JaxPort's challenge: How to move that new cargo

[thelakelander]

JaxPort is expanding, but no one is stepping up to the plate to build a $40 to $60 million railyard needed to handle the goods coming in from the new terminals.

Some eyes are turning to CSX, but there's only one rail line to Blount Island. The question now: Who could pay for adding more track?

By DAVID HUNT, The Times-Union


We're talking big rigs, thousands of them scattered along Heckscher Drive, Florida 9A and the side roads.

One estimate calls for almost 8,500 trucks a day - one every 10 seconds - by 2020 as container traffic at Jacksonville's deepwater ports triples.

It's a cargo boom waiting to happen. The Jacksonville Port Authority anticipates 50,000 jobs and a $3 billion increase in economic impact.

But there will be side effects.

Plans are taking shape to spend millions strengthening the roads, but all signs point to, and by some opinions dictate, the need for rail to keep the containers moving.

And a lone CSX line running through Blount Island won't be enough.

Officials with JaxPort and CSX Transportation say the area needs an intermodal container facility, a rail yard designated to arrange and move port cargo.

The problem is, building such a terminal carries a price tag in the tens of millions. Right now, nobody is stepping up with the money.

The cost may seem like a drop in the bucket to CSX, a railroad that spent $1.7 billion on capital projects last year. Still, CEO Michael Ward said the company is not planning to pay. Part of the issue, he said, is that about 60 percent of those funds are needed just to keep up the tracks, a cost that's swelled with global demand for steel.

"We operate in 23 states. If you want to count drops in the bucket, we have a lot of drops in the bucket," Ward said. "It's really port infrastructure. It's like a pier. The shipping companies don't build that. Our responsibility is that we have locomotives to haul it away and cars to take it."

full article: http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/032408/bus_260438849.shtml

[Jason]

Well if the city fronts the coin wouldn't they also own the multimodal and the new track?  Would the city then charge the rail companies to use the rail?  Sounds to me like CSX would stand to make big bucks on something like this.  They would continue to be the primary carrier of goods into and out of the port and could charge others to use their lines and multimodal center.  Is that how it would work Ock?

[thelakelander]

CSX owns the only line going into Blount Island and they already have a yard on the Westside.  If the city does not play by CSX's rule, they would have to pay to build a second line to connect to NS (assuming NS pays for a yard at the port).  Once the costs of ROW and building a bridge across the Trout River are included, the city would probably come out cheaper building the yard themselves and connecting to the CSX line. 

I wonder could this mean that CSX does not expect a windfall of profits and increased rail traffic from the port expansion?  In the past CSX has been known to invest in rail infrastructure for good profitable customers.  So either CSX feels like their Westside yard can handle the port's expansion or they're just playing hard ball with the city.

[Jason]

Sounds like hardball to me.

Do you think a smaller player would be willing to build the yard, say FEC?

[reednavy]

Probably the latter, the hard ball. Something will need to be done. I won't be here after July, but I want the best for the city, and this is one of them. CSX can afford it, if not, just buy the naming rights to the stadium and call it CSX Field.

[thelakelander]

Sounds like hardball to me.

Do you think a smaller player would be willing to build the yard, say FEC?

My question would be, why would FEC build a yard that would connect to CSX's line?  The same would apply for NS.  In any event, something would have to be worked out with CSX.

[Ocklawaha]

The first question that comes to mind is "what is a yard?" at least in terms of what Jax Port says they need.
If it's many tracks for the loading and unloading of containers then relax, it's in the prints for each of the new dockside terminals themselves. If it's a big place to break down the traffic that came off/or onto those ships then we have several, Export (CSX near Talleyrand), Moncrief (CSX in Moncrief), Simpson (NS in Grand Crossing) as well as the FEC's massive Bowden in the Southside or the CSX intermodal in the far west which stretches along I-295 from Beaver Street to US 1 North.

Seems to me the real fuss is over getting a new access line into the terminals on Hecksher. We want CSX the only carrier in that section to build a new line so the customers will have a "choice" which yard to send their traffic to.... Sort of like you shopping at Firestone for Goodyear tires and expecting them to hand walk you over to Goodyear after a nice sales job...HA! The box our port is in is OUR doing and WE need to be the ones to get it out of that box. This could be done by the City taking over the former CSX lines and perhaps some of the NS too from Westside or Springfield, over the Trout and over to the Terminals. Then we'd have the options of adding extra tracks, another Trout bridge (which with commuter rail might be a need the State has a track record of funding), or a sorting facility.

Just remember, every second those cars sit and wait to be moved into strings, this group for NS to Atlanta, that group for CSX Birmingham or whatever, they are DEAD and not making money. Yards are thus bad and avoided at all costs. The ideal is a ship docks with 8,000 containers for Atlanta, They decide to use NS for example (straight shot), since all are going to Atlanta, the train can be loaded at dockside, blocked in sections for parts of Atlanta, and sent on it's way.

Failing our purchase of a complete nutral access, (which we have a Talleyrand), would mean the other railroads would have to build expensive "tap lines". The only logical route for NS would be somewhere from Hecksher, just south of JIA and around to the far northwest beyond Grand Crossing. We need to bite the bullet on this or we'll be a port captive to the wishes of CSX...and how do you do this without pissing off the Big Dog downtown?

Ocklawaha

[thelakelander]

So, you're saying the answer is for JaxPort/COJ/JTA to purchase the CSX line/ROW from the Port all the way down to Springfield Yard?  Combined with relaying track on the S-Line, that would connect both port terminals to CSX, FEC and NS and open the door for passengar rail between downtown, the airport and Amelia Island.

[thelakelander]

As I suggested back then, warehousing will take care of itself.  If there's money to be made, the private sector will pick up the slack.  However, the city and JTA will be on the hook to make sure the proper infrastructure is in place.  One answer could be the city paying to take over CSX's rail line from Springfield to Blount Island and having a short line operator move freight between the port terminals and CSX, FEC, and NS lines.  Doing such could kill two birds (traditional or Austin style commuter rail/enhanced freight rail service for the port) with one stone.

[Jason]

Its only a benefit for the city if they are able to stay up to date and ahead of the curve with regards expansions and renovations.  Does the city have that capability or that forsight?

[thelakelander]

True, lake.  Although it was also suggested that the rail would take care of itself as well.

From what I've read so far, the problem is:

A. It takes 3 days to give freight by rail from the ships to CSX's Westside yard.
B. It takes 20 minutes to move freight by truck from port to Westside yards.
C. By 2020, an additional 2,470 trucks a day could be on our roads if they can't figure out how to get freight to the Westside rail yards.

The answer is:

A. Build an on-site railyard to arrange and move port cargo, as opposed to this taking place at existing Westside yards.  The problem with this is JaxPort does not want/can not afford to pay for its own $40 million personal railyard.

With that said, it seems like the solution needs to involve the city, JaxPort and JTA, in addition to CSX, if they want CSX to remain the only rail service to Blount Island.  So the problem isn't a private sector one (like warehouses) its a public sector one (we want our own railyard so the port can be more attractive for shipping).

I don't know if CSX would be willing to sell, but if I'm the city, I'd try to buy their line and build my own intermodal center.  While it would cost a pretty penny, it gets the freight on tracks (instead of city roads) that could connect to three rail companies, as opposed to one (that's better for the port and takes more trucks off the road than rail only connecting with CSX would).  It also gives the city/JTA free reign for a variety of passenger rail choices through the Northside, without worrying about CSX telling you what time passenger trains could use the tracks.  If our local entities pooled their resources together for a joint solution, the solution would be cheaper than each sector trying to solve their individual problems on their own.

Btw, the paper has a great map showing the additional traffic that could take over Hecksher, I-95, I-295 and 9A.

[thelakelander]

Theres no doubt that the problem needs solved if we want to expand the port.  Personally I would like to see the solution become a revenue producer for the city itself as adopted by most other port towns.

If the city owned the tracks, revenue could come from a short line leasing rights to provide service to the port and nearby industrial warehouses and factories.  Revenue could also come from ticket sales from commuter rail riders between Amelia Island, the airport and downtown.  If the line is not publicly owned, then there won't be a direct revenue source, other than the port being here itself.

[thelakelander]

Exactly.  As Kevin pointed out.  That rail spur could be easily built by the city and provide income.

There's no reason to build a new spur, there's already one there.  They need to build a railyard at the port to sort out cargo.  By buying the CSX line through the Northside (suggested here), the Blount Island terminal would then be directly connected to FEC, NS and CSX.  If the line isn't purchased, then Blount Island still is only served by one rail company and the additional sources of revenue generators mentioned above can't happen.

Also there is the problem of the highway usage from the port to 95 for direct trucking.

Our interstates are the streets that would be best for additional truck traffic.  However, the problem they are talking (at least in the article) about involves Hecksher Drive, not MLK.

Right now MLK is the preferred and most direct route.  It should be a commercial toll way.

No way.  MLK is also the Northside's main crosstown route through town.  I'd throw tolls up at the county line before bringing them back to the core.

[thelakelander]

The new Matsui and Hajin terminals will not affect MLK.  They are both located along Heckscher Drive.  Their trucks will be using Heckscher, 9A, I-295 and I-95.

[Steve]

Lake you do this by making trucks pull over into a lane for commercial traffic.

The other widespread method is to allow the various companies to pre purchase tolls in order to bypass the toll lane.   The trucks are then marked or stickered to signify access.

And then you will watch every major shipping company who is looking to have a presence in Jacksonville go up the road to Savannah.

The trucks are using MLK now, and they are going to quintuple their usage of the roadway when matsui opens.

I was going to ask the same thing that lake did - both Mitsui and Hanjin are at Heckscher and 9A.  If anything, I'd be concerned about the highway infrastructure on Heckscher between Blount Island and I-95