Creating a Passenger Rail Network for the Piedmont- Atlantic Megaregion Using City Ranking Criteria

Drew Murray – May 2, 2011

Submitted to Catherine L. Ross, Ph.D

Creating a Passenger Rail Network for the Piedmont-

Atlantic Megaregion Using City Ranking Criteria

Drew Murray – May 2, 2011

Submitted to Dr. Catherine L. Ross in accordance with the requirement by the School of City and Regional Planning, Georgia Institute of Technology – Atlanta, GA

Page 2 of 85

Table of Contents:

I. Introduction 4 Global Review 5 Local Review 9 Research Statement 9

II. Literature Review 11 State Rail Plans 11 Alabama 11 Georgia 12 North Carolina 16 South Carolina 17 Tennessee 18 City Ranking and Ranking 20

III. Methodology 22

IV. Analysis 25 Political 25 Cultural 28 Economic 30 Index Scores 31 Atlanta, GA  Charlotte, NC 32 Atlanta, GA  Nashville, TN 35 Charlotte, NC  Raleigh, NC 38 Nashville, TN  Memphis, TN 40 Atlanta, GA  Birmingham, AL 42 Nashville, TN  Birmingham, AL 44 Atlanta, GA  Columbia, SC  Charlotte, NC 46 Columbia, SC  Charleston, SC 48 Columbia, SC  Greenville, SC 50 Atlanta, GA—Charlotte, NC—Greenville, SC  Knoxville, TN 51 Charlotte, NC—Raleigh, NC—Charleston, SC  Wilmington, NC 54 Charleston, SC—Augusta, GA  Savannah, GA 58 Birmingham, AL  Mobile, AL 60 Atlanta, GA—Savannah, GA—Montgomery, AL  Columbus, GA 61 Raleigh, NC—Wilmington, NC  Greenville, NC 64 Athens, GA  Gainesville, GA 66 Savannah, GA—Montgomery, AL—Macon, GA  Valdosta, GA 67 Pensacola, FL, Gulfport, MS 69 Richmond, VA, Virginia Beach, VA 71 Jacksonville, FL 72 Louisville, KY 73

V. Conclusion 75 Scope of Analysis 76

VI. List of Figures 78

VII. Bibliography 83

Page 3 of 85

I. Introduction

We face many issues today. In an ever-flattening global landscape, emerging opportunities are as bountiful as new challenges. Among these are health, energy, economy, equity, mobility, equality, and sustainability. Virtually every twenty-first century issue overlaps with other perplexities, though not always noticeable on the surface. Personal mobility is as inter-connected through each modern challenge as is its physical origins and destinations. Human activity no longer limits movement within political-jurisdictions whether local or national. As political systems endure, they must participate globally by developing infrastructure systems which build functionality. Regardless of whether encouragement to participate is competitive or cooperative, current transportation systems desperately need to be improved to accommodate modern mobility needs.

America is behind in this regard – that is relative to its importance in the global arena. The European

Union and Eastern Asia are leading the world in creating mobility systems that will be sustainable for the emerging era (Contant and Leone de Nie, 2009). Additionally, both have an advantage in political structures which accommodate comprehensive thinking over local individualism (Faludi, 2009). This is a serious challenge for the United States with outdated infrastructure that is either over-capacity or no longer relevant. Vulnerable to the volatility of oil prices, America’s system also accounts for weekly congestion costs in the billions due to wasted gasoline and lost productivity hours (American Public

Works Association, 2009). With a system that is unsustainable and already losing functionality, one would think that infrastructure investment would be eminent. Unfortunately, few people are aware of the implications that this current dilemma actually represents beyond personal convenience.

America needs a transportation system that works and a significant part of that framework will consist of a comprehensive passenger rail network which will connect all urban centers providing equitable access, efficient mobility, energy independence and economic freedom. Many current proposals to

Page 4 of 85 introduce passenger rail back into the American mainstream will not be sustainable over time. Many current plans propose reusing bicentennially dated track networks to save on capital costs; but are these approaches wise since many station locations may occupy large cities of the past which are no longer considered globally significant today? Many historic urban centers yesterday are small towns today and the potential economic development outcomes do not address the needs of where people live today and where they will need to travel tomorrow. Additionally, historic track curvature and at-grade intermodal intersections will not accommodate the high speed train sets needed to guarantee system competitiveness in the global context that new peers such as China is offering. Rather than looking at what can be done in the context of what is most politically expedient in helping America prevent sinking,

I propose to look at what should be done to meet this pressing challenge, albeit a hopeful thought in the context of helping America swim alongside Eastern Asia and Europe via an optimally efficient, comprehensive system for all Americans.

Global Review

The importance of centralized megaregion development, Eastern Asia’s historic, cultural context

(Confucian ideology) illustrates how national planning has become an advantage for Asia in becoming key players in global competitiveness (Yang, 2009). Since Asian countries tend to have top-down authority government systems, localized jurisdiction and territorial issues have virtually no major influence in planning. Though local systems do exist, their funding and design are generally handed down from national or super-regional government agencies (Tanimura and Edgintton, 2001). In some cases however, the implementation process of the national design is left up to the local agencies to fulfill (Yang, 2009). As China and India have many more people than the United States, Japan has nearly half of America’s population in only one-twenty-fifth of the land area. Density is the major difference between American megaregion development and Asia’s simple acknowledgement of megaregion reality.

Page 5 of 85

However, America’s governance has been deeply rooted in local jurisdiction control for hundreds of years now. The expansive land mass of the United States with such a relatively low population density requires local long term regional planning to get things done. However, in today’s global economy, it is becoming clear that no one is an island. In order to remain a contender in today’s political system,

America will have to go against the historical and political grain to develop a national economic development system if it wants to maintain its ground in the global economy (Ross, 2009; Yang, 2009).

Rail in the People’s Republic of China

The Peoples Republic of China is currently implementing a massive passenger rail expansion program, adding over 20,000 kilometers of track, aiming to operate 110,000 kilometers by 2012. The Ministry of

Railways of the Peoples Republic of China have increased annual investment in rail construction by nearly 90% during the past few years up to ¥337-billion ($51.2-billion USD) in 2008 (China Daily, 2009).

This is compared to a one-time commitment of $10-billion in America by the Obama Administration as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, nearly half of which has been pledged to small lines in Florida and California – and as recently as February 2011, this commitment has expanded to $53-billion over the following six years (Freemark, 2001). In late 2009, Vice Minister Wang Zhiguo announced that the department will be investing another ¥2-trillion ($303.7-billion USD) during the remainder of the year and 2010 in order to reach their scheduled goals for beginning operation (China

Daily, 2009).

Rail in the Republic of India

The Republic of India currently operates the world’s fourth largest rail network through its Ministry of

Railways also known as Indian Railways – with over 1.2-millions employees, it is also one of the largest employers in the world. Running over seven thousand passenger trains, Indian Railways serves 13- million passengers daily (Ministry of Railways, 2011). Although during the previous six decades, the

Page 6 of 85 agency has only added an average of 180 kilometers of track each year, re-elected opposition-leader

Railway Minister Mamata Banerjee unveiled ambitious plans to expand the system by 25,000 kilometers during the next ten years as part of the ‘Vision 2020’ initiative (Press Information Bureau, 2010).

Rail in the European Union

Creating the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), regional planners across Europe have combined various goals of the European Union’s objective into one specialized plan. This strategy has caught the attention of American planners who acknowledge the EU as a superior cooperation of many different countries compared to the wasted potential of what one country cannot seem to do by itself

(Faludi 2002; Carbonell and Yaro, 2005). America certainly has a diverse range of natural, economic and cultural resources, but its lack of desire to produce an all-inclusive national plan is additionally embarrassed by what several neighboring nations with deep political histories can do in a cooperative effort to stake their competitive claim into the global economy. Primarily, the development of a

‘pentagon’ of cities – London, Paris, Milan, Munich and Hamburg – determined the first megaregion for

ESDP. However, more extensive planning promoted the idea that perhaps the EU could support multiple megaregions. It is clear that all of Europe must work together if all of Europe wants to be competitive as a major global stakeholder. To accomplish this, the EU has chosen to adopt a polycentric model of economic competitiveness. Multiple megaregions are necessary and each system needs to be accommodated via a transportation network sharing natural and cultural resources (Ross, 2009). Again, it seems America has missed the mark on this one.

Rail in Spain

Spain’s state owned agency reporting to the Ministerio de Fomento (Ministry of Public Works), the

Administrator of Railway Infrastructures is in charge of managing rail traffic, distributing capacity to rail operators, collecting fees for infrastructure use, and managing current and new capital resources

Page 7 of 85 related to rail such as tracks, stations and freight terminals (ADIF, 2011). Over the last twenty years, passenger miles traveled on rail increased by 55% and ADIF is currently working to double the system’s year 2006 network length to 2,136 miles by year 2012 at the cost €23.4-billion (($31.8-billion USD)

(ADIF, 2006). The agency estimates that the rail expansion has created over 600,000 jobs since 2006.

National plans also call for another massive expansion of rail network to 6,200 miles of high speed track by year 2020 (Worldwatch Institute, 2011).

Rail in France

In nearby France, the Société Nationale des Chemins de fer français (SNCF) or French National Railway

Corporation operates the national rail system which currently comprises 1,550 kilometers of track network with plans to add another 2,000 kilometers by year 2020 (Railway-Technology, 2009).

Rail in the Russian Federation

Ratified in mid-2008, the Russian Federation’s Strategy for Developing Rail Transport 2030 plan details a vision to modernize over 13,000 kilometers of existing intercity track over the next seven years by 2015 as part of its first phase. The second phase outlines a plan to expand the system through one of two possible strategies known locally as the minimum or maximum scenarios. Between the two, the system will expand by at least 16,000 – 20,000 kilometers during the year 2016-2030 phase. The government prepares to spend 4.2-trillion Rubles ($142.9-billion USD) on construction and 3.1-trillion ($105.5-billion

USD) Rubles on new rolling stock. Dedicated “super-speed” lines for trains traveling 350-kilometers per hour will be reserved for high-demand routes primarily connecting major urban centers to Moscow.

Secondary regional corridors will run trains operating at 160-200 kilometers per hour (JSC Russian

Railways, 2007).

Page 8 of 85

Local Review

The relevance of maintaining jurisdictional boundaries in an era which sees no economic activity respecting these man-made political fences is certainly a viable question. It is time to set aside a counter-productive system that yields no use for logic or actual activity. By the midpoint of the twenty- first century, America’s population will have added almost another fifty percent, topping out at approximately 440 million people (Carbonell et al., 2005). Local growth trends suggest that most of the growth will occur throughout a network of metropolitan areas, metropolitan extensions, and urban clusters in between connected through economy, culture, environmental systems, and transportation networks (Contant and Leone de Nie, 2009). With increasing demographic diversity, America will have to confront a range of issues including intensified globalism, deepening inequalities, and potential global resource depletions (Contant Leone de Nie, 2009). Preserving the way things are will have a catastrophic impact on America’s economic standing in the world. A new approach is needed to implement a national strategy to improve efficiency and productivity. Studies have shown that local authority structures often miss the big picture, and resume a false sense of economic strength when choosing to operate with no more than their own goals in sight (Levine, 2001). Without cooperative innovation between the thousands of local and regional jurisdictions in the United States, there is little hope for promoting an efficient national plan that is responsive to global competitiveness (Ross, 2009).

Research Statement

This research aims to consider what America can do in regards to implementing a more comprehensive passenger transportation system. This research will focus on the Piedmont-Atlantic Megaregion and examine related global activities in order to apply global ideas to the megaregion to develop an intra- regional passenger rail network serving as many people as possible. The goal here is to begin the process of designing a megaregion passenger rail network so that when policy makers finally decide that

Page 9 of 85 the time is right for America to join its global competitors, there will be a primer of research in place which will offer direction in how to start looking at regions and how cities can be connected to them through passenger rail alignments.

Page 10 of 85

II. Literature Review

State Rail Plans

Alabama

The most recent state rail plan for Alabama was completed in 2008 through the Alabama DOT’s Bureau of Multimodal Transportation Division. The study primarily focuses on freight rail service, but includes a section devoted to passenger rail service. It begins its overview of intercity passenger service by discussing Amtrak’s connections nationally in the context of Alabama. Only two major cities in the state are connected to Amtrak – Birmingham and Mobile. Birmingham is connected to an alignment of

Washington, D.C. to New Orleans, LA through Charlotte and Atlanta. This line also includes stations in

Anniston and Tuscaloosa. The Mobile station is located on an alignment which connects Jacksonville, FL to New Orleans, LA through Tallahassee. However, the track sections between Pensacola and Mobile were destroyed during Hurricane Katrina and were never rebuilt due to low ridership performance.

Major state cities such as Montgomery and Huntsville do not have a connection to Amtrak passenger rail services.

FIGURE-2.1 Southern Rapid Rail Transit Commission – Gulf Coast HSR Corridor, 2008

The plan highlights efforts initiated by the Southern Rapid Rail Transit Commission (SRRTC) which is a tri- state coalition of bipartisan state and local officials as well as public and private stakeholders in

Page 11 of 85

Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi. This commission assists in coordinating funding sources for passenger rail planning studies. Some of these include:

Deep South HSR Corridor Feasibility Study (1995) – A review of a potential corridor between

Atmore, AL and Lake Charles, LA

Gulf Coast HSR Corridor Feasibility Study (1999) – A review of two potential corridors which

include Alabama stations including a corridor between New Orleans, LA and Birmingham, AL and

a corridor between New Orleans, LA and Pensacola, FL

New Orleans to Mobile Corridor Development Plan (2006) – A review of engineering and

financial requirements for a potential intercity passenger rail alignment between New Orleans

and Mobile

The Alabama State Rail Plan did not necessarily propose or plan any new corridors. It simply stated that it supports the current plans of the SRRTC initiatives and encourages Amtrak to expand services.

Georgia

The most recent state rail plan for Georgia was completed in 2009 through the Georgia DOT’s

Intermodal Programs Division. The study focused almost equally on freight and passenger rail services.

Prefacing the passenger section, the report discusses recent studies in mode choice and trip preference surveys which found that for the right price, a reliable agglomeration of passenger rail services with appropriate service frequencies will generate 7-10-million trips per year. The GDOT has since been focusing on Environmental Assessments of potential corridor lines such as AtlantaMacon and

AtlantaAthens. The report includes a well-articulated vision as well as specific policy statements such as Statement #4:

Page 12 of 85

“Take an active leadership role in the incremental development and implementation of High

Speed Passenger rail service with efforts to realize 200 mph service in the future. Work with our

sister states and create a high speed rail network connecting major southeastern cities with

Atlanta and Macon as multimodal hubs in the State of Georgia.”

The plan reviews previous studies which conclude the forecast growth of vehicle miles of travel (VMT) will exceed highway capacity in many intrastate corridors and accordingly by 2030, population and labor force statistics are expected to double. Between 1995 and the 2020 forecast, intercity trips between

Atlanta and other major state centers are expected to increase by between 71-142% depending on the corridor (GDOT Intercity Rail Plan, 1997).

The document also reviews current passenger rail plans which incorporate Georgia cities for potential station locations. Among these are the following:

Southeast HSR Corridor (2004) – a 366-mile section of track operated by Norfolk Southern which

will connect Charlotte to Macon through Spartanburg, Greenville, and Atlanta utilizing 2-6 daily

high-speed trains.

Atlanta to Jacksonville Intercity Passenger Rail Service Study (2003) – a corridor study

connecting Atlanta to Jacksonville via Macon and Jesup, GA to be operated by Amtrak.

Southeast HSR Feasibility Study (2008) – A review of the CharlotteMacon section of the

corridor in partnership with North Carolina and South Carolina DOT’s. The study concluded that

under the best-case scenario, the system would operate train speeds at 125-150 mph with 14

station locations along the route.

Atlanta to Chattanooga High-Speed Ground Transportation Tier I EIS Study (Current) – This study

reviews the possibility of connecting Atlanta to Chattanooga, including the feasibility and

environmental impacts of different alignment recommendations.

Page 13 of 85

Amtrak provides limited connectivity to Georgia stations through three rail lines. Silver Meteor/Silver

Star provides service between New York and Florida through Coastal Georgia. Palmetto provides service between New York and Georgia with business class amenities. The Crescent offers service from New

York to New Orleans through Atlanta along the Charlotte-Atlanta Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR)

Corridor.

Looking into the future, the Georgia State Rail Plan focuses on corridors which are in the initial stages of development and research. These corridors include:

AtlantaLouisville which included connections in Chattanooga and Nashville

MaconSavannahJacksonville as part of the SEHSR Corridor

RaleighFlorence, SCCharlestonSavannah as part of the SEHSR Corridor

AtlantaBirmingham – currently the alignment does not allow for speeds in excess of 50 mph,

at which current speeds range from 35-40 mph

Other visions for a state intercity rail plans calls for nine of Georgia’s largest cities to be connected to

Macon, in addition to two large travel markets in neighboring states. This system is expected to generate over two million trips per year by 2030. Macon will be the central node for Georgia intercity rail networks, and the AtlantaMacon alignment will be considered the “backbone” of the aggregate system connecting intercity service to national service. The intercity system is based on the connection of eight core non-Atlanta cities which are Albany, Athens, Augusta, Brunswick, Columbus, Savannah,

Waycross and Valdosta. Additionally, a Georgia Rail Passenger Program study looking at commuter rail networks which would provide a revenue surplus based on ridership forecasts includes seven alignments connecting to Atlanta with 45 station locations. By 2030, forecasts are for over ten million riders for this commuter rail service.

Page 14 of 85

FIGURE-2.2 Georgia Intercity High Speed Rail Plan (GDOT State Rail Plan, 2009)

Page 15 of 85

North Carolina

The most recent state rail plan for North Carolina was completed in 2009 through the North Carolina

DOT’s Rail Division. The study is primarily focused passenger rail services with only contextual mentions of freight rail service. However, rather than a service plan, the North Carolina state rail plan is actually a management plan. There are some mentions of new projects and a vision for passenger rail corridors, but primarily this plan focuses on managing the current infrastructure and investments in rail systems which the state already owns or operates. North Carolina is one of the more proactive state investors in passenger rail programs. The state subsidizes two Amtrak routes – The Carolinian which connects New

York to Charlotte and the Piedmont which connects Charlotte to Raleigh. Additionally, the North

Carolina Railroad Company (NCRR) owns a 317-mile x 200’ wide corridor between Charlotte, Greensboro and Raleigh as well as a connection to the state port at Morehead City. The NCDOT has been hard at work since 2001 improving the track networks which have already decreased travel time between

Raleigh and Charlotte by 35 minutes.

FIGURE-2.3 North Carolina High Speed Rail Project Management Plan (NCDOT, 2009)

Page 16 of 85

Passenger rail service in North Caroline consists of six major lines:

1. Carolina - New YorkNew Orleans – passing through Raleigh and Charlotte

2. Piedmont - RaleighCharlotte

3. Crescent - New YorkNew Orleans – passing through Greensboro and Charlotte

4. Silver Meteor - New YorkFlorida – passing through Rocky Mount and Fayetteville

5. Palmetto - New YorkGeorgia – passing through Rocky Mount and Fayetteville

6. Silver Star - New YorkFlorida – passing through Rocky Mount, Raleigh and Southern Pines

The state also participated in the study of the SEHSR Corridor by the Federal Railroad Administration which reviewed the feasibility of the section that will connect the New York/Washington D.C. areas through North Carolina to Charlotte. The study looked at the end-to-end potential travel times as compared to a no-build alternative finding that between nine different scenarios, travel time would range between 6-7.5 hours compared to ten hours in the no-build scenario. Ridership forecasts range between 1.3-1.8 million passengers.

South Carolina

The most recent state rail plan for South Carolina was completed in 2008 through the South Carolina

Department of Commerce in partnership with the SC DOT. The study is primarily focused on freight rail services but include some information about a passenger rail vision as well. South Carolina is served by four Amtrak trains along three routes connecting the South with the Northeast. South Carolina ridership totaled over 200,000 in 2009 along these corridors. These trains include:

Silver Star – New YorkTampaMiami via Columbia, SC

Silver Meteor – New YorkMiami via Charleston, SC

Palmetto – New YorkSavannah via Charleston, SC

Crescent – New YorkNew Orleans via Greenville, SC

Page 17 of 85

FIGURE-2.4 South Carolina Freight and Passenger Rail Corridors (SC Department of Commerce, 2008)

There are three proposals for intercity passenger rail in South Carolina which are currently active. The

SEHSR Corridor includes two routes which pass through the state. The CharlotteAtlanta route passes through Spartanburg and Greenville while the RaleighSavannah route passes through Columbia.

Aside from cooperating with these national and regional corridors, two sets of commuter corridors were identified around Columbia and Charleston where a need already exists.

Tennessee

The most recent state rail plan for Tennessee was completed in 2003 through the Tennessee DOT. The study is primarily focused on freight rail services but include some information about a vision for passenger rail as well. Tennessee’s biggest challenge is that there is no national service routes with the exception of one station located in Memphis. In other words, there is not even a skeleton to work with to build a passenger rail system in Tennessee, so the Tennessee Rail System Plan attempted to address this concern.

Page 18 of 85

FIGURE-2.5 Passenger Rail Routes in the Eastern United States (TDOT, 2003)

Among twelve potential intercity passenger rail corridors which could serve the state, four were selected as creating the greatest utility for the state’s population for the least difficulty of implementation. These include MemphisNashville, LouisvilleChattanooga via Nashville,

ChattanoogaBristol via Knoxville, and NashvilleBristol via Knoxville. Annual ridership for these corridors is forecasted to range from 82,200 – 155,400.

FIGURE-2.6 Annual Ridership for the Most Promising Tennessee Passenger Rail Corridors (TDOT, 2003)

Page 19 of 85

The plan calls for priority cooperation with Kentucky and Virginia to create the interstate corridors such as LouisvilleNashville corridor, which will eventually extend through Chattanooga to Atlanta.

City Classification and Ranking

Prioritizing cities is a foundational step in creating a passenger rail network from scratch. Prioritizing cities by a ranking methodology helps determine what the main system nodes will be that will become the backbone of the network as well as the attractors for ridership which will assist corridor city stations to be successful. In order to determine how to prioritize cities in the Piedmont-Atlantic Megaregion for this purpose, it is important to draw from global classification methods as a theoretical framework.

Terminology such as Global City or World City have been around since the late 1800’s although the recent usage of these terms have gained popularity over the last couple decades since the publishing of

The Global City: New York, Tokyo, London by sociologist Saskia Sassen. The book discussed economic and social issues relating to the distribution and concentration of powers and economic systems. Since then, many scholars have written about topics relating to the classification of urban entities around the world. This trend has produced a plethora of varying types of criteria used to justify different ways of ranking cities. Generally, experts agree on which cities are the world leaders, but the way in which criteria is chosen to make these determinations can change which second-tier cities are included or excluded (Doel & Hubbard, 2002). Generally, there are four different sets of criteria which are used in many frameworks to classify and rank global urban areas:

Economic Characteristics: These include the number of corporate headquarters, multinational

corporations, financial institutions, law firms, or stock exchanges based in the city. In addition,

production capacity and output such as gross domestic product, bank deposits and wealth of

population are also considered (Beaverstock, 2005; Mercer, 2010; Vorasarun, 2008).

Page 20 of 85

Political Characteristics: These include population, demographics, housing types, urbanization,

personal mobility, and types of municipal, regional, or national offices are located in the city

(World Resources, 1999; United Nations, 2004).

Cultural Characteristics: These include the number of educational institutions, museums,

galleries and tourist attractions located in the city. Additionally the diversity of demographics,

religion, research, media and historic significant are also types of cultural characteristics

(O’Connor, 2005).

Infrastructure Characteristics: These include sophisticated mass transportation systems,

international airports, seaports, passenger rail ridership the presence of high-tech

communication networks, recognizable skylines, and inventory of service infrastructure such as

parks, libraries, and hospitals (Witlox, 2004; Wendel Cox, 2003).

Using appropriate datasets to represent various kinds of criteria to measure cities against each other is a beneficial way to understand how cities relate to one other. By creating indices, representing this information, cities can be ranked by different attributes and analyzed accordingly.

Page 21 of 85

III. Methodology

The steps of this research process are fairly straightforward, though completing the process itself for 85 different cities shall be robust. There are eight main processes in this research plan, not including sub- steps.

1. Data Collection

In step one, the purpose is to collect appropriate data to analyze for this project. The minimum threshold for core-based statistical area population shall be 65,000 since that is also the minimum threshold for the American Community Survey to collect data on a specific political jurisdiction. This threshold shall include all Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA’s) located in the Piedmont-Atlantic

Megaregion (PAM) – only two MSA’s in the United States do not meet this minimum threshold.

Additionally, forty-six Micropolitan Statistical Areas shall be included in this threshold as well.

Data was collected for several attributes including total population, age 65+ population, post-secondary enrolled population, population attaining bachelors’ degree for higher, non-white population, foreign- born population, same-sex partner household population, population fluent in languages other than

English, labor force population, and aggregate income of population.

2. Averaging Data Attributes

This step requires an average to be taken of all core-based statistical area records for each data attribute

– population averages and aggregate income average.

3. Indexing Data & Compiling Score

This calculation requires each core-based statistical area attribute record to be divided by the attribute’s mean to create an index score. This calculation but be completed for each attribute type – therefore measuring each CBSA against its peers for each attribute.

Page 22 of 85

4. Calculating CBSA Score

Step four requires all attribute scores for each CBSA record to be summed to create a total CBSA record score. This total score measures all attributes for each CBSA record against its peers for all attributes.

5. Calculating Total Scores

Step five requires each CBSA record to be ranked using by their summed scores.

6. Designating Alignments by Rank

Step six requires alignments to be designated based on the ranking of summed scores of CBSA records.

Beginning with ‘rank 1’ through ‘rank 85’, alignments must be designated in this order. In other words,

Alignment 1 must be ‘rank 1’’rank 2’. Alignment 2 will be based on its proximity to previous alignments – termed parent cities for this purpose. Guidelines for making alignment decisions include:

1. Alignments must connect cities in rank order (see example above).

2. After the first alignment is determined, all remaining alignments must be selected based on the

ranking city’s proximity to previous city alignments – termed parent cities.

a. Example: “Charlotte is one of Birmingham’s parent cities. However, Birmingham is not in close proximity to Charlotte, but Birmingham’s other parent city, Atlanta, is connected to Charlotte. Therefore Birmingham can connect to Charlotte by connecting to Atlanta, therefore satisfying both parent city connections.” b. Duplication must be reduced as much as possible

3. Corridor cities between alignment cities must be selected based on total population, labor force

population and aggregate income statistics. If multiple corridor cities have very similar statistics,

the decision must be based on the corridor city’s proximity to a future potential connection.

7. Connection to Border Cities

Step seven required that the Piedmont-Atlantic Passenger Rail Network (PAPRN) be connected to

‘Border Cities’ which are major cities located in close proximity to the five states – generally just across

Page 23 of 85 the border. These cities include Jacksonville, Tallahassee, Pensacola, Gulfport, Louisville, and Richmond-

Virginia Beach.

8. Construct Shuttle Routes

Step eight requires that CBSA’s which are not feasible by the criteria and methodology listed above to be connected to the PAPRN by shuttle services. This step should be completed during Step 6 but should be designated as a shuttle route rather than a rail alignment during that step.

Page 24 of 85

IV. Analysis

In order to create a megaregion passenger rail network from the beginning, it all must be constructed using simple data. Such a system must begin with the most powerful cities to anchor the network for regional stability. Station locations must begin with the urban entities which can provide the most support for the system through ridership generation, capture and attraction. While only few cities can make the cut for Global City classification worldwide, similar data attributes have been selected to help measure the classification of cities in the Piedmont-Atlantic Megaregion including political, cultural and economic measures.

Political

Political attributes consist of different types of population in addition to total population.

Total Population

City Rank Population Index

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1 5,476,664 16.06 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC 2 1,745,524 5.12 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN 3 1,581,908 4.64 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 4 1,304,905 3.83 Birmingham-Hoover, AL 5 1,131,070 3.32 Greenwood, SC 81 69,671 0.20 Fort Payne, AL 82 69,380 0.20 Statesboro, GA 83 69,213 0.20 North Wilkesboro, NC 84 66,555 0.20 Greeneville, TN 85 66,282 0.19 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

More than any other data attribute, total population offers one of the best views of how powerful a city will be to provide a station location in a megaregion network. Total population basically offers the analyst with the highest number of riders possible in generation, capture and attraction. Although no city will send its entire population onto passenger train sets exclusively to intercity travel, total population generally provides a look into what a ceiling of possibility will look like in comparison to other cities. Notice that the smallest ranked cities in population each have very similar statistics to each

Page 25 of 85 other – the reason for this is because the American Community Survey, from which the majority of the attribute data for this analysis is accessed, only collects data for political entities with a minimum threshold population of 65,000. This minimum threshold also serves as a good minimum indication for corridor city station location decisions.

Elderly Population

City Rank Population Index

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1 467,632 11.69 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC 2 173,806 4.34 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN 3 165,867 4.15 Birmingham-Hoover, AL 4 147,120 3.68 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 5 137,212 3.43 Lincolnton, NC 81 9,893 0.25 Lancaster, SC 82 9,865 0.25 Fort Payne, AL 83 9,822 0.25 Statesboro, GA 84 7,086 0.18 Hinesville-Fort Stewart, GA 85 3,888 0.10 Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Elderly population measures how many people in the core-based statistical area are age 65 for older.

This population cohort may be more likely to demand intercity passenger rail service for a variety of reasons from ability to drive long distances to desire for comfort during travel and ability to travel.

Post-Secondary Enrolled Population

City Rank Population Index

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1 266,442 14.22 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC 2 85,901 4.59 Raleigh-Cary, NC 3 70,370 3.76 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN 4 66,068 3.53 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 5 60,432 3.23 Talladega-Sylacauga, AL 83 2,977 0.16 Seneca, SC 82 2,923 0.16 Columbia, TN 81 2,483 0.13 North Wilkesboro, NC 84 2,101 0.11 Lancaster, SC 85 2,086 0.11 Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Page 26 of 85

Post-Secondary Enrolled Population measures the number of people residing in the core-based statistical area who are currently enrolled in college. Host cities for major educational institutions make excellent corridor cities because they are crucial ridership generators. Most major universities are not attended by people residing locally; therefore students are living away from home while furthering their education. Cities which have significant populations enrolled in post-secondary educational institutions should stand out because those people are potential riders to visit hometowns. Additionally upon graduation, those populations will be seeking employment and will need convenient access to other cities for interviewing without breaking the limited budget during post-graduation pre-employment status. For this reason, college towns stand out.

Educated Population

City Rank Population Index

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1 1,195,276 19.60 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC 2 367,577 6.03 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN 3 324,129 5.31 Raleigh-Cary, NC 4 307,502 5.04 Birmingham-Hoover, AL 5 208,205 3.41 Hinesville-Fort Stewart, GA 81 6,779 0.11 Greeneville,TN 82 6,007 0.10 North Wilkesboro, NC 83 5,635 0.09 Roanoke Rapids, NC 84 5,116 0.08 Fort Payne, AL 85 4,446 0.07 Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Educated Population measures the number of people age 15 or older who have attained a Bachelors

Degree or higher forms of education. Typically, college-educated people do not stay in one place forever. Educational capital is needed everywhere, so employed people with formal college training are likely to travel for business and pleasure.

Page 27 of 85

Cultural

Cultural attributes consist of different types of minority populations indicating an existing non-dominant cultural community.

Non-White Population

City Rank Population Index

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1 2,409,301 21.30 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 2 682,533 6.04 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC 3 579,327 5.12 Birmingham-Hoover, AL 4 371,091 3.28 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN 5 356,996 3.16 Talladega-Sylacauga, AL 81 27,835 0.25 Columbia, TN 82 14,164 0.13 North Wilkesboro, NC 83 7,202 0.06 Fort Payne, AL 84 5,189 0.05 Greeneville, TN 85 3,487 0.03 Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Non-White Population measures the number of racial minorities residing in the core-based statistical area. Areas with a high population of minorities host non-dominant cultural communities which provide an attractive factor for tourists as well as personal and business interactions within the creative class.

Foreign-Born Population

City Rank Population Index

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1 780,233 28.51 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC 2 187,642 6.86 Raleigh-Cary, NC 3 137,836 5.04 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN 4 127,160 4.65 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 5 69,848 2.55 Cullman, AL 81 2,329 0.09 Tullahoma, TN 82 1,563 0.06 Greeneville, TN 83 1,499 0.05 Roanoke Rapids, NC 84 1,411 0.05 Talladega-Sylacauga, AL 85 1,091 0.04 Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Foreign-Born Population measures the total number of non-citizens and citizens born outside of the

United States. Areas with a high foreign-born population host non-dominant cultural communities.

Page 28 of 85

Same-Sex Household Population

City Rank Population Index

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1 26,686 21.79 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC 2 8,906 7.27 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN 3 6,764 5.52 Columbia, SC 4 4,346 3.55 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 5 4,270 3.49 Cleveland, TN 81 237 0.19 Orangeburg, SC 82 227 0.19 Gadsden, AL 83 138 0.11 North Wilkesboro, NC 84 77 0.06 Talladega-Sylacauga, AL 85 28 0.02 Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Same-Sex Household Population measures the total number of household members reporting themselves as same-sex unmarried partner households on census forms. This is an indirect way that the census counts gay and lesbian households. Although it is an extreme undercount of LGBT’s (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) since it only allows reporting of unmarried couples, and relies on the self- reporter’s comfort level of sharing this type of information, it is still a useful way to measure the LGBT community’s size in one city relative to another city. Cities with a large LGBT population proportion statistically have larger proportions of arts employment and can feel more tolerant to cultural differences in addition to other attractive features (Murray, 2007).

Non-English Fluent Population

City Rank Population Index

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1 305,923 25.87 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC 2 85,899 7.27 Raleigh-Cary, NC 3 58,042 4.91 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN 4 54,957 4.65 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 5 36,094 3.05 Fort Payne, AL 81 1,968 0.17 Greenwood, SC 82 1,726 0.15 North Wilkesboro, NC 83 1,644 0.14 Gadsden, AL 84 1,258 0.11 Talladega-Sylacauga, AL 85 795 0.07 Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Page 29 of 85

Non-English Fluent Population measures the number of people residing in the core-based statistical area who are fluent in languages other than English. Areas with high non-English speaking population host non-dominant cultural communities.

Economic

Economic attributes consist of financial statistics as well as productive population measures.

Labor Force Population

City Rank Population Index

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1 2,660,601 16.21 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC 2 864,890 5.27 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN 3 797,145 4.86 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 4 605,197 3.69 Raleigh-Cary, NC 5 560,551 3.41 Seneca, SC 81 30,998 0.19 North Wilkesboro, NC 82 30,802 0.19 Lancaster, SC 83 30,336 0.18 Greeneville, TN 84 29,407 0.18 Fort Payne, AL 85 27,736 0.17 Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Labor Force Population measures the number of workforce members residing in the core-based statistical area. A large city workforce indicates an area with significant economic interaction.

Aggregate Income

City Rank Population Index

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1 $141,630,424,800 17.70 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC 2 $49,122,792,100 6.14 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN 3 $40,801,175,300 5.10 Raleigh-Cary, NC 4 $31,408,650,200 3.93 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 5 $28,631,402,400 3.58 Lancaster, SC 81 $1,302,044,500 0.16 Greeneville, TN 82 $1,204,972,200 0.15 Roanoke Rapids, NC 83 $1,163,638,500 0.15 Statesboro, GA 84 $1,148,127,300 0.14 Fort Payne, AL 85 $1,047,008,500 0.13 Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Page 30 of 85

Aggregate Income measures the total sum of all the personal incomes of the entire core-based statistical area’s residential population. Another way of defining this statistic is “buying power”.

Index Scores

City Rank Index

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1 192.9 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC 2 58.0 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN 3 45.6 Raleigh-Cary, NC 4 38.0 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 5 36.2 Birmingham-Hoover, AL 6 28.8 Columbia, SC 7 23.3 Greensboro-High Point, NC 8 21.5 Durham-Chapel Hill, NC 9 20.4 Charleston-North Charleston-Summerville, SC 10 18.8 Sevierville, NC 76 1.6 Cullman, AL 77 1.6 Lincolnton, NC 78 1.5 Mount Airy, NC 79 1.5 Lancaster, SC 80 1.5 Seneca, SC 81 1.4 Greeneville, TN 82 1.4 Talladega-Sylacauga, AL 83 1.2 Fort Payne, AL 84 1.1 North Wilkesboro, NC 85 1.0 Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Page 31 of 85

Atlanta, GA  Charlotte, NC

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Atlanta 1 192.9 5,476,664 2,660,601 $141,630,424,800 Charlotte 2 58 1,745,524 864,890 $49,122,792,100

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Greenville 11 18.3 639,617 308,138 $14,200,167,700 Athens 26 7.3 192,222 105,388 $3,607,944,300 Spartanburg 27 6.9 286,822 133,267 $5,453,254,900 Gainesville 32 5.7 187,743 87,481 $3,969,676,300 Anderson 42 3.8 184,901 83,705 $3,862,687,300 Greenwood 73 1.8 69,671 31,028 $1,556,448,400 Seneca 81 1.4 71,514 30,998 $1,552,545,200

As is noticeable, in every category of data analysis, Atlanta is the obvious outlier as it ranks much higher than the other cities ranked directly afterwards. For example, in index, population, income and labor force Atlanta boasts approximately three times that of second-place holder, Charlotte. Cities ranked second through sixth place have much more in common relative to scale than Atlanta. So it would make

Page 32 of 85 sense to perceive Atlanta’s role in the context of a Piedmont-Atlantic megaregion passenger rail system to be the central network hub. Considering its geographic location, being a central network hub also makes sense in that regard as well.

Although it does not compare with Atlanta in any regard to ranking, Charlotte unsurprisingly ranked in second place – or first place among the non-outliers. Therefore the first alignment to consider for a passenger rail network must be Atlanta, GA to Charlotte, NC. Corridor cities include Greenville, Athens,

Spartanburg, Gainesville, Anderson, Greenwood and Seneca. These cities vary in the following ways:

Population: 71,500 – 639,600

Labor Force: 30,900 – 308,100

Aggregate Income: $1.5 – 14.2-Billion

In designing the alignment, it is important to look at the corridor cities by their population, labor force and aggregate income more so than their ranking because making the alignment itself successful for passenger rail connectivity is the paramount goal here. Every city will get its turn to be reviewed for a connection to the network in the order of its ranking – which is the purpose of the ranking and index – but for alignment designation purposes, connecting people, labor and money are the important factors to be considered. So, while Athens ranks second (actual rank is 26th) among the corridor cities above

Spartanburg, it will be considered for alignment connectivity after Spartanburg because its population, labor force and aggregate income statistics are smaller. However, in the case those two competitive cities are very similar in population, labor force and aggregate income, the index score can be used to resolve the dispute, as well as a consideration of each city’s geographic proximity to other urban centers which would need connections to the passenger rail network.

In this corridor, Greenville has the priority to be connected followed by Spartanburg. Since both cities are near a direct-line path between Atlanta and Charlotte, they are easy contenders for potential

Page 33 of 85 station-locations. Athens and Gainesville on the other hand are obvious competitors for the first station exiting the Atlanta region towards Charlotte but are nearly equally variant from a direct-line between

Atlanta to Charlotte as well as Atlanta to Greenville – therefore a choice between the two must be determined. Athens outranks Gainesville in regard to population and labor force, but Gainesville has a higher aggregate income than Athens. In this situation, it is important to look at geographic characteristics to assist in making a decision. In regard to geographic location, Athens is in closer proximity to other urban areas which will need a connection to a megaregion passenger network, but

Gainesville is only in proximity to Atlanta which is the central network hub. North of Gainesville, there are no urban centers which could be logical corridor cities for other alignments, whereas Athens could be a logical corridor city between Atlanta and Augusta. In this case, Athens is chosen due to its population, labor force and geographic proximity to other urban centers as well as its higher index score.

Anderson, Greenwood and Seneca appear to be competitors for station location due to their geographic position in the center of the alignment area. Anderson obviously dominates in regard to population, labor force and aggregate income. Due to its proximity to a direct-line between Athens and Greenville as well as its other superior rankings in population, labor force and aggregate income, Anderson is chosen as the station location between its competitors. Finally Gastonia, was given a station location before the end of the alignment due to its high urbanized area population of 145,908. Although it is part of the Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC.,SC. Metropolitan Statistical Area, it is an entirely different urbanized area than that of Charlotte and of quite a significant size. Gastonia’s urbanized area population is closest to that of Spartanburg’s. When reviewing the potential of multiple station locations placed within the same core-based statistical area – generally for very large CBSA’s – urbanized area population is used as the metric to determine level of significance relative to other station locations along the same alignment.

Page 34 of 85

Statistics - (AtlantaAthensAndersonGreenvilleSpartanburgGastoniaCharlotte)

Total Corridor Population: 8,525,750

AtlantaGainesvilleSenecaGreenvilleSpartanburgGastoniaCharlotte -117,886 AtlantaAthensGreenwoodGreenvilleSpartanburgGastoniaCharlotte -115,230

Total Corridor Labor Force: 4,155,989

AtlantaGainesvilleSenecaGreenvilleSpartanburgGastoniaCharlotte -70,614 AtlantaAthensGreenwoodGreenvilleSpartanburgGastoniaCharlotte -52,677

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $217.8-Billion

AtlantaGainesvilleSenecaGreenvilleSpartanburgGastoniaCharlotte -$1.948-Billion AtlantaAthensGreenwoodGreenvilleSpartanburgGastoniaCharlotte -$2.306-Billion

According to the aggregate alignment statistics for Atlanta to Charlotte, the chosen alignment is the optimum selection when compared with potential alternatives which were discussed earlier. The

Athens versus Gainesville decision proved to be more beneficial with AthensAnderson being selected, as well as the choice between Anderson and Greenwood.

Atlanta, GA  Nashville,TN

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Page 35 of 85

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Atlanta 1 192.9 5,476,664 2,660,601 $141,630,424,800 Nashville 3 45.6 1,581,908 797,145 $40,801,175,300

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Chattanooga 13 14.4 524,211 257,111 $12,039,340,300 Dalton 41 3.9 134,319 61,834 $2,233,104,500 Rome 62 2.5 96,250 49,433 $1,874,868,000 Cleveland 64 2.3 113,193 54,342 $2,302,565,700 Tullahoma 72 1.9 100,093 48,107 $1,970,409,900 Nashville ranks third after Charlotte, and is geographically located northwest of Atlanta. Therefore, the logical alignment will be AtlantaNashville with no need to create a separate CharlotteNashville alignment since Charlotte (northeast of Atlanta) can connect to Nashville westward via Atlanta, making

Atlanta a corridor city. Again, another purposeful design standard for creating a megaregion passenger rail network is to reduce duplication wherever possible. So, if Charlotte can connect to Nashville through Atlanta within a reasonable deviation from its imaginary direct-line alignment, then infrastructure for that connection purpose should not be duplicated.

Principal CBSA corridor cities include Chattanooga, Dalton, Rome, Cleveland and Tullahoma. These cities vary in the following ways:

Population: 96,250 – 524,211

Labor Force: 48,107 – 257,111

Aggregate Income: $1.8 – 12.0-Billion

Other corridor cities to be considered include Murfreesboro (urbanized area: 167,288), Cartersville

(urban cluster: 40,616) and Calhoun (urban cluster: 18,750). A direct line alignment between Atlanta and Nashville skips Rome, Chattanooga and Dalton towards Tullahoma and Nashville. However, since

Page 36 of 85

Chattanooga is the obvious first choice for a corridor city due to its overwhelming population, labor force and aggregate income in comparison to other potential corridor cities, it should receive special consideration. Additionally, Chattanooga is ranked 13th in the City Classification Index and will soon be a contender for alignment consideration for connectivity to its larger peers which will include Atlanta and

Nashville. Due to these factors, Chattanooga becomes the priority corridor city for the

AtlantaNashville alignment, which unfortunately pushes Cleveland outside of a reasonable geographic proximity to a direct AtlantaChattanooga alignment or a ChattanoogaNashville alignment. For now,

Cleveland’s viability for passenger rail connection must be set aside.

For the first leg of the AtlantaNashville alignment, there are two possible alignments to connect

Atlanta to Chattanooga – one includes Rome, while the other skips Rome but includes two minor stops.

The decision factors to consider here include population and proximity. The Rome alignment boasts a population of 96,250 in one fewer stop than the non-Rome alignment which only supports a population of 59,366. Additionally, veering the alignment to Rome creates a proximity to a future alignment route towards Birmingham while aligning a straight-path through Cartersville and Calhoun ignores that opportunity. Therefore when acknowledging the opportunity of proximity for future alignments, in addition to population capture, the Rome alignment makes more sense.

Throughout the rest of the AtlantaNashville alignment, there is virtually no competition between potential station locations due to the scarcity of urbanized areas in proximity to a direct line alignment of AtlantaChattanoogaNashville. Although part of the Nashville-Davidson—Murfreesboro—

Franklin, TN. MSA, Murfreesboro is a reasonable contender for potential station location since it boasts an urbanized area of 167,288 at a distance from Nashville’s urban center but in close proximity to a direct line ChattanoogaNashville alignment.

Page 37 of 85

Statistics - (AtlantaRomeDaltonChattanoogaTullahomaMurfreesboroNashville)

Total Corridor Population: 7,913,445

AtlantaCartersvilleCalhounDaltonChattanoogaTullahomaMurfreesboroNashville -36,884

Total Corridor Labor Force: 3,874,231

AtlantaCartersvilleCalhounDaltonChattanoogaTullahomaMurfreesboroNashville -49,433

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $200.5-Billion

AtlantaCartersvilleCalhounDaltonChattanoogaTullahomaMurfreesboroNashville -$1.8-Billion

Charlotte, NC  Raleigh, NC

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Charlotte 2 58 1,745,524 864,890 $49,122,792,100 Raleigh 4 38 1,125,827 560,551 $31,408,650,200

Page 38 of 85

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Greensboro 8 21.5 714,765 361,778 $16,424,240,700 Durham 9 20.4 501,228 266,284 $13,555,150,300 Winston-Salem 16 12.5 484,921 40,346 $11,150,355,700 Burlington 36 4.4 150,358 70,024 $3,162,670,500 Thomasville 44 3.7 158,582 76,570 $3,431,706,500 Salisbury 47 3.5 140,798 71,877 $2,926,660,900 Southern Pines 63 2.5 87,158 36,971 $2,089,639,900

Ranked in fourth place, Raleigh is the next city to be connected to the passenger rail network. Due to its proximity eastward of Charlotte, there is no need to offer alignments for direct connection to Atlanta and Nashville, as a connection to Charlotte will provide further access to those cities. Principal CBSA corridor cities include Greensboro-High Point, Durham-Chapel Hill, Winston-Salem, Burlington,

Thomasville-Lexington, Salisbury and Southern Pines. These cities vary in the following ways:

Population: 87,158 – 714,765

Labor Force: 36,971 – 361,778

Aggregate Income: $2.1 – 16.4-Billion

Other corridor cities to be considered include Concord (urbanized area: 124,521), Asheboro (urban cluster: 33,389) and Sanford (urban cluster: 30,175). A direct line alignment from Charlotte to Raleigh is situated through vast rural areas, skipping almost potential station locations in North Carolina. Two potential alignments with slight variation to a direct-line route could connect Asheboro, Southern Pines, and Sanford – all of which are typically smaller urban areas surrounded by rural territory.

However, observing the geographic orientation of most of the potential corridor cities in this region, it is quite easy to notice that nearly all of the urban areas are situated in two connecting straight lines between Charlotte and Raleigh. Concord, Salisbury, and Thomasville are located in close proximity to a direct-line route between Charlotte and Winston-Salem; while Greensboro, High Point, Burlington,

Page 39 of 85

Durham, and Chapel Hill are located in close proximity to a direct-line route between Winston-Salem and Raleigh. Due to this unique geographic positioning of cities, which includes the seven largest corridor cities, designing two alignments of CharlotteWinston-Salem and Winston-SalemRaleigh becomes the preferred choice. But in keeping with the previous methods of connecting corridor cities based on ranking in population, labor force, and aggregate income and geographic proximity, the same alignment decision is chosen. Thomasville is skipped between Salisbury and Winston-Salem because connecting it would create a forward-backward type design between Thomasville and High Point although a bus rapid transit (BRT) or shuttle connection could fulfill the connection without skewing or duplicating the alignment.

Statistics - (CharlotteConcordSalisburyWinston-SalemHigh PointGreensboroBurlingtonDurhamRaleigh)

Total Corridor Population: 4,863,421

Total Corridor Labor Force: 2,235,750

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $127.7-Billion

Nashville, TN  Memphis, TN

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Page 40 of 85

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Nashville 3 45.6 1,581,908 797,145 $40,801,175,300 Memphis 5 36.2 1,304,905 605,197 $28,631,402,400

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Jackson 58 2.7 114,153 55,936 $2,240,617,800 Columbia 75 1.7 84,302 35,605 $1,728,177,100 Ranked fifth place, Memphis is the next city to be connected to the passenger rail network. Due to its proximity westward of Nashville, there is no need to offer alignments in direct connection to Atlanta,

Charlotte or Raleigh – as a connection to Nashville will provide further access to those cities. There are only two urban areas of significant size in the region between Nashville and Memphis and both are in close proximity to a direct-line route. These two corridor cities are Columbia and Jackson. These two cities vary in the following ways:

Population: 84,302 – 114,153

Labor Force: 35,605 – 55,936

Aggregate Income: $1.7 – 2.2-Billion

Since there is only one alignment option in this situation, below are the alignment statistics.

Statistics - (NashvilleColumbiaJacksonMemphis)

Total Corridor Population: 3,085,268

Total Corridor Labor Force: 1,493,883

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $73.4-Billion

Page 41 of 85

Atlanta, GA  Birmingham, AL

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Atlanta 1 192.9 5,476,664 2,660,601 $141,630,424,800 Birmingham 6 28.8 1,131,070 502,630 $28,313,621,200

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Anniston 54 2.9 114,081 52,582 $2,274,031,700 Rome 62 2.5 96,250 49,433 $1,874,868,000 Gadsden 69 2 103,645 43,418 $2,096,554,900

Ranked sixth place, Birmingham is the next city to be connected to the passenger rail network. Due to its proximity westward of Atlanta, there is no need to offer alignments in direct connection to Charlotte or Raleigh – as a connection to Atlanta will provide further access to those cities. However, a more direct route to Nashville will need to be considered taking into account the urban areas of significant size which are geographically located in between Birmingham and Nashville which will need connection to the passenger rail network as well.

Page 42 of 85

As discussed earlier, the decision to include Rome in the AtlantaNashville alignment was partly due to its geographic proximity to potential future alignments such as an AtlantaBirmingham route.

Therefore, the AtlantaRome segment of the AtlantaNashville alignment will serve as the first segment of the AtlantaBirmingham route. There are only two urban areas of significant size in the region between Rome and Birmingham and both are in close proximity to a direct-line route. These two corridor cities are Anniston-Oxford and Gadsden. These two cities vary in the following ways:

Population: 103,645 – 114,081

Labor Force: 43,418 –52,582

Aggregate Income: $2.1 – 2.2-Billion

These two potential corridor cities are very similar in population, labor force and aggregate income statistics. Additionally these two cities are approximately the same proximity to a direct-line route in the same location along the route, and a line between them will be almost perpendicular to a direct-line alignment. In this case, there are two possible alignment choices resulting in a very similar capture of population, labor force and aggregate income. Also, each choice will disadvantage an entire community of equal size to its competition. Therefore, an alternative is chosen by placing the station location in an approximate center area between Anniston and Gadsden – slightly closer to Anniston due to its larger statistics.

Statistics - (AtlantaRomeAnniston-Oxford/GadsdenBirmingham)

Total Corridor Population: 6,921,710

Total Corridor Labor Force: 3,308,664

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $176.2-Billion

Page 43 of 85

Nashville, TN  Birmingham, AL

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Nashville 3 45.6 1,581,908 797,145 $40,801,175,300 Birmingham 6 28.8 1,131,070 502,630 $28,313,621,200

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Huntsville 17 11.7 406,316 203,418 $11,382,437,400 Florence 49 3.3 144,238 67,572 $2,870,551,700 Decatur 55 2.9 151,399 70,570 $3,109,777,200 Columbia 75 1.7 84,302 35,605 $1,728,177,100

Page 44 of 85

Birmingham still needs an efficient connection to Nashville which will provide a connection to Memphis as well. An alignment is considered by looking at significant urban areas between Birmingham and

Nashville. Columbia is already connected to Nashville via the NashvilleMemphis alignment and it falls within close proximity to a direct-line route between Birmingham and Nashville, so the consideration here becomes a BirminghamColumbia alignment. There are three cities in general proximity to this direct-line route including Decatur, Huntsville and Florence. These cities vary in the following ways:

Population: 144,238 – 406,316

Labor Force: 67,572 –203,418

Aggregate Income: $2.8 – 11.4-Billion

While Decatur is situated almost precisely on the direct-line route, Huntsville much larger in every statistic and therefore receives the priority for connection. However, since Decatur is almost directly on the alignment anyway, and has a higher statistics than Florence, it also becomes a fair contender for a potential station location. Unfortunately, Florence’s farther distance from a direct route connecting

Huntsville to the BirminghamColumbia alignment as well as its inferior population, labor force and aggregate income statistics make it an unfavorable station location for this particular alignment.

Florence can still be connected to Decatur via a BRT or shuttle service.

Statistics - (BirminghamDecaturHuntsvilleColumbiaNashville)

Total Corridor Population: 3,354,995

Total Corridor Labor Force: 1,609,368

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $85.3-Billion

Page 45 of 85

Atlanta, GA  Columbia, SC  Charlotte, NC

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Atlanta 1 192.9 5,476,664 2,660,601 $141,630,424,800 Charlotte 2 58 1,745,524 864,890 $49,122,792,100 Columbia 7 23.3 745,381 368,507 $17,807,715,400

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Augusta 14 13.9 539,652 259,605 $11,436,586,200 Athens 26 7.3 192,222 105,388 $3,607,944,300 Lancaster 80 1.5 77,767 30,336 $1,302,044,500

Columbia ranks eighth after Birmingham for connection to the passenger rail network. Due to its distance from the AtlantaCharlotte alignment, a similar route connecting Atlanta and Charlotte can be established via Columbia, although this is not the intention. The intention is to connect Columbia to its nearest regional parent cities which are Atlanta and Charlotte. Through Atlanta, Columbia will be connected to Nashville, Memphis and Birmingham while its connection to Charlotte will provide service

Page 46 of 85 to Raleigh. As discussed earlier in the AtlantaCharlotte section, Athens was chosen over Gainesville in part due to its proximity to other urban areas which will need a future connection to the passenger rail network. Athens therefore will provide a route to Columbia via Augusta, therefore connecting a second major urban center in the process of connecting Columbia.

There are two CBSA corridor cities in general proximity to a direct-line AthensColumbia route –

Greenwood and Augusta-Aiken. While Greenwood is situated in much closer proximity to a direct-line route between Athens and Columbia, Augusta boasts nearly ten times the population, labor force and aggregate income when compared to Greenwood. Additionally, Athens was chosen over Gainesville in the AtlantaCharlotte alignment decision partly based on a future potential connection to Augusta, so the alignment decision for Atlanta-AthensColumbia will include Augusta rather than Greenwood. A second station in the Augusta area will be located in Aiken due to its significant urban population distanced from central Augusta.

Statistics - (AtlantaAthensAugustaAikenColumbia)

Total Corridor Population: 6,953,919

Total Corridor Labor Force: 3,394,101

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $174.5-Billion

There is only one CBSA corridor city in general proximity to a direct-line ColumbiaCharlotte route –

Lancaster. However, there are two urban areas within the base city CBSA’s which are contenders for potential station location due to their significant urban area populations and geographic proximity to a direct-line ColumbiaCharlotte route. These cities are Camden (urban cluster 17,470) and Rock Hill

(urbanized area 87,365). There are no other significant urban areas in proximity to a direct-line route, so there is no competition between station locations in this alignment.

Page 47 of 85

Statistics - (AtlantaAthensAugustaAikenColumbia)

Total Corridor Population: 2,568,672

Total Corridor Labor Force: 1,263,733

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $68.2-Billion

Columbia, SC  Charleston, SC

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Columbia 7 23.3 745,381 368,507 $17,807,715,400 Charleston 10 18.8 659,191 321,206 $15,665,450,600

Page 48 of 85

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Sumter 59 2.6 104,495 43,135 $1,810,143,400 Orangeburg 70 2.0 90,112 41,113 $1,484,553,100

Since Greensboro and Durham, NC have already been connected to the network in the

CharlotteRaleigh alignment, Charleston is next in line for connection. Columbia is the only parent city to in proximity to Charleston so a ColumbiaCharleston alignment design is next. Through Columbia,

Charleston will be connected to Charlotte and Raleigh to the north and Atlanta, Nashville, Memphis and

Birmingham to the northeast. There are two CBSA corridor cities within close proximity to a direct-line route between Columbia and Charleston – Sumter and Orangeburg. Though the two cities are similar in population, labor force and aggregate income, Sumter is significantly larger and has a higher index score than Orangeburg. However, Orangeburg is in an almost direct-line alignment between Charleston and

Columbia, as well as a future connection to Greenville, SC. A connection to Sumter would not justify a direct connection to Columbia but to Camden instead and this alignment would interrupt a direct route between Charleston, Columbia and Greenville, SC. Sumter is also in close proximity to potential future station locations in Florence, SC and Fayetteville, NC. So while Sumter’s statistics are stronger than

Orangeburg in this case, its proximity to a direct-line route is weak but its proximity to future potential station locations is strong. Therefore, Orangeburg is selected for the ColumbiaCharleston alignment.

Additionally, due to the elongated, spatial orientation of Charleston’s urbanized area, two additional station locations are considered to serve North Charleston and Summerville.

Statistics - (ColumbiaOrangeburgSummervilleNorth CharlestonCharleston)

Total Corridor Population: 1,494,684

Total Corridor Labor Force: 730,826

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $34.9-Billion

Page 49 of 85

Columbia, SC  Greenville, SC

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Columbia 7 23.3 745,381 368,507 $17,807,715,400 Greenville 11 18.3 639,617 308,138 $14,200,167,700

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Greenwood 73 1.8 69,671 31,028 $1,556,448,400

Ranked 11th following Charleston is Greenville, SC. which is already connected to Atlanta and Charlotte via Alignment 1, but needs a connection to Columbia as well. This is also the opportunity Greenwood,

SC. has been waiting for since it is the only corridor city between Greenville and Columbia. South of

Greenville, Mauldin, SC. (urbanized area 94,704) will also be considered for a station location.

Page 50 of 85

Statistics - (ColumbiaOrangeburgSummervilleNorth CharlestonCharleston)

Total Corridor Population: 1,454,669

Total Corridor Labor Force: 707,673

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $33.5-Billion

Atlanta, GA—Charlotte, NC—Greenville, SC  Knoxville, TN

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Atlanta 1 192.9 5,476,664 2,660,601 $141,630,424,800 Charlotte 2 58 1,745,524 864,890 $49,122,792,100 Nashville 3 45.6 1,581,908 797,145 $40,801,175,300 Greenville 11 18.3 639,617 308,138 $14,200,167,700 Knoxville 12 17.7 699,247 362,220 $17,007,163,100

Page 51 of 85

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Asheville 15 12.5 412,671 205,558 $9,637,191,000 Hickory 23 8.8 365,364 168,066 $6,779,837,900 Johnson City 33 5.2 197,381 100,615 $3,855,106,200 Statesville 46 3.5 158,153 79,273 $3,789,191,800 Cleveland 64 2.3 113,193 54,342 $2,302,565,700 Morristown 66 2.3 137,612 63,327 $2,552,308,500 Sevierville 76 1.6 86,243 48,562 $1,669,380,600 Greeneville 82 1.4 66,282 29,407 $1,204,972,200

Knoxville is ranked twelvth after Greenville, SC which has already been connected to the passenger rail network. Situated in the northernmost region of the Piedmont-Atlantic Megaregion, Knoxville will require separate networks to connect to major markets, such as Atlanta, Charlotte, Nashville and

Greenville. Like the Charlotte to Raleigh alignment, connecting Knoxville to these parent cities will be a beneficial task for the megaregion passenger network due to the geographic positioning of urban areas located along imaginary lines toward each other these major markets. Because Knoxville is larger than

Chattanooga in statistics and index scores, the alignments cannot be designated as

KnoxvilleChattanooga although the connection will provide service to two parent cities, Atlanta and

Nashville. For the purpose of maintaining the same standard, there will be four alignment sections pertaining to Knoxville.

In section one and three – the Atlanta and Nashville alignments – there is only one corridor city between

Knoxville and Chattanooga – Cleveland. Additionally Cleveland is very close to the direct-line route between Knoxville and Chattanooga, so in this case, it the perfect station location choice.

Statistics - (AtlantaRomeDaltonChattanoogaClevelandKnoxville)

Total Corridor Population: 7,043,894

Total Corridor Labor Force: 3,445,541

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $177.0-Billion

Page 52 of 85

Statistics - (NashvilleMurfreesboroTullahomaChattanoogaClevelandKnoxville)

Total Corridor Population: 3,249,231

Total Corridor Labor Force: 1,630,192

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $78.2-Billion

In section two, the CharlotteKnoxville alignment contains six CBSA corridor cities which as discussed earlier are conveniently positioned in an arc shape from Knoxville to Charlotte. These cities include

Sevierville, Morristown, Greeneville, Johnson City, Hickory, and Statesville. These cities range in population, labor force and aggregate income:

Population: 66,282 – 365,364

Labor Force: 29,407 –168,066

Aggregate Income: $1.2 – 6.8-Billion

Additionally the city of Mooresville (urban cluster 30,254) is in direct alignment with

CharlotteStatesville so a potential station location should be considered as well.

Statistics - (CharlotteMooresvilleStatesvilleHickoryJohnson CityGreenevilleMorristownSeviervilleKnoxville)

Total Corridor Population: 3,455,806

Total Corridor Labor Force: 1,716,360

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $90.0-Billion

Finally, GreenvilleKnoxville is section four of Alignment 10. This route only includes one unconnected corridor city, Asheville, NC. This alignment connects Greenville, SC to Greeneville TN via Asheville.

Statistics - (GreenvilleAshevilleGreeneville MorristownSeviervilleKnoxville)

Total Corridor Population: 2,041,672

Total Corridor Labor Force: 1,017,212

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $46.2-Billion

Page 53 of 85

Charlotte, NC—Raleigh, NC—Charleston, SC  Wilmington, NC

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Raleigh 4 38 1,125,827 560,551 $31,408,650,200 Columbia 7 23.3 745,381 368,507 $17,807,715,400 Charleston 10 18.8 659,191 321,206 $15,665,450,600 Wilmington 18 10.9 354,525 177,526 $9,289,348,300

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Fayetteville 19 10.6 360,355 158,653 $7,111,827,800 Myrtle Beach 25 7.6 263,868 133,665 $6,293,864,400 Florence 34 4.9 200,653 94,789 $4,032,374,800 Lumberton 50 3.2 129,559 56,549 $1,667,886,700 Dunn, NC 57 2.7 115,761 48,299 $2,087,744,500 Sumter 59 2.6 104,495 43,135 $1,810,143,400 Southern Pines 63 2.5 87,158 36,971 $2,089,639,900

Page 54 of 85

Wilmington, NC is ranked eighteenth after Huntsville, AL which as already been connected to the passenger rail network. Due to its isolated location from the current network, it will need a connection to Raleigh, Columbia and Charleston. Again, similar to previous alignment cases, there are several cities positioned in a line between Raleigh and Columbia, so a connection f prom Wilmington to that line will provide a logical alignment serving many urban areas. Finally, a coastal route to Charleston can also serve Savannah and continue to Jacksonville, FL in future alignments.

The corridor cities along the ColumbiaWimington alignment will connect to Camden as to provide a direct link to Columbia as well as Charlotte. These cities include Lumberton, Florence and Sumter and they vary in the following ways:

Population: 104,495 – 200,653

Labor Force: 43,135 – 94,789

Aggregate Income: $1.6 – 4.0-Billion

Lumberton provides the most logical connection to Wilmington due to its equidistant positioning along the RaleighColumbia stretch of urban areas as well as its proximity to Wilmington. As discussed in the

ColumbiaCharleston alignment, Sumter was passed over due to its distance from the direct line, but also because its proximity to cities such as Florence which would need consideration for future potential station locations. Sumter is also in close proximity to Camdem where the route splits between Columbia and Charlotte. Therefore, the ColumbiaWilmington section of Alignment 11 proves to be more beneficial to Sumter than the Charleston connection could have been.

Statistics - (ColumbiaCamdenSumter FlorenceLumbertonWilmington)

Total Corridor Population: 1,534,613

Total Corridor Labor Force: 740,506

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $34.6-Billion

Page 55 of 85

The RaleighWilmington alignment calls for a decision-making process since there are several urban areas between Lumberton and Raleigh. The decision factors to be considered in this situation include comparison of the potential stations’ CBSA Scores, their proximities to a direct-line RaleighWilmington alignment, and the potential reduction of duplication of future alignments. In other words, if one of the potential station locations is city ranked for future connection, preference should be given to that city over non-ranked cities in order to prevent duplication of alignments serving the same region (refer to

Methodology: Step 6-2b). The CBSA corridor cities include Fayetteville, Southern Pines, and Dunn as well as the urban areas of Sanford (urban cluster 30,175), Smithfield (urban cluster 21,129), and Clayton

(urban cluster 22,229). Smithfield and Clayton share a core-based statistical area with Raleigh and would be two potential west-Raleigh station locations should Dunn be selected as the post-Fayetteville station. Sanford on the other hand is a Micropolitan Statistical Area with a significant urban cluster population and would be considered for a potential station location if Southern Pines were selected as the post-Fayetteville station location.

While Dunn ranks higher than Southern Pines and boasts significantly larger CBSA population and labor force statistics, they are virtually similar in aggregate income. An important factor in station location is the size of the urbanized area population because a station must be situated in a dense area for a greater potential of ridership capture. Interestingly, though Dunn boasts these impressive numbers when compared to Southern Pines, the population in its CBSA is actually somewhat evenly dispursed throughout the area, rather than clustered together as in Southern Pines. Dunn’s urban cluster population is just over half the size of that of Southern Pines. Dunn’s CBSA also includes another urban cluster of merely three thousand as well. If Dunn and one west-Raleigh urban cluster were selected, the most urban area population capture for the two potential station locations would equal 37,762 whereas if Southern Pines and Sanford were selected the urban area population capture would be nearly

Page 56 of 85 doubled at 66,654. For this reason, Southern Pines and Sandford are selected for potential station location.

Statistics - (RaleighSanfordSouthern Pines FayettevilleLumbertonWilmington)

Total Corridor Population: 2,057,424

Total Corridor Labor Force: 990,250

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $51.5-Billion

For Wilmington’s coastal connection to Charleston, there is only one corridor city along a direct-line route, Myrtle Beach. However, due to its extremely elongated urban populaton spatial distribution consideration should be made for two potential station locations. One station location should be positioned in central Myrtle Beach which is convenient to North Myrtle Beach and Conway, and another location should be considered on the southern edge of the urban area between Pawley’s Island and

Georgetown, SC. For the same reason, a station location should be considered north of Charleston in

Mount Pleasant to serve that urban area as well.

Statistics - (RaleighSanfordSouthern Pines FayettevilleLumbertonWilmington)

Total Corridor Population: 1,277,584

Total Corridor Labor Force: 632,397

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $31.2-Billion

Page 57 of 85

Charleston, SC—Augusta, GA  Savannah, GA

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Charleston 10 18.8 659,191 321,206 $15,665,450,600 Augusta 14 13.9 539,652 259,605 $11,436,586,200 Savannah 20 10.5 343,092 175,899 $7,664,600,400

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Hilton Head 28 6.0 178,436 75,742 $4,984,137,700 Statesboro 65 2.3 69,213 34,644 $1,149,127,300

Following Wilmington and Fayetteville, Savannah is ranked twentieth for connection to the passenger rail network. The nearest parent cities to Savannah are Charleston and Augusta. Each parent city is only

Page 58 of 85 separated from Savannah by one CBSA corridor city – Hilton Head Island-Beaufort towards Charleston which Savannah’s international airport shares its name, and Statesboro towards Augusta.

In the CharlestonSavannah section of Alignment 12, Hilton Head Island and Beaufort, SC are two separated cities which are geographically positioned side by side and share the same core-based statistical area. The station location is recommended to be positioned between the two, on the mainland rather than the island to maximize access from the surrounding region.

Statistics - (CharlestonBeaufort-Hilton Head IslandSavannah)

Total Corridor Population: 1,180,719

Total Corridor Labor Force: 572,847

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $28.3-Billion

In the AugustaSavannah section of Alignment 12, Statesboro is the only core-based statistical area between the Augusta and Savannah.

Statistics - (AugustaStatesboroSavannah)

Total Corridor Population: 951,957

Total Corridor Labor Force: 470,148

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $20.2-Billion

Page 59 of 85

Birmingham, AL  Mobile, AL

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Birmingham 6 28.8 1,131,070 502,630 $28,313,621,200 Mobile 21 10.2 411,721 180,517 $8,571,865,200

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Montgomery 22 9.5 367,475 164,902 $7,911,508,600 Tuscaloosa 31 5.8 209,956 96,606 $4,199,305,900 Daphne 37 4.3 179,878 81,355 $4,630,198,300

Page 60 of 85

Following Savannah, Mobile is ranked twenty-first to be connected to the passenger rail network. The nearest parent city to Mobile is Birmingham with only two corridor cities located between the two.

Daphne is located in close proximity to the east, but is near a direct-line route between Mobile and

Pensacola which will be connected in a future alignment. These corridor cities include Tuscaloosa and

Montgomery.

Statistics - (BirminghamTuscaloosaMontgomeryMobile)

Total Corridor Population: 2,120,222

Total Corridor Labor Force: 944,655

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $48.9-Billion

Atlanta, GA—Savannah, GA—Montgomery, AL  Columbus, GA

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Atlanta 1 192.9 5,476,664 2,660,601 $141,630,424,800 Savannah 20 10.5 343,092 175,899 $7,664,600,400 Montgomery 22 9.5 367,475 164,902 $7,911,508,600 Columbus 24 7.9 288,135 128,839 $5,833,559,300

Page 61 of 85

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Macon 29 5.9 230,940 112,179 $4,572,067,400 Auburn 38 4.2 135,883 63,656 $2,946,169,900 Warner Robins 40 4.0 135,715 70,844 $3,345,928,300 Statesboro 65 2.3 69,213 34,644 $1,149,127,300

Following Mobile, Columbus is ranked twenty-fourth to be connected to the passenger rail network.

The nearest parent cities to Columbus are Atlanta, Savannah and Montgomery. Connecting to Atlanta and Savannah provides an opportunity to create and central node at Macon and Warner Robins. Macon and Warner Robins are the only CBSA corridor cities in the region between Atlanta and Columbus although they are not in proximity to a direct-line route between Atlanta and Columbus. Still, connecting at Macon and Warner Robins creates a central node which will be convenient to Atlanta,

Savannah, Augusta, and future connections such as Albany and Tallahassee. Macon and Warner Robins do not have to compete for station location because they can both be part of the same route if Warner

Robins is selected as the node city where Atlanta, Savannah and Columbus lines intersect.

Statistics - (AtlantaMaconWarner RobinsColumbus)

Total Corridor Population: 6,131,454

Total Corridor Labor Force: 2,972,463

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $155.4-Billion

To connect Columbus to Savannah through Warner Robins, the alignment will join at Statesboro, therefore also providing a connection to Augusta as well. Between Warner Robins and Statesboro however, the alignment will pass through as highly rural area of Georgia. One additional stop should be considered for Dublin, Georgia. Dublin is a Micropolitan Statistical Area, so technically it is a CBSA corridor city. The reason Dublin is not included in the original analysis is because its CBSA population is below 65,000 which is the minimum threshold for data collection by the American Community Survey.

Page 62 of 85

Although the total Micropolitan population is less than that threshold, its urban cluster population of

20,131 is significant in the context of the region of Georgia which this line will pass through. In essence,

Dublin is the only significant population cluster between Warner Robins and Statesboro – thus the reason to state that Dublin should be considered for potential station location along this corridor.

Statistics - (ColumbusWarner RobinsDublinStatesboroSavannah) – not including Dublin statistics*

Total Corridor Population: 836,155

Total Corridor Labor Force: 410,226

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $17.9-Billion

Finally, the ColumbusMontgomery alignment is separated by only one CBSA corridor city, Auburn-

Opelika which is a host city for a major university.

Statistics - (ColumbusAuburnMontgomery)

Total Corridor Population: 791,493

Total Corridor Labor Force: 357,397

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $16.7-Billion

Page 63 of 85

Raleigh, NC—Wilmington, NC  Greenville, NC

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Raleigh 4 38 1,125,827 560,551 $31,408,650,200 Wilmington 18 10.9 354,525 177,526 $9,289,348,300 GreenvilleNC 30 5.9 179,715 90,779 $3,753,638,100

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Jacksonville 43 3.8 173,064 67,412 $3,036,507,600 Goldsboro 48 3.5 113,811 53,373 $2,342,942,800 Wilson 52 3.1 78,353 39,213 $1,512,835,900 New Bern 53 3.1 121,456 53,192 $2,452,885,400

Page 64 of 85

Following Columbus, Greenville, NC is ranked thirtieth to be connected to the passenger rail network.

Greenville will need a connection to Raleigh and Wilmington, NC. Between Greenville and Raleigh, the two CBSA corridor cities are Goldsboro, NC and Wilson, NC. Goldsboro is significantly larger than

Wilson, but both are positioned equidistance from a direct-line route towards Raleigh. It is recommended that a station location be placed between the two cities to capture a larger population and to have greater access to a northern connection to Richmond and Virginia Beach.

Statistics - (RaleighGoldsboro-WilsonGreenville)

Total Corridor Population: 1,497,706

Total Corridor Labor Force: 743,916

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $39.0-Billion

Fortunately, Greenville is positioned where the CBSA corridor cities towards Wilmington are positioned in a curved line. The two CBSA corridor cities are New Bern, NC and Jacksonville, NC. While Kinston, NC

(urban cluster 27,479) is location approximately directly on a direct-line route between Greenville and

Wilmington, such a route would miss the two much larger CBSA corridor cities in the arc direction to

Wilmington.

Statistics - (WilmingtonJacksonvilleNew BernGreenville)

Total Corridor Population: 828,760

Total Corridor Labor Force: 388,909

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $18.5-Billion

Page 65 of 85

Athens, GA  Gainesville, GA

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Athens 26 7.3 192,222 105,388 $3,607,944,300 Gainesville 32 5.7 187,743 87,481 $3,969,676,300

Gainesville is ranked thirty-third after Greenville, NC to be connected to the passenger rail system. Since eventually Gainesville will likely connect to a regional Atlanta rail system, it is recommended that the

Gainesville connection focus on adding additional potential to the city. By connecting to Athens,

Gainesville will have a connection to Atlanta in addition to direct access to lines connecting Augusta,

Savannah, Columbia and Greenville. Also Gainesville College has a satellite campus in Oconee County

(Athens CBSA).

Statistics - (GainesvilleAthens)

Total Corridor Population: 379,965

Total Corridor Labor Force: 192,869

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $7.5-Billion

Page 66 of 85

Savannah, GA—Montgomery, AL—Macon, GA  Valdosta, GA

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Savannah 20 10.5 343,092 175,899 $7,664,600,400 Montgomery 22 9.5 367,475 164,902 $7,911,508,600 Macon 29 5.9 230,940 112,179 $4,572,067,400 Albany 35 4.4 164,238 76,727 $2,843,108,100 Valdosta 45 3.7 135,623 67,598 $2,594,689,400

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Warner Robins 40 4.0 135,715 70,844 $3,345,928,300 Dothan 51 3.2 142,693 62,378 $2,839,088,100 Enterprise 56 2.8 96,782 40,720 $2,152,188,500 Brunswick 60 2.6 103,974 51,724 $2,422,989,700 Hinesville 68 2.1 76,090 32,671 $1,330,028,800

Page 67 of 85

The Southern Arc includes several cities which still need a connection to the passenger rail network including the next city in line, Albany, GA as well as Valdosta, GA, Dothan-Enterprise, AL and Brunswick,

GA. This section of network also deals with adding a connection to Tallahassee, FL which is considered a

“border city”. The closest parent cities to Albany are Savannah, Columbus and Macon. Fortunately,

Albany can access all three of these cities via a connection to Warner Robins without CBSA corridor city interruption. Extending the Albany connection southward can provide a connection to Tallahassee through the Thomasville (urban cluster 21,578) Micropolitan Statistical Area. The total

AtlantaTallahassee line will only consist of four “interruptions” (or corridor city stations).

Statistics - (MaconWarner RobinsAlbanyThomasvilleTallahassee) not including Thomasville or Tallahassee statistics*

Total Corridor Population: 530,893

Total Corridor Labor Force: 259,750

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $10.7-Billion

Following Albany, Valdosta is the next city in the Southern Arc region which needs connection to the passenger rail network. Valdosta’s nearest parent cities are Montgomery, Albany and Tallahassee to the west, and Savannah and Jacksonville to the east. Starting with SavannahValdosta, there are two CBSA corridor cities along the coast which will eventually connect to Jacksonville, and one micropolitan corridor city of significant size between the coastal cities and Valdosta. The coastal CBSA corridor cities are Hinesville-Fort Stewart(GA), and Brunswick(GA) and the micropolitan corridor city of significant size is Waycross (urban cluster 24,413).

Statistics - (SavannahHinesvilleBrunswickWaycrossValdosta) not including Waycross statistics*

Total Corridor Population: 658,779

Total Corridor Labor Force: 327,892

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $14.0-Billion

Page 68 of 85

Valdosta is in very close proximity to Thomasville, so it will connect to Albany and Tallahassee via

Thomasville. Extending the ValdostaThomasville line westward to Montgomery will connect Dothan and Enterprise which are the only CBSA corridor cities between Thomasville and Montgomery. Since

Dothan and Enterprise are so close to one another, it is recommended that one station be located between the two cities.

Statistics – (MontgomeryDothan-EnterpriseThomasvilleValdosta) not including Thomasville statistics*

Total Corridor Population: 742,573

Total Corridor Labor Force: 335,598

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $15.5-Billion

Pensacola, FL; Gulfport, MS

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Mobile 21 10.2 411,721 180,517 $8,571,865,200 Dothan 51 3.2 142,693 62,378 $2,839,088,100

Page 69 of 85

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Daphne 37 4.3 179,878 81,355 $4,630,198,300

Network Overview of Border Cities

Now that every region containing an indexed and ranked core-based statistical area has been connected to the Piedmont-Atlantic megaregion passenger rail network, it is important to connect the significant border cities to the network. Border cities are major statistical areas which are located across megaregion lines but have significant attraction to the Piedmont-Atlantic Megaregion.

Mobile is the largest city in need of a border city connection, which is to Pensacola(FL). Pensacola is an extremely west-east elongated urbanized area. The nearest major node to the east is Dothan-

Enterprise. Due to Pensacola’s stretched urban area, it is recommended that there be two station locations for Pensacola – one for the central urban area and one for the eastern area. The Crestview(FL) urban cluster is located just north of the east end of the Pensacola urbanized area, therefore it is recommended that a potential station location be placed between the eastern edge of Pensacola’s urbanized area and Crestview’s urban cluster. This alignment will also allow a connection to the

Daphne-Fairhope core-based statistical area between Mobile and Pensacola. Also it is recommended to include a connection to Gulfport-Biloxi(MS) for Mobile.

Statistics - (Gulfport-BiloxiMobilePensacolaDothan-Enterprise) not including Mississippi or Florida statistics*

Total Corridor Population: 734,292

Total Corridor Labor Force: 324,250

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $16.0-Billion

Page 70 of 85

Richmond, VA; Virginia Beach, VA

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base City

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Wilson 52 3.1 78,353 239,213 $1,512,835,900 New Bern 53 3.1 121,456 53,192 $2,452,885,400

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Rocky Mount 39 4.1 146,596 71,315 $2,803,588,400 Roanoke Rapids 71 2.0 74,718 33,272 $1,163,638,500

Page 71 of 85

Via the New Bern-Wilson station location, Raleigh will be connected to Virginia markets, Richmond and

Virginia Beach. North Carolinian CBSA corridor cities Rocky Mount and Roanoke Rapids are positioned in the straight line between New Bern-Wilson and Richmond.

Statistics - (RaleighNew Bern-WilsonRocky MountRoanoke RapidsRichmond) not including Virginia statistics*

Total Corridor Population: 1,546,950

Total Corridor Labor Force: 957,543

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $39.3-Billion

Jacksonville, FL

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base City

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Brunswick 60 2.6 103,974 51,724 $2,422,989,700

Page 72 of 85

Via the Brunswick station location, cities such as Atlanta, Savannah, Charleston and Valdosta will be connected to Jacksonville. It is recommended that a potential station location be placed at Saint Mary’s-

Kingsland(GA) (urban cluster 29,964) on the Georgia side of the line. This station would also be convenient to Fernandina Beach(FL).

Statistics - (CharlestonHHISavannahHinesvilleBrunswickSt Mary’sJacksonville) not including Florida statistics*

Total Corridor Population: 1,360,783

Total Corridor Labor Force: 657,242

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $32.0-Billion

Louisville, KY

Produced by Drew Murray, 2011 using ESRI ArcGIS – GCS_North_American_1983 Coordinate System Attribute Data Extracted from 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates

Base Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Nashville 3 45.6 1,581,908 797,145 $40,801,175,300 Knoxville 12 17.7 699,247 362,220 $17,007,163,100

Page 73 of 85

Corridor Cities

City Rank Index Population Labor Force Income

Cookeville 61 2.6 105,218 50,825 $1,780,156,700

The final border city with connection potential is Louisville(KY). Connecting through Cookeville(TN) can provide convenient access from Nashville and Knoxville in addition to providing a more direct connection between the two.

Statistics - (NashvilleCookevilleLouisville) not including Kentucky statistics*

Total Corridor Population: 1,687,126

Total Corridor Labor Force: 847,970

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $42.6-Billion

Statistics - (KnoxvilleCookevilleLouisville) not including Kentucky statistics*

Total Corridor Population: 804,465

Total Corridor Labor Force: 413,045

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $18.8-Billion

Statistics - (NashvilleCookevilleKnoxville)

Total Corridor Population: 2,386,373

Total Corridor Labor Force: 1,210,190

Total Corridor Aggregate Income: $59.6-Billion

Page 74 of 85

V. Conclusion

This paper proposes a passenger rail network for the Piedmont-Atlantic Megaregion using city ranking criteria and outlines an approach that warrants further explanation. After reviewing this analysis of alignment decisions to create a megaregion passenger rail network, a comparison analysis of the previous model and current state and national plans should be considered.

Looking at the state rail plans for Alabama it seems clear that the state is not proactively supporting passenger rail services except by lending its support for non-state planning agencies. For Alabama, the

Gulf Coast High Speed Corridor and similar secondary efforts do align with recommendations offered through the Piedmont-Atlantic Passenger Rail Network (PAPRN) analysis, but are focused locally and region-specific for the tri-state study area. This limited focus may be a detriment to the success of a rail program in Alabama. The state needs to connect to a megaregion system for optimum performance.

Georgia on the other hand has taken a very proactive approach to planning for intercity rail, but it relies heavily on existing track infrastructure which connects small towns which were significant markets a century ago, but have little significance in today’s megaregion economy. Additionally track curvature of historic rail lines will not support high speed trains and at-grade street and highway crossing will not support driver, cyclist and pedestrian safety. Georgia needs to consider creating a new infrastructure rather than reusing old freight lines for a completely different type of economic interaction which adheres to different rules.

North Carolina seems to be on the right track, having invested heavily historically in passenger rail services. North Carolina will benefit substantially from the Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor as most of the route alignments actually originate in the state through Rocky Mount and Raleigh before splitting in several directions to serve the rest of the Piedmont-Atlantic Megaregion. The state railroad company even owns a corridor right of way which spans the entire state east-west from one of its ports. South

Page 75 of 85

Carolina is less proactive, but has identified a need for commuter rail systems in two of its major cities and Tennessee, unlike Georgia, is starting from scratch to create new corridors based on its own needs rather than using old freight lines.

Scope of Analysis

This research is only a preliminary step in initiating the conversation of looking at the Southern region of the United States as a cluster of population centers in need of efficient interaction and connection to each other. A limitation of this analysis is that it primarily looks at justifying connections between cities based off their demographic makeup, population types and economic factors. Continued research should analyze trip-distribution models to determine if the selected alignments are the competitive choices over alternative corridor-city selections.

Continued research should also consider more sophisticated indexing models by looking at more detail-oriented attributes such as Gross Domestic Product, Retail/Sales, Captive-ridership

Population, Vehicle Miles of Travel, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. These types of information are more difficult to collect, but for more detailed analysis, these would represent a beneficial way to further this research. Some criticism of this research may be that the indexing models rely too heavily on cultural populations, but it is important to note that passenger rail systems exist to move and connect people. Total population alone does not explain everything about a city. The existence of non-dominant cultural communities creates character for cities which in turn create attractive features as well. Rather than just looking at which city has the most people, it is important to note that cities with strong communities of any kind become known for those communities. Heritage tourism becomes an important factor in why people choose to visit various places. It is important to remember that the purpose of connecting cities in a

Page 76 of 85 passenger rail network is to connect people. Imports and exports may not be as important a consideration as aggregate personal income, because this research is not looking at freight rail, but connecting people.

Page 77 of 85

VII. List of Figures

FIGURE-2.1 Southern Rapid Rail Transit Commission – Gulf Coast HSR Corridor, 2008

Page 78 of 85

FIGURE-2.2 Georgia Intercity High Speed Rail Plan (GDOT State Rail Plan, 2009)

Page 79 of 85

FIGURE-2.3 North Carolina High Speed Rail Project Management Plan (NCDOT, 2009)

Page 80 of 85

FIGURE-2.4 South Carolina Freight and Passenger Rail Corridors (SC Department of Commerce, 2008)

Page 81 of 85

FIGURE-2.5 Passenger Rail Routes in the Eastern United States (TDOT, 2003)

FIGURE-2.6 Annual Ridership For The Most Promising Tennessee Passenger Rail Corridors (TDOT, 2003)

Page 82 of 85

VII. Bibliography

"About Adif ." Administrator of Railway Infrastructures.

http://www.adif.es/en_US/conoceradif/conoceradif.shtml (accessed May 1, 2011).

"Adif - Strategic plan." Administrator of Railways Infrastructures.

http://www.adif.es/en_US/conoceradif/plan_estrategico.shtml (accessed May 1, 2011).

Beaverstock, J.V.. "World city networks ‘from below’: international mobility and inter-

city relations in the global investment banking industry." GaWC Research Bulletin.

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/rb/rb179.html (accessed May 1, 2011).

Carbonell, Armando, and Robert D. Yaro. "American spatial development and the new

megalopolis." Land Lines 2, no. 17 (2005): 1-4.

China Daily, "China to expand railway network to 110,000 km by 2012," August 12, 2009.

http://www.whatsonxiamen.com/news6659.html (accessed May 1, 2011).

Contant, Cheryl K., and Karen Leone de Nie. "Scale Matters: Rethinking Planning Approaches

across Jurisdictional and Sectoral Boundaries." In Megaregions: planning for global

competitiveness. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2009. 11-17.

Doel, M., and P. Hubbard. "Taking World Cities Literally: Marketing the City in a Global Space

of flows." Cities 6, no. 3 (2002): 351-368.

"Evolution." Ministry of Railways (Railway Board).

http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/view_section.jsp?lang=0&id=0,1,261 (accessed May

1, 2011).

Faludi, Andreas. "The Megalopolis, the Blue Banana, and Global Economic Integration Zones in

European Planning Thought." In Megaregions: planning for global competitiveness.

Washington, DC: Island Press, 2009. 18-34.

Page 83 of 85

Freemark, Yonah. "The White House Stakes Its Political Capital on a Massive Intercity Rail Plan

« The Transport Politic." The Transport Politic.

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2011/02/08/the-white-house-stakes-its-political-

capital-on-a-massive-intercity-rail-plan/ (accessed May 1, 2011).

Press Information Bureau, Government of India. "Indian Railway." IndiaOneStop . . . . .Indian

Business Information and Advisory Resource.

http://www.indiaonestop.com/railway/railwayintro.htm (accessed May 1, 2011).

Levine, J.N.. "The Role of Economic Theory in Regional Advocacy." Journal of Planning

Literature 16, no. 2 (2001): all.

M. "Mercer's 2008 Cost of living highlights." Mercer 1 (2009): all.

Murray, Drew. “Predicting the Arts: Applying Queer Theory to Econometric Analysis of Human

Occupations” (Applied Econometrics Paper advised by Risa Kumazawa, Ph.D., School

of Economic Development, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, Georgia, 2007)

O'Conner, K.. "International students and global cities." GaWC Research Bulletin 161.

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/rb/rb161.html (accessed May 1, 2011).

"Reinvesting in America's Transportation System." American Public Works Association.

http://reinvestintransportation.apwa.net/subPage.asp?page=r3 (accessed May 1, 2011).

Ross, Catherine Laverne, and Jessica L.H. Doyle. "The Megaregion and the Future of American

Planning." In Megaregions: planning for global competitiveness. Washington, DC:

Island Press, 2009. 250-279.

Russell, Simon. "How To Make America’s Rail Industry Competitive Again | Worldwatch

Institute ." Worldwatch Institute . http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6539 (accessed

May 1, 2011).

Page 84 of 85

"Strategy | Russian Railways." JSC Russian Railways.

http://eng.rzd.ru/isvp/public/rzdeng?STRUCTURE_ID=7 (accessed May 1, 2011).

"TGV High-Speed Rail Network, France." Railway-Technology. www.railway-

technology.com/projects/frenchtgv/ (accessed May 1, 2011).

Tanimura, P.H., D.W. Edgington, and R. Alterman. "National-Level Economic and Spatial

Planning in Japan." In National-Level Planning in Democratic Countries: An

International Comparison of City and Regional Policy-making. Liverpool: Liverpool

University Press, 2001. 197-218.

UN. "World resources 1998–99." United Nations Population Division 1 (1999): 1.

UN. "World urbanization prospects: the 2003 revision." Economic and Social Affairs 1 (2004): 1.

Vorasarun, C.. "Cities Of The Billionaires - Forbes.com." Information for the World's Business

Leaders - Forbes.com. http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/30/billionaires-london-moscow-

biz-billies-cz_cv_0430billiecities.html (accessed May 1, 2011).

Wendell Cox. "Urban transport fact book." Wendell Cox 1 (2003): 1.

Witlox, F., L. Vereecken, and B. Derudder. "Mapping the global network economy on the basis

of air passenger transport flows." GaWC Research Bulletin 157.

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/rb/rb157.html (accessed May 1, 2011).

Yang, Jiawen. "Spatial Planning in Asia: Planning and Developing Megacities and

Megaregions.― Megaregions: Planning for Global Competitiveness." In Megaregions:

planning for global competitiveness. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2009. 35-52.

Page 85 of 85