San Francisco County 19,541,568 611,676 3.1% $0.77 

San Mateo County 30,636,351 1,843,029 6.0% $0.75 

I-80/880 Corridor 82,212,383 5,349,424 6.5% $0.40 

Santa Clara County 32,781,433 3,077,651 9.4% $0.40 

Total 165,171,735 10,881,780 6.6% $0.48 

Source: NAI BT Commercial 

Average lease rates in San Joaquin County are more comparable to the SACOG region, with average 

rates for warehouse space ranging from $0.18 to $0.45 per square foot, NNN. A substantial 

amount of trucking, warehouse, and distribution activity that serves the Bay Area is now located 

in San Joaquin County. According to data from the California Employment Development 

Department, employment in transportation and warehousing has more than doubled in San Joaquin 

County since 1990. This growth is expected to continue as the area offers a low cost alternative 

for facilities and access to major highways. Even this area, however, is beginning to 

evolve toward smaller floor plans and more intensive uses as urbanization continues. 


Page 202

XIII. Goods Movement Land Use Implications 

Industrial space for goods movement industries in the SACOG region are concentrated along the 

region’s major transportation coridors, including I80, I5, and Highways 50 and 99. As the cost 

and availability of land increases in the urbanized areas, industrial and warehouse activities are 

being located in outlying areas that offer lower cost land with potential for expansion. With the 

increase in population and housing growth, industrial uses are often viewed as incompatible with 

surrounding land uses, driving these activities further away from the more urbanized areas. 

These trends have implications for both the goods movement industry and the customers they 

seek to serve. 

Planning Challenges 

Many jurisdictions in the region are engaged in the process of General Plan updates, including 

the City of Sacramento, Sacramento County, Rocklin, Rancho Cordova, Yolo County, and Lincoln. 

Land use implications have emerged as a high priority in the region. A balance of jobs and 

housing in areas of the region ultimately will impact the mobility and commute times of residents. 

Transportation planning is a major component of the analysis being undertaken, with attention 

being given to traffic congestion, alternative modes, pedestrian safety, and air quality. 

Most jurisdictions in the region have adopted smart growth principles and are incorporating these 

concepts into their long range planning efforts and development processes. 

The City of Sacramento has a particular challenge in transportation planning because of limited 

options for truck access and parking when dealing with an existing and generally older infrastructure. 

Over the years, the City of Sacramento has adopted ordinances allowing for designated 

truck routes and monitors the impacts of goods movement activities on the neighboring 

residential areas. Overall, the volume of average annual daily traffic generated by trucks is considerably 

lower than that of passenger vehicles. 

Although regional economic development leaders have shown interest in retaining industrial uses 

in the more urbanized areas of the region, the push for redevelopment of infill areas with higher 

value uses has fiscal implications for jurisdictions. When comparing several uses, including 

warehouse, manufacturing, R&D, office, and residential uses, the tax benefits to governments 

varies significantly by use. Compared to warehouse use, the property taxes generated and associated 

land values are substantially higher when the land is used for higher density office development, 

retail, or residential development. Although high density office development has been 

shown to generate the highest tax base among these uses, the sales tax revenue generation from 

retail uses is generally considered the most desirable to local government. Also, since Proposition 

13 reduced local property tax revenues, sales tax revenues from retail activities are viewed 

even more favorably. 

These general assumptions do not take into consideration the weight of resulting job creation 

from each use (i.e., higher paying positions in office, R&D, or industrial jobs as compared to retail). 

Also, when considering alternative uses for property, jurisdictions must consider the cost of 


Page 203

providing public services for various uses. Generally, residential uses result in a higher cost for 

public services. 

The estimated land demand for warehouse/distribution previously discussed could have major 

implications for land use decisions in the region. As jurisdictions in the region engage in General 

Plan updates and land use alternatives, care should be taken to ensure that such factors are 

considered and that adequate transportation planning is included in these processes. 

Policy Considerations 

The adoption of Smart Growth principles for the region will encourage the redevelopment of infill 

sites in the urban core and support less outward expansion of growth in the future. These 

land use policies could have significant impact on the goods movement industries in the region, 

and vice versa. 

As the density of the urban core increases the transportation infrastructure rarely keeps pace. 

Buildings get higher, but streets are no wider than before. The trend toward mixed-use and 

live/work developments can exacerbate the problem by putting land uses with differing freight 

transportation needs in the same development, if not the same building. Smart Growth concepts 

sometimes favor “livability” over functionality, and may not makeexplicit provision for efficient 

truck access. 

Increasing distances between distribution centers and the market for goods in population and 

employment centers of the region may result in increased fuel costs, longer travel times, and increased 

emissions. Another important consideration is the potential effect on the local economy 

if transportation and goods movement industries decline in the region. The possible loss of jobs 

for unskilled or marginally educated workers in the region would result in a lower standard of 

living for many workers if comparable employment is not available. 

Jurisdictions also must weigh the impacts of higher value uses in areas identified for redevelopment 

or in the outlying areas. Consideration must be given to the potential of increased tax revenues 

versus costs of public services. Employment generation (quality and quantity) by use type 

also should be a factor in land use decisions. Compatibility with surrounding areas and quality 

of life for residential areas in close proximity are often the drivers of such decisions. 

Many communities are now implementing a form-based zoning approach, which involves area 

stakeholders in the creation of the land use code. Form-based zoning differs from conventional 

zoning (use-based zoning) in that it emphasizes the form, character, and shape of buildings as 

they relate to streets and public spaces. Form-based codes use drawings and other graphics to 

show the scale, location, and character of a development. The City of Sacramento recently implemented 

a pilot program of form-based zoning in specific areas of the city, which could be further 

implemented as part of the General Plan Update. The simplicity of typical distribution and 

logistics facilities, however, may not lend itself to form-based zoning. For the most part, new 

DCs and logistics faculties are ordinary tilt-ups with little relation between building form and 

traffic generation. 


Page 204

Goods Movement and the Blueprint Process 

Goods Movement and Smart Growth 

The Sacramento Region Blueprint Project is an effort to bring together land use, housing, design, 

and transportation issues in a comprehensive planning process. Among the key components of 

the Blueprint process is the incorporation of Smart Growth principles: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Transportation Choices 

Housing Diversity 

Compact Development 

Use of Existing Assets 

Mixed Land Uses 

Quality Design 

Natural Resources Conservation 

These principles have been applied in a concerted effort to promote livable community development. 

Regional support for these principles is clear in the results of surveys and in the content 

and participation in community workshops. 

The application of Smart Growth principles is not inherently either consistent or inconsistent 

with goods movement issues. There may be a need, however, to expand the scope of Smart 

Growth principles in the Blueprint process to: 

 

 

 

take advantage of goods movement improvement opportunities in the process of rethinking 

development patterns; 

insure that proposed developments and development patterns meet functional as 

well as aesthetic requirements; and 

avoid being “blindsided” by goods movement isues late in the development cycle. 

The transportation choices considered in most of the Blueprint materials and presentation materials 

reviewed by the study team focus on passenger modes. Transit-oriented development, pedestrian-friendly 

streets, compact development, mixed use, and expanded bikeways are all meant to 

encourage passengers to make shorter trips and fewer auto trips. A June 2005 presentation by 

Fehr and Peers, for example, discused “modal equity” and the tradeof between space for autos, 

space for buses, space for bicycles, and space for pedestrians–without a mention of trucks. 

A presentation on narrower streets, also from the June 2005 workshop, offers an attractive view 

of a sinuous tree-lined residential street (Exhibit 168). 


Page 205

Exhibit 168: Narrower Streets 

Clearly, garbage, delivery, or construction vehicles would not enhance this scene, but the residents 

will create demand for these and other types of truck trips. In older neighborhoods and 

older commercial areas narrower, more attractive streets like these were often made possible by 

the unseen presence of less attractive but utilitarian alleys behind the homes and stores. 

As an illustration, Exhibit 169 shows an “Opportunity Site” from a workshop presentation in the 

Riverside Gateway project in Roseville. 

Exhibit 169: Riverside Gateway Opportunity Site 

Two potential development scenarios are shown in Exhibit 170. The two scenarios do not explicitly 

contemplate truck access to the grocery store or the five retail establishments. Trucks 

delivering to these commercial establishments or hauling away refuse would be commingled 

with autos in the parking lot or parked on the street–a problem endemic with “strip mal” developments. 


Page 206

Exhibit 170: Opportunity Site Development Scenarios 

In contrast, the older commercial buildings immediately north of the Opportunity Site (Exhibit 

171) are served by an alley, and need not accept truck deliveries through the front door. Coincidently, 

Rainer Alley shown in Exhibit 171 connects to the parking lot shown in Exhibit 170 

(marked with arrow). 


Page 207

Exhibit 171: Alley Access to Older Buildings 

The potential attractions of compact and mixed use developments are illustrated in Exhibit 172, 

taken from another workshop presentation. 

Exhibit 172: Mixed Use Developments 

The increase in floor area ratios from 0.2 to 0.5 provides a strong profit and tax incentive, but 

also requires an increase in structured parking (e.g. multi-level parking structures) from 60% to 


Page 208

90% of the total and a reduction from 3.5 to 2.25 per thousand square feet. The goods movement 

question is whether the truck access needs of such a development for deliveries, services, and 

waste removal can still be met without spilling over into the street. The supporting land uses for 

transit-oriented development shown in Exhibit 173 raise the same question. 

Exhibit 173: Supporting Land Uses for Transit-Oriented Development 

There are many other possible examples to illustrate the potential for goods movement considerations 

to frustrate the Smart Growth goals of the Blueprint if not given early attention in the 

planning process. 

The desire of both communities and planners to make maximum use of existing assets and infill 

opportunities as an alternative to suburban sprawl is one area in which goods movement improvements 

and Smart Growth can be mutually supporting. The vitality of legacy urban 

neighborhoods depends in part on access, as few commercial establishments can survive on just 

neighborhood patronage. Wherever improvements to truck access and circulation can free up capacity 

for pedestrian and passenger mobility, everybody wins. The goal should not be to keep 

trucks out, but to keep trucks out of the way. 

One challenge to the Blueprint process is to insure that the anticipated development types and 

projects are truly complete, in the sense of accommodating goods movement requirements 

(chiefly truck access) without either frustrating the Smart Growth objectives or creating undesirable 

spillover effects. The key steps taken to meet this challenge could include: 

 

 

Locating the best available information on the goods movement needs of development 

types under consideration, and best practices in planning and mitigation. 

Verifying the applicability and relevance of standards or practices through local observations 

and case studies. 


Page 209

Reviewing Blueprint scenarios and planning principles to establish their compatibility 

with goods movement requirements or identify any necessary refinements or 

adjustments. 

Institutionalizing goods movement considerations in future Blueprint efforts. 

To the extent that these challenges can be met, the Blueprint process offers a golden opportunity 

to meld the functional needs for goods movement with the Smart Growth aspirations of the region 

and its communities. 

Reinvestment vs. Greenfield Developments 

The Blueprint scenarios make a distinction between “reinvestment” development at infil or 

“brownfield” sites and new “greenfield” developments on vacant land. The two types of development, 

while not always perfectly distinct, present different goods movement planning questions. 

Reinvestment development raises issues of retrofit and mitigation. If the land is changing uses or 

moving from less intensive to compact planning uses, the preexisting goods movement access is 

unlikely to suit the new requirements. 

 

 

One classic example is replacing a group of small retail and service establishments 

with a single“big box” home improvement center. The older, smaler stores would 

have received small lots of goods in small trucks, where as the home improvement 

center wil move much more merchandise and receive it in 53’ semis. 

Another, less obvious example is replacing small stores and offices with a high-rise 

office building. Although the office building tenants may not ship any freight, their 

combined appetite for office supplies, coffee, furniture, and office machines, and 

daily deliveries from FedEx, UPS, and DHL, will keep a constant supply of trucks 

parked around the building. 

The single largest problem is that as buildings grow higher the streets stay the same width. The 

only way that an urban area can support more intensive land uses is to build truck access and 

parking into each development plan. 

Greenfield developments present fewer barriers to be overcome but usually treat goods movement 

as an afterthought. The implications of design standards, zoning requirements, setbacks, 

floor area ratios, and other planning variables for goods movement are not well documented or 

standardized. Regional planners may have to research applicable standards and planning practices 

to insure that greenfield development plans do not inadvertently create avoidable goods 

movement problems. 

Goods Movement as a Planning Category 

The Blueprint planning process divides developed land uses into residential versus employment 

types, and divides the employment types into retail, office, industrial, and public. Private transportation 

facilities such as truck terminals, truck parking lots, rail yards, truck stops, and ancil- 


Page 210

lary businesses are generally classified as industrial. Distribution centers, warehouses, and transloading 

facilities would likewise be classified as industrial. 

There may be a useful purpose in considering transportation and distribution facilities as a distinct 

land use type for planning. A review of the truck trip generation rates of the kinds of facilities 

in the SACOG region may disclose a wide range of goods movement impacts that should be 

distinguished in the planning process. The Institute of Transportation Engineering (ITE) trip generation 

factors would be a good starting point but those factors should be verified in contacts 

with local stakeholders. 

Commonality of Passenger and Goods Movement Needs 

The extensive traffic and transportation modeling efforts that have been incorporated in the 

Blueprint process have been focused on passenger needs but have implications for goods movement 

as well. 

As congestion increases both passengers and trucks are affected by delay and uncertainty. Planning 

and land use policies that reduce long-term congestion and increase passenger mobility ordinarily 

benefit trucks and goods movement in the same way. The long list of transportation projects 

in the Blueprint scenarios contain many that will benefit trucks as well as cars. Transit improvements 

would have indirect good movement benefits to the extent that they divert trips from 

streets and highways. 

Both autos and trucks attempt to cope with growing congestion and unreliability by choosing alternate 

routes and shifting the time of their trip. A key distinction is that the origin, destination, 

and timing of a freight movement are ordinarily fixed within narrow bounds. A trucker with a 

load to deliver to a given store on a given day does not have the option of going to a different 

store or waiting until the weekend. The ability of shippers and consignees to shift business to 

early morning and evening hours should be explored but is inherently limited. 

There may be a need to supplement the travel demand modeling incorporated in the Blueprint 

process with coordinated or parallel modeling of truck movements based on commodity flows 

and local trip patterns resulting from land use decisions. Major truck flow modeling efforts have 

been undertaken by the Fresno Council of Governments, the Southern California Association of 

Governments, and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority in California, 

and by major cities and other jurisdictions worldwide. 

Location Options 

Planning is the art of tradeoffs, and the need for well-informed tradeoffs is very clear in the relationship 

between goods movement and other elements by the Blueprint. 

The goods movement activity of primary importance to the Blueprint process is that generated by 

the production and consumption of the region itself. In considering these implications and recent 

trends in land use and market-driven location decisions, SACOG and other stakeholders in the 

region may need to consider alternatives to support the retention of goods movement activities in 


Page 211

the region. There are two fundamental approaches to promoting the coexistence of urban development 

and urban goods movement. 

Urban hubs with urban line-haul access 

Placing a truck service hub in the urban setting should, theoretically, minimize the total VMT 

required to meet urban goods movement needs. The hub would require efficient access for larger 

line-haul trucks (semis) and would perform local pickup and delivery with smaller trucks. 14 There 

are two basic drawbacks to this approach. 

 

 

Compatibility of trucking hubs with urban development. In terms of land cost, 

environmental issues, esthetics, and localized congestion, trucking hubs are 

unlikely to be acceptable in or near commercial and residential areas in an urban 

setting. 

Ability to capture significant trucking activity. Urban settings require service 

from many different kinds of trucks and trucking operations, some daily and some 

annually. A large portion of the urban truck trips are made by private fleets that do 

not have trucking fleet locations separate from their production or distribution centers. 

Planners would likely find that urban trucking hubs would accommodate only 

a minority of the trucking operations. 

It is perhaps instructive that over the previous decades the trend has moved away from this approach.Trucking 

operations that were located “downtown” have generaly moved out to the periphery. 

Peripheral hubs with urban delivery access 

The status quo is peripheral hubs, with pickups and deliveries made in smaller vehicles where 

possible. This approach allows for more compatible adjacent land uses and minimizes the intrusion 

of semis into the urban setting. The urban delivery access, however, is often inadequate. As 

described in the Case Studies, goods movement into and out of the urban area is awkward at best, 

with a mix of unanticipated truck types attempting to negotiate legacy streets and loading areas. 

The status quo is not without its challenges. As noted above the tradeoff for locating logistics 

facilities in more compatible, lower cost areas may be more total VMT if one trip to the urban 

core is replaced by several trips in smaller trucks. 

The development of peripheral hubs is also consistent with the regional nature of commercial 

trucking. An LTL trucking facility in West Sacramento is serving much of the SACOG region, 

not just urban Sacramento. If the same hub were placed within the urban core, trips to Woodland 

or Rocklin would have to travel in and out. The same considerations apply to private distribution 

centers and their delivery fleets. 

14 

. One variation on this approach is the use of large trucks with roll-up doors as mobile distribution hubs by UPS. 

A multi-door semi trailer is loaded with parcels bound for urban delivery and meets the local delivery trucks in a 

parking lot. The local trucks deliver the parcels and return to the semi with outbound parcels. 


Page 212

Corridor Strategy 

A corridor strategy might be regarded as a compromise. The maps in Exhibit 174 and Exhibit 

175 clearly show the tendency of trucking firms to locate along major highway corridors. Land 

use policies that reserved space adjacent to freeways for logistics-related uses would effectively 

create corridors of “periphery” through the region. 

Exhibit 174: I80 Trucking Cluster 


Page 213

Exhibit 175: US50 Trucking Cluster 

Recent confirmation of the health risks associated with diesel particulates and other vehicles 

emissions and longstanding concerns over noise provide two additional reasons to consider creation 

of industrial preserves or enclaves along freeways instead of allowing residential or commercial 

uses. 


Page 214

XIV. Next Steps 

Phase 2 of the Goods Movement Study is intended to be an analytic exploration of problems, options, 

and scenarios for the SACOG region. In Phase 2, the study will need to delve deeper into 

the major goods movement issues identified in Phase 1. Phase 3 will then lay out policies and 

action plans. 

Urban truck movements. It is clear from the survey results and the study team’s observations 

that the most troublesome aspect of goods movement is the difficulty of moving trucks into, out 

of, and through the urbanized part of the region. This problem is manifest as pavement deterioration, 

traffic tie-ups, noise, air quality, congestion, neighborhood incursion, and truck parking 

problems. The problem is most acute in the older, denser areas with legacy infrastructure. The 

challenge will be to understand the problem in detail, identify best mitigation practices, and custom 

tailor solutions for SACOG communities. 

Planning for goods movement. Freight transportation is not ordinarily part of the urban planning 

curriculum and is an afterthought at best in most planning efforts. Whether the issue is 

truck routes, rail corridors, or flight paths, there is a pressing need to incorporate goods movement 

issues into future regional planning efforts. 

Land use tradeoffs. As noted in the report the current pattern is for goods movement facilities– 

trucking fleets, DCs–to locate farther from the urban core in search of low-cost land and freedom 

from restrictions. While this tendency is thought to increase total truck VMT, there is a 

clear need for data collection and modeling to verify and inform the tradeoffs being made. If a 

land use plan opens up former industrial sites to residential and commercial development, what 

is the net impact on passenger and freight VMT and emissions? While the report offers some 

general suggestions regarding the circumstances under which peripheral locations would be preferable, 

more work is clearly needed to investigate local and regional circumstances. 

Coexistence with rail freight growth. SACOG and its member jurisdictions have little influence 

over the location and use of rail lines. Union Pacific, BNSF, and Sierra Northern will continue 

to solicit desirable freight and move it as efficiently and expeditiously as possible within 

their own systems. Mitigating community impacts, particularly at grade crossings, will require 

cooperation between the railroads and the affected jurisdictions. There is an excellent model for 

a regional grade separation improvement plan in the Seattle area FAST corridor project. 

Development of logistics businesses. Some logistics businesses are already located in the 

SACOG region and others will be attracted by local market growth, highway and rail access, and 

strategic location. The question facing the region is whether to seek and encourage logisticsbased 

economic development. The rewards are good entry-level jobs with attractive compensation 

and opportunities for advancement. The costs are additional freight movements not required 

by local production or consumption. 

Port of Sacramento’s future.The Port of Sacramento is at a crossroads. Previous staple commodity 

movements have diminished and neighboring land uses are less and less compatible with 

marine cargo operations. At the same time, the Port has a new governing body and a new strate- 


Page 215

gic alliance with the Port of Oakland intended to usher in an era of growth. At issue is the potential 

strategic and economic value of the Port to the region and the kind of cargo growth that 

might be expected under the new regime. 

Air cargo growth. For a variety of reasons discussed in the report air cargo growth at SMF and 

MBR has been uneven, and slower than previously expected. At a minimum, it may be time for 

new detailed forecasts and revised strategic plans to match the region’s aims with curent and 

expected industry conditions. 

Data and information collection. In dealing with all of these issues SACOG and other regional 

policy makers in transportation and land use would be well served by targeted efforts to fill data 

gaps and provide a stronger foundation for analysis. A data and information collection strategy 

could be linked to specific concerns of member jurisdictions and the requirements of modeling 

efforts in Phase 2. 


Page 216

Appendix A: Goods Movement Stakeholders 

Private Sector Stakeholders 

The lists presented here are a starting point for identifying the full potential range of parties with 

a vital interest in goods movement and goods movement policy. In one sense virtually every 

commercial firm buying or selling goods has an interest in goods movement, and many such 

firms will respond to issue in their immediate neighborhoods, just as the same firms have an interest 

in passenger transportation issues that affect their clientele. The list here present private 

sector transportation carriers and other transportation-related organizations that were located in 

the course of this study. (Note that some firms are listed in more than one category.) These firms 

can be expected to have an interest in region-wide goods movement, although that interest will 

differ dramatically by issue and location. 

Exhibit 176: Partial List of SACOG Region Trucking Firms 

Trucking Firms 

Company Address City 

A & J Transport 1444 L St Rio Linda 

A Better Moving & Storage Co 6640 Fair Oaks Blvd Carmichael 

A C Freight Systems Inc 850 F St Broderick 

A M & S Trucking Co 60 Main Ave Sacramento 

A Wright's Hauling 331 Santiago Ave Sacramento 

A-1 Construction Equipment Svc 2816 Ostrom Rd Marysville 

AAA Always Available Able Hlng PO Box 231416 Sacramento 

Aalum Hauling 3404 Hanks St Sacramento 

Abf Freight System Inc 3250 47th Ave Sacramento 

Adams Marketing 7301 John Galt Way Arbuckle 

Adams Schwab & Adams Woodland 1020 East St Woodland 

Advance Disposal Inc 1407 J St Sacramento 

Ag4 Trucking 2990 N Township Rd Yuba City 

Akal Trucking 15 Sandpointe Ct Sacramento 

Al Maldonado Trucking 4851 Barkwood Ln Shingle Springs 

Al Thomas Trucking 19555 N Highway 99 Acampo 

Alarm Trucking Co 5808 15th Ave Sacramento 

All Star Movers Llc 3167 Fitzgerald Rd Rancho Cordova 

All Valley Deisel 8794 Fruitridge Rd Sacramento 

Allan Farmer Trucking 1015 Airport Rd # C Rio Vista 

Allen Faris Trucking 1929 Auburn Blvd Sacramento 

Alliance Traffic Group 8331 Valdez Ave Sacramento 

Allstate Trucking Co 3 Main St Woodland 

Almer Trucking 10980 Shambeao Way Elk Grove 

Ambac Equipment Co 1960 Colusa Williams Hwy Colusa 

American Distribution 6400 Belleau Wood Ln # 8 Sacramento 

American Transportation Tech 9944 Mills Station Rd Sacramento 

Amistad Freight Svc 14153 Market St Walnut Grove 

Anderson Trucking Svc Inc 5644 Verner Oak Ct Sacramento 

Andy Rocha Trucking 10630 Simmerhorn Rd Galt 


Page 217



Anglen Hauling 7251 Bonita Way Citrus Heights 

Ann Transport 3801 Tavi Ave North Highlands 

Anp Trucking 2525 L St # 120 Sacramento 

Anthony Enterprises 9920 Zion Way Sacramento 

Antonini Enterprises 1258 Obanion Rd Yuba City 

Applegate Drayage 8350 Fruitridge Rd # 1 Sacramento 

Archibald & Sons Trucking 2689 Plute Rd Marysville 

Arlan L Daniel Trucking 24930 State Highway 49 Auburn 

Around Zero Co 7252 Roca Way Sacramento 

Ascom Transport Systems Inc 6736 Earhart Dr Sacramento 

Atwal Trucking 9013 Tillander Way Elk Grove 

B & T Trucking Inc 1550 S River Rd West Sacramento 

B G Transport Inc 7891 Stockton Blvd Sacramento 

Baldoni Transport Co 10505 Ophir Rd Auburn 

Baldwin Trucking Inc 595 East St Woodland 

Bap Logistics 1643 Spring Valley Dam Ln Colfax 

Basra Trucking 9444 Harbour Point Dr # 204 Elk Grove 

Basra Trucking Inc 1104 Oswald Rd Yuba City 

Bbds 2934 Ramco St # 130 West Sacramento 

Beeline Transportation 10140 Freeman Rd Elk Grove 

Beeline Transportation 8900 Elder Creek Rd Sacramento 

Beets Trucking 771 El Centro Blvd # A Rio Oso 

Berkfield Auto Transport 7324 Bradshaw Rd Sacramento 

Bernie Gorman Jr Trucking Co 12849 Gorman Ln Woodland 

Bertolini Trucking Inc 3742 N Beale Rd # A Marysville 

Bettencourt Transport 4500 Yankee Hill Ct Rocklin 

Bettendorf Trucking 1445 Highway 65 Lincoln 

Bhathal Bros Trucking 8368 Mcgray Way Elk Grove 

Big June & Son Trucking 5097 40th St Sacramento 

Bill Amarel Trucking Inc 2260 Oswald Rd Yuba City 

Blacksea 6239 Riverside Blvd # 4 Sacramento 

Blain Stumpf Rock Sand 5561 Davidson Rd Placerville 

Blain Stumpf Rock Sand & Grvl PO Box 231 Shingle Springs 

Bm&m & H Trucking 19405 Foresthill Rd Foresthill 

Bob Kramer Trucking 9512 Dillard Rd Wilton 

Boblitt Trucking 8449 Ranchita Way Fair Oaks 

Bob's Trucking Inc 6059 Bradshaw Rd Sacramento 

Bola Transport 8557 Sunnybrae Dr Sacramento 

Bo's Trucking 813 Jessie Ave Sacramento 

Brian Cecil Lowbed Svc 25200 County Road 96 Davis 

Briggs Trucking 9010 Langs Hill Rd Newcastle 

Bud-Line Trucking Inc 6501 Florin Perkins Rd Sacramento 

Burns Trucking 870 Forbes Ave Yuba City 

Butte Sand & Gravel 10373 S Butte Rd Sutter 

C & C Equipment Transport Inc PO Box 340202 Sacramento 

C & C Removal & Cleaning Svc 3709 Broadway Sacramento 

C & D Trucking 3491 W Highway 12 Burson 

C C Castor Trucking 10831 El Arroyo Rd Elk Grove 

C H Robinson Worldwide Inc 1020 Sun Down Way Roseville 


Page 218



C J Trucking 8299 Primoak Way Elk Grove 

C Jackson Trucking 155 John Henry Cir Folsom 

C L Smith Trucking 37763 State Highway 16 Woodland 

Ca Alliance-Advanced Transport 980 9th St Sacramento 

California Distribution Ctr 2080 Enterprise Blvd West Sacramento 

Capital Express Lines 517 Foxford Glen Ct Roseville 

Capitol Crating 6945 Power Inn Rd Sacramento 

Cardoza Trucking 8641 Oldwoods Way Sacramento 

Cargo Net Transportation Inc 859 F St West Sacramento 

Cecchini Trucking Co 9846 Whiskey Slough Rd Holt 

Cencal Express Trucking Inc PO Box 793 Linden 

Central Freight Lines 1621 Main Ave Sacramento 

Central Transport Intl & Truck 3610 52nd Ave Sacramento 

Ces New Star Inc 9001 Foothills Blvd # 170 Roseville 

Cfr Trucking 3235 Mission Ave Carmichael 

Cgl Freight Solutions 4661 Pell Dr Sacramento 

Chavarin Trucking 4920 Carey Rd Sacramento 

Chavarria Trucking 463 U St Rio Linda 

Clark Trucking Svc Inc 2000 S River Rd West Sacramento 

Clutch Cargo 5536 Feather River Blvd Marysville 

Commercial Container Corp 6640 Fair Oaks Blvd Carmichael 

Contract Transportation Svc 1091 Tinker Rd # 300 Rocklin 

Con-Way Western Express 3516 Kiessig Ave Sacramento 

Craters & Freighters 2441 Front St West Sacramento 

Cruz Trucking 38180 Jefferson Blvd Clarksburg 

Cryogenic Transportation Inc 2000 E Main St # B Woodland 

Crystal Creek Farms Inc 3341 River Rd Colusa 

D & H Transport 586 Franklin Ave Yuba City 

D & H Transport-Ag Hauling PO Box 551 Yuba City 

D & H Trucking 8420 Elder Creek Rd Sacramento 

D & L Cargo 6281 Treosti Pl Valley Springs 

D & M Transport 7837 Wintergreen Dr Citrus Heights 

D & P Transport 3371 64th St Sacramento 

D & S Trucking 680 Sutter St Yuba City 

D C Transport Inc 4725 Kelton Way # A Sacramento 

D C Transportation 4321 Madison Ave Sacramento 

D J Blohm 4051 Stage Ct Placerville 

D J Blohm Trucking 5080 Cayuga Rd Pollock Pines 

D S Trucking 2240 Coroval Dr Sacramento 

Dan Dukes Trucking Inc 1350 Vinci Ave Sacramento 

Darnell's Trucking 8745 Spruce Ridge Way Antelope 

Dawn's Transport 1300 National Dr # 120 Sacramento 

Dbt Dulay Brother Trucking 8809 Caselman Rd Sacramento 

Delta Materials 8979 Elk Grove Florin Rd Elk Grove 

Delta Transport 1010 Twin Cities Rd Walnut Grove 

Delta Transport 14153 Market St Walnut Grove 

Demello Transport 1250 Market St Yuba City 

Dependable Highway Express 6101 Sky Creek Dr Sacramento 

Devine & Peters Intermodal 3870 Channel Dr West Sacramento 


Page 219



Dhami Truck Plaza 7891 Stockton Blvd Sacramento 

Diamond T Transfer Svc 5640 Maric Rd El Dorado 

Direct Shot Water Truck Svc 2425 39th Ave Sacramento 

Djs Trucking 7887 Westbank Ct Sacramento 

Don Robinson Sand & Gravel Inc 2145 Grass Valley Hwy Auburn 

Dora Trucking 3529 Granby Dr Sacramento 

Double B Trucking 640 Glen Oak Ct Folsom 

Double M Trucking 710 Dutton St Winters 

Doug Koebel Trucking 37277 State Highway 16 Woodland 

Douglas Jackson Trucking 9942 Rio Vista Ct Sacramento 

Driver Leasing By Right Drctn 3838 Watt Ave # D404 Sacramento 

Durand Trucking 122 Copper Leaf Way Sacramento 

E & J Trucking Inc 6836 Marabou Ct Sacramento 

Eagle US Air Freight 4040 Vista Park Ct Sacramento 

Envision Trucking 3800 W Capitol Ave West Sacramento 

Evans Transport Co 5617 Rosedale Way Sacramento 

Evans Transportation 9266 N Butte Rd Live Oak 

Evergreen Forwarding Inc 910 Florin Rd # 203 Sacramento 

Express Southwest 8251 Galena Ave Sacramento 

Fedex Freight West 1820 Parkway Blvd West Sacramento 

Fiveway Industries Llc 3339 N Township Rd Yuba City 

Flapjack Intermodal 3320 State Highway 49 Cool 

Foothills Transportation Inc 117 W Main St Woodland 

Forward Air Inc 1020 Striker Ave # 160 Sacramento 

Fredericksen Tank Line 850 Delta Ln West Sacramento 

G & S Transportation 4353 Lakebreeze Dr Rocklin 

G & T Trucking 6379 Lochinvar Way Sacramento 

G I Trucking Co 8233 Belvedere Ave Sacramento 

G R Trucking 12548 White Rock Rd Rancho Cordova 

G R Trucking 5460 Parkford Cir Granite Bay 

Garcia Bros Trucking 50285 Clarksburg Rd Clarksburg 

Gary Beebe Industries Inc 500 Wise Rd Lincoln 

Gary Brusseau Trucking 6706 Fricot City Rd San Andreas 

Geo Logistics Americas Inc 2975 Oates St West Sacramento 

Geraci Transportation Svc 460 Roseville Rd Roseville 

Glc Trucking 8565 Weyand Ave Sacramento 

Gold Line Express 6 Eaton Ct Woodland 

Gold Line Express Inc 216 N East St Woodland 

Gold River Transport 5815 18th Ave Sacramento 

Golden Eagle 3620 Golden Eagle Way Sacramento 

Golden State Express 8028 Red Fern Ct Antelope 

Golden Transport 6171 Hesby Way Sacramento 

Grace Trucking 11802 Ivie Acres Ln Herald 

Grant Cooper Equipment 17027 S Grafton St Esparto 

Gregory Water Systems PO Box 1588 Elk Grove 

Guerrero Trucking 2421 Sammy Ct Rescue 

Gurmel's Trucking Inc 8132 Elsie Ave Sacramento 

Guzman's Trucking 4924 Baker Ave Sacramento 

H Miller Trucking 6561 Dantoni Rd Marysville 


Page 220



Harding's Hauling 6382 Horseshoe Bar Rd Loomis 

Harlow Recovery Inc 6000 Midway St # E Sacramento 

Harry L Johnson & Morjon Trckg 941 Barry Rd Yuba City 

Hartill Lowbed Svc PO Box 762 Arbuckle 

Hartsell Trucking Inc 3422 51st Ave Sacramento 

Harvey A Winje Trucking 776 Cold Springs Rd Placerville 

Hemi Express 1754 Enterprise Blvd West Sacramento 

Hendrickson Trucking 7080 Florin Perkins Rd Sacramento 

Henry's Enterprises 3113 La Desa Way Newcastle 

Herrick Transportation 6435 Wexford Cir Citrus Heights 

Inter-City Inc 9297 Gerber Rd Sacramento 

Interstate Distributor Inc 1400 Churchill Downs Ave Woodland 

Iop Trucking 263 Selby Ranch Rd # 8 Sacramento 

Ira Lines 600 Galveston St West Sacramento 

Ivey Joe's Trucking 1824 3rd Ave Sacramento 

Ivey Jo's Trucking 6936 Romanzo Way Elk Grove 

J & Lil' V's Small Hauling Svc 7130 5th Park Way Sacramento 

J & S Trucking 117 Otto Cir Sacramento 

J O Transport 5842 Vista Ave Sacramento 

Jack's Sand & Gravel 6870 English Colony Way Penryn 

Jackson & Son Trucking 2171 Monifieth Way Sacramento 

Jacobs Hauling 3925 41st Ave Sacramento 

James M Soares Trucking Inc 5121 Hedge Ave Sacramento 

Jim Doherty Trucking 9765 Elder Creek Rd Sacramento 

Jim's Hauling PO Box 1473 Rocklin 

Jody's Water Transport 24075 County Road 22 Esparto 

John H Foster Trucking 1957 E Main St Woodland 

Jon Yourd Trucking 22350 Foresthill Rd Foresthill 

Jones Motor Group 9337 Rolling Glen Ct Orangevale 

Jsg Trucking Co Inc 19400 N Highway 99 Acampo 

K & M Bark & Sawdust Inc 39800 Kentucky Ave Woodland 

Keith Trucking 9223 Suede Hill Ct Orangevale 

Keller Trucking 7504 Bama Ct Sacramento 

Kellogg Distribution 2063 Idzorek Rd Mcclellan 

Kenefick Trucking 834 Cedar Canyon Cir Galt 

Kenny Prince Trucking 5381 Shangrala Ln Camino 

Kent's Trucking 3400 S Butte Rd Yuba City 

Khanday Dhar Express 7545 Franklin Blvd # 1 Sacramento 

Kings Transport 7547 Franklin Blvd # 2 Sacramento 

Kobierecki Trucking PO Box 757 Cool 

Ktl 520 Houston St West Sacramento 

Ktl 8167 Alpine Ave # B Sacramento 

Laguna Line 4101 Gothberg Ave North Highlands 

Landstar Inway Inc 9001 Foothills Blvd # 170 Roseville 

Landstar Ranger Inc 2531 Sombra Ct Yuba City 

Larry Jenkins Trucking 5545 Merchant Cir Placerville 

Lawson Drayage Inc 9900 Kent St Elk Grove 

Lewis Trucking 1310 3rd St Colusa 

Liddicoat Deed Trucking 2991 Clark St Georgetown 


Page 221



Lotus Intermodel Inc 1521 Main Ave Sacramento 

Lovcen Express 4501 Maryam Ct Fair Oaks 

Lum Bunn & Son 14395 Race Track Rd Walnut Grove 

M & S Trucking 9372 Mira Del Rio Dr Sacramento 

M C Transportation Inc 1710 Main Ave Sacramento 

M Davies Trucking PO Box 611 Rocklin 

M G Richmond Trucking 11671 Walmort Rd Wilton 

M Line Transportation Co PO Box 643 Citrus Heights 

M Mahli Trucking 3730 Bilsted Way Sacramento 

M S Carrier 7447 Power Inn Rd # B Sacramento 

Maan Trucking 9857 Novara Way Elk Grove 

Major R Express 8185 La Almendra Way Sacramento 

Manica Brink Trucking PO Box 77487 Sacramento 

Manley & Sons Trucking 8896 Elder Creek Rd Sacramento 

Manley & Sons Trucking Inc 6516 Mattos Ln Sacramento 

Martin Trucking 9056 Robbins Rd Sacramento 

Martin Trucking 9765 Elder Creek Rd Sacramento 

Marvins Transport 7009 Flanders Way Sacramento 

Matheson Fast Freight 9780 Dino Dr Elk Grove 

Matheson Mail Transportation 10519 E Stockton Blvd Elk Grove 

Matheson Postal Svc Inc 455 Bannon St Sacramento 

Mc Kinors Tough Trucking 8501 Center Pkwy Sacramento 

Mc Laughlin Draying Co 2080 Enterprise Blvd West Sacramento 

Mc Laughlin Draying Co 8311 Valdez Ave # 300 Sacramento 

Mc Lean Towing & Transport 7425 Lindale Dr Sacramento 

Mc Pherson Robert 6661 School St Georgetown 

Mello Reload 1470 E Kentucky Ave Woodland 

Mike's Hauling 4125 Freeman Cir Auburn 

Mike's Hauling 9120 Feather River Way Sacramento 

Military Associated Truck Svc 8793 Los Encantos Cir Elk Grove 

Minoan Lines 8360 Lake Forest Dr Sacramento 

Mlt Transportations 7475 E Woodbridge Rd Acampo 

Montana Express 8900 Elder Creek Rd Sacramento 

Montero Trucking 1336 State Highway 174 Colfax 

Morning Star Co 724 Main St Woodland 

Morning Star Trucking Co 896 Obanion Rd Yuba City 

Morton Excavating & Demolition 5101 Lemon Hill Ave Sacramento 

Mother Lode Tractor & Till 5342 Coyote Pass Rd Shingle Springs 

Motivated Transportation Dynmc 1935 Industrial Dr Auburn 

Mpl Trucking 23800 Grey Partridge Ln Auburn 

Myers Heavy Hauling 9892 Buena Vista Dr Marysville 

Myers Heavy Hauling Shop 1415 N Beale Rd Marysville 

Network Delivery System 1700 Enterprise Blvd West Sacramento 

Newman Trucking 1500 Gladding Rd Lincoln 

Newman Trucking 1555 Virginiatown Rd Lincoln 

Nolan's Backhoe Svc 7128 English Colony Way Penryn 

Northern Carriers Inc 552 N Palora Ave Yuba City 

Nrv Carriers 8845 Shasta Lily Dr Elk Grove 

O K Trucking 1321 Harter Rd Yuba City 


Page 222



Oak Harbor Freight Lines 900 F St Broderick 

Old Dominion Freight Line Inc 3440 52nd Ave Sacramento 

Over The Hill Transport 6801 Garden Hwy Sacramento 

Overnite Transportation Co 900 F St West Sacramento 

Owen George Trucking 11135 Alta Mesa Rd Wilton 

Ozark Trucking 1025 Joellis Way Sacramento 

P Trucking 4769 Heatherbrae Cir Sacramento 

Pacer International 1401 Parkway Blvd West Sacramento 

Pacific West 5721 Manzanita Ln Coloma 

Panella Trucking Inc 21 Pioneer Ave Woodland 

Patco Trucking Inc PO Box 278208 Sacramento 

Patron Trucking Inc-Wilson 4645 Raley Blvd Sacramento 

Paul E Vaz Trucking 4740 E Peltier Rd Acampo 

Paul Graham Drilling & Svc Co 680 River Rd Rio Vista 

Paul Graham Trucking 2522 Airport Rd Rio Vista 

Paul R Stevenson-Trucking 2865 Oswald Rd Yuba City 

Pegasus Logistic Systems 2856 La Loma Dr # 50 Rancho Cordova 

Peter Dittmer Trucking 22817 Foresthill Rd Foresthill 

Phacoweeat Trucking 7212 Diana Way Sacramento 

Pmr Trucking 3112 Banff Ct Antelope 

Ponderosa Farms Inc 8051 Rio Linda Blvd Elverta 

Popular Trucking 7441 Power Inn Rd # A Sacramento 

Prefling Transportation 4089 Camanche Pkwy N Ione 

Priority Transport 9664 Harvest View Way Sacramento 

Pug'z Towing 8555 Florin Rd # B Sacramento 

Quality Freight Inc 3420 Coach Ln # 7 Cameron Park 

R & E Rios Trucking 13 Ramon Dr Galt 

R & G Tractor Svc 2540 Sierra Vista Rd Rescue 

R & R Trucking 8083 Lexus Way Sacramento 

R B Trucking 11070 Hirschfeld Way # 53 Rancho Cordova 

R C & Sons Trucking 12991 County Road 102 Woodland 

R C Transportation 8420 Silver Run Way Antelope 

R W Trucking 10704 Beclan Dr Rancho Cordova 

Rapid Freight Inc 830 Professor Ln Sacramento 

Rath Trucking 8201 Demetre Ave Sacramento 

Rausser Brothers Trucking Inc 12000 Liberty Rd Galt 

Rci Transport 520 Houston St West Sacramento 

Richardson Trucking 11757 Hobday Rd Wilton 

Rikkatrans Express 6632 Hometown Way Sacramento 

Rio Linda Usd 6619 6th Ave Rio Linda 

Roadway Express Inc 4200 W Capitol Ave West Sacramento 

Rod Transport 3800 W Capitol Ave West Sacramento 

Rod Trucking Inc 2848 American Ave Sacramento 

Rodi Enterprises 3950 Mack Rd Sacramento 

Romex Transport 9960 Phoenician Way Sacramento 

Ron Martel Equipment Transport 2546 Riego Rd Pleasant Grove 

Rossen Trucking 5513 Chestnut Rd Marysville 

Roy E Lay Trucking 1218 E Kentucky Ave Woodland 

Roy Miller Freight Lines Inc 8740 Younger Creek Dr Sacramento 


Page 223



Royalty Auto Transport 7236 Greenhaven Dr # 107 Sacramento 

Rushway Inc 9990 Hillview Rd Newcastle 

S & M Trucking 8924 Napa Valley Way Sacramento 

S & S Trucking 3932 Talmage Ct Sacramento 

S D Trans Inc 9490 Rhone Valley Way Elk Grove 

S Malhi Trucking 8811 Boysenberry Way Elk Grove 

S R Tow & Transport 5030 Walnut Ave # 9 Sacramento 

Sagara Trucking Inc 88 Pioneer Ave Woodland 

Saia Motor Freight Line Inc 1745 Cebrian St West Sacramento 

Sam's Combo 701 Plaza Ave # 37 Sacramento 

Saunders & Sons Trucking 9441 Mereoak Cir Elk Grove 

Scandia Trucking 1437 Furneaux Rd Marysville 

Scarberry Trucking 2650 Ivy St Live Oak 

Schneegas Trucking 3711 Norris Ave Sacramento 

Schneider National 3851 Channel Dr West Sacramento 

Scott House Movers 7029 32nd St North Highlands 

Scott Zellers Trucking 14890 Sky High Dr Glencoe 

Service Express Transportation 221 W Court St # 4 Woodland 

Sierra Detroit Diesel 855 Stillwater Rd Broderick 

Sierra Landscaping Material 5850 Mother Lode Dr Placerville 

Silver Springs Express Inc 5902 Brace Rd Loomis 

Simple Freight 739 Hunter Pl Folsom 

Sisemore Trucking 18 Hiller Ct Woodland 

Sisemore Trucking 801 East St Woodland 

Sos Trucking 1856 Olvera Dr Woodland 

Sos Trucking II 38520 Kentucky Ave Woodland 

Spna Dedicated X Press 852 Northport Dr # 101 West Sacramento 

Squeaky Clean Enterprises 1305 Crane Dr Suisun City 

Ssb Trucking 9012 Kilar Ct Elk Grove 

Stan's Trucking 1633 I St Rio Linda 

Steven C Williams Trucking 3950 Mack Rd # 161 Sacramento 

Still & Son's Truck Repair 2990 N Township Rd Yuba City 

Stow It & U Haul Of Woodland 1319 E Beamer St Woodland 

Sullivan Enterpirses 7014 Chesline Dr Fair Oaks 

Sutter Sand & Gravel Inc 1459 Market St Yuba City 

Taj Express 1831 Tracy Dr Yuba City 

Tamber Trucking 1807 Genoa Ct Yuba City 

Taylor Heavy Hauling 8620 Antelope North Rd # A Antelope 

Team Royal Express 551 Sutter Ave West Sacramento 

Technical Transportation 2975 Oates St # 20 West Sacramento 

Teg Express 10114 Clairina Way Elk Grove 

Terrance Riley Trucking 171 Livermore Way Folsom 

Three River Trucking 618 Galveston St West Sacramento 

Tim A Manley Trucking 9151 Gerber Rd Sacramento 

Tim Manley Trucking 8896 Elder Creek Rd Sacramento 

Tmc Trucking 9276 Los Torres Dr Elk Grove 

Tnt Trucking 1856 Rutherford Ct Yuba City 

Tonka Trucking 4799 24th St Sacramento 

Transcon Lines 10401 Grant Line Rd Elk Grove 


Page 224



Transit Express 8951 Springhurst Dr Elk Grove 

Transnet 2568 Industrial Blvd West Sacramento 

Transport International Pool 601 Harbor Blvd West Sacramento 

Triple Br Trucking 3501 Bradshaw Rd # 7 Sacramento 

Trips 4 Tots 9349 Sierra Spring Way Elk Grove 

Two Rivers Transport PO Box 417790 Sacramento 

United Air & Road Transport 4856 Dalewood Dr El Dorado Hills 

United Brothers Transportation 5982 Alvern Way Sacramento 

United Trucking 2136 Vollan Way Sacramento 

US Xpress Inc 8251 Galena Ave Sacramento 

USA Express 340 Aspen Ct Roseville 

Usf Bestway Inc 830 E St Broderick 

Usf Reddaway Inc 620 Harbor Blvd West Sacramento 

V & I Express 6945 Trailride Way Citrus Heights 

V E Lee Inc Trucking 4580 Greenstone Rd Placerville 

V K Express 8516 Aleksander Ct Sacramento 

Valley Agriculture Trucking 

753 N Geo. Washington 

Blvd 

Yuba City 

Valley Farm Transport 1425 S Township Rd Yuba City 

Valley Select Transport Svc 8029 Chriswoods Ct Sacramento 

Varozza Trucking 7661 S Shingle Rd Shingle Springs 

Ven USA Trucking 3102 Chettenham Dr Rancho Cordova 

Vera Trucking 8795 La Riviera Dr # 41 Sacramento 

Verex 2000 Trading Post Ct Elverta 

Verona Joes Trucking 110 Spinel Cir Sacramento 

V-Man's Trucking 3951 Galbrath Dr North Highlands 

W W Trucking 8148 Holm Oak Way Citrus Heights 

Warren E Gomes Excavating Inc 551 Airport Rd Rio Vista 

Watkins Trucking 9119 Elkmont Dr Elk Grove 

Weimar Auto Wreckers 21300 Canyon Way Weimar 

West Coast Transport 6525 Hitchcock Way Sacramento 

West Coast Transport 8555 Weyand Ave Sacramento 

Western Home Transport Inc 186 Muir Woodland 

Western Transportation Svc 3805 Channel Dr West Sacramento 

Western Turk 5040 Riosa Rd Lincoln 

Western Turk 7036 Meadowlark Ln Sheridan 

Williams Trucking Co 8948 Four Seasons Dr Elk Grove 

Xpress Global Systems Inc 11255 Pyrites Way Gold River 

Yellow Transportation Inc 3210 52nd Ave Sacramento 

Yray Darin & Son Trucking Co 22001 E Copperopolis Rd Linden 

Yuvi Trucking 4001 S Watt Ave # 25 Sacramento 

Zhj2 5429 Verner Ave Sacramento 

Zisk Sand & Gravel 205 Thomas St Roseville 


Page 225

Exhibit 177: SACOG Area LTL Truck Terminals 

LTL Truck Terminals 

Company Addess City 

Central Freight Lines 1621 Main Ave Sacramento 

Con-Way Western Express 3516 Kiessig Ave Sacramento 

Dependable Highway Express 6101 Sky Creek Dr Sacramento 

Fedex Freight West 1820 Parkway Blvd West Sacramento 

Oak Harbor Freight Lines 900 F St Broderick 

Old Dominion Freight Line Inc 3440 52nd Ave Sacramento 

Overnite Transportation Co 900 F St West Sacramento 

Roadway Express Inc 4200 W Capitol Ave West Sacramento 

Saia Motor Freight Line Inc 1745 Cebrian St West Sacramento 

UPS 1380 Shore Blvd West Sacramento 

Watkins Trucking 9119 Elkmont Dr Elk Grove 

Yellow Transportation Inc 3210 52nd Ave Sacramento 

Exhibit 178: SACOG Region Truck Stops (Partial Listing) 

Truck Stop Address City 

Dhami Truck Plaza 7891 Stockton Blvd Sacramento 

Jahant Food & Fuel 24323 N Highway 99 Acampo 

Sacramento 49er Travel Plaza 2828 El Centro Rd Sacramento 

United Petroleum Truck Stop 29770 County Road 8 Dunnigan 

Exhibit 179: SACOG Region “Card Lock” Truck Fueling Stations 

Name Street City 

CFN 1515 S. River Road West Sacramento 

CFN 4790 West Capital Av W. Sacramento 

CFN 4420 Northgate Blvd Sacramento 

CFN 4076 Seaport Blvd. West Sacramento 

CFN 2600 Arden Way Sacramento 

CFN 2549 Marconi Ave. Sacramento 

CFN Florin-Perkins Road Sacramento 

CFN 4250 Madison North Highlands 

CFN 2732 Citrus Road Rancho Cordova 

CFN 8660 Auburn Blvd. Roseville 

Pacific Pride 4200 Roseville Rd. North Highlands 

Pacific Pride 1201 Fee Dr. Sacramento 

Pacific Pride 200 N. 12Th St. Sacramento 

Pacific Pride 4400 Raley Blvd. Sacramento 

Pacific Pride 5800 S. Watt Ave. Sacramento 

Pacific Pride 7001 E. Parkway Sacramento 

Pacific Pride 8221 Alpine Ave. Sacramento 

Pacific Pride 9687 Gore Rd. Sacramento 

Pacific Pride 3022 Evergreen St. West Sacramento 


Page 226

Exhibit 180: SACOG Region Truck Repair and Services 

Name Addess City 

Brookins Equipment Repair 6333 Wagner Ave Arbuckle 

Stewart & Stevenson Power Inc 855 Stillwater Rd Broderick 

Shands Diesel Truck Repair 885 E Lodi Ave Lodi 

Orangevale Diesel Inc 8942 Greenback Ln # H Orangevale 

Pohler Diesel Repair 2900 Mortara Cir Placerville 

Wise Diesel Equipment Repair 4500 Savage Rd Placerville 

Independent Diesel Repair 3395 Luyung Dr # B Rancho Cordova 

Goodyear Truck Tire Retread 141 Commerce Cir Sacramento 

Imler Diseel Performance 2445 Harvard St Sacramento 

Inline Diesel Repair Inc 6430 Freeport Blvd Sacramento 

Marc Becker Fuel Injection 1001 Richards Blvd Sacramento 

Precision Automotive Repair 2850 47th Ave Sacramento 

Tognotti's Auto-Truck World 2509 Fulton Ave Sacramento, CA 

B & R Head & Block Repair 407 Harbor Blvd West Sacramento 

D & D Diesel Repair 528 Harbor Blvd West Sacramento 

Diamond Diesel Svc Inc 2785 Del Monte St # A West Sacramento 

P M Truck Repair 3740 Commerce Dr West Sacramento 

Quality Diesel 2434 Evergreen Ave West Sacramento 

Sacramento Diesel Pump Svc 2479 Rice Ave West Sacramento 

Valley Fuel Injection 1243 E Beamer St Woodland 

Allen Diesel Energy 921 N Geo. Washington # B Yuba City 

Heer's Auto & Diesel 1499 Market St Yuba City 

North Valley Diesel 2800 Live Oak Blvd Yuba City 

Wright's Truck Svc 671 S Industrial Dr Yuba City 


Page 227

Exhibit 181: Firms Described as Warehouses or Distribution Centers 15 


A 1 Budget 1346 Q St Rio Linda 

Adam's 102 Dryer 17900 County Road 102 W oodland 

Adams Schwab & Adams W arehouse Highway 99 & Main St Dunnigan 

Adams Schwab & Adams W oodland 1020 East St W oodland 

All Size Storage 2328 Maritime Dr Elk Grove 

American Distribution 6400 Belleau W ood Ln # 8 Sacramento 

Anchor Boat Storage 14410 Thornton W alnut Grove Rd W alnut Grove 

Apex Global Logistics 2975 Oates St # 20 W est Sacramento 

Bbds 2934 Ramco St # 130 W est Sacramento 

C V Logistics 2741 Riverside Blvd Sacramento 

Cal Family Foods 500 Lurline Ave Colusa 

California Distribution Ctr 2080 Enterprise Blvd W est Sacramento 

California Storage Ctr 1106 Corporate W ay Sacramento 

California Storage Ctr 8392 Power Inn Rd Elk Grove 

Cgl Freight Solutions 4661 Pell Dr Sacramento 

Chrisman Drier 484 B St W illiams 

Colusa Milling Co 2881 Niagara Ave Colusa 

Colusa Rice Co E Main St Colusa 

Continental W arehouse Of Sacra 8760 Younger Creek Dr # B Sacramento 

County Line W hse 1075 County Road 99 W Dunnigan 

De Pue W arehouse Co 5656 Haas Rd W illiams 

De Pue W arehouse Co 5999 Fresh W ater Rd W illiams 

De Pue W arehouse Co 618 E St W illiams 

De Pue W arehouse Co PO Box 490 W illiams 

De Pue W arehouse Co W illiams W arehouse W illiams 

Delta Express Couriers Inc 1631 Enterprise Blvd # 1 W est Sacramento 

Depot Park 16 Business Park W ay Sacramento 

Erdman W arehouse 8661 Ceres Rd Knights Landing 

Foothill W arehouse 2005 Husted Rd W illiams 

Genco Return Ctr Fhi 350 Hanson W ay W oodland 

Georgia-Pacific Corp 1400 Churchill Downs Ave W oodland 

Golden Gate W arehouse Co 4661 Pell Dr # 8 Sacramento 

Golden W est Distribution 8650 23rd Ave Sacramento 

Great W estern Growers Of Ca 6133 Abel Rd W illiams 

Hudson-Shorts Inc 2080 Enterprise Blvd # A W est Sacramento 

Hydra Reload Ctr 2063 Idzorek Rd # 783k Mcclellan 

Hydra Trucking & W arehousing 8670 Younger Creek Dr Sacramento 

Hydra W arehouse Inc 8110 Power Ridge Rd Sacramento 

Hydra W harehousing Corp 6300 S W att Ave Sacramento 

Mc Laughlin Draying Co 8311 Valdez Ave # 300 Sacramento 

Miller Landing W arehouse 8666 Millers Landing Rd Grimes 

Mwd Logistics 4840 Lang Ave Mcclellan 

Neil Service Ctr 5513 Putah Creek Rd W inters 

Oilseeds W arehouse 540 Main St Grimes 

Pacific Gas & Electric Co 3736 Rancho Rd Marysville 

Pacific W arehouse Supply 333 N 7th St Sacramento 

Premier Product Management Inc 8430 Rovana Cir Sacramento 

Rite Aid 1755 E Beamer St W oodland 

Riverside Elevators 14712 State Highway 160 Isleton 

S & W Storage 1423 J St Sacramento 

Safe Store Inc 10234 Spaatz W ay Mather 

Scofield's W arehouse 677 S St Sacramento 

Sierra W est Express 3301 51st Ave Sacramento 

Storage Mobility Of California 4235 Forcum Ave Mcclellan 

Total Service Logistics 8225 Siena Ave Sacramento 

Tyndall Mound W arehouse 37060 County Road 6 Knights Landing 

Vertis 1630 Terminal St W est Sacramento 

W esco Enterprises Co 3235 Monier Cir # 1 Rancho Cordova 

W estern Material Supply 8866 Elder Creek Rd Sacramento 

Z & Z Enterprises Inc 751 Northport Dr W est Sacramento 

15 Note: These are firms who self-described themselves as warehouses or distribution centers in Yahoo! Yellow Pages. These listings do not 

include the very large number of privately owned distribution centers (e.g. owned by a retail chain or a manufacturer) that do not provide service 

to others. 


Page 228

Exhibit 182: Air Cargo & Air Freight Forwarders 


Adams Air Cargo 7301 John Galt Way Arbuckle 

Adams Cartage Inc 932 Mckinley Ave Woodland 

Adcom Express 2509 Del Monte St West Sacramento 

Aero Speed Delivery 4200 Pinell St Sacramento 

Air Switzerland 3845 Atherton Rd Rocklin 

Airwolf Express 473 East Ave Lincoln 

Apex Global Logistics 2975 Oates St # 20 West Sacramento 

Atlas Express Padala 6051 Mack Rd Sacramento 

California Sierra Express Inc 2975 Oates St West Sacramento 

Eagle Global Logistics 4040 Vista Park Ct Sacramento 

Forward Air Inc 1020 Striker Ave # 160 Sacramento 

Geo Logistics Americas Inc 2975 Oates St West Sacramento 

Hi Cargo Handlers 6701 Lindbergh Dr Sacramento 

Lynden Air Freight 2510 Evergreen Ave West Sacramento 

Mad Dog Express Inc 1650 Bell Ave # 100 Sacramento 

Meest 2830 Auburn Blvd # 5 Sacramento 

Mejico Express 12 W Court St Woodland 

Northwest Airlines Inc 6733 Lindbergh Dr Sacramento 

Pilot Air Freight Corp 920 Striker Ave Sacramento 

Southwest Airlines Co 6733 Lindbergh Dr # A Sacramento 

Technical Transportation 2975 Oates St # 20 West Sacramento 

Tricor America Inc 1690 Cebrian St West Sacramento 

Union Flights 3868 Bazley Way Mather 

Unishippers Association 901 Sunrise Ave # B9 Roseville 


Page 229

Exhibit 183: Moving and Storage Companies 

Nam e Address City 

A Best W ay To M ove 2517 C onnie D r Sacram ento 

A Better M oving & Storage Co 2703 D el M onte St W est Sacram ento 

A Better M oving & Storage Co 6640 Fair O aks Blvd Carm ichael 

A Better M oving & Storage Co 826 Professor Ln Sacram ento 

AAA M oving 7518 Pratt Ave Citrus Heights 

Advanced M oving 2855 Ione St Sacram ento 

Advanced M oving 4218 C hildhood C t Shingle Springs 

Affordable M oving & Storage 405 30th St Sacram ento 

All M y Sons M oving & Storage 545 Jefferson Ave Sacram ento 

All M y Sons M oving & Storage 800 E St Broderick 

All Pro M overs 4549 Varsity Ct Sacram ento 

All Star M overs Llc 3167 Fitzgerald R d Rancho C ordova 

Allied Van Lines 2561 G rennan Ct Rancho C ordova 

Allied Van Lines 8451 R ovana Cir # 100 Sacram ento 

Am azing Spa M overs 4991 Valletta W ay Sacram ento 

Am erican R iver Rv & Boat 3667 O m ec Park D r Rancho C ordova 

Anatoliy's M oving 3004 Kinglet W ay Antelope 

Atlas Van Lines 6821 8th St Rio Linda 

Atlas Van Lines 717 Bridge St Yuba C ity 

Auburn M oving Co 10155 M ount Vernon Rd Auburn 

Auburn Van & Storage 150 G um Ln Auburn 

Avid Advancem ent M oving 5309 Lake Pleasant Dr Elk G rove 

Bekins 150 G um Ln Auburn 

Bekins M oving & Storage 151 O pportunity St Sacram ento 

Best Choice M overs 6363 Aslin R d Sacram ento 

Best W ay M overs 5836 M other Lode D r # C Placerville 

Big D's Truck & O fc M oving Svc 49 Rodondo Ave Suisun City 

C & J M oving 304 Palazzo Ct Lincoln 

C alifornia M oving System s 3801 H appy Ln Sacram ento 

C anova M oving & Storage 6821 8th St Rio Linda 

C apital C ity M oving & Storage 3298 O range G rove Ave North H ighlands 

C apitol C rating 6945e Power Inn R d Sacram ento 

C apitol R elocation System s Inc 6350 Blue Sky C reek Dr # 500 Sacram ento 

C ity M oving System s 8267 Alpine Ave Sacram ento 

C olonial Van & Storage 5901 88th St Sacram ento 

C olonial Van & Storage 8451 R oyanan Cir # 100 Davis 

D K D irect 11351 Trade C enter Dr # 300 Rancho C ordova 

Eskaton M oving C onnecitons 5105 M anzanita Ave Carm ichael 

Fast & Cheap M overs 8209 Lake W illow W ay Elk G rove 

Folsom R elocation & Storage 1739 Abbeyfeale Ct Folsom 

Freem an Enterprises 4300 82nd St # C Sacram ento 

G olden State M oving & Storage 11851 Valensin Ranch R d # B G alt 

G raebel Sacram ento M overs 1760 Enterprise Blvd W est Sacram ento 

G reat Am erican M overs 5901 Alder Ave # E Sacram ento 

G reenback M oving Supplies 9418 G reenback Ln O rangevale 

H ansen's M oving & Storage 5336 Prairie Loop Placerville 

H awaii C argo Transportation 6640 Fair O aks Blvd Carm ichael 

J & M M oving 6520 W ooded Creek W ay O rangevale 

Jim m y's Piano M oving 1875 D iesel Dr # 7 Sacram ento 

Joyce M oving & Storage 5901 88th St Sacram ento 

M arysville Van & Storage 902 Von G eldern W ay Yuba C ity 

M arysville Van & Storage Co 901 Von G eldern W ay Yuba C ity 

M aster Relocation Svc 1419 G St M arysville 

M aster Van & Storage 623 14th St M arysville 

M ayflower M oving 6350 Sky C reek D r # 600 Sacram ento 

M c C all & Sons M oving Svc 7405 G reenback Ln # 184 Citrus Heights 

M etro M oving & Transportation 9367 Lufkin W ay Elk G rove 

M om entum M oving 8930 Leatham Ave Fair O aks 

M oore M oving & Storage System s 860 W O nstott Rd Yuba C ity 

M other Lode Van & Storage 11255 Pyrites W ay # 400 G old River 

M oving Assistance 6724 Superior Dr North H ighlands 

M oving M ade Eazy By Roediger 2901 W eikert Dr Sacram ento 

M oving Star Ca 6963 Power Inn R d Sacram ento 

M oving Star California 6225 Binet Dr # A Citrus Heights 

M oving Star California Llc 11285 Sunrise G old Cir # C Rancho C ordova 

M usclem en M oving C o 3054 Fite C ir # 101 Sacram ento 

N orth Am erican Van Lines 1464 Enterprise Blvd W est Sacram ento 

N orth Am erican Van Lines 7337 R oseville R d Sacram ento 

O sborn M oving 3201 Langley W ay Antelope 

Pac Van M overs 2517 C onnie D r Sacram ento 

Pacific Storage C o 4601 Beloit D r Sacram ento 

Padded W agon 4329 Pasadena Ave Sacram ento 

Pdq Van & Storage Co 930 Yuba St M arysville 


Page 230

Exhibit 184: Private Sector Goods Movement Advisory Group Attendees 

Agency Contact Name Telephone 

California Trucking Association Eric Sauer 916-373-3562 

California Trucking Association Matt Schrap 916-373-3514 

DHL Express John Gusman 916-364-4134 

FedEx Express Michael Lamadrid 916-554-5462 

FedEx Freight Mike K. Farrell 916-371-9182 

FedEx Ground Rob Huber 916-387-3328 

Inve$tnet/Lynxs Bob Rosenberg 916-929-6310 

Roadway Express David Jackson 916-373-3204 

Rushway Transportation Ken Rush 530-888-6536 

Sacramento 49er Truck Stop Jim Miller 916-804-9225 

Sierra Northern Railway John J. Speight 916-640-0250 

U.S. Xpress Dale A. Tabat 707-426-3788 

Union Pacific Railroad Jeff Asay 916-789-6217 

Union Pacific Railroad Scott D. Moore 402-544-3706 

Union Pacific Railroad Jerry Wilmoth 916-789-6360 

Public Sector Stakeholders 

Exhibit 185 gives a listing of public sector representatives attending SACOG Goods Movement 

Advisory Group meetings, other than SACOG’s own staf. The list ilustrates the breadth of 

agency involvement in goods movement issues. Note: This list will be extended and supplemented 

with other lists of agencies and jurisdictions in the final report. 


Page 231

Exhibit 185: Public Sector Goods Movement Advisory Group Attendees 

Agency Contact Name Telephone 

CA Business, Transportation & Housing Jason Hone 916-323-5389 

Cal State, Sacramento College of Business Marty Wilson 916-278-7198 

Caltrans District 3 Patrick Tyner 916-274-0558 

Caltrans Division of Aeronautics Colette Armao 916-654-5346 

Caltrans Division of Aeronautics Kevin Ryan 916-653-3012 

Caltrans HQ Office of Goods Movement Dan McKell 916-651-6012 

Caltrans HQ Office of Goods Movement Tom Messer 916-653-4590 

Caltrans HQ Office of Goods Movement John Williamson 916-324-5527 

City of Citrus Heights Diane Nakano 916-727-4770 

City of Galt Chris Erias 209-366-7230 

City of Rancho Cordova Wes Ervin 916-923-1562 

City of Roseville Nela Luken 916-774-5281 

City of Roseville Paul Richardson 916-774-5276 

City of Sacramento Economic Development Jim Rinehart 916-808-5054 

City of West Sacramento Kurt Overmeyer 916-617-4535 

City of West Sacramento Stephan Patek 916-617-4645 

City of West Sacramento/Port of Sacramento Mike Luken 916-371-8000 x360 

County of Sacramento DWMR Doug Kobold 916-875-7087 

ECOS 

John Deeter 

EDCTC Mike Higgins 530-642-5262 

El Dorado County Shawna Purvines 530-621-5570 

El Dorado County DOT Richard Shepard 530-621-5981 

Port of Sacramento John Sulpizio 916-371-8000 x300 

Port of Sacramento/City of West Sacramento Tom Scheeler 916-617-4882 

SacDOT Dean Blank 916-874-6121 

Sacramento County Airport System G. Hardy Acree 916-874-0600 

Sacramento County Airport System John Febbo 916-874-0775 

Sacramento County Airport System Rob Leonard 916-874-0960 

Sacramento County Airport System George Munson 916-874-0767 

Sacramento Metro Chamber Sam Driggers 916-443-2672 

Sacramento Metro Chamber Dave Mason 916-552-6800 

SACTO Barbara Hayes 916-441-2144 

SMAQMD Jim Jester 916-874-4817 

SMAQMD Ron Maertz 916-874-4882 

SMAQMD Larry Sherwood 916-874-4880 

SMAQMD 

Karen Wilson 

Sutter County Danelle Stylos 530-822-7400 

UC Davis - ITS Yueyue Fan 530-754-6408 

YSAQMD Mat Ehrhardt 530-757-3673 

YSEDC Tim Johnson 530-751-8555 


Page 232

Appendix B: Jurisdictions Survey 

Cover Letter 

SUBJECT: 

Sacramento Area Goods Movement Study Questionnaire 

Dear _________________: 

SACOG, working with a specialized consulting team, has just initiated the first phase of a regional 

goods movement study to help better identify the issues and challenges related to moving 

freight in our six-county region. The primary goals of this first phase effort are to collect as 

much data as possible relating to goods movement; to identify trucking and rail issues; and to 

identify locations impacted by truck and rail traffic. Later phases of the project will lead to recommendations 

for improvements that will facilitate the movement of freight and related traffic 

while minimizing related impacts on local jurisdictions. SACOG will be relying on input from 

our local jurisdictions and other stakeholders so that we can understand your issues of interest 

with respect to freight movement within your jurisdiction. Ultimately, this effort will help the 

SACOG area more effectively compete for federal, state and regional funding that is available 

for “Goods Movement” related improvements. 

We suggest that the survey be distributed to the following departments/areas: 

Public Works: Traffic Engineering, Engineering, Design, Operations, Maintenance, etc. 

Administration/City Manager 

Planning 

Public Safety (Fire, Sheriff, etc.). 

We ask that you please distribute these forms and help ensure their completion. Please return the 

completed forms to the address below on or before April 14. You may email, fax, or mail your 

completed survey forms. The address to mail is: 265 Morgan Way, Roseville, CA 95678-6030 

Attn: Rita Brohman. Fax is (916) 772-2585, email is rlb@iteris.com. 

Any questions or comments regarding the letter or the survey may be directed to Rita Brohman 

at (916) 772-7976 or Jason Crow at (916) 340-6219. Thank you very much for your assistance. 

Sincerely, 

Mike McKeever 

Executive Director 

______________ 


Page 233

SACRAMENTO AREA GOODS MOVEMENT STUDY 

QUESTIONNAIRE 

The purpose of this questionnaire is to collect information regarding goods movement trucking and railrelated 

problems and issues in your jurisdiction. Your comments will be used to help develop the Sacramento 

Area Goods Movement Study, which is being sponsored by SACOG. Call Rita Brohman (916- 

772-7976) at Iteris (consultant assisting with the project) or Jason Crow (916-340-6219) at SACOG with 

any questions regarding the survey or study effort. Please circulate this survey to the appropriate persons 

in your jurisdiction. 

JURISDICTION: 

_________________________________________________________________________________ 

PLEASE LIST NAMES, TITLES AND PHONE NUMBERS OF ALL PERSONS WHO HELPED 

COMPLETE THE SURVEY (for follow-up questions): 

Name Title Phone 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________ 

1) Rank trucking-related impacts in your jurisdiction 

(1 = no problem, 3 = moderate problem, 5 = severe problem) 

11) Truck-Related Impact 

12) Severity Rank 

(circle appropriate rank for each type of impact) 

(1 = no problem, 3 = moderate problem, 5 = severe problem) 

Congestion Due to Trucks 1 2 3 4 5 

Neighborhood Intrusion by Trucks 1 2 3 4 5 

Truck Parking 1 2 3 4 5 

Truck Traffic Safety 1 2 3 4 5 

Street Deterioration Due to Trucks 1 2 3 4 5 

Hazardous Materials Hauling 1 2 3 4 5 


Page 234

Truck Noise 1 2 3 4 5 

Truck Air Pollution 1 2 3 4 5 

Night 

Nighttime Truck Operations 1 2 3 4 5 

Construction Trucks 1 2 3 4 5 

Long Haul Trucks 1 2 3 4 5 

Short Haul, Local Delivery Trucks 1 2 3 4 5 

Other 

___________________________ 

_______________________________ 

1 2 3 4 5 

2) What types of trucking-related facilities are present in your jurisdiction? Do they create 

problems and if so, what kind? 

TRUCK TRAFFIC GENERATORS 

Facility Type 


jurisdiction? 

(Yes/No) 

Creates Problems? 

(Yes/No) 

Describe Nature of Problem 

Truck Terminals 

Truck Sales/Repair 

Warehousing/Distribution 

Light Manufacturing 

Heavy Manufacturing 

Food Processing 

Agriculture 

Sand & Gravel 

Parcel Carriers 

(e.g., FedEx, UPS) 

Postal Service Centers 

Mail Order Businesses 

Moving and Storage 

Port or Barge Terminals 

Recycling or Scrap Operations 

Garbage Dumps or Transfers 

Utility Service Yard 

Corporation or Highway 

Maintenance Yards 


Page 235

Major Active Construction 

Sites 

Nurseries 

Grain/Feed Storage/Sales 

Other 

_______________________ 

_______________________ 

Other 

_______________________ 

_______________________ 

3) Is your jurisdiction experiencing problems on arterial streets due to truck movements? 

YES_____ NO______ If so, please define the problems and/or attach a map. 

4) Are there intersections experiencing problems related to excessive truck traffic or truck 

movements? YES_____ NO______ If yes, please define the problems: 

5) Does your jurisdiction have physical roadway inadequacies that may affect truck movements? 

These may include: Bridges (weight limits); Overpasses (height limits); Intersections 

(turning radii), etc. 

YES_____ NO______ If yes, please define the types and locations of inadequacies: 

6) Are there other trucking-related problems in your jurisdiction? (e.g. cut-through truck traffic 

in residential areas, on-street loading problems, off-street access, etc. If so, please describe: 


Page 236

7) Does your jurisdiction have a designated truck route system? 

YES_____ NO______ If yes, please attach a map of system. 

8) Does your jurisdiction have truck-related ordinances and/or other regulations? 

YES_____ NO______ If yes, please attach a copy. 

9) Are trucks prohibited on specific streets? 

YES_____ NO______ If yes, please list streets and/or attach map. Define restrictions - by 

hour, tonnage, 

# axles, etc. 

10) Truck traffic counts will be taken for this study or follow on studies. Please recommend 

streets and specific locations in your jurisdiction that would be appropriate for truck 

counts. Please list locations and/or attach map. 

11) Are there any residential or business groups that have been actively addressing problems 

relating to truck issues? YES_____ NO_____ 

If we may contact any of these people/groups who might provide additional information 

regarding truck movements or issues, please list those contacts. 


Page 237

12) Please attach copies of any other related data you have that will help to identify problems 

and issues in your jurisdiction. These may include: 

Truck traffic counts (two years old or newer) 

AADT flow map 

General Plan elements that relate to trucks 

Any other information you feel will be helpful 

13) Are there any RAIL related impacts in your community such as congestion at grade crossings, 

grade crossing safety issues, noise or other? YES_____ NO_____ 

If yes, please briefly explain the rail issues/impacts: 

14) Have there been any significant changes in the recent past related to goods movement impacts, 

or do you expect significant changes in the future based on your land use plans or 

other reason ? 

YES_____ NO_____ 

If yes, please briefly explain the expected changes/impacts: 

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE! 

Please Email, Fax or Mail Completed Survey to: 

Rita Brohman, Iteris Inc. 

265 Morgan Way 

Roseville, CA 95678-6030 

FAX: (916)772-2585 

PHONE: (916) 772-7976 

Email: rlb@iteris.com 

Please submit your responses as soon as possible 


Page 238

Appendix C: Case Studies 

IKEA 

The opening of a 265,000 square-foot IKEA store in West Sacramento’s Riverpointe Marketplace 

on March 1, 2006, was welcomed both by city officials and innumerable Central Valley fans of 

the Swedish home-furnishings store who had grown weary of trips to the chain’s Bay Area outlets. 

An $18.3-billion global retailer, IKEA is the world’s leading home-furnishing retailer with 

235 stores in 34 countries on five continents. Located adjacent to the Reed Avenue exit off of 

I80, the IKEA store will eventually be joined by a Wal-Mart superstore and a Home Depot as 

well as a number of smaller stores and restaurants. 

The site is three miles from the intersection of two of the most important and busiest interstate 

highways in America–Interstate 5 and Interstate 80. 

The IKEA store contains display areas for a range of 8,500 different products. It sprawls across 

two floors and features 53 room settings, 3 model homes, and a 250-seat restaurant serving a variety 

of meals including Ikea’s signature plate –Swedish meatballs. Outside are 1,200 parking 

spaces. The store also has a supervised children's play area, said to be a big plus for IKEA’s chief 

customer -- a mom in her late 30s. 

IKEA is more than a retailer; it is also an innovative story in logistics. In the 1950s, when an employee 

could not fit a table into the trunk of a customer’s car, he solved the problem by removing 

the legs for later attachment. From that the idea of packing as furniture products into flat packages 

arose. By shipping furniture unassembled in flat packages, IKEA has realized huge savings 

in its transportation costs. The company’s distribution centers also began aranging products on 

shipping pallets in exactly the manner they would be displayed on the selling floor. "For every 

truck container we have, another home-furnishings retailer would need seven," boasted a company 

spokesman. 

One of IKEA's strictest site-location requirements in the U.S. is that all stores be located directly 

off a major freeway. 

IKEA sources its products globally, and a growing percentage of those products are coming from 

the Far East. Yet the majority still comes from Europe, which remains the epicenter of its international 

business world. 

The new West Sacramento store, like its counterparts up and down the West Coast from San 

Diego to British Columbia, is supplied primarily from a huge distribution facility IKEA has established 

on the Tejon Ranch south of Bakersfield. A few items such as mattresses and sofas are 

shipped directly to the store by vendors in Arizona and New Mexico. 

Even though the West Sacramento store is located adjacent to a Union Pacific mainline, everything 

sold at the store arrives by truck. IKEA, in general, very rarely ships by air. As the West 


Page 239

Sacramento store’s logistics manager Ulrich Beck told an interviewer: “I doubt this store wil 

ever ship anything by air.” 

Worldwide, two-thirds of IKEA’s merchandise is sourced in Europe. Another 30 percent comes 

from Asia. Just three percent–largely those mattresses and sofas -- is North American in origin. 

Virtually all of the items for sale at the West Sacramento store arive in 53’ containers hauled up 

I5 from the Tejon Ranch DC by a contractor, Knight Transportation of Phoenix. Beck estimates 

that less than 1 percent of their products come to the store directly through the Port of Oakland. 

IKEA's Western North American Distribution Center is located on the Tejon Ranch Industrial 

Complex located on an 80 acre site near the intersection of Highway 99 and Interstate 5 outside 

of Bakersfield. It is a 1.7 million-square-foot building. With 99 percent of its imported merchandise 

arriving at the Port of Long Beach, IKEA had its site-location consultant conduct a mileage 

study to determine the “equilibrium point” of posible locations taking into account long-term 

growth plans. The DC had to serve IKEA stores from San Diego to Vancouver. The next step 

was to study the labor markets; stability and availability factors as well as wage rates were 

evaluated. The final phase took into consideration construction and land costs as well as community 

and fees. The new DC replaced a smaller facility in Ontario, California. It is also a special 

foreign trade subzone operated under the auspices of the Port of Los Angeles. 

In an average week, 20-22 trailers are unloaded at five loading docks located at the rear of the 

West Sacramento store. (There is also a slanted ramp on the west side of the building to facilitate 

home-delivery of heavy or bulky items.) The pace quickens in the week to ten days before and 

after IKEA’s two big sales periods. Here’s a surprise: Christmas isn’t one of them. Instead, IKEA 

holds a summer sale starting at the end of May that runs through early June. A second sale is held 

to mark the occasion in late August when IKEA issues its annual catalog. (The international publication 

run is 160 million.) In the week or so before these two major sales periods, as many as 6- 

8 truckloads of merchandise will be unloaded each day at the West Sacramento store. And that 

pace is repeated in the week immediately after a major sale, as the store replenishes its shelves 

with new merchandise. 

Traveling time for truckers hauling containers of IKEA merchandise from the Tejon Ranch DC to 

West Sacramento is normally six hours. To minimize traffic delays, the trucks move by night. 

The trailers are unloaded between 3 and 4 in the morning. Returned merchandise and empty pallets 

are then loaded into at least one of the containers for the trip back to Tejon Ranch. (Packaging 

materials are collected for recycling. The West Sacramento store has its own trash compactor 

and contracts with Waste Management to remove both recyclables and other refuse from the facility.) 

With the unloading typically taking two hours, the schedule enables the trucks to clear the Sacramento 

area before morning commute traffic starts. 

Home-delivery of heavy or bulky items is out-sourced to a local delivery firm. 

Every third week, a truck delivers a container full of Polish wood products that has been shipped 

via an East or Gulf Coast port. Smaller shipments arrive daily via UPS and FedEx, chiefly to 


Page 240

meet demand for specific items that are in short supply. Every Friday morning, the store also 

takes delivery of plants from a local nursery. Three trucks with miscellaneous items arrive during 

an average week with goods from local contractors for the store’s restaurant and the Bistro/Swede-Shop 

area adjacent the check-out counters. Up to five smaller truck deliveries will be 

made weekly with items such as linen and office supplies. Materials required for facility maintenance, 

ranging from light bulbs to cleaning fluids, arrive on trucks delivering 2-3 pallets a week. 

Fresh bread and produce for the store’s second-floor restaurant are delivered every day. 

Which get us back to those meatbals. They’re not actualy from Sweden. Nor are they the 

handiwork of the Swedish chef. But even though they are sourced locally, the recipe is genuine. 

Not a single meatball was served up to the public until a panel of certified Swedes conducted a 

series of tastings to make sure that the taste and texture of these meatballs would please the most 

discriminating Swedish pallet. The company began serving up meatballs and other Swedish 

foods in the late 1950s, after noticing that shoppers left the store to eat at midday. Today, there’s 

no reason to leave the store. 


Page 241

Los Rios Community College District 

Not all regional institutions with a vested interest in facilitating the movement of trucks are engaged 

in the conveyance of goods. Consider the widely dispersed campuses of the Los Rios 

Community College District which rely upon a central facility in Rancho Cordova for their maintenance 

services. 

With a district-wide enrollment that totaled 71,430 in 2005 the LRCCD is a major force in adult, 

post-secondary education in the Sacramento region. One in every twelve adults in the greater 

Sacramento area is enrolled at one of the four main campuses. For many, the district offers a 

unique path to otherwise unattainable personal and professional goals. In the fall of 2005, 36.7 

percent of all students in the district were first generation college students. Many are immigrants 

or members of minority groups traditionally under-represented in California’s coleges and universities. 

Of those enrolled in 2005, 51.4% aimed to transfer to a four-year college. 

Its primary campuses are American River College (31,488 Fall 2005 enrollment), Sacramento 

City College (21,788), Cosumnes River College (11,632, and Folsom Lake College (6,522). But 

it also has community outreach centers in West Sacramento, Davis, downtown Sacramento, Natomas, 

Rancho Cordova, and Placerville. The district also offers a variety of special services to 

businesses large and small and to government agencies at a location on Ethan Way in Sacramento. 

The district has grown with the community. Today enrollment today is more than 45% higher 

than what it was just ten years ago. In fall of 2005, the district opened more than 300,000 square 

feet of new and modernized facilities at its four colleges— the single largest opening of facilities 

in its district’s history. Folsom Lake Colege added nearly 100,000 square feet in educational 

space as well as a new bookstore and cafeteria; American River College opened its new Natomas 

Center which is already enrolling more than 3,000 students; and Cosumnes River and Sacramento 

City colleges opened a new Learning Resources Center and a Technology Center, respectively. 

The district’s master plan envisions four more campuses to be build adjacent light rail stations 

by 2012. 

All of these campuses require the attention of maintenance personnel with the wide range of 

skills that often go unappreciated until they are needed. Rather than duplicate maintenance functions, 

the district recently consolidated its maintenance and support operations at a 20,00 squarefoot 

site in Rancho Cordova, near Bradshaw and Hwy. 50. The site was specifically selected because 

of its ready highway access. 

From the Ranch Cordova site, a fleet of 56 service vehicles move around the region to meet the 

district’s maintenance and repair needs. (Basic custodial and grounds keeping remain the responsibility 

of each teaching site.) The maintenance facility’s staf curently numbers 84 ful-time 

employees. 

According to LRCCD chancellor Brice Harris, the district has realized considerable cost savings 

by consolidating the maintenance programs of the individual campuses. He estimates that, were 

the district forced to duplicate the services of this central facility at each of the individual teach- 


Page 242

ing and administrative sites, the district’s $9 milion maintenance budget would be at least double. 

Pablo Manzo, the district’s maintenance director thinks that may be an understatement: “I believe 

double would be conservative given the duplication of not only personnel but fleet vehicles, 

specialized tools and equipment, training, regulatory compliance, and facilities shops/offices at 

each site.” 

Of course, having a centralized maintenance facility means that maintenance personnel accumulate 

an increasing amount of what they cal “windshield time,” the minutes spent negotiating 

through congested traffic to get to and from their assignments. 

What specific botlenecks or delays do the district’s maintenance personnel face? According to 

Manzo: “Geting to American River Colege from the facility maintenance center in Rancho 

Cordova has become an issue. It takes longer and longer to traverse Watt avenue from Hwy. 50 

to Auburn Blvd., or loop back through town and take Business 80, which can also be slow any 

time of day. Of course, the tradeoff is that we can get to Cosumnes River College and Folsom 

Lake College much quicker.” 


Page 243

Sacramento Bee 

It takes a lot to publish a daily newspaper and get it delivered to 293,000 subscribers Monday 

through Saturday and to 331,000 subscribers each Sunday. 

Start with the paper and ink. Lots of paper and ink. 

Shipments of newsprint, the largely recycled paper on which newspapers are printed, arrive 

every weekday at the Bee’s production facility, which covers three city blocks immediately adjacent 

to the newspaper’s editorial and administrative ofices in Midtown Sacramento. 

Newsprint comes in rolls, each some four feet in diameter and weighing nearly 1700 pounds. 

Unraveled, each rol is a ribbon of paper stretching some nine miles. On average, the Bee’s printing 

presses chew through nearly 200 of these huge rolls every day. 

Getting that much paper to the Bee requires some heavy-lifting. 

Last year, for example, paper mills in Oregon, Washington and British Columbia supplied the 

Bee with exactly 72,163 rolls of newsprint, weighing in at a total of 55,534 metric tons. Just under 

30 percent arrived by truck -- 848 truckloads carrying 21,086 rolls to be precise. The rest 

rolled in on 558 rail cars to a rail siding on the old R Street industrial corridor directly behind the 

newspaper’s buildings. (The Bee and the Blue Diamond Growers complex at 18 th and C Streets 

are the only remaining businesses in the Central City still served directly by rail.) 

Newsprint shipments arrive everyday, Monday through Friday. As with other supplies coming to 

the Bee, the newsprint trucks are scheduled to arrive during day-light hours so as not to conflict 

with the late night flow of trucks leaving with freshly printed newspapers. 

Because each rail car can accommodate more than three times the number of rolls that can be 

shipped in a single tractor-trailer, the Bee would prefer to receive as much newsprint as possible 

by rail. Selecting the mode of transport, however, is the prerogative of the paper mills, and continued 

use of rail will hinge on whether the railroads continue to provide reliable, economic service 

between the Pacific Northwest and the Sacramento region. It will also depend on the willingnes 

of Union Pacific to maintain service along the rail spur linking the Bee’s siding to the 

region’s rail yards. 

Paper, of course, is nothing without ink, and the Bee consumes well over 100,000 pounds of the 

stuf every month. The newspaper’s principal ink wel, located in a sub-basement beneath the 

printing presses, is a tank capable of holding 52,000 pounds (or about 6500 gallons) of black ink. 

Nearby are separate tanks each able to hold up to 30,000 pounds each of red, blue and yellow 

inks. (The Bee is installing new printing presses which will enable it to expand its use of color.) 

All of these inks arrive in tanker trucks from two ink suppliers in Sparks, Nevada. The trucks, 

which have a capacity of 35,000 to 40,000 pounds, pul into the parking lot behind the Bee’s 

production plant and pump their cargos through a maze of pipes to the appropriate storage tanks 

two floors below. The process is not unlike that used to delivery gasoline to filling stations. 


Page 244

A third key item integral to producing a newspaper are the aluminum plates on which the contents 

of each page of the newspaper are etched. Each year, the Bee goes through about 50,000 of 

these plates, which are sourced from a manufacturer in Argentina. Shipped by sea to the Port of 

New York-New Jersey, they are then transported by truck to Sacramento. 

Printing a newspaper is one thing; getting it out to homes, offices and newsstands is another. 

The Bee publishes two editions. The first is the so-called State Edition, with a press run of about 

31,000 copies (37,000 on Sundays). It is intended primarily for distribution outside of the Sacramento 

region. Some 500 copies of the State Edition are shipped to the post office for mailing to 

subscribers throughout the nation and the world. 

Printing of the State Edition typically begins at 10:15 every night. Within fifteen to twenty minutes, 

the first bundles are being carted to the loading docks. By 11:30, six trucks owned and operated 

by private contractors have departed, carrying copies of the State Edition along designated 

trunk routes heading west into the Bay Area, north as far as Medford, Oregon, and south as far as 

Modesto. 

At various points along those trunk routes, bundles of papers are dropped off for distribution 

along numerous sub-routes. In Chico, for examples, the papers are dropped with a distributor 

who has contracted with 12 carriers for delivery to homes, offices and newsstands. 

The press run of the much larger Final Edition, numbering some 270,000 copies on weekdays 

and 297,000 on Sundays, begins about 11:40 p.m. each night. The first bundles start departing 

around midnight, and by 2:30 a.m. the last copies of the Final Editions have left the building. 

The trucks carying them belong to the Bee and are moving out to the paper’s 19 primary distribution 

centers scattered throughout Sacramento, Yolo, Placer and El Dorado counties– the Bee’s 

core circulation area. 

There the delivery trucks -- a combination of straight-trucks and vans -- are met by the army of 

approximately 1300 individual carriers who will use their own conveyances to deliver the Bee. 

(85% of the Final Edition go to homes and offices; 15% to newsstands.) 

The day of the enterprising young paper-boy has long since passed. 97% of the deliveries are 

made by adults driving their own vehicles. 

And it’s not just the handiwork of the Bee’s reporters and columnists that these cariers are delivering. 

Each night between 8 and 11pm, four trucks arrive at the Bee from printing plants in the Bay 

Area carrying as many as six national newspapers for which the Bee handles local delivery 

throughout its distribution area. These newspapers are: The New York Times, the Wall Street 

Journal, the Financial Times, Investors Busines Daily, and Baron’s. Upon arival at the Bee’s 

midtown production plant, these newspapers are shuttled to local distribution centers ahead of 

the Bee’s Final Edition. 

Finaly, there’s what the British sometimes cal bumpf. 


Page 245

Last year printing plants throughout the West, working under contract with individual advertisers, 

produced some 1.6 billion pieces of promotional material–advertising inserts that wound up 

hiding amidst the pages of the Bee. These inserts are delivered by truck as well, usually in advance 

of the intended circulation date. 

Once it’s time to distribute them, Bee employees use high-speed machines to group advertisers’ 

inserts with others destined for the same delivery routes. Each day’s newspaper contains at least 

one soft news section that is typically printed hours or even a couple of days in advance of the 

rest of the day’s paper. These sections are loaded onto large machines which automaticaly drop 

packets of preprinted advertising into the "jacket" created when the section is opened. These sections 

are then strapped into bundles coded with distribution codes and are sent out by truck to the 

distribution centers. Hours later, when the Final Editions show up, carriers merge the sections 

containing advertising inserts with the rest of the paper. 

And that, as the Bee’s publicists like to describe it (presumably with apologies to Eugene 

O’Neil), sums up “a long night's journey into day.” 


Page 246

Teichert Aggregates 

Concrete is literally the foundation on which modern civilization is built, and aggregate is one of 

its main ingredients. Demand for aggregate is driven chiefly by housing construction, which 

means that fast-growing regions like Sacramento use huge amounts of the stuff. In fact, regional 

demand is estimated by local construction industry experts to be approximately 10 tons per capita. 

In that light of that fact, it should not come as a shock–although it still does–that transporting 

aggregate from quarries to job sites in the six-county SACOG region requires no fewer than 

800,000 truck trips per year, on roads constructed in large part with aggregate. 

"We need it for roads, we need it for buildings, we need it for cement; it's a critical building supply," 

said Sacramento County economic development director Paul Hahn recently commented in 

a Sacramento Bee article about proposals to open new aggregate mining operations in rural parts 

of eastern Sacramento County. 

While concrete is familiar to everyone, aggregate is not. In its raw form, it is a gravelly mix of 

small rocks and stones harvested from quarries chiefly located in the dry creek and river beds. 

Before being used, aggregate is washed and sorted by size and appearance. Larger stones may be 

crushed to provide the material for specialized use such as ballast to support underground sewer 

pipes. Aggregates of particular colors may be reserved for decorative projects. 

Teichert Materials is one of this area’s largest purveyors of concrete as wel as aggregate, asphaltic 

concrete, and concrete pipes and other precast products. Whether the client is building a 

downtown skyscraper or pouring concrete for a backyard patio in Elk Grove, Teichert Materials 

or one of its competitors is probably on the job. Some of the firm’s most recent high-profile projects 

the Cache Creek Casino-Resort expansion, the massive East End state office project in 

downtown Sacramento, and the new parking structure at Sacramento International Airport. 

Along with its sister company Teichert Construction, Teichert Materials traces its corporate roots 

back to 1887 when Adolph Teichert got his first contract in Sacramento building the sidewalks 

around the State Capitol. 

Today, Teichert Materials mines and supplies sand and gravel from several sites throughout the 

region. The company serves a market that stretches from Marysville to Fresno and from Woodland 

to Truckee. With locations throughout Northern California and the Central Valley, the company 

is one of the largest aggregate producers in the United States. In addition to aggregate and 

ready-mix concrete, the company’s product line features aggregate asphaltic concrete for road 

construction and precast products for underground utilities and infrastructure construction - such 

as storm drains, sewers, manholes, and boxes for electrical, telecommunications, and gas. 

Demand in the six-county SACOG region has been strong in recent years, tracking the rise in 

residential and commercial construction. The aggregate market is driven by housing construction 

(which in turn drives a lot of commercial construction in the shape of schools, shopping centers, 

churches, fire houses, etc.). Housing starts at therefore a dominant leading indicator of demand. 

The other big driver of demand in the industry locally is Caltrans. 


Page 247

Californians use a bit more aggregate than the average American; per capita demand here averages 

7 tons per year statewide. But there can be wide variations in demand from county to county 

and even from neighborhood to neighborhood. Demand is generally lower in build-up areas seeing 

little new construction of roadways. It is highest in fast-growing suburban areas where new 

roads, sewers and other infrastructure need to be constructed. The industry Rule of Thumb holds 

that a new subdivision in the Sacramento region will require, on average, 40 tons of aggregate 

per house. 

Geology can also influence the level of demand. For example, the damp, soggy soils in the Natomas 

area require more aggregate to support roads than in Elk Grove. Overall, according to Teichert 

Material’s Bob Gustafson, demand in the Sacramento region to be 10 tons per year per capita. 

Not surprising, the transportation of the company’s products involves some heavy-lifting. According 

to the latest Commodity Flow Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, crushed 

stone and gravel represented fully 16 percent (by weight) of all commodities transported in U.S. 

in 2002. That is more than shipments of coal or petroleum products. With an average truck load 

of 40 tons of aggregate and with a regional population of about 2 million, the Sacramento region 

generates enough demand for aggregate to fill 800,000 trucks per year. 

Yet these trucks don’t go very far. Aggregate is a commodity with an exceptionaly low value-toweight 

ratio. Average transportation cost is ten cents per ton per mile. That makes it uneconomical 

to transport it any appreciable distance. In the Central Valey, company’s moving aggregate 

tend to observe a “Thirty-mile Rule” –30 miles being the typical distance hereabouts between 

permitted aggregate sites. Except for a specialized, more expensive product like decorative aggregate, 

hauling more than 30 miles is rare. 

Half of Teichert’s aggregate is sourced localy, chiefly from quaries located south of Hwy. 50 

along an ancient bed of the American River. Teichert's American River Drive headquarters sits 

atop a former mining site, as does the 129-acre Granite Regional Park in Sacramento. Another 

thirty percent comes from the Marysville area and the other twenty percent from the Woodland/Cache 

Creek area. Much of Sacramento County has been mined over the past century. 

Teichert subcontracts for the hauling of aggregate. Construction is a seasonal business, and Teichert 

does not want to invest in heavy equipment that may sit idle in the off-season, generally 

early December through the end of April. The prime season for the construction industry in this 

area is May through end of November, although is largely weather driven. Last year work continued 

through December because rains were late. Conversely, late spring rains this year delayed 

start of normal building season. 

The need to move large numbers of heavy trucks through urban and suburban areas gives rise to 

a wide range of issues. Like virtually every company with distribution facilities south of Hwy. 

50, the absence of a suitable connector road to the Interstate 80 corridor near Roseville was mentioned 

as a high priority. Access along Hazel from mines along American River to Roseville area 

is second priority. The desirability of grade separations from Light Rail lines adjacent to Hwy. 50 

was also cited as a way to facilitate truck movements. 


Page 248

In recent months, Teichert and two competitors -- Granite Construction and DeSilva Gates– 

have filed applications to mine aggregate in rural parts of eastern Sacramento County. Granite 

would mine on a ranch adjacent to one Teichert plans to buy from developer Angelo K. Tsakopoulos 

near the community of Walltown. Meanwhile, Dublin-based DeSilva Gates Construction 

has applied for permits to establish quarries on both sides of Scott Road north of Deer Creek 

Hills. 

According to a June 24 article by the Sacramento Bee’s Mary Lynne Velinga: “Both Teichert 

and Granite use rubber conveyer belts to transport aggregate from existing mines along a former 

bed of the American River to a processing facility where the rocks are washed, sorted, crushed, 

and turned into asphalt or concrete. Teichert's conveyer stretches six miles; Granite's three and a 

half. Conveyers cross under both Bradshaw Road and Jackson Highway. At one point, the companies' 

conveyers trundle over each other like a miniature convergence of two freeways.” 

Teichert indicates that it would use a similar conveyer belt to move some of the aggregate from 

this new mine to its existing Grantline Road processing facility. It concedes, however, that most 

of the aggregate would be transported by trucks that would use a new access road it would build 

in conjunction with Granite Construction. For its part, DeSilva Gates would send an estimated 

500 trucks a day along Scott Road. 

Teichert’s Gustafson observes that the aggregate company’s main public relations problem involves 

truck traffic, specifically the noise and the congestion that follow in the wake of a huge, 

slow-moving truck carrying several tons of gravel. According to Gustafson, air quality issues 

seem to be secondary cause for local opposition, especially when asphalt plants needed for major 

road construction or repair projects need to be sited. 

Over time, the company’s primary transportation routes are expected to shift.It is estimated that, 

within 50 years or so, Teichert’s American River aggregate quaries wil play out. When that 

happens, more of the burden of supplying most of the region’s construction needs wil likely fal 

to the so-called Marysville Gold Fields. These quarries, which range east of Marysville and north 

of Beale Air Force Base in Sutter County, are estimated to contain two-thirds of the entire state’s 

“permited reserves” of aggregate. (There may be additional aggregate sites, but, because of environmental 

concerns or local political opposition, these sites are off-limits for development.) As 

the need arises to ship ever larger volumes of aggregate to some of the region’s fastest-growing 

housing markets, Gustafson sees traffic congestion around Lincoln emerging as a major bottleneck. 

A new road bypasing Lincoln would be something on the company’s wish-list. 


Page 249

Whole Foods Market 

Consumers across America but especially in California have come to demand an ever-widening 

array of food products from their local grocers. We have been rewarded with unprecedented variety. 

To accommodate the resulting cornucopia, stores have exploded in size, leading to the expectation 

that soon customers might have to use GPS to find the frozen blueberries. Groceries now 

routinely boast full-service delis, in-store bakeries, extensive wine and liquor selections, a wonderfully 

baffling array of cheese counters, increasing stocks of organic foods, and sushi bars have 

become de rigueur in many areas. 

So accustomed are most of us to finding our groceries fully-stocked with merchandise, perhaps it 

isn’t needles to say that al of these products have to be delivered by truck. Although the penny 

may occasionally drop when we see a 53-foot trailers with Raley’s or Safeway painted on it being 

hauled down the freeway, it is safe to say there is very little public awareness of what it takes 

to supply our neighborhood groceries. 

Consider the Whole Foods Market on the northeast corner of Arden and Eastern Avenues in Sacramento. 

It is part of a chain dedicated to providing organic foods products to health-conscious 

American consumers. It is also on the cutting edge of the food-shopping as theater movement. 

Whole Foods Market has a product selection of perishable foods and most of its products are 

from natural food vendors. The company also sells a limited selection of conventional national 

brands. Whole Foods Market's product categories include produce, seafood, grocery, meat and 

poultry, bakery, prepared foods and catering, specialty (beer, wine and cheese), whole body (nutritional 

supplements, vitamins, body care and educational products, such as books), floral, pet 

products and household products. 

Each morning it receives a delivery of its private label merchandise, frozen foods, baked goods, 

and bulk cofee from the chain’s regional distribution center in San Francisco. After dropping of 

the daily shipment, that truck will pick up fresh produce from regional growers before heading 

back to the DC, which will soon be relocated to Vacaville. 

But that truck supplies only a portion of what the store stocks. Deliveries of natural foods and 

food products also arrive six days a week from the United Natural Foods warehouse in Rocklin, 

a 487,000-square-foot structure formerly occupied by Ace Hardware. Nature’s Best in Santa 

Cruz delivers to the store once a week. Clover Stornetta Dairy delivers milk and other dairy 

products six days a week from its Petaluma processing plant, the only one nationwide that runs 

both conventional and organic milk every day. Fresh fish is brought in daily from Whole Food’s 

California Distribution Center in San Francisco. Cuts of meat arrive from the Oregon Beef Company. 

Nutritional items and body care products such as vitamins and lotions typically arrive in 

smaller parcels delivered by UPS, which may call at the store as many as five times a day. Approximately 

ten percent of the store’s merchandise is supplied by local vendors, from organic 

produce to fresh flowers to corn chips, preserves and a peanut butter formulated specifically to 

the tastes of a panel of local kids. 

Competitive forces within the food retailing industry have forced mergers and acquisitions. As 

more and more products are put on display, floor space has become increasingly precious, and 


Page 250

ack-of-the-store storage areas have become luxuries no grocery can afford. As a result, deliveries 

are made more frequently and in smaller quantities. Today, the typical large supermarket receives 

two daily deliveries of goods from regional distribution centers via tractor-trailers. But 

stores are also served by small fleets of vehicles of various dimensions bearing specialty products, 

cut flowers, baked goods, dairy products, etc. 

Large chain stores served by huge distribution centers typically receive ten to twenty smaller 

truck deliveries, but stores that are part of smaller chains may receive as many as one hundred 

deliveries a day. During a one week period in early May 2006, the Whole Foods market in Sacramento 

received the deliveries shown in Exhibit 186. The weekday average was 96 deliveries. 

Exhibit 186: Daily Deliveries at Whole Foods Market 

140 

120 

120 

100 

100 100 

Daily Deliveries 

80 

60 

80 

80 

50 

40 

20 

12 

0 

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday 

Deliveries, which are made to the back of the store, are generally scheduled so that no unloading 

takes place before 7:30 in the morning. However, the large delivery trucks from the Whole Foods 

Bay Area distribution center will often arrive as early as 6 a.m. to avoid early morning rush-hour 

traffic. Likewise, several local vendors will show up as early as 5 a.m., parking in the lot in front 

of the store. According to the store manager or team-leader, unloading deliveries at night between 

9 and 11 is under consideration. 

For economic as well as environmental reasons, the store is shifting from using a trash compactor 

to composting of waste paper and cardboard. According to the California Integrated Waste 

Management Board., the twenty Whole Foods markets in Northern California last year composted 

4,433 tons of material, recycled 1,200 tons of plastics, aluminum, and glass, and 2,393 

tons of cardboard. That is an annual average of nearly 350 tons or nearly 20 truckloads per store 

per year, not including municipal waste pickups. The savings averaged $6,000 per store per year. 


Page 251

Final SACOG Phase 1 Goods Movement Report

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?