Section Description Section Description Section Description Table of 1.0 Executive Summary 6.0 Intermodal Terminal Design 9.0 Road Improvements "Outside the Terminal Contents 6.1 Introduction Fence" Improvements 2.0 Introduction 6.2 Terminal Layout 9.1 Existing Roads in Livernois-Junction Area 2.1 Project Description 6.2.1 Gates 9.1.1 Central Avenue 2.2 Purpose of the Project 6.2.2 Lighting 9.1.2 Lonyo Avenue 6.2.3 Lift Equipment & Operations 9.1.3 Dix/Central Intersection 3.0 Scope of Services 6.2.4 Drainage 9.1.4 North PerimeterRoad 3.1 Rail Improvements “Inside the Terminal Fence” 6.2.5 Terminal Operations 9.1.5 Wyoming Avenue 3.2 Rail Improvements “Outside the Terminal 6.2.6 Security Issues 9.1.6 Livernois Avenue Fence” 6.2.7 Noise & Aesthetics 3.3 Road Improvements "Outside the Terminal 6.2.8 Parameters for DIFT Design 10.0 Construction Staging Fence" 10.1 Rail Improvements "Inside the TerminalFence" 7. 0 Rail Improvements "InsideInside the Terminal Fence"Fence 10. 2 Rail Improvements "OutsideOutside the Terminal Fence"Fence 4.0 Existing Conditions 7.1 Preferred Alternative 10.3 Road Improvements "Outside the Terminal 4.1 Detroit Area Railroad Operations 7.1.1 Overview Fence" 4.2 Existing Primary Intermodal Yards 7.1.2 Projected Intermodal Traffic 4.2.1 Canadian National Moterm Yard 7.1.3 Projected Manifest Traffic 11.0 Cost Estimates 4.2.2 Canadian Pacific Expressway Yard 7.1.4 Projected Passenger Traffic 4.2.3 Canadian Pacific Oak Yard 7.1.5 Livernois-Junction Yard Layout Glossary 4.2.4 Livernois-Junction Yard 4.3 Existing Support Yards 8.0 Rail Improvements "Outside the Terminal 4.3.1 Conrail Lincoln Yard Fence" 4.3.2 Conrail River Rouge Yard 8.1 Improvements at Interlockings 4.3.3 Conrail North Yard 8.1.1 Beaubien 4.3.4 CSX Rougemere Yard 8.1.2 CN Coolidge & CP YD 4.3.5 Norfolk Southern Oakwood Yard 8.1.3 CP Mill 4.3.6 Norfolk Southern Delray Yard 8.1.4 CP Waterman & Dix 4.4 Existing Interlockings 8.1.5 Delray 8.1.6 Milwaukee Junction 5.0 Existing Rail Traffic 8.1.7 Oakwood Junction 5.1 IIdintroduction 8818.1.8 Schaefer S h f 5.2 Intermodal Traffic 8.1.9 New Rotunda 5.3 Manifest Traffic 8.1.10 Vinewood 5.4 Passenger Traffic 8.1.11 West Detroit 8.1.12 Trenton 1 1.0 Executive 1.0 Executive Summary Summary Introduction Engineering Evaluation Conclusions This report outlines the engineering requirements for the During the project, a number of key issues were identified and The selected site of the Livernois-Junction Yard is owned by creation of the Preferred Alternative selected for the proposed evaluated to assess the requirements of a terminal for each of Conrail. Only the eastern end of the facility is currently uti- Detroit Intermodal Freight Terminal (DIFT) at the Livernois- the railroad participants. These issues included: lized by railroad trains. The rest of the yard is mostly vacant. Junction Yard. This work was undertaken by Benesch for The Conrail, NS and CSX utilize the eastern end for manifest train Corradino Group of Michigan, Inc. (Corradino) as part of the • Current intermodal traffic and predicted growth; switching and container trains. Environmental Impact Statement involving the evaluation of • Current train operations and predicted growth, including the type, size and location of intermodal facilities. passenger rail operations; The Preferred Alternative presented within this report ad- • Type of equipment being used; dresses the requirements of each of the railroads wishing to During the project, a number of alternatives were evaluated • Train lengths and train routing; utilize the consolidated intermodal facility and the issues as- and assessed with input from the Michigan Department of • Ability to move trains into and out of a terminal and the sociated with getting trains and trucks to and from it. Transportation (MDOT), public meetings, discussions with surrounding railroad infrastructure; Corradino, and the railroads. There are four Class 1 railroads • Access requirements for trucks from the Interstate system; Included in the consolidated intermodal facility at the Liv- involved: CSX, Norfolk Southern (NS), Canadian National • Local roadway impacts; ernois-Junction Yard are terminals for: 1) NS Triple Crown (CN), and Canadian Pacific Railway (CP). In addition, Conrail • Gate and security requirements; and, trains; 2) NS, CP and CSX container trains; and, 3) Conrail Joint Assets (jointly owned by CSX and NS) and Amtrak oper- • Storage requirements. manifest trains. In addition, improvements to the yard and ate on the railroads around the DIFT project area. the signalized junctions between rail corridors (interlockings) Discussions on the requirements and conclusions of these have been evaluated and improvements to remove and/or The type of intermodal operations for each of these organiza- evaluations are presented within the body of the report. reduce conflicts are presented. These not only improve the tions revolves primarily around container movements. How- operational flexibility of the Livernois-Junction Yard, but of ever, NS operates both intermodal container trains made up of These evaluations led to a number of concepts and modifica- Amtrak and CN trains which pass along the mainline tracks container well cars and flats, and Triple Crown services, which tions thereof. Through the consultation process noted earlier, that border the Livernois-Junction Yard. are bimodal truck trailers. These trailers are designed to oper- consolidation at Livernois-Junction Yard was selected as the ate as a standard road trailer and a railroad freight car. These Preferred Alternative. services utilize different equipment types and have different requirements for their facilities. Both CSX and CP now oper- ate only container train well cars and flats. Taking into consideration the factors above, and the routes that the railroads operate radiating from the Greater Detroit Area, engineering assessments to improve freight and transportation opportunities were determined. 2 1.0 Executive Summary Livernois Junction Yard Looking East Livernois Junction Yard Looking North Livernois Junction Yard Looking West 3 2.0 2.0 Introduction 2.1 Project Description Introduction The Greater Detroit Area is one of the most dynamic inter- There is a lack of sufficient intermodal capacity in the Greater modal markets in North America for a number of reasons, Detroit Area. The Detroit Intermodal Freight Terminal Proj- including: ect (DIFT) looks to increase intermodal capacity by enhanc- ing intermodal operations of the four Class I railroads operat- • Because of the auto industry, Detroit leads the na- ing in the State of Michigan. A Class I railroad does at least tion in its use of "RoadRailer" technology, i.e., a truck $319 million (2007 dollars) of business annually. The four trailer becomes a rail car by placing rail wheels under- Class I railroads which operate in Michigan are CSX, Norfolk neath. Southern, Canadian National, and Canadian Pacific. • One-third of Detroit’s intermodal traffic is trucked to Presently, there are five primary intermodal terminals located and from other cities. This means it travels by rail to within the Greater Detroit Area: Chicago, Toledo, or Windsor for example, and then is trucked to Detroit. Better intermodal service could • Canadian National Moterm Yard result in a diversion of some of this intermodal activ- • Canadian Pacific Oak Yard ity to Detroit because of reduced transportation costs. • Livernois-Junction Yard (Both CSX & Norfolk South- This would eliminate some trucks from Michigan’s ern operate an intermodal facility at Livernois-Junc- roads, which could reduce congestion and help ease Intermodal Train Transporting tion Yard) Single & Double Stack Containers the need for added capacity on the roadway network. • Norfolk Southern Delray Yard • Norfolk Southern Oakwood Yard (Triple Crown) • The proposed improvement of the Detroit-Windsor rail tunnel and the construction of a new Port Huron- The intermodal terminal area located behind the Michigan Sarnia rail tunnel enhance intermodal access to/from Central Depot and operated by Canadian Pacific is no longer the Detroit area. in business. Mazda has an intermodal terminal at Flat Rock in Wayne County, but it is dedicated exclusively to Mazda and not available for commercial use (Exhibit 2.1). The CN Moterm terminal in Ferndale and the private use facility operated by CN for Mazda in Flat Rock, MI. will remain. 4 2.0 2.2 Purpose of the Project Introduction The purpose of the Detroit Intermodal Freight Terminal Project (DIFT) is to support the economic competitiveness of southeast- ern Michigan and the state by improving freight transportation opportunities and efficiencies for business and industry. The goal is that Southeast Michigan has a facility, or facilities, with sufficient capacity to provide for existing and future intermodal demand. It is the role of government (in this case MDOT) to ensure that the businesses and industries involved in the freight transpor- tation segment of the economy continue to have access to the market (i.e., customers, workers, shippers and the like). This, in turn, supports jobs and ensures maintenance of a high quality of life for the region's citizens. MDOT's role is served by engaging in the DIFT project to improve the connectivity between modes through provision of a better interface between the public road system and the private rail system; and, to facilitate the develop- ment of significant capacity at the region's intermodal facilities. In addition, the purpose of the Detroit Intermodal Freight Ter- minal Project (DIFT) is to support America’s national defense. National defense mobilization and deployment is increasingly reliant on intermodal connectors to project U.S. military power abroad to meet the challenges of regional conflicts. Detroit is one of the top intermodal markets in the nation.