The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20181598_Att. 30 - NCDOT Rail Division, 2015 Comp_20160222GOi'. McCROR1"5 � I �� .�. Vi;aiou for North Caroli�a Implementing the 25-Year Vision Pat McCrory, Governor of North Carolina Nick Tennyson, Secretary of Transportation Keith Weatherly, Interim Deputy Secretary for Transit Paul C. Worley, Rail Director August2015 _ �, ��, y' �+ ' , �"!�""' j � ' = r, > �Ip .�I i0 � '; , "� ,�� 1� , � T f's'��,�I � 91� _ � � � � ' . t•:�� ti- ,a '� �- __� � ,� . - - `'a,.. � � - i -.ry '� �_ + ��r..� _ �� 'i 4n_. _ i,� ti 9� Attachment 30 �! ;,�' � II #,�, �Y ��. r I+,s e ' '0�1 � tl � ,.�. �, . �y �s t• � � •4,� - . �, 4.� � . _ � �` � - r ` �1 �P�°�` _.r . � t' :o=� -,r� _->_ �T�� ' �t"..a� - . __ _ ..�, � �, '� � �✓ _ ,. _ _ . ""ul �� ._ - , W., ra - _. G �i�- �� - -_� Introduction PURPOSE OF THE STATE RAIL PLAN The purpose of the North Carolina Comprehensive State Rail Plan (State Rail Plan) is to: • Establish the public vision for tlie state rail system and support the State's goals and policies to improve passenger and freight rail transportation. • Analyze and prioritize rail corridors, progi�a�ns, and proposed projects • Propose future improvements and investments, and assess funding options. • Provide a current inventory of the rail system and identify trends, mai•kets, and needs. • Describe how programs managed by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Rail Division work together with other government agencies, businesses and industries to deliver a comprehensive set of rail services that are integrated in the State's overall transportation system. The State Rail Plan fulfills all the requirements of the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) State Rail Plan guidance and complies with the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA). The State Rail Plan also supports the state's long-standing rail planning practice. Since 1977, the North Carolina General Assembly has both encouraged and empowered the NCDOT to adopt and implement a state rail plan consistent with existing state and federal legislation. The State Rail Plan also supports Governor McCrory's 25-Year Vision for North Carolina, which was unveiled in September 2014 and includes expanded access to passenger and freight rail to all regions of the state to spur economic growth. August 2015 COMPR�HENSIWlE ST�^:TE ii�^�IL PLAN = �=� The State Rail Plan is a component of the state's lon,g-sYanding rail planninc� �r-actice anc! Gavernor McCray's 25-Year Vision for North Carolina, which includes the fottowiiig rail-relateeigoals: • Improve rail connections Uetween military bases and ports GOV McCRORY'S • Intermodal facilities to support freight shipping, and scheduled C�� intercuodal service to Port oF Wilnnington� • I�nproved rail access to Globat Tras�sParkand Port of Morehead City • Econoinically com�etitive rail service to inland ports • Improve rai] and seaport connections to I-95 to serve U�z Eastern US Vision for Notth Carolina ------- .....---------------.... ------ • Expand mass transit options, includingrail • Expand access to passenger rail options in all regions of tlie state ��•]��:��r_r��:�ev�»ev This State Rail Plan links to other ongoing statewide transportation plans and initiatives and establishes the public benefits of additional rail investment. The State Rail Plan will be used to help guide decision making as the state invests in enhancements to the passenger and freight rail system in North Carolina. NCDOT will use the prioritization methods in the State Rail Plan to help evaluate projects and corridoi�s. The evaluation prioritization process, as well as the prioritized projects and corridors can be appraised and updated as needed to determine the effectiveness of the state's investments.l The State Rail Plan is also linked with NCDOT's new Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) program, which overhauled NCDOT's methodology for prioritizing and selecting capital expenditures. The data and projects listed in the State Rail Plan will be used by NCDOT to help determine which projects will be evaluated and when they are programmed under STI. 1 1The State Rail Plan includes references to forward-looking p•ends and commodity forecasts. The trends are based on the State Rail Plan team's current understanding of potential rail developments and are used to identify freight and passenger rail service opportunities. CONTENTS OF THE STATE RAIL PLAN The following table describes the chapters in the State Rail Plan, including the key topics included in each chapter. The figure that follows the table outlines the process used to analyze data, identify overall needs, evaluate and prioritize rail corridors, identify projects to meet the needs and opportunities, and rank Chapter/Title Executive Summary Introduction 1. The Role of Rail in Statewide Transportation Chapter Topics Summary of the State Rail Plan �t�}f�IPRL6�i�P�951VE SL'.t';T� E2�;Il PLAN and develop timeframes for the rail projects. These processes are detailed in the various chapters in the State Rail Plan. Purpose and contents for the State Rail Plan State Rail Plan goals and objectives, and strategies to measure progress; the role of rail transportation in the state's transportation system; an overview of freight and passenger rail services; description of the state's rail programs and funding authority Description and inventoiy of the existing freight and passenger rail system; rail system trends and forecasts; rail 2. The State's Existing Rail System service needs and opportunities Proposed improvements and investments for passenger rail that meet the goals and objectives of the State Rail 3. Proposed Passenger Rail Improvements Plan and the identified service needs and opportunities, including new services, station improvements, better and Investments connections to other modes, and capacity improvements that are coordinated with freight 4. Proposed Freight Rail Improvements Recommended freight improvements and investments that meet the State Rail Plan goals and objectives and and Investments identified fi•eight needs and market opportunities 5. The State's Rail Service and Investment Program 6. Coordination and Review Appendices August 2015 North Carolina's 20 year vision for rail transportation; coordination efforts to meet the vision; prioritized projects to meet the vision; capital and operating plan; economic benefits; finance plan Description of how stakeholders were involved in the development and coordination of the State Rail Plan Documentation of detailed analysis, findings, and methodologies used in preparing the State Rail Plan �� tc�t� �Rail Plan ,- ►'�� Cor�idor Prioritiz�tian � �. TAC N�I�ETING Id�en�3fy Exrtting Id�tlfy 4rr�ra�l Con�fti+�ns, N,ai1 Serviue �teeds Trec�ds, Foreta�ts � . - . � . - . COMPREHENSNE ST,ATE R,aIL PLAN � �'AC II��TING Rai9road Engagement I .:. .,.� - b timefram�� Grnup pra�+e� Y I�e State�wride '- sta�d� p� ra��.s to w�hin e�ach conridnr P a4 �` by� time�fra�me indi � ua' profet Vt�ion for Rail m�ee4 needs and opportunities � Project Selection and Prioritiz�ti�on August 2015 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS North Carolina Department of Transportation Nick Tennyson, Secretary Anthony J. Tata, Former Secretary Keith Weatherly, Deputy Secretary for Transit Jeff Mann, Former Deputy Secretary for Transit Paul C. Worley, Rail Director Rail Plan Transportation Advisory Committee Bryce Ball, NC General Assembly - Legislative Liaison Charles Edwards, NC Centei- for Global Logistics Marc Hamel, NC Department of Transportation Rail Division Marc Hoecker, Norfolk Southern Carl Hollowell, Railway Association of North Carolina Rob Hosford, NC Department of Agriculture Jim Kessler, North Carolina Railroad Company Josh Levy, NC Depai•tment of Commerce Project Team NCDOT Rail Division Sandra Stepney Shirley Williams Neil Perry Ryan White Cheryl Hannah Colista Freeman Federal Railroad Administrafion Jessie Fernandez-Gatti AECOM Eddie McFalls Travis Pollack Alix Demers Mark Johnston Ashley Lane Bruce Williams Lee Hutchins Brent Ogden Toni Horst Carey Barr Sara Carini CC}NIPR�I-IE1�9SIVE aT�TE E2�IL PLAN Rudy Lupton, NCDOT Statewide Logistics Jay McArthur, Amtrak Todd McIntyre, Federal Railroad Administration Jason Orthner, NCDOT Rail Division Allan Paul, NCDOT Rail Division Jahmal Pullen, NCDOT Rail Division Susan Pullium, NCDOT Strategic Planning Marco Turra, CSX Transportation Planning Communities Ann Steedly Shannon Cox Drew Spiliotis Hatch Mott McDonald Glenda Gibson Patrick Simmons Ellen Holding Aileen Mayhew IHS Global Bob Brodesky Alelcsandra Maguire Institute for Transportation Research and Education George List Thomas Cook Daniel Findlay August 2015 iv List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/ Abbreviation AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic ACWR Aberdeen, Carolina and Western Railway ADA Americans with Disabilities Act Amtrak National Railroad Passenger Corporation ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act BCA Benefit-cost analysis BEA Bureau of Economic Analysis BRT Bus Rapid Transit BTS Bureau ofTransportation Statistics CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy CAGR Compound Annual Growth Rate CAMPO Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization CATS Charlotte Area Transit System CCU Cab Control Units CDIA Charlotte-Douglas International Airport CE Categorical Exclusion CFR Code of Federal Regulations CGS Charlotte Gateway Station CIT Charlotte Intermodal Terminal Class I Railway companies having annual carrier operating revenues of at least $467 million CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality management program CNLA Carolina Coastal Railway CRTPO Charlotte Regional Transportation Planning Organization CSRP Comprehensive State Rail Plan (State Rail Plan) CSXT CSX Transportation August 2015 ��'if�IPRLI-IEP�951V� ST:�TE 62.�I1 PLAN Acronym/ Abbreviation DATA Durham Area Transit Authority DC District of Columbia DOD Department of Defense DOT Department of Transportation DRPT Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation EA Environmental Assessment EIA US Energy Information Administration EIS Environmental Impact Statement EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAF Freight Analysis Framework FAK A mix of commodities being shipped together, often intended for a particular retailer FHWA Federal Highway Administration FL Florida FRA Federal Railroad Administration FRRCSI Freight Rail & Rail Crossing Safety Improvement fund FTA Federal Transit Administration FTE Full-Time Employee FY Fiscal Year GA Georgia GARVEE Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle GDP Gross �omestic Product GHG Greenhouse Gas Grade Elevating a roadway or rail over the other by means of Separation bridging GSMR Great Smoky Mountains Railroad GSP Gross State Product Acronym/ Abbreviation GTP Global TransPark HAZMAT Hazardous Materials HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program HSIPR High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail program HTF Highway Trust Fund IBM International Business Machines Intermodal Two or more modes of transportation in conveying goods, such as truck trailers on trains IRS Internal Revenue Service LOS Level of Service LOST Local Option Sales Tax LPA Locally Preferred Alternative LRT Light Rail Transit LRTP Long-Range Transportation Plan MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act MAS Maximum Allowable Speed Metrolina Charlotte region MHC Port of Morehead City MOTSU Military Ocean Terminal — Sunny Point MPH / mph Miles per Hour MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area Multimodal Two or more modes of transportation for the movement of people, or in conveying goods NC North Carolina NCA&T North Carolina Agriculture & Technology State University NCAMPO North Carolina Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations NCDOC North Carolina Department of Commerce NCDOT North Carolina Department of Transportation August 2015 CONIPR�HENSIVE ST^,-eTE R,�IL PLAN - Acronym/ Abbreviation NCGA North Carolina General Assembly NCGS North Carolina General Statute NCMIN North Carolina Multimodal Investment Network NCRR North Carolina Railroad Company NCSPA North Carolina State Ports Authority NCSU North Carolina State University NEC Northeast Corridor NHS National Highway System NS Norfolk Southern O&M Operations and Maintenance OSMB Office of State Management and Budget OTP On-Time Performance P&N Piedmont and Northern rail line PART Piedmont Authority Regional Transit PIP Piedmont Improvement Program POW Port of Wilmington PPP or P3 Public-Private Partnership PRIIA Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 PTC Positive Train Control PTI Piedmont-Triad International Airport RDU Raleigh-Durham International Airport RIAP Rail Industrial Access Program ROD Record of Decision RPO Rural Planning Organization RR Railroad RRIF Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing RRRP Railroad Rehabilitation and Repair Program (disaster assistance) RSIA Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 vi Acronym/ Abbreviation RTP Research Triangle Parl< RUS Raleigh Union Station SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SB 402 Eastern Infrastructure Improvement Study, prepared in accordance with NC Senate Bill 402 SC South Carolina SEC Southeast Corridor SEDS State Energy Data System SEHSR Southeast High Speed Rail SENC Southeastern North Carolina SEROps Southeast Rail Operations Study Short Line Railway companies having annual carrier operating revenues between $0 and $37 million SIAP Short Line Infrastructure Assistance Program SIB State Infrastructure Bank SIP Stakeholder Involvement Plan SMF Strategic Mobility Fund SP&R State Planning & Research SRP State Rail Plan STB Federal Surface Transportation Board STI Strategic Transportation Investments Law STIP State Transportation Improvement Program STP Surface Transportation Program STRACNET Strategic Rail Corridor Network TAC Technical Advisory Committee TAP Transportation Alternatives Program TBT Thoroughbred Bulk Terminal TEU Twenty-foot equivalent unit TIFIA Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act August2015 Acronym/ Abbreviation TIGER TIP TN TOD Triad Triangle TSS TTI UNC US US EIA USD USDOT VA VMT WNC WTRY CONIPR�HENSIVE ST^,-eTE R,�IL PLAN - Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery Transportation Improvement Program Tennessee Transit Oriented Development Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point region Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill region Traffic Separation Studies Texas Transportation Institute University of North Carolina United States US Energy Information Administration US Dollar United States Department of Transportation Virginia Vehicle Miles Traveled Western North Carolina Wilmington Terminal Railroad vii Table of Contents Introduction Acknowledgements List of Acronyms and Abbreviations 1.1.2 1.2 1.2.1 1.2.1.1 1.2.1.2 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4 1.2.5 1.2.6 1.3 1.3.1 1.3.2 1.3.3 1.4 1.5 1.5.1 August2015 � iv v Chapter One - The Role of Rail in Statewide Transportation_1-1 North Carolina's Transportation System Goals 1-1 NCDOT Mission and Goals 1-1 Governor's 25-Year Vision for Noi-th Carolina 1-1 The Role of Rail in North Carolina's Transportation System_ 1-2 Rail System 1-2 Freight Rail 1-2 Passenger Rail 1-6 Highways 1-7 Ports/Marine 1-9 Aviation 1-9 Multi-modal 1-9 Long-range Planning 1-11 Governance Structures 1-12 Federal Government 1-12 State Government 1-12 Regional, County, and Local Government 1-13 Funding 1-14 Laws, Policies, Initiatives 1-15 Legislative Policy and Initiatives 1-15 c��s��zE�i�r�-�Av��rA�c�.,r�i�s��;na 1.5.2 Private Sector Initiatives 1-17 1.5.3 NCDOT Rail Initiatives 1-17 1.5.3.1 Crossing Hazard Elimination Program 1-17 1.5.3.2 Railroad Safery Enforcement Program 1-18 1.5.3.3 Public Safety Awareness 1-18 1.5.3.4 State Safety Oversight Program for Fixed Guideway Rail Systems _ 1-19 1.5.3.5 Intercity Passenger Rail Service 1-19 1.5.3.6 Station Improvements 1-19 1.5.3.7 Piedmont Improvement Program (PIP) 1-19 L5.3.8 Other Track Improvements 1-20 1.5.3.9 Freight Rail and Rail Crossing Safety Improvement Fund (FRRCSI) 1-20 1.5.3.10 Corridor Preservation 1-20 1.5.3.11 Rail Planning 1-21 1.5.3.12 Multimodal and Intermodal Planning 1-21 1.5.4 LocalInitiatives 1-22 2 2.1 2.1.1 2.1.1.1 2.1.1.2 2.1.1.3 2.1.1.3.1 2.1.1.3.2 Chapter Two - The State's Existing Rail System 2-1 Rail System Description and Inventory 2-1 Existing Rail System 2-1 Freight Rail System 2-1 Railroad Classifications and Definitions 2-1 Freight - Class I Railroads 2-3 CSX Transportation 2-3 Norfollc Southern 2-3 2.1.1.3.3 2.1.1.4 2.1.1.5 2.1.1.6 2.1.1.7 2.1.1.8 2.1.1.8.1 2.1.1.8.2 2.1.1.8.3 2.1.1.9 2.1.1.10 2.1.2 2.1.2.1 2.1.2.2 2.1.2.3 2.1.2.4 2.1.3 2.1.3.1 2.1.3.2 2.1.3.3 2.1.4 2.1.4.1 2.1.4.2 2.1.4.3 2.1.4.4 August2015 Characteristics of the Class I Network 2-3 Freight -Class III (Short Lines) 2-10 Intercity Passenger Rail Se►vices 2-10 Connecting Bus Services 2-14 Proposed Rail Services 2-15 Rail Stations 2-15 Existing Active Stations 2-15 Station Planning for Existing Service 2-15 Station Planning for Future Service 2-16 Tourist Railroads 2-19 Out of Service and State-Owned Corridors 2-19 Major Freight and Passenger Terminals and Intermodal Connections 2-21 Major Rail Yards 2-22 Intermodal Facilities 2-22 Port Facilities 2-25 Passenger Multimodal Terminals 2-27 Passenger Rail Service Objectives 2-28 Improving Services 2-28 Implementing the Southeast Corridor 2-29 Expanding Rail Service to Unserved Markets in North Carolina _ 2-30 Passenger Rail Performance Evaluation 2-31 Passenger Miles/Train Miles Z-31 On-Time Performance 2-32 Customer Satisfaction 2-34 Financial Evaluation of State-Supported Services 2-35 e�� P�9 F�ZE FI E C�l � IV E� i A f� d�.,r� i L PL�^; n6 2.1.5 Public Financing of Rail Projects and Services 2-36 2.1.5.1 Federal Rail Funding Programs 2-36 2.1.5.1.1 The Passenger Rail [nvestment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) 2-37 2.1.5.1.2 Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) 2-37 2.1.5.1.3 The FRA High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Program (HSIPR) 2-37 2.1.5.1.4 FRA Rail Line Relocation and Improvement Capital Grant Program 2-37 2.1.5.1.5 FHWA Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) and Section 130 Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Program 2-37 2.1.5.2 Federal Loan Programs 2-38 2.1.5.2.1 Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) _ 2-38 2.1.5.2.2 Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) 2-39 2.1.5.2.3 Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle (GARVEE) 2-39 2.1.5.2.4 Railroad Track Maintenance Credit Program 2-39 2.1.5.2.5 Railroad Safety Technology Grants Program 2-39 2.1.5.2.6 Railroad Rehabilitation and Repair Program (Disaster Assistance) 2-40 2.1.5.3 North Carolina State Rail Funding Programs 2-40 2.1.5.3.1 North Carolina Highway Fund 2-40 2.1.5.3.2 Annual Legislative Appropriations 2-40 2.1.5.3.3 North Carolina Railroad Dividends 2-42 2.1.5.3.4 Local Option Fuel, Sales or Property Tax 2-43 2.1.5.4 Opportunities For Private Sector Investment 2-44 2.1.5.4.1 2.1.5.4.2 2.1.5.4.3 2.1.6 2.1.6.1 2.1.6.2 2.1.6.3 2.1.6.4 2.1.7 2.1.7.1 2.1.7.2 2.1.7.3 2.1.7.4 2.1.7.5 2.1.7.6 2.1.7.7 2.2 2.2.1 2.2.1.1 2.2.1.1.1 2.2.1.1.2 2.2.1.1.3 2.2.1.1.4 2.2.1.2 2.2.1.2.1 2.2.1.2.2 August2015 User Fees 2-44 Sale/Leaseback of Rail Assets 2-44 Public-Private Partnerships 2-45 Safety and Security Programs 2-46 National Railroad Safety Oversight 2-46 Planning and Implementing Crossing Safety Programs _ 2-47 Inspection and Oversight 2-48 Public Awareness and Education 2-49 Economic and Environmental Impacts of Rail 2-49 Economic Impacts of Rail 2-50 Freight Rail 2-53 Passenger / Freight Rail and Quality of Space 2-53 An Additional Transportation Option 2-55 Tourism and Recreation 2-55 Environmental Impacts of Rail 2-55 Health Impacts of Rail 2-55 Trends and Forecasts 2-58 Demographic and Economic Trends Z-59 Demographics 2-59 Population Trends 2-59 Population Density 2-61 Commuting Patterns 2-63 Population Characteristics 2-64 Economics 2-68 Employment by Sector 2-68 Geographic Distribution of Rail-Dependent Sectors 2-71 2.2.2 2.2.2.1 "►.�►.�.�►J 2.2.2.3 2.2.3 2.2.3.1 2.2.3.2 2.2.3.3 2.2.3.4 2.2.3.5 2.2.4 2.2.4.1 2.2.4.2 2.2.4.3 2.2.4.4 2.2.4.5 2.2.5 2.2.6 2.2.6.1 2.2.6.2 2.2.6.3 2.2.6.4 2.2.6.5 2.2.6.6 2.2.6.7 c��s��zE�i�r�-�Av��rA�c�.,r�i�s��;na Freight Trends 2-73 Existing Freight Flows 2-73 Rail Freight: Non-Intermodal Flows versus Intermodal Flows_ 2-77 Emerging Freight Trends 2-80 Passenger Rail Trends 2-88 North Carolina Passenger Rail Ridership Trends 2-88 Piedmont and Carolinian Ti-ends 2-89 Amtrak Thruway Bus Trends 2-90 Other Rail Trends 2-90 Other Statewide Travel Trends 2-90 Fuel Cost Trends 2-92 Fuel Cost 2-92 Fuel Consumption 2-92 Motor Fuel Tax 2-93 Implications for Revenue 2-94 Implications for Rail 2-93 Rail Congestion Trends 2-94 Highway and Airport Congestion Trends 2-96 Highway Congestion 2-96 Existing and Projected Highway Congestion 2-97 Highway Congestion and Passenger Rail 2-100 Highway Congestion and Freight Rail 2-101 Airport Passenger Service 2-104 Airport Passenger Expansion Plans 2-105 Airport-Transit Expansion Plans 2-105 2.2.6.8 2.2.7 2.2.7.1 2.2.7.2 2.2.7.3 2.2.7.4 2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.2.1 2.3.2.2 2.3.2.3 2.3.2.4 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.4.1 2.3.4.2 2.3.5 2.3.6 2.3.6.1 2.3.6.1.1 2.3.6.1.2 2.3.6.1.3 2.3.6.2 August2015 Conclusion 2-106 Land Use Trends 2-106 The Role of Rail in Shaping North Carolina's Land Use _ 2-106 Freight Rail Traffic Generators 2-106 Passenger Rail Traffic Generators 2-107 Land Use Patterns and Trends 2-110 Rail Service Needs and Opportunities 2-111 Rail Service Needs - Freight 2-113 Rail Service Needs - Commuter Rail 2-113 Charlotte Region 2-113 Triangle Region 2-114 Triad Region 2-115 Hampton Roads Region 2-116 Rail Service Needs - Intercity Passenger Rail 2-116 Corridor Prioritization 2-116 Freight Corridor Prioritization 2-123 Passenger Corridor Prioritization 2-124 Freight Rail Needs and Opportunities Z-124 Passenger Rail Needs and Opportunities 2-128 Passenger Rail Needs Assessment 2-126 Existing Passenger Rail Market Needs 2-126 Emerging Passenger Rail Market Needs 2-126 Passenger Rail Operational and Financial Needs 2-127 Passenger Rail Opportunities 2-127 t� tJ �'9 F�ZC� [�� E�J � OV E S, V A f � 6�.,ra V L�L�^: P�V 3 Chapter Three - Proposed North Carolina Passenger Rail Improvements and Investments 3-1 3.1 Corridor and Project Analysis 3-1 3.2 Southeast Corridor 3-7 3.2.1 Piedmont Corridor: Raleigh To Charlotte 3-8 3.2.1.1 Fourth and Fifth Frequencies 3-8 3.2.1.2 New Stops and Improved Stations 3-9 3.2.2 Washington, DC to Charlotte 3-10 3.2.2.1 Raleigh to Richmond 3-10 3.2.2.2 Raleigh to Charlotte Capacity Improvements 3-11 3.2.2.3 Cai�olinian Improvements 3-13 3.2.3 Charlotte To Atlanta 3-13 3.3 Statewide Thruway Service 3-15 3.4 Southeastern NC Service Extension 3-18 3.4.1 Proposed Operations 3-18 3.4.2 Proposed Infrastructure Needs 3-18 3.5 Western NC Service Extension 3-21 3.5.1 Proposed Operations 3-21 3.5.2 Proposed Infrastructure Needs 3-21 3.6 Eastern North Carolina Service 3-23 3.7 Potential Intercity Coi�ridors 3-24 3.7.1 Lynchburg Connection 3-24 3.7.2 Charlotte to Wilmington 3-24 3.7.3 Raleigh to Greenville 3-24 3.7.4 Raleigh to Morehead City 3-24 3.7.5 Raleigh to Hampton Roads 3-25 3.8 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.4 4.4.1 4.4.2 4.4.3 4.4.4 4.4.5 4.4.6 4.4.7 4.4.8 4.4.9 4.4.10 4.4.11 4.4.12 4.4.13 August 2015 Potential Commuter Rail 3-27 Summary of Proposed Improvements 3-29 Chapter Four - Proposed Freight Rail Improvements and Investments 4-1 Purpose and Need 4-1 Leveraging Moda] Transportation Investments 4-2 Program Strategies 4-2 Emerging Rail Freight Needs 4-3 [nvestment Programs 4-3 Freight Projects: Private and Public Sector Infrastructure and Operations 4-4 Process of Identifying Projects 4-4 Estimated Construction Costs 4-4 Class I Corridors and Projects 4-4 Corridor 02- CSXT - Charlotte to TN state line 4-10 Corridor 03- NS - Salisbury to Asheville 4-11 Cori�idor 06- NS - SC state line to VA state line 4-11 Corridor 07- CSXT - Charlotte to Monroe 4-13 Corridor 08- NS - Charlotte to Columbia 4-14 Corridor 09- NS - Greensboro to Selma 4-14 Corridor 11- CSXT - Monroe to Pembroke 4-15 Corridor 12, 12f, and 13- CSXT - Hamlet to Raleigh, Norlina, and Weldon 4-16 Corridor 15- CSXT - VA state line to SC state line 4-17 Corridor 17- NS - Selma to Morehead City 4-18 4.4.14 4.4.15 5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.3.4 5.4 5.5 5.5.1 5.5.2 5.5.3 5.5.4 5.6 5.6.1 5.6.2 5.7 5.8 6 6.1 C��i�9��ZEFIECJ�IVE �iA f � 62.,r�iL RL�;n6 Corridor 19- CSXT - Pembroke to Wilmington 4-19 Improvements to Short Line Railroads 4-21 Chapter Five - State Rail Service and Investment Program 5-1 Vision 5-1 Program Coordination 5-8 Rail Agencies Organization and Policy Changes 5-9 Existing Federal Programs 5-9 Existing State Programs 5-9 Illustrative Funding Programs from Other States 5-10 Other Potential Funding Sources 5-10 Program Effects 5-10 Passenger Element 5-31 Description of Analysis Approach 5-31 Capital Financing Plan 5-32 Operating Financing Plan 5-38 Passenger Rail Public and Private Benefits 5-40 Freight Element 5-40 Finance Plan 5-40 Freight Rail Public and Private Economic Benefits 5-49 Rail Studies and Reports 5-49 Passenger and Freight Rail Capital Program 5-52 Chapter Six - Coordination and Review 6-1 Public Participation Approach 6-1 6.1.1 6.1.2 6.1.3 6.2 6.3 6.3.1 Stakeholder Involvement Plan Stakeholder Groups and Participation Opportunities Communication and Feedback Tools Coordination with Neighboring States 6-1 6-1 6-2 6-2 Stakeholder Involvement in the Development of the State Rail Plan 6-2 NC Delegation of the VA-NC Interstate High Speed Rail Compact _ 6-3 6.3.2 Technical Advisory Committee 6.3.3 6.3.4 i��i�9F�ZEFIECJ�IVE �iA f � 6�.,r�iL PL�^;n6 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1 North Carolina's Rail System 1-3 Figure 1-2 STB Waybill Summary - Commodities Carried by Rai] Originating and Terminating in NC (2012) 1-4 Figure 1-3 Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments within North Carolina - Value by Domestic Mode: 2007 1-4 Figure 1-4 Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments from North Carolina - Value by Domestic Mode: 2007 1-5 Figure 1-5 Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments to North Carolina - Value 6-3 by Domestic Mode: 2007 1-5 Coordination with Railroads, Ports and Intermodal Terminals 6-3 Coordination with Transit Authorities 6-3 6.3.5 Coordination with Metropolitan and Rural Planning Organizations (MPOs/RPOs) 6-3 6.3.6 Industry Group Outreach 6-4 6.4 Issues Identified During the Rail Plan Process 6-5 6.5 Consideration and Incorporation Of Stakeholder Input State Rail Planning Coordination 6-7 6-7 APPENDICES A. Rail Division National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Activities, 2000-2014 B. Demographic and Economic Trends C. IHS Global Report D. Corridor and Project Prioritization Methodology E. Vision, Goals and Objectives, Strategies, Success Criteria F. Cost Benefit Analysis G. Economic Impact Analysis H. Technical Advisory Committee Member List August 2015 Figure 1-6 Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments within North Carolina - Tonnage by Domestic Mode: 2007 1-5 Figure 1-7 Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments from North Carolina - Tonnage by Domestic Mode: 2007 1-6 Figure 1-8 Domestic, Import, and Expoi-t Shipments to North Carolina - Tonnage by Domestic Mode: 2007 1-6 Figure 1-9 North Carolina's Interstates and US Routes 1-8 Figure 1-10 North Carolina's Interstates and Class I Railroads 1-8 Figure 1-11 North Carolina Marine Ports, Intermodal Facilities and Freight Railroad 1-10 Figure 1-12 No►-th Carolina Airports and Intercity Passenger Rail lines_ 1-10 Figure 1-13 North Carolina Multimodal Facilities and Intercity Passenger Rail lines 1-11 Figure 1-14 Organization of the Rail Division within NCDOT 1-13 Figure 2-1 Track Ownership and Railroad Operators in North Carolina _2-2 Figure 2-2 Annual Tonnage Hauled on North Carolina's Class I Freight Network 2-4 Figure 2-3 Strategic Rail Corridor Network in North Carolina 2-5 Figure 2-4 Corridors Designated by Train Signal Rules 2-9 Figure 2-5 North Carolina Passenger Rail Service 2-13 Figure 2-6 NCDOT-Owned and Out-of-Service Rail Corridors 2-20 Figure 2-7 Major Rail Facilities Across North Carolina 2-22 Figure 2-8 Existing Intermodal Rail Networks & Facilities of CSXT and NS2-24 Figure 2-9 NS Outbound [ntermodal from Charlotte and Greensboro _ 2-24 Figure 2-10 NS Inbound Intermodal to Charlotte and Greensboro 2-24 Figure 2-11 CSXT Outbound Intermodal from Charlotte 2-25 Figure 2-12 CSXT Inbound Intermodal to Charlotte Z-25 Figure 2-13 Historical and Projected Bulk and Breakbulk Tonnage at NC Ports 2-26 Figure 2-14 Top Five Imported Commodities by Yeai• - Morehead City _ 2-Z6 Figure 2-15 Top Five Exported Commodities By Year - Morehead City _ 2-26 Figure 2-16 Top Five Imported Commodities By Year - Wilmington 2-27 Figure 2-17 Top Five Exported Commodities By Year - Wilmington Z-27 Figure 2-18 Passenger Miles Per Train Mile, NC Trains, 2010-2014 2-32 Figure 2-19 On-Time Performance, Carolinian and Piedmont Trains 2-32 Figure 2-20 On-Time Performance, Long Distance Trains Serving North Carolina 2-33 Figure 2-21 Off-NEC Host Responsible Delays, Carolinian and Piedmont Ti�ains 2-34 Figure 2-22 Annual Overall Customer Satisfaction Scoi�es for NC Trains _ 2-35 Figure 2-23 Percent of Fully Allocated Operating Costs Covered by Passenger Related Revenue 2-36 Figure 2-24 Strategic Transportation Investments 2-41 Figure 2-25 North Carolina Train-Car Crashes: 1988 - 2014 2-48 Figure 2-26 Trespassing Incidents in North Carolina 1988 - 2013 2-49 August 2015 C��P�9F�ZEFIEC�I�IVE�iAf�6�.,r�iLPl�^:n6 Figure 2-27 Ton Miles per Gallon by Mode 2-56 Figure 2-28 Air Quality Non-Attainment Areas 2-57 Figure 2-29 Air Quality Maintenance Areas 2-58 Figure 2-30 North Carolina and Regional Population Trends and Projections (1970-2030) 2-59 Figure 2-31 Geographic Extent of North Carolina Regions 2-60 Figure 2-32 Projected Change in County Population (2012-2033) 2-60 Figure 2-33 Noi-th Carolina Population Density by Square Mile (2012) _ 2-62 Figure 2-34 Population Density (2012) and Passenger Rail Ridership (2013) _ 2-62 Figure 2-35 Projected Population by County (2033) and Passenger Rail Facilities 2-63 Figure 2-36 Mean Travel Time by County (2012) 2-64 Figure 2-37 Minority Populations in North Carolina shown by US Census Tracts 2-66 Figure 2-38 Adults Speaking English "Less than Very Well" 2-66 Figure 2-39 Percent of Population below Poverty Thresholds by County _ 2-67 Figure 2-40 Median Household Income 1990 - 2012 2-68 Figure 2-41 Adjusted Median Household Income 1990 - 2012 (2012 dollars) _ 2-68 Figui-e 2-42 Population Pyramid showing Age and Gender for North Carolina's Population in 2012 2-68 Figure 2-43 Trends in North Carolina's Gross Domestic Product (GDP)_ 2-69 Figure 2-44 North Carolina Employment Trends by Industry (2004-2013) _ 2-70 Figure 2-45 North Carolina Employment Projections by Industry (2015-2040) 2-71 Figure 2-46 Employers in North Carolina (Manufacturing, Agriculture, and Mining) 2-72 Figure 2-47 STB Waybill Summary - Commodities Carried by Rail Originating and Terminating in NC (2012) 2-74 Figure 2-48 Top Trading Partners - Trade fi�om NC by Weight 2-75 Figure 2-49 Top Trading Partners - Trade to NC by Weight 2-75 Figure 2-50 Top Trading Partners - Trade from NC by Value 2-75 Figure 2-51 Top Trading Partners - Trade to NC by Value 2-75 Figure 2-52 NC Outbound and Inbound Flows across the US 2-76 Figure 2-53 Outbound Rail Flows from North Carolina, 2011. Figure 2-54 North Carolina Rail Flows by Weight Figure 2-55 North Carolina Rail Flows by Value Figure 2-56 North Carolina Intei-modal Rail Flows by Weight Figure 2-57 North Carolina Intermodal Rail Flows by Value _ Figure 2-58 Norfolk Southern's Crescent Corridor Figure 2-59 CSX Transportation's National Gateway Corridoi- Figure 2-60 Triassic Rift Basins in North Carolina 2-77 2-78 2-78 Z-79 2-79 2-80 2-80 2-81 Figure 2-61 North Carolina Outbound Rail Flows, Carload and Intermodal (top, bottom), 2011 and 2035 2-83 Figure 2-62 North Carolina Inbound Rail Flows, Carload and Intermodal (top, bottom), 2011 and 2035 2-84 Figure 2-63 North Carolina Through Rail Flows, Carload and Intermodal (top, bottom), 2011 and 2035 2-85 Figure 2-64 Destinations of NC Chemical/Plastic-Related Inbound Rail Flows, 2011 and 2035 Z-87 Figure 2-65 Total North Carolina Passenger Rail Boardings, 2001-2013_ 2-88 Figure 2-66 Annual Ridership, Carolinian and Piedmont Trains, 2004-2013 _ 2-89 Figure 2-67 North Carolina per Capita Driving Trends, 2001-2013 2-91 Figure 2-68 North Carolina Transportation Trends, 2001-2013 2-91 August2015 Q��P�9F�ZEFIEC�I�IVE �iA f � 6�.,r�IL PL�^:n6 Figure 2-69 North Carolina Ridership, Motor Fuel Consumption, and Fuel Cost Trends 2-92 Figure 2-70 Statewide Highway Congestion Map 2-97 Figure 2-71 Charlotte Region 2012 Congestion Map 2-99 Figure 2-72 Triad 2012 Congestion Map 2-99 Figure 2-73 Triangle 2012 Congestion Map 2-100 Figure 2-74 Average Daily Long-Haul [nterstate Freight Truck Traffic (2007) (Figure Source: FHWA) 2-102 Figure 2-75 Projected Average Daily Long-Haul Interstate Freight Truck Traffic (2040) (Figure Source: FHWA) 2-102 Figure 2-76 Peak-Period Congestion on High-Volume Truck Portions of the National Highway System: 2040 2-103 Figure 2-77 Enplanements by Airport (2012) 2-104 Figure 2-78 Primary Freight Rail Traffic Generators 2-107 Figure 2-79 Map of Freight Rail-Oriented Land Uses 2-109 Figure 2-80 Map of Urbanized Areas Figure 2-81 State Rail Plan Prioritization and Selection Process Figure 2-82 North Carolina Rail Corridors Figure 2-83 Prioritized Freight Corridor Needs Figure 2-84 Prioritized Passenger Corridor Needs Figure 3-1 Prioritized Passenger Rail Corridors Figure 3-2 Federally Designated Southeast Corridor Figure 3-3 Piedmont Improvement Corridor Figure 3-4 Federally Designated Southeast Corric�or ii7 NC Figure 3-5 Future S Line Segment of Southeast Corridor _ Figure 3-6 Improvement Projects for Southeast Corridor Figure 3-7 Charlotte to Atlanta Portion of Southeast Corridor 2-109 2-112 2-118 2-121 2-122 _3-2 _3-7 3-8 3-10 3-11 3-12 3-13 Figure 3-8 Charlotte to Atlanta Passenger Rail Corridor Study Area Figure 3-9 Corridors for Potential Thruway Service Extensions Figure 3-10 Potential Thruway Motor Coach Routes Figure 3-11 Southeastern NC Service Extensions Figure 3-12 Potential Southeastern NC (Raleigh-Goldsboro-Wilmington) Service Figure 3-13 Western NC Service Extension i��i�9F�ZEFIECJ�IVE �iA f � 6�.,r�iL PL�^;n6 3-14 LIST OF TABLES 3-15 Table 1-1 Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments within North Carolina, 3-16 from North Carolina, and to North Carolina - Value by Domestic Mode: 2007, in US million dollars 1-4 3-18 Table 1-2 3-20 3-21 Table 1-3 Figure 3-14 Potential Westet-n NC (Asheville-Salisbury) Service 3-22 Figure 3-15 Improvements to Address Passenger / Freight Interoperability on the A Line and S Line 3-23 Figure 3-16 Potential Intercity Passenger Rail Corridors 3-24 Figure 3-17 Potential Passenger Rail Study Corridors 3-26 Figure 3-18 Potential Commuter Rail Corridors, Charlotte Region 3-28 Figure 3-19 Potential Commuter Rail Corridors, Triangle Region 3-28 Figure 3-20 Potential Commuter Rail, Triad Region 3-29 Figure 3-21 Potential Commuter Rail, Northeastern NC to Hampton Roads, VA 3-29 Figure 4 1 North Carolina Freight Corridors Prioritized 4-5 Figure 4 2 Railroad Operators 4-22 Figure 5-1 Passenger Rail Corridor Priorities to Implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision 5-5 Figure 5-2 Freight Corridor Priorities to Implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision 5-6 Figure 5-3 Freight Corridor Priorities to Implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision (Map Key) 5-7 Figure 5-4 Train-Car Collisions and Patalities, 1988-2014 5-11 Figure 5-5 Typical Transportation Project Development Process 5-49 August 2015 Table 1-4 Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments within, from, and to North Carolina - Tonnage by Domestic Mode: 2007, in thousand tons 1-5 Commuting Mode Share in North Carolina 1-6 NCDOT Rail Division Funding, 2010-2014 1-15 Table 2-1 No►-th Carolina Rail Corridor Characteristics Summary 2-6 Table 2-2 Train Signals 2-8 Table 2-3 Train Signal Control Rules 2-8 Table 2-4 Railroad Mileage in North Carolina 2-10 Table 2-5 Characteristics of Amtrak Services in North Carolina 2-12 Table 2-6 Table 2-7 Table 2-8 Annual Ridership by Station in North Carolina North Carolina Rail Station Characteristics„ _ NCDOT-0wiied Rail Corridors 2-14 2-17 2-21 Table 2-9 Capacities of Existing Intei-modal Terminals in NC 2-23 Table 2-10 Projected Services, Additional Piedmont / Carolinian Frequency, Southeast Corridor, Southeastern NC (SENC) and Western NC (WNC) Services 2-31 Table 2-11 Average Quarterly End-Point On-Time Performance, All Trains Seivice North Carolina 2-33 Table 2-12 State Support for Carolinian and Piedmont Services (2014 dollars) 2-35 Table 2-13 Rail Project Types by STI Category Table 2-14 Direct Economic Impacts of Rail Services in North Carolina ($2014M) 2-42 2-51 Table 2-15 Broader Social Economic [mpacts of Amtrak Passenger Rail Services in North Carolina ($2014M) 2-52 Table 2-16 Direct Jobs from Rail in North Carolina 2-53 Table 2-17 Percent of Employees Working Outside County of Residence 2-63 Table 2-18 Race Percentage Trends 2-65 Table 2-19 NC and US Industry Sector Comparison 2-69 Table 2-20 Summary of North Carolina Rail Flows 2-78 Table 2-21 Summary of North Carolina Intermodal Rail Flows 2-79 Table 2-22 Comparison of North Carolina and North Dakota 2-82 Table 2-23 North Carolina Rail Boardings by Station (2001-2013) 2-89 Table 2-24 Federal Motor Fuel Tax Rate aild Distribution Z-93 Table 2-25 Summary of Top Two Host Railroad-Responsible Delays for Passenger Services by Quarter (Q4 FY 2010 through Q1 FY 2014) 2-95 Table 2-26 What Congestion Means to the Local Economy, 2011 2-96 Table 2-27 Regional Congestion Measures 2-98 Table 2-28 Regional Projected Growth: 2013-2033 2-98 Table 2-29 Amtrak Piedmont and Carolinian Travel Times 2-101 Table 2-30 Comparison of Rail and Air Travel for NC Destinations 2-104 Table 2-31 Comparison of Rail and Air Travel for Atlanta, Georgia and Washington, DC Z-105 Table 2-32 Rail Corridors in North Carolina 2-119 Table 2-33 Data Used to Prioritize Corridor Needs 2-120 Table 3-1 Passenger Rail Corridor Tiers and Potential Projects August 2015 3-3 C��P�6��4EC�l�IVE �iA f � 62.,r�IL PL�^:n6 Table 3-2 Projected Ridership and Revenue, Fourth and Fifth Frequencies _ 3-9 Table 3-3 Projected Ridership and Revenue, Fully-implemented Southeast Corridor 3-13 Table 3-4 Projected Passenger Rail Program Capital Costs 3-31 Table 4-1 Freight Rail Corridor Tiers and Potential Projects 4-6 Table 4-2 Short Line Potential Projects and Funding Needs 4-23 Table 5-1 Table 5-2 Table 5-3 Table 5-4 Table 5-5 Table 5-6 Table 5-7 The Governor's 25-Year Vision and the State Rail Plan 5-2 State Rail Plan Goals, Vision, Objectives 5-4 Near-Term (Short Range) Passenger Rail Program Effects _ 5-15 Long-Term (Long Range) Passenger Rail Progi�am Effects_ 5-18 Near-Term (Short Range) Freight Rail Program Effects 5-21 Long-Term (Long Range) Freight Rail Program Effects 5-26 Near-Term (Short Range) Passenger Rail Projects and Benefits _ 5-34 Table 5-8 Mid- to Long-term (Long Range) Passenger Rail Projects and Benefits 5-36 Table 5-9 Operating Finance Projections, Piedmont and Carolinian Services, State Fiscal Years 2015-2019 (2014 dollars) 5-38 Table 5-10 Projected Ridership and Revenue, all NC Passenger Train Services, 2025 (2014 dollars) 5-39 Table 5-11 Near Term (Short Range) Freight Rail Projects and Benefits _ 5-41 Table 5-12 Mid- and Long-Term (Long Range) Freight Rail Projects and Benefits 5-44 Table 5-13 Potential Passenger Rail Studies 5-50 c��s��zE�i�r�-�Av��rA�c�.,r�i�s��;na Table 5-14 Potential Fi•eight Rail Studies 5-50 Table 5- 15 Summaiy of Freight, Passenger, and Safety Needs (2014 dollars) _ 5-52 Table 5-16 Operation and Maintenance Summary of the Near Term (2015- 2019) 5-53 Table 6-1 Industry Groups 6-2 Table 6-2 TAC Meeting Schedule and Tasks 6-3 August 2015 1 Chapter One - The Role of Rail in Statewide Transportation This chapter describes the overall mission and goals for the multimodal transportation system in North Carolina and the role of rail as a component of North Carolina's transportation network. 1.1 NORTH CAROLINA'S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM GOALS 1.1.1 NCDOT Mission and Goals The goals and objectives for the State Rail Plan must support the mission and goals of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and the NCDOT Rail Division. NCDOT Mission Connecting people and places safely and efficiently, with accountabiliry and enviro��mental sensitiviry to enhance the economy, health and well-being of North Caralina. NCDOT Goals • Make our transportation network safer. • Make our transportation network move people and goods more efficiently. • Make our infrastructure last longer. • Make our organization a place that works well. • Make our organization a great place to work. Source: North Carolina Department of Transportation. www.ncdot.gov/performance/missiongoals The mission and goals for NCDOT ai-e not specific to any single transportation mode. They apply to all NCDOT programs that impact the state's multimodal transportation network, including rail. C��I'�V�V��,G-BEN�IVE �I�I� ��IL9�LAN The NCDOT Rail Division's mission is the "...safe and efficient movement of people and goods on North Carolina's railroads through freight, passenger and safety programs, supporting job creation and economicgrowth."1 This State Rail Plan was developed to support the mission and goals of both NCDOT and the NCDOT Rail Division, as well as the broader public policy goals for North Carolina. 1.1.2 Governor McCrory's 25-Year Vision for North Carolina The State Rail Plan is also a component of Governor McCrory's 25-Year Vision for North Carolina, which is a plan to help connect all North Carolinians with jobs, education, healthcare, and each other. The plan will help stimulate job growth and generate an overall positive economic impact for North Carolina.z The 25-Year Vision for North Carolina includes the following rail-related goals: • Improve rail connections between military bases and ports • Intermodal facilities to support freight shipping, and scheduled intermodal service to Port of Wilmington • Improved rail access to Global TransPark and Port of Morehead City • Economically competitive rail service to inland ports • Improve i•ail and seaport connections to I-95 to serve eastern U.S. • Expand access to passenger rail options in all regions of the state • Expand mass transit options, including rail • Expand access to passeizgei- rail options in all regions of the state The State Rail Plan is also consistent with other statewide plans including the State Transportation Improvement Program, State Long Range Transportation Plan, and State Freight Plan. 1North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. http: // www.ncbytrai n.org/aU o ut/ default.html L http://www.ncdot.gov/ncvision25/ August 2015 1-1 CCI�'V9�l2�4-BENaIVE S I� I� t��IL 9�LAIV 1.2 THE ROLE OF RAIL IN NORTH CAROLINA'S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM This section summarizes the role of rail in North Carolina in the context of the state's multimodal transportation system. Detailed descriptions of the existing freight, passenger, and commuter rail systems are provided in Chapter 2. 1.2.1 Rail System Today there are over 3,200 miles of railroad in North Carolina, serving 86 of the state's 100 counties. North Carolina's Rail System is shown in Figure 1-1. 1.2.1.1 Freight Rai! The state is served by two Class 13 railroads - Norfolk Southern (NS) and CSX Transportation (CSXT) and 20 short line railroads that connect businesses and industries to the Class I netwoi-k. In addition, the North Carolina Railroad (NCRR) Company owns and manages a 317-mile corridor extending from the Port of Morehead City to Charlotte. NS operates along the corridoi- through and operating and maintenance agreement. The freight rail network in North Carolina provides services to ports, power plants, mines, military iilstallatiolls, and industries including, but not limited to, agriculture, forestry, plastics, furniture, food products, and chemicals. Freight railroads support jobs for about 2,600 railroad employees in the state.4 The rypes and percentages of commodities carried by rail o►-iginating and terminating in North Carolina are shown Figure 1-2. 3 A Class I railroad is a railway company having annual carrier operating revenues of at least $467 million. For additional definitions on railroad classifications, see section 2.1 in Chapter 2. 4 NC Maritime Strategy Technical Memorandum - North Carolina Railroads Existing and Planned lnfrastructure, AECOM May 2012 August 2015 1-2 COMPREI-I�NSN� STATE RAIL PLAN . �= Figure 1-1 North Carolina's Rail Syste►n August 2015 1-3 Origina�ed in NC Tert�minat�ed �r� NC i4.4 million tons/204,20Q carloads 47.4 million tons/591,2�0 earloads Through volumes averaged 38 million tons (615,000 carloads) over last 10 years. Source: Association ofAmerican Railroads Figure 1-2 STB Waybill Summa�y - Co►nmodities Carried by Rail Originating and Terminating in NC (2012) Over the last 10 years, in addition to the tonnage originated or terminated in North Carolina (Figure 1-2), North Carolina's network has also supported approximately 38 million tons (615,000 carloads) of through traffic, primarily on north-south Class 1 railroad lines. Generally, lower volume east-west Class 1 branch lines and short lines help connect NC industries to the primary north- south Class I network. These branch lines-to-Class I-connections provide important national and international economic and transportation linlcages for industries located in rural and small urban areas. F►-eight Analysis Frameworlc (FAF) data compiled by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) shows freight movement trends for North Carolina in terms of value and weight. Table 1-1 shows the value of shipments within, from, and to North Carolina by mode. Figures 1-3, 1-4, and 1-5 visually depict the values shown in Table 1-1. Table 1-2 shows the tonnage of shipments within, from and to North Carolina by mode. Figures 1-6, 1-7, and 1-8 visually depict the values shown in Table 1-2. By far, the majority of shipments (by value and tonnage) are by truck. Table 1-1 �u-rr�e��r��►r��:��r�r,�• Domestic, [mport, and Export Shipments within North Carolina, from North Carolina, aiid to North Carolina - Value by Domestic Mode: 2007, in US million dollars MODE WITHIN FROM TO Truck $202,548 $185,790 $171,168 Rail $677 $3,911 $9,532 Water $0 $38 $17 Air (include truck-air) $14 $2,134 $2,429 Multiple modes & $6,032 $24,077 $44,416 mail Pipeline $0 $0 $1,777 Other and unknown $3,037 $5,980 $2,009 Total $212,308 $221,931 $231,349 ,��I S�ipments u�rr�larr� N�arth �arv�ir�a - '��I��e �y ao��stic �Illc��le ■Trurk ■ R.a i I F Ut+ater ■ Air (i nclude truck-airj � Multiple r�ocles & m,ail Piweline Other an�! unkno�,an Figure 1-3 Domestic, Import, and Export Shipinents within North Carolina - Value by Domestic Mode: 2007 August 2015 1-4 Apl Shuprr��r�� fr�� J�r#f� �a��ral�na - '�a�l�e �y [��nrn�s�i� iNlode ■ Tru�k ■ Rail � L'Ua�er ■ AirGindude ¢ru�k-air) � A11ul:iple mcdes 8i mail - Pi�eline Q�her �nd unknown Figure 1-4 Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments from North Carolina - Value by Domestic Mode: 2007 �4C1 �I�u�ments ic� �9�erth �a�rolin� - V�lu� ��r [�a�m�s�ic iMode Figure 1-5 August 2015 ■ Tru�k ■ R�il � +N a� er ■,4ir�in�lude �ruck-air] ■ Multfple made� 8� mail � Pipeline []�.her znd unkrr�t�tn Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments to North Carolina - Value by Domestic Mode: 2007 TaUle 1-2 COMPREI-I�NSIV� ST�1iE RAII� PLAN Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments within, from, and to Nordi Garolina - Tonnage by Domestic �9ode: 2007, in ghoa�sand tons MODE WITHIN FROM TO Truck 289,873 80,838 76,294 Rail 3,607 7,451 60,481 Water - 1 47 Air (include truck-air) 0 49 $5 Multiple modes & mail 1,402 5,101 6,216 Pipeline - - 4,929 Other and unknown 1,135 1,532 1,030 Total 296,017 94,971 149,082 �4�1 �I�apm�ro�s wr`�thi� I�ar�h ��r��ina - �T�nr��age b+�'�D+�me��ic f�+1vd� ■ Truc� ■ Rail � 'W�Iat�,r ■ Fiir{a�c3�udz t�vc6�-air} ■ iVl�elt�pEe meades & arraA9 � pip�sime t7the� a�d un&cr�rawrm Figure 1-6 Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments within North Carolina - Tonnage by Domestic Mode: 2007 1-5 AII '�h�i�rr�e�n�s�frcrrrr �loa��h �Car€�lur�a - To�n�g� �y a�rr��stic �1a�d� ■Tru�k ■Rail = 44'at�r ■,Air (i nducle truck-air� � M1.�lultiple mades & rnail Pipeline C7#h�r and unknown Figure 1-7 Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments from North Carolina - Tonnage by Domestic Mode: 2007 ,�['�I 5h�i��m��nts t� �l�rtM Carc�li�r� - T�ar�c��ge hy► �c�m��tic 1�11�d� Figure 1-8 ■�ru�k ■F�ail � lh+at�r ■,�ir f i nclud�e trucls-airj I� Multipl� rx��c1�� & rmail �- Pipelirre �Oth�r �nd unkr��v.rn Domestic, Import, and Export Shipments to North Carolin�a - Tonnage by Domestic Mode: 2007 CCI"V9�l2�,0-BENaIVE S I�11 � F�'�11L E�IAIV 1.2.1.2 Passenger Rail North Carolina is served by six intercity passenger trains with stops in 16 communities. Amtrak also connects to other communities with its Thruway Bus Service connections. Over 70 percent of North Carolina's population is within a 30-inile radius of a passenger station, with an additional 11 percent of the state's residents within a 30-mile radius of stops served by Amtrak's Thruway Bus Service. Currently there is no commuter or regional rail services in the state. The Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) does operate a light rail line (Blue Line) and is currently constructing an extension of that line. CATS and the regional transit agencies in the Triad area and Triangle area are also planning for commuter rail systems. Since 2001, North Carolina intercity rail ridership (boardings and alightings) have nearly doubled, from 500,000 in 2001 to nearly 1 million in 2013. Commute inode share for trips to work in 2012 is shown in Table 1-3. In 2012, most people in North Carolina traveled to work by car, truck, or van (90.6 percent). Only 1.1 percent of people used a form of public transportation. Table 1-3 Co►nmuting Mode Share in North Carolina Workers Age 16 years and over 4,237,689 MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK Car, truck, or van 91.6% Drove alone 80.9% Carpooled 10.7% In 2-person carpool 8.1% In 3-person carpool 1.4% In 4-or-more person carpool 1.2% Workers per car•, truck, or van 1.07 Public transportation (excluding taxicab) 1.1% Walked 1.8% Bicycle 0.2% Taxicab, motorcycle, or other means 1.0% Worked at home 4.3% August 2015 1-6 CC°I�V9�9��,4-BEN�IVE SI�I� F��IL9�LAN 1.2.2 Highways There are about 80,000 miles of state-maintained i-oads in North Carolina. The major cities, interstates, and United States (US) routes are shown in Figure 1-9. Passenger and freight rail can help to reduce car and truck congestion on state- maintained roads, by moving more people and more fi-eight. The highway system is shown with the rail system in Figure 1-10. Interstate 85 and I-40 parallel the Amtrak Carolinian and Piedmont passenger train routes serving the major population centers of Metrolina (Charlotte, Concord, and Gastonia), the Triad (Winston-Salem, High Point, and Greensboro) and Triangle [Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill). The Crescent parallels I-85 serving stations from Greensboro and Charlotte. The Silver Star route parallels US 1 and 1-95 serving the Sandhills, the Triangle, Wilson and Rocky Mount. The Silver Meteor and Palmetto passenger trains follow the 1-95 corridor serving Fayetteville, Selma, Wilson and Rocky Mount. Major freight railroads also parallel interstates and US routes in North Carolina. These corridors include: • US 74 Corridor: CSXT between Charlotte and Wilmington • I-77 Corridor: NS between Pineville and Mooresville • I-40 Corridor: NS between Asheville and Salisbury and NS/NCRR between Greensboro and Raleigh • I-85 Corridor: NS/NCRR between South Carolina, Charlotte and Durham • I-95 Corridor: CSXT between South Carolina, Fayetteville and Virginia • US-1 Corridor: CSXT between Hamlet, Southern Pines and Raleigh • US-70 Corridor: NS/NCRR between Raleigh and Morehead City As highway congestion continues to increase, provision of alternative modes to move people and goods will be essential to the State's economy. August 2015 1-7 � '��, /l / � ' � y '�� t' F r �rJ.- , /: _. i r " _ '--- —_ -T� Chartvrtte � �... Legend Interstate Urbanized Area Figure 1-9 North Carolina's Interstates and US Routes _ �. = r :. � :�:� �--� = , - s � , _:� �-, �;; _ ,.�. J _- .. - . �'� �✓ W��,�si � -SaMem �� I - r I � ville �_. Charlfltte Lege,nd — In4ersia4e ^--- Amtrak Route Ciass 3 Freight Railroad L7rtsanized Area Greensboro Durharm � _ _ Raleigh Figure 1-10 North Carolina's Interstates and Class I Railroads � GreenviAe _ .. Wilmington 6reenville Wilmington \c�ti�-�' N N COMPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN August 2015 1-8 1.2.3 Ports/Marine North Carolina operates State Ports in Morehead City and Wilmington; both are served by a single class 1 railroad company. The Port of Morehead City is served by Norfolk Southern along the North Carolina Railroad Company (NCRR)-owned corridor that connects to Charlotte via the Triangle and Triad. The Port of Wilmington is served by CSXT with a connection to Charlotte that. parallels the US 74 corridor. Coastal Carolina Railroad (CLNA) provides switching services at the Port of Morehead City and the Wilmington Terminal Railroad (WTRY) does so at the Port of Wilmington. The Port of Morehead City serves bulk and breakbulk (goods that must be loaded individually, such as heavy equipinent) freight and has no container cranes on site. The Port of Wilmington serves bulk and breakbulk freight but also has two berths dedicated to container service. Based on analysis conducted as part of the North Carolina Maritime Sti�ategy (NCDOT 2012), the capacity of the container terminal at the Port of Wilmington is estimated at 530,000 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs). Over the last five years (2010-2014), an average of 267,000 TEUs has been moved through the container facility for an approximate 50 percent utilization.s The movement of bulk and breakbulk freight through both ports has varied over time and is explained in detail in Chapter 2 along with trends in the top five imports and exports moving through both ports. The locations of the ports in Morehead City and Wilmington are shown on Figure 1-11. 1.2.4 Aviation North Carolina is home to nine major airports with regularly scheduled passenger service. These airports include Charlotte-Douglas, Raleigh-Durham, Piedmont Triad, Wilmington International, Fayetteville Regional, Albert Ellis (]acksonville), Coastal Carolina (New Bern) and Pitt-Greenville and are shown on Figure 1-12. In 2012, Charlotte-Douglas accounted for 75 percent of passenger boardings in North Carolina, followed by Raleigh-Durham (17 percent) and Piedmont Triad (3 percent) with the other six airports accounting for 1 percent or less of enplanements. Currently, No►-th Carolina has no direct connections between passenger rail facilities and airports. However, future rail and other transit options in some s North Carolina State Ports Authority Cargo Movement History and Forecast, )une, 2014 CLh'V9�9��=;4-4EN�IVE � If'11 � ��IL 9�LAN locations may offer the ability to access airports within North Carolina directly from adjacent passenger rail stations. Charlotte Douglas International is located adjacent to the Amtrak Crescent route which also shares track with the Piedmont and Carolinian routes a few miles northeast of the airport. The Triad and Triangle are also located along the Piedmont and Carolinian routes. See Chapter 2 for more information on these regions' plans to link airports to either commuter rail or st►•eetcars. 1.2.5 Multi-modal In addition to the two State Ports, the North Carolina State Ports Authority operates the Piedmont Triad Inland Terminal and the Charlotte Inland Terminal. Inland terminals offer staging ground venues for transferring cargo between trucks or between modes. The Piedmont Triad Inland Terminal is located in southwest Greensboro, at the interchange of I-40 and I-73, and within 6 miles of Norfolk Southern Greensboro Intermodal Terminal, where there is a Virginia lnternational container station, and Piedmont Triad [nternational Airport. However, it is currently not in use. The Charlotte Inland Terminal is located north of Charlotte Douglas International Airport and one mile from the CSXT Charlotte Intermodal Terminal and eight miles from the new Norfolk Southern Intermodal Terminal. The CSXT Charlotte Intermodal Terminal and the NS Greensboro and Charlotte Intermodal Terminals and intermodal routes through NC are shown on Figure 1-11. North Carolina has made significant pi-ogress in establishing multi-modal transportation centers in the state's large and mid-sized urban areas over the last two decades. These multi-modal transportation centers typically house Amtrak passenger rail stations, intercity bus providers (Gi-eyhound and Carolina Trailways) and city and regional transit agencies bus depots. Figure 1-13 shows the existing multi-modal stations and their connections to intercity passenger rail. See Chapter 2 for detailed information on existing and planned multi-modal transportation centers in North Carolina. August 2015 1-9 �K•��i�:�a:ia��►■��r=r��:r�i�� ,� � � .- �,- �; _�;�;f, r �'' �,�� ,� 1.= ��„Fs/r <:�`fr`= `�' �. : . � ��, ,��. ; r : ,.;� � _ ., %`- � Greansboro � — , r Kihston �' Charlatte � L�gend `--�--� . �� " * NC �orts Authority Inland Parts - Charlotte and Piedonont Triad � " nnorenead c�ry � Norfolk Sauthern Intermoda! Terrn+r�als - CLT Airpart and Greensboro � i �, ,� s�� • C5X �niermodal Terminal - C6�arGotte O NC Global YransPark � wimingcon � I North Carolima State Parts - Wilmingkon & Morehead Ciry Interstate Freig�t Rsilroa�' Figure 1-11 North Carolina Marine Ports, Intermodal Facilities and Freight Railroad � qr e�i`c�' r�F �� , �� `�� ," , _ c1 �. Sa�sb hy G�e� �'a �g.gr Rocky Moun h ��d,� G� 9 o,;�r�'�o �x Ulhlson� Greertwille Ashevil Ie G C �s �" ��Oh� h`�`/orl� Selma Southem Pines New Ber -- --'-- `� Fayetteoil9e Amirak Routes & Stations: Hamiet Jacksanville -(+ Cfe5Cen1: New Orleans [o New York City serving Gastania, Charlo4te, 5alisbury, High Point, GreensY�oro station.s Le�gend �� AmtraR Route Cr3!'01!lilell / Pledlt7ollt: Charlotte to Raleigh witia Carolrnian service to NYG wiiminyton • Amtrak Station aerving Charlotte, Kanna,polis, Salisbury, High Point, Greensboro, Burlington, Durham, Gary, Rele�gh statians {' MajarAirport SIIVEC MStE�OC/ PBIf►12tt0: Mrami to New Yark City S11YBl St71": Savarrnah to New York Gity serving Fayetteville, Selma, Wlson, ftocky Mount stations serving Hamlet, Sou[hern Penes, Cary, Raleigh, Rocky Mount stations Figw•e 1-12 North Carolina Airports <��d i�itercity Passenger Raifl lones August2015 1-10 ,. , � 4Y�x�� y= �1 . /i'� " /'` - . � / � � . ��'"l _ _- "_ �-:.` . r�j i;r . . Sd�� 'd��a b�'% Gd Ch AO�s SY��a a•��rr e r0� ��1�� ra� Q�c � y Gl�'e� G� .�r � f9h Of�s� fD �x�e f Selma Sauthem Pines Fayetteville Multi-moda� Connections at Amtrak Statio�s: Amtrak Station Only: � -�-*—�- Amtrak Raute Namlet Arntrak wit� �us Con�rections: � Bus Siation ■ Bus Route Onl�r "'` Amtrak with Bus Station � Intercity Bus Connections: � On-Site � Walking Distan Amtrak with Future Multi-modal Statian Plans: Z, Figure 1-13 North Carolina 1'✓lultimodal Facilities and Intercity Passenger Rail lines 1.2.6 Long-range Planning Several NCDOT long range plans have addressed freight and/or passenger rail needs. Recent planning projects include: • Eastern Infrastructure Improvement Study (2015), which assessed the impacts of strategic infrastructure investments in three of the state's transportation and economic assets: the Global TransPark, Port of Morehead City, and restoring the Wallace to Castle Hayne rail corridor. The risks, opportunities, and impacts of a variety of investments, including rail infrastructure and complementary facilities, were investigated to determine the financial feasibility and potential economic impacts of the investments. • NC Maritime Strategy (2012), which investigated the role of the ports in the state's economy and the impacts of a range of opportunities that would result from investments in transportation infrastructure. The study also identified improvements for rail that would enhance the transport of goods at the ports and inland. " Rocky Wilson N �K•��i�:�a:ia��►■��r_r��:r_�i�� x�� • Seven Portals Study (2011), which explored transportation infrastructure investments that would encourage economic development in potential logistics villages across the state. The study was aimed at the business community to demonstrate the state's readiness for commerce in a variety of industries to encourage job growth and support economic activity. • Statewide Logistics Plan (2008), which developed a plan to address long-term statewide mobility needs by identifying priority commerce opportunities, recommending transportation infrastructure that would result in economic growth, and outlined a timeline. Coordinating an econoinic development plan with transportation infrasti-uctui-e investments was one of the recommendations. • State Rail Plans (2001, 2009) have previously identified priority rail corridors and recommended projects to improve freight and passenger rail in the state. Under the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA), FRA requires updates every five years to remain eligible for federal grant funds. August 2015 1-11 The NCDOT Rail Division has also studied a potential passenger rail service extension to western North Carolina (Salisbury to Asheville) and to eastern North Carolina (Raleigh to Wilmington) and (Raleigh to Greenville). Additional information on these passenger rail plans and implementation of the Southeast Corridor are provided in Chapter 2. 1.3 GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES The roles of federal, state, regional, and local governments in shaping rail policy in North Carolina are summarized in this section. 1.3.1 Federal Government Rail is influenced at the federal level by three modal agencies of the USDOT - the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), with primary involvement by FRA in North Carolina rail activities. The mission of the FRA is "to enable the safe, reliable, and efficient movement of people and goods foi- a strong America, now and in the future." The FRA issues and enforces safety regulations, makes select investments in rail corridors across the country, and supports the development of research and technology.� The passage of the Rail Safety Improvement Act (2008), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA) (2008), and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (2009), along with subsequent appropriations and initiatives, expanded FRA's priinary focus on safety improvement to encompass both safety and development.� The national oversight of rail safety by FRA, including their role in inspection programs, is addressed in detail in 1.5.3 under Safety Programs. The FRA also oversees compliance with the National Envii•onmental Policy Act (NEPA) and implementing regulations for federally- 6 Federal Railroad Administration. "Overview." Visited 7 April 2014. Available: http: //www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0351 ' Federal Railroad Administration. "Overview." Visited 7 April 2014. Available: h ttp :// www. fra. d o t. go v/ P a g e/ P 0 3 51 ��h'V9�9��,4-BEN�IVE �I�I� �f'11L9�LA[� funded rail projects. The FRA conducts environmental reviews according to the "FRA Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts."8 The FTA provides technical and financial assistance to transit authorities operating or planning for commuter rail. As part of this effort, the FTA coordinates with the NCDOT Rail Division and local transit authorities to ensure projects meet the safety standards established under the State Safety Oversight Program for Fixed Guideway and Rail Systems.9 The FHWA administers the Railway-Highways (Section 130) Crossings Program. Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) continued the annual funding set aside from the Highway Safety Improvement Program for 23 USC 130 to provide funds foi- the elimination of hazards at railway-highway crossings.l� FHWA is also a signatory on the environmental studies conducted for the Southeast Corridor. 1.3.2 State Government Primary responsibility for coordinating rail programs in North Carolina lies within the NCDOT's Rail Division. Enabling legislation passed in 1977 established the Rail Division and gave the NCDOT authority to rehabilitate and improve railroads, to construct rail or related facilities, to purchase railroads for maintenance and preservation purposes, to inspect equipment and facilities, and to carry out safety and accident prevention programs.11 The Director of the NCDOT Rail Division is the State Rail Transportation Authority (SRTA), as defined by PRIIA. The Rail Division is housed in the Division of Transit alongside the Aviation, Bicycle and Pedestrian, Ferry, and the Public Transportation divisions. The five branches of the Rail Division and their respective responsibilities are described below. Figure 1-14 shows the organization of the Rail Division within NCDOT. e Federal Railroad Administratio�. "National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Procedures." Available: http://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0215. Visited 25 Apri12014. �North Carolina Department of Transportation. North Carolina Rail Plan 2009 Executive Summary. 1° Federal Highway Administration. Railway-Highways Crossing (Section 130) Program. http: //safety.fhwa.dot.gov/� ngs/ �iNorth Carolina Department of Transportation. North Carolina Rail Plan 2000. January 2001. August 2015 1-12 NCDQi Rail Q]iwisifln NC 6oard of Transpdrtalion Se[rQtary DepuYy Secre[aeyforTransit a��a � Flnance & {antracts Oifice . 4�� 1 Pmmyam qsvstnnt Aclmin. Assixtrnt planning&Oevelaipment Fngineering'[oordination � BFili1CI1 i�lSdfE $fdilill I� � RrojectD�vslopment , I Rliitlra:+�&Rr�ilTrant�t S�fr.ty �versi9ht � Planning � CrossingSaletyStudies ScraPegiclnfrtiatives � InvenzoryR��ea Highway Proyett PEIPYCfy� bi 17esign�&ConstruRfan I Bratich IDesign c«,str��c:� Signals and Devi[es Operatia„s a Faciutles Branch � Cnnirior�49anagement PassengerOperations Facilities & Stations � � MarkeGng Figure 1-14 Organization of the Rail Division within NCDOT • Operations & Facilities Branch - Plans, finances and markets rail passenger service; oversees passenger rail customer service; works with local governments to plan for station improvements; oversees equipment and facility maintenance; manages station staff in cooperation with Amtrak and trains volunteers • Planning & Development Branch - participates in regional transportation planning processes; plans for future intercity passenger rail; manages the internal grant program; acquires strategic rail corridors for preservation; ensures environmental compliance for rail projects funded in the State Transportation Improveinent Program (ST[P); coordinates strategic planning efforts with the railroad companies • Engineering Coordination & Safety Branch - implements the statewide crossing improvement program; reviews designs for rail ��NV9�9��,G-eEN�IVE � If'1I � ��IL 9�LAN transit; inspects rail infrastructure and equipment; promotes rail safety awareness • Design & Construction Branch - designs and constructs roadway/rail at-grade crossing and railroad track improvements and coordinates construction activities with railroad companies • Finance & Contracts Office - coordinates with federal transportation modal administrations; contracts with Amtrak for passenger service; coordinates funding agreements with local governments The North Carolina Board of Transportation develops policies, establishes priorities, and approves conti-acts and funding for all modes of transportation under the department. The Board also promulgates rules and regulations concerning all transportation functions assigned to the department. In addition, the Board helps develop and approve the department's multi-year STIP. The nineteen members are appointed by the governor, the president of tlle North Carolina Senate, and the speaker of the North Cai•olina House of Representatives. The Board of Transportation is the State Rail Plan Appi-oval Authority (SRPAA), as defined by PRIIA. The General Assembly and Governor can create specialized task forces or request studies be conducted for logistics and other rail-related infrastructure or economic development initiatives.1z The General Assembly and Governor also work with NCDOT to identify funding needs and develop a budget. 1.3.3 Regional, County, and Local Government The NCDOT cooi-dinates with state's nineteen Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and nineteen Rural Planning Organizations (RPOs) at MPO/RPO board meetings and at project-specific meetings. MPOs are federally- designated regional transportation planning organizations for urban areas of 50,000 people or more. RPOs are state-designated organizations that plan for the remaining portions of the state. MPOs and RPOs are responsible for regional freight planning, intra-city rail planning, and short-term local project 1zNorth Carolina Department of Commerce. Governor's Logistics Task Force. April 15, 2011. Accessed March 25, 2014. http://www.nccommerce.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=cF2HDx8Hwkc%3D&tabid=1575&mid=41 79 August 2015 1-13 prioritization. MPOs are required to develop a multi-modal Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) that addresses long term needs for freight and transit, including light rail and commuter rail, where applicable. MPOs coordinate with transit agencies, counties, and local governments to include these projects in the MTP so that they may be funded. These entities also work together with NCDOT on other rail projects such as roadway/rail traffic separation studies and individual crossing closings. In addition to their involvement in NCDOT and regional transportation planning processes, local and regional transit authorities lead transit planning processes in many communities, including regional commuter and light rail development in Metropolitan regions, integration of intercity rail with local and regional transit services, and multimodal station development. In 1997, the General Assembly authorized Mecklenburg County to levy a half-cent sales tax dedicated to transit so that Charlotte could fund their transit expansion plans.13 The General Assembly passed similar legislation in 2008 allowing Guilford, Forsyth, Durham, Wake, and Orange counties to levy a half-cent sales tax for transit and enabling 94 other counties to levy a quarter-cent sales tax for transit.14 Similar to the legislation enabling Mecklenburg County, the 20081egislation requires county commissioners to vote to put the half-cent sales tax to a voter referendum. Upon a voter majoriry approval, the sales tax revenues go toward the service recommendations outlined in approved regional transit plans. Voters in Durham and Orange counties have passed these referendums. Local governments then coordinate with regional transportation planning organizations, NCDOT, and federal transportation agencies to implement intra- city passenger rail. The Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) is the only transit authority in North Carolina that has built and operates a light rail line. Several 73Flowers, Carolyn. CEO, Charlotte Area Transit System. Charlotte-MecklenUurg Region Rapid Transit and Land-Use Integration Presentation to Legislative Committee on Urban Growth and InFrastructure. March 23, 2010. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://www.ndeg.net/documentsites/committees/LSCUG[I/2009- 2010%20lnterim/March%2023,%202010/2010-0323%20C.FIowers°/o20- %20CATS%20Presentation.pdf 14General Assembly of North Carolina. House Bill 148 Legislative Fiscal Note. August 3, 2009. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2009/FiscalNotes/House/PDF/HFN0148v4nl.pdf ��I'�V�V��',G-BEN�IVE � If'1 V � �'�11� V��L_L11[� other metropolitan areas are planning for future light rail and commuter rail lines (see Chapter 2). 1.4 FUNDING This section describes the State's authority for grant, loan, and public/private pai�tnership financing, how the State has used these authorities in the past, State revenue sources that are dedicated to rail funding (if any), and how much the State has provided in funding over the past five years. Funding for the past five state fiscal years is shown in Table 1-4. Many of the funding sources and programs listed below are from state programs that have now been eliminated under the state's new transportation funding law, as well as federal grants under the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which do not reoccur annually. More detail on the programs that help fund Rail Division activities can be found in Section 1.5 below and in Chapter 2. August 2015 1-14 i� �� N9 V� V��, 4-8 E N� IL� E S I f4 u 4� �'�11 � V��1 [� Table 1-4 NCDOT Rail Division Ftmding, 2010-2014 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 Operations & Facilities $5,719,828 $7,275,000 $1,706,666 $1,706,666 $1,706,666 Rail Industrial Access $1,750,000 $700,000 $119,000 $119,000 Engineering & Safety $970,971 $1,200,000 $1,356,667 $1,356,667 $1,356,667 Environmental & Planning $1,659,966 $975,000 $1,156,667 $1,156,667 $1,156,667 Travel Time Improvements/Matching Funds $3,082,592 $2,243,144 $3,462,153 $3,462,153 $1,628,007 Maintenance of Rail [nfrastructure $1,000,000 $1,750,000 $2,400,000 $2,400,000 $2,400,000 Rail Capital & Safety $2,856,153 $3,743,144 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 Streamline Freight Operations-Greenville and Pembroke $3,539,865 Contracted Se�vices $8,100,000 $8,100,000 $8,517,073 Grants to Short Lines $2,000,000 $400,000 $400,000 State Appropriation - Statewide $61,473 Freight Rail & Rail Crossing Safety $19,200,000 TOTALS $17,100,983 $23,426,153 $21,701,153 $21,201,153 $38,465,080 1.5 LAWS, POLICIES, INITIATIVES Sections 1.2 through 1.4 described the current status of rail in North Carolina's overall transportation system and how the NCDOT Rail Division's governance and funding support rail as an integral part of the state's transportation network. Article 2D of North Carolina General Statute 136 addresses railroad revitalization in the state. Chapter 44.36 designates DOT as the agency to administer federal and state railroad revitalization programs.ls There are also private sector, federal, state, and local legislative and policy initiatives that are guiding the future development of rail in our state, as described below. 1.5.1 Legislative Policy and Initiatives In recent years there have been fundamental changes in state and federal transportation law that have impacted how North Carolina administers and funds its rail programs. • The Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA) mandates that Positive Train Control (PTC) be implemented across a significant portion of the �s http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/statutes/StatutesTOC.pI?Chapter=0136 Nation's rail industry by Deceinber 31, 2015. Lines requiring PTC are essentially Class I railroad mainlines that handle any poisonous- inhalation-hazardous materials, and any railroad mainlines over which regularly scheduled intei�city passenger or commuter rail services are provided. PTC refers to communication-based/processor-based train control technology that provides a system capable of reliably and functionally preventing train-to-ti�ain collisions, overspeed derailments, incursions into established work zone limits, and the movement of a train through a mainline switch in the improper position.l� The NCDOT Rail Division has been in discussion with both CSXT and NS on how this new rule will impact shared freight/passenger corridors and how it will impact the construction costs of pi�oposed commuter rail lines that might be located on non-Class I railroads. • In 2008 the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA) was passed, which reauthorizes Amtrak and requires states to sign new agreernents with Amtrak on state-sponsored passenger train routes "Federal Railroad Administration. Positive Train Coutrol (PTC) Overview (Railroad Safety). http: //www.fra. dot.gov/ Page/P 0621 August 2015 1-15 such as the Piedmont and Carolinian. The law also establishes new guidelines for federal support for conventional and high speed passenger programs and is the law that establishes the requirements for this State Rail Plan." • [n 2009, President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), which included additional funding for speed and capacity improvements along federally designated high speed rail cori-idors. NCDOT was awarded over $545 million in competitive grants to fund the Piedmont Improvement Program, a series of projects between Raleigh and Charlotte that will enhance safety, increase capacity, and increase travel speeds for freight and passenger rail. An ARRA grant for $25 million will be used to install three double cross- overs on double tracked sections of CSXT's A Line to help alleviate freight and passenger traffic congestion along the corridor. Two of the cross-overs are located in Nash County and one in Halifax County. Most of these projects are currently under construction and all must be completed by September 30, 2017. • In 2013, Governor Pat McCrory signed into law the St►�ategic Transportation Investment (STI) program, which completely overhauls NCDOT's methods for prioritizing and selecting capital expenditures. STI divides the state's funds into three categories - statewide, regional impact and division. The division category refers to NCDOT's 14 Highway Divisions, or administrative groupings of counties. Priorities in this category consider local rankings. Freight capacity projects on Class I railroads are eligible for statewide funds. Rail service spanning two or more counties (and not funded through statewide funds) are eligible for regional funds, and any non-statewide and non-regional projects are eligible for division funds. All projects - regardless of mode - are evaluated against a 100 point scale that considers factors including congestion, mobility, access, and economic and benefit-cost impacts. It should be noted that some funding programs that have been used for rail projects, such as the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), Transportation Alternatives, and roadway/rail crossing ��Federal Railroad Administration. Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA). http://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0393 �� I'� V� V��', G-8 E N� I'v� E� I f1 V� F��11 � V�dJ=1 �9 improvements, are evaluated through separate prioritization processes. NCDOT reviews the STI prioritization process as needed. STI results guide the development of the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The STIP is a ten year program of transportation projects that is updated biannually.l� • The Freight Rail & Rail Crossing Safety Impi-ovement Fund (FRRCSI) was also established under law in 2013. FRRCSI uses dividends paid to the state of North Carolina fi-om the NCRR to fund some freight and rail/roadway crossing safety projects. The dividends fund two state grant programs: The Short Line Infrastructure Access Program (SIAP) and the Rail Industrial Access Program (RIAP), as well as crossing safety improvements. The Rail Division administers the program and funds projects based upon eligibility, needs, and priority. Freight projects ai-e matched by the private partner at 50 percent or more. • In September 2014, Governor Pat McCrory and Transportation Secretary Tony Tata unveiled the Governor's 25-Year Vision for transportation in North Carolina. The plan's comprehensive solutions to address statewide transportation needs include: ■ Strengthening the maintenance of our existing facilities ■ Improving our public transportation network including passenger rail ■ Expanding bicycle and pedestrian networks statewide ■ Supporting greater broadband connectivity through existing right of way The vision also addresses the need for alternative funding solutions that will help the state close the gap between infrastructure needs and available funding. The alternative funding solutions include optimizing public-private partnerships, reducing dependency on federal dollars, taking advantage of historically low interest rates, and presenting ��'North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. Presentation to the NCDOT Rail Planiling Forum, November 12, 2013 August 2015 1-16 targeted revenue recommendations to the General Assembly for action during the 2015 legislative session.'� On July 6, 2012, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) was signed into law. While this legislation does not directly impact the NCDOT rail programs, it does impact potential light rail and commuter rail projects that might share rights-of-way with freight or intercity passenger rail and the joint development of multimodal transportation centers. The act has also offered some grant funding that could be used for rail projects. Other recent state legislative programs that have impacted rail include SB-402, which directed the NCDOT, NC Department of Commerce and the NC Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to study the feasibiliry of infrastructure improvements to the Global TransPark and the North Carolina State Ports. The SB-402 study was complete as of January 2015 and recommended the establishment of the Secretary of Transportation's Freight Intermodal Advisory Council to help leverage strategic infrastructure investments to foster economic growth.20 1.5.2 Private Sector Initiatives In 2007, NS initiated planning and construction of major infi-astructure improvements along their Crescent Corridor, running from New York to New Orleans and Memphis.21 The program consists of a$2.5 billion investment that will include 300 miles of new passing tracks, sections of double tracks, and new or expanded terminals in 11 markets. A portion of this corridor is part of the NCRR between Greensboro and Charlotte. The Crescent Corridor includes the recently completed $92 million, 200-acre intermodal facility constructed at the Charlotte Douglas International Airport adjacent to Norfolk Southern's mainline extending to Atlanta.Lz Additional information about improvements along the Crescent Corridor is provided in Chapter 2. 19 https://apps.ncdot.gov/newsreleases/details.aspx?r=10308 ��, Worley, PauL Presentation to the NC Board of Transportation, February 5, 2014. 21 http://www.thefutureneedsus.com/images/uploads/crescent-corridor-brochure_l.pdf Zl http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/Airport/News/Pages/IntermodalFacilityFastFacts.aspx �� °I'� V� 9��', G-8 E N� IV E� I� V��'�11 � V��L_L11 V� CSX Transportation also has a multi-state corridor improvement initiative, known as the National Gateway. This program is an $850 million initiative to improve CSXT corridors in sevei-al states, ii�cluding North Carolina.23 National Gateway projects included capacity and efficiency improvements at CSXT's Charlotte Intermodal Terminal and improved access to the Port of Wilmington.24 Further discussion of the National Gateway is also included in Chapter 2. In the past decade, the NCRR has funded track, bridge, safety, and capacity improvements on its 317-mile corridor between Charlotte and Morehead City. Projects have included multiple grade crossing improvements, bridge and structure upgrades, track tie and rail replacements, signals, new sidings, and expanded yard facilities. NCRR has also contributed to railroad improvement projects constructed by others, such as pedestrian underpasses by Elon University and the University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG). NCRR's Strategic Plan is focused on capital investments that enable rail freight, expand rail to move passengers, and invest in North Carolina. These invesrn�ents are geared toward ecoi�omic development and job creation. An example is the new lead track to the North Carolina Industrial Center (NCIC) in Mebane. 1.53 NCDOT Rail Initiatives North Carolina is a national leader in many rail efforts, including partnerships with Class I and other freight railroads, safety programs, corridor preservation, and passenger rail. Many of these programs have been in place for years, and have been recommended by the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) and other states as best practices. Below are brief descriptions of these initiatives and programs, and their benefit to North Carolina. 1.5.3.1 Crossing Hazard Elimination Program A major component of the NCDOT Rail Division's safety efforts go towards eliminating roadway/rail crossing hazards. The Rail Division's Crossing Hazard z3 http://www.nationalgateway.org/ z4 http://www.nationalgateway.org/sites/default/files/project/resources/files/CSX_National- Gateway-Fact-She et_Charlotte_0. pdf August 2015 1-17 Elimination Program is responsible for maintaining a crossing inventory and analyzing data to prioritize crossings for closure or upgrade. NCDOT develops funding agreements with local governments and railroads, the projects are programmed in the STIP and move forward to design and implementation.Zs The program's goal is to reduce the number of at-grade i�oadway/rail crossings and add safety enhancements such as signage, gates, bells and flashing lights at crossings. In 1992, only 30 percent of the state's 5,000 public railroad crossings had flashing lights and gates. As of 2014, automatic warning devices are in place at 60 percent of the now 4,025 public crossings in North Carolina.26 Even with increased efforts to improve safety during the past decade, 30 percent of North Carolina's public at-grade roadway/rail crossings remain unprotected by mechanical warning devices. The NCDOT, in cooperation with the FHWA, is working to install active warning devices at those unprotected crossings. 27 The NCDOT also conducts Traffic Separation Studies (TSS), which invobe a community-wide planning approach to identify issues related to crossings and to determine appropriate short- and long-term crossing improvements. As part of a TSS, the Rail Division coordinates with MPOs, local communities, and affected businesses to develop recommendations.28 An initial component of NCDOT's crossing improvement program is the Sealed Corridor program between Raleigh and Charlotte, which is the busiest rail corridor in the state (for freight rail, passenger rail and roadway traffic) and a component of the Southeast Corridor. 29 NCDOT has worked with FRA, NS, the NCRR, and CSXT since 1995 to "seal" the corridor between Raleigh and Charlotte by using enhanced traffic control devices, crossing closures and grade separations to separate all highway and rail t►-affic. zSNorth Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. Train Crossing Program. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://ww�n�.ncbytrain.org/safety/crossings.html z�North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. http://www. ncbytrain. o rg/safety/seal ed.html 27Thomas, Drew. North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. Email dated June 16, 2014. zallorth Carolina Department of Transportation. North Carolina Rail Plan 2000. Januaiy 2001. �yNorth Carolina Department of Transportation. Sealed Corridor Program. Accessed March 6, 2014. http: //www.ncbytrain. o rg/safety/seale d.html i� �� I��V �� p:= 4-4 E I�! � I'w� E$ Tr1 u 4- k:�"� V 4_ G� d�'� �9 Since 1995, 68 crossings have been eliminated and more than 145 crossings have been upgraded to in accordance with the Sealed Corridor Program along the Raleigh to Charlotte Corridor. Additionally, 175 crossings have been eliminated and more than 1,300 upgraded in other corridors. Between 1995 and 2012, the annual number of automobile/train crashes in NC has fallen from 135 to 45. North Carolina is recognized as a national leader for its Sealed Corridor Program, and its efforts continue to improve safety along rail corridors. 1.5.3.2 Railroad Safety Enforcement Program NCDOT and the FRA staff jointly inspect North Carolina's 3,200 miles of railroad track, as well as thousands of cars and locomotives, plus at-grade crossings and train cont►-ol signal systems to ensure they meet federal safety standards. In the 2014 calendar year NCDOT staff completed 111 motive power (locomotives) equipment (rail cars) inspections, 98 signal and train control inspections, and 110 track inspections. Those inspections included 11,910 motive power (locomotives) and equipment (railcars) units, 1,403 signal and train control units, and, 3,927 miles of track. 1.5.3.3 Public Safety Awareness NCDOT promotes rail safety public awareness through the Rail Division's BeRailSafe program. The pi-ogram publishes informational materials and offers presentations to community groups, and training to law enforcement, fire departments, EMS and other first responders. i0 The NCDOT BeRailSafe program complements ongoing public awareness activities of national groups such as Operation Lifesaver and its North Carolina Opei�ation Lifesaver affiliate.31 This program has reached out to at least 20,000 North Carolina residents and members of the general public and more than 2,100 first responders. 3oNorth Carolina Department of Transportation. BeRailSafe. Accessed March 6, 2014. http: //www.berail sa fe.org/ 31Operatiou Lifesaver. Operation Lifesaver - About Us. Accessed March 6, 2014. http: //ol i.org/about-us August 2015 1-18 1.5.3.4 State Safety Oversight Program for Fixed Guideway Rail Systems The Rail Division coordinates with the FTA and local transit agencies to ensure existing and proposed light rail projects meet safety standards as part of the State Safety Oversight Program for Fixed Guideway and Rail Systems.3z Curi-ently CATS is the only transit agency operating a rail transit system (CATS Blue Line light rail), with a 9.3 mile extension now under construction. This program enables NCDOT to help transit agencies develop and follow a Safety and Security Plan that meets MAP-21 and CFR 659 requirements. 1.5.3.5 Inter-city Passenger Rail Service Since 1990, NCDOT has provided financial, capital and staff support for Amtrak passenger rail services. This support began with partial funding for Amtrak's Carolinian between Raleigh and Charlotte, and was expanded to indude the Piedmonttrains in 1995 and 2010. Other intercity passenger rail support includes construction of NCDOT's Capital Yard Maintenance Facility, consti-uction and renovation of stations (described in the next section), and creation of the nation's first and largest volunteer ti�ain host program. Since 1990, ridership on Amtrak in North Carolina has tripled, and ridership since 2001 has doubled - by 2013 there were nearly one million trips originating or ending in North Carolina. NCDOT now supports six trains daily to Raleigh, Greensboro and Charlotte and other cities on the Piedmont and Carolinian. NCDOT has also partnered with communities to make intercity passenger rail stations a cornerstone for revitalization of city centers. The NC Volunteer Train Hosts Program has trained volunteers who daily ride the Carolinian and Piedmont trains and serve as ambassadors for North Carolina. 1.5.3.6 Station /mprovements Since 1992, NCDOT has led the effort to restore historic train stations or build new stations served by Amtrak to provide better transportation connections for these communities. Some projects were constructed through federal transportation enhancement funds, some through state funds and local contributions, and others through the Piedmont Improvement Program (PIP) 32North Carolina Department of Transportation. North Carolina Rail Plan 2009 Executive Summary. i��l'�9�9��,4-BEN�IVE S I� I��IL 9�lAN (described below). Some stations improvements, such as Greensboro and Cary, were constructed as multi-modal stations with local bus connections. Nine active passenger stations have been renovated and three new stations have been constructed by NCDOT since 1995 (Cary, Durham, Fayetteville, Greensboro, Hamlet, High Point, Kannapolis, Rocky Mount, Salisbury, Selma, Southern Pines and Wilson). Additionally, the NCRR redeveloped the Burlington station using approximately $3 million of their own funding. Previously, several of these communities had no staffed stations, forcing patrons to wait outside for the train without the availability to purchase tickets, check baggage, or be sheltered from the elements. Today, nearly every North Carolina town with Amtrak service has a modern station with a waiting area and ticket kiosks. All of the active intercity passenger rail stations are staffed by Amtrak or contract employees. Most of the stations have connecting local bus transit and taxi services.33 1.5.3.7 Piedmont Improvement Program (PIP) This is an effort by NCDOT to modernize the Raleigh to Charlotte corridor, whicli is the state's main passenger and freight rail corridor, through a series of railroad and highway construction projects and enhancements. These pt-ojects are largely funded through federal stimulus money through the ARRA, as well as with funds from NCRR. The FRA awarded the state a$545 million grant from that program in 2010, and a cooperative agreement with the agency specifies that $520 million of the money goes directly to PIP. The remainder of the funds is helping to improve reliability of existing fi-eight and passenger service from Raleigh to Virginia. The program includes 13 new bridges (grade separations), 32 miles of second track and passing sidings, 12 miles of new roadway, and closure of up to 23 public at-grade rail/roadway crossings. The program has also renovated or improved train stations in Cary, High Point, Burlington and Kannapolis. The program also funded improvements to the Capital Yard Maintenance Facility and the first phase of the Charlotte Locomotive and Railcar Maintenance Facility. In addition to the construction projects, the program also 3'North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. Station Locations. http: //www.ncbytrai n.org/d esti natio ns/defa ult.html August 2015 1-19 funded the pui�chase and refurbishment of additional passenger rail cars and locomotives to support additional frequencies between Raleigh and Charlotte. The PIP is an extension of previous track and signal improvements that NCDOT has completed in concert with NS, CSXT and NCRR along the Charlotte to Raleigh corridor. Since 1990, the passenger rail travel time has been reduced by more than 34 minutes in this corridor.34 The pi•ograin will make train travel safer and more reliable, enhance opportunities foi- greater job growth and commercial development, and better connect the economic ►-egions of Raleigh and Charlotte and the communities in between. By eliminating 23 at-grade crossings, the program will improve safety. It will also remove at least six bottlenecks by adding capacity along the busy Raleigh to Charlotte corridor by constructing additional track, track realignments, and new railroad bridges, 1-educing delays for both freight and passenger rail. Finally, the program will allow foi� two additional daily Amtrak trains between Raleigh and Charlotte, bringing the total to five daily round trips. 1.5.3.8 Other Track /mprovements NCDOT has also worked with local governments, CSXT, NS and the shoi•t line railroads on rail relocation projects in three communities: Elkin, Greenville, and Pembroke. The Elkin switching/siding relocation will relocate the Yadkin Valley Railroad freight switching outside of downtown. The Greenville project (completed in 2010) constructed a new connector track and a new CSXT rail yard north of the city limits that removed switching and other freight rail activities out of downtown Greenville, eliminating long blockages at several at- grade crossings. The Pembroke project will construct a new connector track that will improve access between CSXT's north-south A-line and their east-west Charlotte to Wilmington line, reducing the traffic impacts in downtown Pembi-oke caused by trains switching between the two lines. 3s i��•I'�V�V��,G-BEN�IL�E � I� I � �'�IL 9�LAV� These rail relocation projects have benefitted both freight rai] operators and their customers through more efficient and safer switching and storage operations, and have benefited local communities and motorists thi-ough reduced noise, vibration and fewer blocked crossings in their downtowns. 1.5.3.9 Freight Rail and Rail Crossing Safety Improvement Fund (FRRCSIJ FRRCSI is a program established in 2013 that uses a portion of the NCRR cash dividend to fund eligible freight and roadway/rail crossing safety projects -- including projects on short lines -- via two Rail Division grant programs: the Short Line Infrastructure Assistance Program (SIAP) and the Rail Industrial Access Program (RIAP). (Prior to 2013, these two initiatives were funded th►-ough a sepa►•ate but now-superseded state p�•ogram.) The Rail Division staff uses quantitative analysis to determine funds per category (track improvements, crossing improvements, rail access improvements) and then to prioritize the projects in each categoiy.36 The program has funded safety improvements at several at-grade crossings, as well as improvements to short lines that have served industries especially in i•ural areas. Since 1994, the RIAP has helped fund over 70 projects that have helped create over 5,700 jobs.37 Also in the past nine years, NCDOT has obligated $13.6 million via 74 grants for SIAP. 1.5.3.10 Corridor Preservation The Rail Corridor Preservation Act, passed by the NC General Assembly in 1988, gave NCDOT authoriry to purchase railroads and preserve rail corridors, and declared it a public purpose for NCDOT to reassemble critically important lost portions of rail corridors by condemnation. The Rail Division also provides technical assistance to local governments and economic development groups to preseive fi-eight-rail service to customers along light-density branch lines. In addition, state and federal funds are used to assist short line railroads in making improvements to tracks and bridges, 3'�Historic train travel time taken from news article "New Train Won't Start on Schedule", Wilmington Morning Star, November 28, 1994 http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=[7ksAAAAIBAJ&sjid=DRUEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3271,5272817 &dq=amt�-alc+carolinian&h1=en 3sNorth Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. PowerPoint presentation to the North 3�Worley, Paul. Presentation to the NC Board of Transportation, February 5, 2014. Carolina General Assembly Joint Legislative Transportation Oversight Committee, February 10, 37 North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. 2012. http://www.ncbytrain.org/projects/iildustrial/summary.html August 2015 1-20 thereby helping to keep these lines active (see FRRCSI program description under Funding). NCDOT now holds title to more than 100 miles of rail corridors to be preserved for future use. The first line to be acquired in 1988 under the law was the 67- mile Murphy branch, which was later sold to the Great Smoky Mountains Railroad for use as a rail excursion tourism line. In 2011, the Rail Division completed a major upgrade of the Piedmont and Northern rail corridor between Mt. Holly and Gastonia. A combination of State and Gaston County funds paid for the $5 million refurbishment, and Patriot Rail is now providing freight service along the Mount Holly to Gastonia portion of the corridor.38 1.5.3.11 Rail P/anning Program Description: NCDOT has undertaken several planning initiatives, but perhaps none are inore important than the plans for implementing the Southeast Corridor. Beginning in 1994, North Carolina, Virginia, South Carolina and Georgia joined to form a four-state coalition to facilitate development of the Southeast Cori-idor (SEC). After studies were completed showing that the SEC was both warranted and feasible, North Carolina and Virginia began a Tier I Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for alternatives from Washington, DC to Charlotte. A final Tier I EIS was completed in June 2002, with FRA issuing a Record of Decision (ROD) in October 2002. Since then, a Tier II EIS for alternatives from Raleigh to Richmond, VA has been undertaken; the Draft EIS is complete and the Final EIS and ROD should be completed by the end of 2014.39 The FRA and Georgia DOT are currently undertaking a Tier I EIS to study the proposed Atlanta to Greenville-Spartanburg, SC to Charlotte Passenger Rail Corridor Investment Plan.40 The FRA and Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation are currently undertaking a Tier II EIS to study passenger rail from Richmond, Virginia to Washington, DC.41 Othei- planning initiatives have included study of extending passenger rail services to Western North 3IINorth Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. http://www.ncbytrain.org/projects/preservatio n.html 3�Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor. http://www.sehsr.org/history.html 'o US DOT, Federal Railroad Administrarion. Atlanta to Charlotte Passenger Rail Con�idor. https: //www. fra.d ot.gov/Page/ P065 7 41 Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation. DC to Richmond Southeast High Speed Rail. http://www.dc2rvarail.com/about/project-history/ C��h'V9�9��,4-BEN�IVE �I�I� �f'11L9�LAN Carolina (Asheville) and Eastern North Carolina (Wilmington). The NCDOT planning staff has also completed several other environmental studies for track improvement projects, and applications for federal grants. A table listing the many environmental documents completed as part of the planning efforts by NCDOT over the past 12 years is provided in Appendix A. Overall, there have been 44 studies approved and there are 11 studies underway. Program Benefits: The planning and environmental work for the Southeast Corridor have helped identify the need for intercity rail in the Raleigh to Charlotte corridor and connecting to Washington, DC. These efforts have led NCDOT to invest in constructing or renovating seven rail station improvements in the Charlotte to Raleigh corridor, and over $300 million in track and signal improvements that have improved travel time, capacity, and the overall passenger rail service in North Carolina.42 Ultimately, ridership on the Carolinian and Piedmont trains has increased over 70 percent in the last 9 years. The Rail Division has been awarded over $545 million in competitive fedei-al funds for rail improvements, in large measure because of the planning and project implementation efforts that have documented the needs and illustrated the benefits of the various rail projects in North Carolina. 1.5.3.12 Multimoda/ and Intermodal P/anning The NCDOT Rail Division's efforts for multimodal connections include working with local governments, local transit agencies and intercity bus providers such as Greyhound and Trailways to develop multimodal connections when planning and constructing intercity rail stations. Examples include joint bus/rail facilities in Greensboro, Salisbury, High Point and Cary, as well as plans for major multimodal stations in Raleigh and Charlotte. NCDOT has also supported connecting bus service from the Greensboro station to Winston-Salem, and Amtrak now has Thruway Bus Service to several communities in eastern North Carolina. With regards to intermodal freight initiatives, the NCDOT has worked with NS on their new Charlotte intermodal freight center (opened in 2013), worked with CSXT on the National Gateway project including improvements at the Charlotte 4zNorth Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. Future Service. http://www.ncbytrain.org/projects/future.html August 2015 1-21 Intermodal Terminal, and is currently investigating rail access and other infrastructure improvements to the Global TransPark and the NC State Ports Authority.43 In 2007, NCDOT began development of the NC Multimodal Investment Network (NCMIN), a tool used to stratify all the components, facilities and modes of the state's transportation system. All transportation facilities are classified into tiers that define how facilities function, the type of travel they serve, and other measures like connectivity and usage.44 As part of this initiative, the NCDOT Rail Division classified various rail corridors according to their level of importance for passenger and freight.45 This program allows NCDOT to classify entire corridors by their relative importance to the state, and see where certain modal corridors are parallel, which helps guide investments. 1.5.4 Locallnitiatives Local transit agencies in North Carolina are planning for light rail, commuter rail and other transit improvements that have required coordination and planning with the Rail Division's programs. Charlotte region: The Charlotte-Mecklenburg 2030 Transit/Land Use Plan includes several projects that have required coordination with the NCDOT Rail Division. These indude the CATS Blue Line (opened 2007) and the Blue Line Extension light rail (under construction), which uses portions of NS/NCRR right-of-way, including portions that will be part of the SEC, as well as planning for commuter rail on the NS `0' Line (CATS proposed Red Line). CATS has also been working with NCDOT on planning for the new Charlotte Gateway Station that will connect intercity passenger rail, commuter rail, bus and streetcar services in downtown Charlotte.46 43Worley, Paul. Presentation to the NC Board of Transportation, February 5, 2014. 44North Carolina Department of Transportation. Na•th Carolina Multimodal Investment Network. http://wwwncdot.gov/download/performance/NCMIN_Definitions.pdf 'SNorth Carolina Department of Transportation. North Carolina Railroad System Map. http://www.ncdot.gov/download/perfa�mance/NCM[Nmaps/RailMap.pdf 4�Charlotte Area Transit System. http://charmeckorg/city/charlotte/cats/planning/Pages/defaiilt.aspx ��I'�V�9��,G-BEN�IL�E � I� I � �'�IL V��1[� Piedmont region: The Piedmont Authority for Regional Transit (PART) has undertaken plans for commuter rail services to connect the communities of Winston-Salem, Greensboro and Burlington, which will include portions of the NS/NCRR corridor shared with fi�eight rail and intercity passenger rail. 47 Triangle region: Triangle Transit has been planning for commuter rail and light rail in the NS/NCRR and CSXT corridors in the Ti•iangle region. The most recent studies include recommendations for commuter rail and light rail along the NCRR corridor linking Durham, Ca�y, Raleigh and Garner, and light rail on the CSXT corridor from downtown Raleigh to North Raleigh (which would parallel existing and proposed intercity passenger rail services).48 The Durham- Orange Light Rail Project is a proposed 17 mile corridor from Chapel Hill to Durham, 2 miles of which are proposed in the NCRR right-of-way. Triangle Transit is in the project development phase of this project. The City of Raleigh has been developing plans for a new Raleigh Union Station, which will connect intercity passenger rail, commuter rail, light rail and bus in downtown Raleigh. The region's two Metropolitan Planning Organizations are also embarking on a freight study in Fiscal Years 2015 and 2016 that will be incorporated into the MPO's joint Long Range Transportation Plan update.49 47Piedmont Authority for Regional Transit. http://www.partnc.org/images/PnR_Lot%20Map_101507.pdf 4BTriangle Transit. Our Transit Future. http://ourtransitfuture.com/projects/ 49 Capita] Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. 2014-2015 Unified Planning Work Program. Adopted March 19, 2014. http://www.campo-nc.us/UPWP/FY-2015/FY15-UPWP-2014-03-19- ADOPTED-S[GNED.pdf August 2015 1-22 2 Chapter Two - System The State's Existing Rail This chapter provides an overview and inventoi-y of the state's existing rail system, and describes the trends and forecasts that illustrate the need for rail in North Carolina. It also describes the criteria used to evaluate and prioritize the rail corridors and projects that could meet the needs and service gaps identified in the State Rail Plan. 2.1 RAIL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND INVENTORY This section describes the existing rail system in North Carolina, including its impact on North Carolina's economy and environment. 2.1.1 Existing Rail System North Carolina has over 3,200 miles of railroad, serving 86 of the state's 100 counties. This section describes North Carolina's Class I and short line railroads as well as Amtrak's passenger service. 2.1.1.1 Freight Rail System The rail network in North Carolina provides services to ports, power plants, mines, military installations, and industries including, but not limited to, agriculture, forestry, plastics, furniture, food products, and chemicals. Freight railroads support jobs for about 2,600 railroad employees in the state.l The freight rail system carries almost any product grown or produced in a global economy in a wide variety of service alignments. Bulk goods, such as coal, may be carried in unit trains of uniform car types with dedicated loading and unloading facilities. Intermodal trains may be comprised entirely of containers yet the individual destinations and contents of the containers are widely varied. Mixed freight and manifest trains may contain a single or multiple cars of the same product. � NC Maritime Strategy Technical Memorandum - IVorth Carolina Railroads Existing and Planned Infrastructure, AECOM May 2012 The individual train movements are based on a number of operating factors fi-om overall customer demand to the US Department of Transpor•tation (USDOT) shipping requirements. The railroads may schedule daily departures and arrivals of refrigerated cars and intermodal trains to meet predictable schedules for customers. 2.1.1.2 Railroad Classifications and Definitions US railroads are grouped by size classifications established by the Surface Transportation Board and based on annual operating revenues. The Class II minimum size is adjusted from time to time by the Board while the Class I ininimum is indexed annually for inflation. The class definitions are significant in that the i•egulatory and annual reporting requirements are considerably greater for the Class I railroads.z A Class I railroad is a railway company having annual carrier operating revenues of at least $467 million. There are seven Class I freight carriers in North America. Amtrak is also a Class I carrier under this definition. Class I railroads Amtrak, Norfolk Southern (NS), and CSX Transportation (CSXT) operate within North Carolina. A Class II raili-oad is a railway company with annual operating revenues of less than $467 million and more than $40 million. No Class II railroads operate in North Carolina. A number of Class II railroads have emerged by creating operating divisions of acquired Class III railroads. For example, the Genesee & Wyoming Inc., a$1.6 billion company in 2013, operates 116 railroads in 11 regions including four in North Carolina with over 180 track miles. A Class III railroad is a railway company with annual operating revenue of less than $37 million. In North Carolina there are two types of Class III railroad companies: Short Line and Switching and Terminal. ➢ Short line railroads are independent railroad companies that operate over a short distance, usually fewer than 350 miles. zAmerican Short Line and Regional Railroad Association. http://www.aslrra.org/about_aslrra/faqs/ August 2015 2-1 � Switching and Terminal railroads are defined by the American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association as railroads that are either jointly owned by two railroads for the purpose of transferring cars between railroads or operate solely within a facility or group of facilities. All Switching and Terminal coinpanies are Class III, regardless of revenue. Twenty Class III railroads operate in North Carolina ranging from 3 to 173 miles in length. Railrood �wnershi,p Charlotte Aeea Transit System � CSX iransportation 'm' � � Gepartment of _ Norfolk Southem De�en�e _ � �� CSX Transportation and NS l G[E �/ � �, Winston-Salem J/'�� Norih �arQliNa RR Co�pany ' T- ' m m l � m Short Line � �� 1 � ' �� Fligh Point� _�, Two federally-owned railroads are also located in North Carolina, providing access to Camp Lejeune and Military Ocean Terminal - Sunny Point. NS and CSXT operate across each of these federally-owned rights-of-way, respectively. Figure 2- 1 identifies railroad owners and operators in North Carolina. Within the overall classification of raili-oads is the types and volumes carried by each of the railroads. For the Class I and II railroads, the traffic routing is often based on North Carolina customers as well as the overall traffic and conditions on their North Amei�ican network. Class III railroads ai-e typically directly influenced by the customers along their respective lines, although in some cases they may be operating as a connecting line between Class Is or from a port to a Class I railroad. � T f , Norlina _ � �..� � � ��- � � .� i i . f� �-� � _ - � .�� -� - �m ; �' , . -Conover _ - m Asheville ; Concord -m 'a - m _. � m 'm Gas�`tonia� ' � � �- � : �„�.,�-- C..� �""�`m m _ :;.,�;°� Charlom��Mo� nr� � Railroad Opera[or � � [�1� Great SmQky Mountains RR [02] Blue Ridge Southem Railroad [10] kigh Point, Thomasville & Denton RR [03] Ttl�ermal Belt Raifway [11] Caroiina Coastal Raidway [04] Caldwell County RR [12] Launnburg & Southern Coanpany [05] Alexander RR [13] Aberdeen & Roc�sh RR [O6j Yadkin VaEley RR =- [14] Atlantic & Western Railway �wumu--.._ rtocKy �� Raleigh Cary � i4 13 [07] Charlotte Nrea Transik Systern [15] Clfnton Terminal RR [i8] Chesapeake BAlbemarle RR [OSjAberdeen Caroli�a 8 West�m Railway [16] Wilmington Terminal RR ['f9] Carolina Souther� RR [OSj Winston-Salem Southbound Railway [17] Narth Caralina & Virginia RR �- I2Q] Cape Fear Railway Figure 2- 1 Tracl{ Ownership and Railroad Operators in �lorth Carolina August2015 !ount - c.., � �601�� - ��'� �� i Greenville m —,--� � 1 m • � Goldsboro. '' r� Lee Creeky� � - �J � � � � �,.� � ��:,-I�ew'�em t Wallace Jacksanvilrle'Morehead C � , ��,� 4 � �z fWlirriington [21] P4edmonC 8 Narthern Railway CSX Transportation Norfolk Sauthem Nor ra scac� �b� 2.1.1.3 Freight — Class I Railroads Two Class I freight railroad companies, CSX Transportation (CSXT) and Norfolk Southern Railway (NS), operate approximately 70 percent of the state's rail system. Short lines and switching companies operate the remainder of the system. 2.1.1.3.1 CSX Transportation CSX Corporation is headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida. It provides rail transportation services over its 21,000 route mile network to 23 states east of the Mississippi River and two Canadian Provinces.3 CSXT operates approximately 1,111 miles of track in North Carolina. In 2013, CSXT handled more than 872,000 carloads of freight along its network in North Carolina.4 It operates along three primary corridors. An east-west line runs fi-om Charlotte to the Port of Wilmington and passes through Pembroke and Hamlet. The north-south A Line is CSXT's busiest in North Carolina and traverses the eastern part of the State, paralleling I-95. The A Line is part of CSXT's Florida to New York Corridor; an average of 32 freight trains per day operate along this line.s CSXT also has a major north-south corridor in the western part of the State that connects Tennessee to South Carolina and is a major conduit for coal from Appalachia to powe�• plants in North Carolina and the Southeast. CSXT has major rail yards at Hamlet, on the Charlotte to Wilmington route, and at Rocky Mount on the A Line. CSXT also has a recently expanded intermodal tei•minal in Charlotte and bulk transfer terminals at Charlotte, Raleigh, Wilmington and Winston-Salem. CSXT is developing its National Gateway Corridor, which is an initiative that will improve intermodal service between Mid-Atlantic ports and the manufacturing and consumer centers in the Midwest. The A Line, the CSXT Charlotte Intermodal Terminal and the Port of Wilmington are all components of the National Gateway Corridor. CSXT's network is shown in Figure 2- 1. 3 CSXT Company Overview, http://csx.com/index.cfm/about-csx/company-overview/ ' CSXT State Information, http://www.csx.com/index.cfin/about-csx/company-overview/state-fact- sheets/north-carolina/ s Based on NCDOT SARAH GIS database. 2.1.1.3.2 Norfolk Southern NS operates 20,000 route miles in 22 states and Washington, DC. NS's corporate headquarters are located in Norfolk, VA. In Noi-th Carolina, NS operates approximately 1,213 miles of track. NS' primary corridor parallels I-85 through the central part of the State connecting Charlotte and Greensboro with Atlanta, Georgia and the Northeast. On average, 35 freight trains per day operate along this line.� NS also operates two majoi- east-west lines; one connecting Greensbo►-o to Durham, Raleigh, and the state port in Morehead City and the other connecting Asheville and western North Carolina to their main north-south corridor in Salisbury. NS' Charlotte to Greensboro and Greensboro to Morehead City lines are operated under an operating and maintenance agreement with the North Carolina Railroad Company (NCRR).� NS has a major classification yard, at Linwood, just north of Salisbury. NS also operates two intermodal facilities in North Carolina; one in Greensboro and a recently opened a new, much larger facility at Charlotte-Douglas International Airport. NS also operates two bulk ti-ansfer terminals located just south of Charlotte and east of Winston-Salem. In addition, NS maintains an auto distribution terminal east of Winston-Salem. The eastern leg of NS' Crescent Corridor Initiative utilizes the NS corridor paralleling [-85 through North Carolina. The Crescent Corridor is an initiative to improve intermoda] service between New Orleans and Memphis in the Southeast and the Northeast by constructing new terminals and improving ti-ack capacity and speeds. The recently opened Charlotte Intermodal Terininal is a major component of the Crescent Corridor Initiative. NS' network is also shown in Figure 2-1. 2.1.1.3.3 Characteristics of the Class I Network Figure 2- 2 presents gross tonnage carried by the Class I freight network in North Carolina. As expected, higher volumes are carried on north-south routes, though in addition to those routes, CSXT's Pembroke to Charlotte route carries greater than 20 million gross tons. Through traffic across the spectrum of commodities contributes significantly to the volumes shown. Such traffic arises 6 Based on NCDOT SARAH GIS database. � NS operates over NCRR under an operating and maintenance agreement. The operating and maintenance agreement covers all 317 miles of the NCRR. While the State of North Carolina owns 100% of the stock of the NCRR, it does not directly own the properties nor control the operating and maintenance agreement. August 2015 2-3 in part from North Carolina's central position relative to activities up and down Both Class I railroads are also part of the Strategic Rail Corridor Network the eastern seaboard. In addition, hazardous material carloads can be (STRACNET). STRACNET is an interconnected and continuous rail line network transported by rail. Hazardous materials are generally shipped as part of a consisting of over 38,000 miles of track serving over 170 defense installations manifest train that includes a mix of commodities and goods in a wide variety of across the nation. Figure 2- 3 shows this network. rail cars appropriate to each type of freight. Four of the corridors are indicative of connections to ports and key industries in North Carolina (Raleigh-Morehead City, Norlina-Pembroke, Monroe-Pembroke, and Pembroke-Wilmington). �perator f-` � -,d � Norrna _ = _ - 1, h ` � � J , --.. ,- _ � J-- � �,�. CSXT � i -- - - - - - - � __ _ - � � � Greensboro, �� -- , � � �� , Winston-Salem i. Durl�ar� RockyMaunt ��r r� S��E � � Burlington � '� - • High Roint �a Ral@I�h� � i � Gulf �` Wilson �r,eaenville -——`—� . —_.._ r'' �L,, Asheville _ Conover i , , � - Concord ' � — Goldsboro w�..� _ �� . Lee�Cre� t .� rr �r` Gastania , _ J ,, � �� .;a -� �` y . ` - � _ _ Fa etteville -. ��.� Charlotte ��nroe - � � - �� c New E�em �.— � � � Wallace � Mo� head City Mainlet Pembr.oke � � 7�onnage (Gross Mfllion Ton) ��" ' `�Jacksonville J �� 0-2.5 � . _ , _ 2_6 - 6.0 � `' �Wifmington 6.1 - 10.0 f 10.1 - 20.0 20.1 - 45.�1+ 5aurce: CSX Transportatron tonnage, 2033; �Of�C12Q� NQt /�V�II�b�@ NS DirecNonal Traffic Densiiy, 2011. Figure "l -'l Annual Tonnage Hauled on North Caroliva's Class I Freight Network August 2015 2-4 :.r- .r o� ��`: '' " M � i � �/ � r� �� .� r� � / .,'. i�� J �Y. ! : : � I , ' , _ - � �� y� r .:; - � . - . .. . . . . l,; , ,�. .. �� _. _^-•_�r 1 ' 4YinstomSa4er ^ f c � s:. �� .- �`� i - -- - �� .�� . i� � i � �, Ashevill� , ti.► � � � ''_ .t f / : r t r �: fia°rs i � f,.0 � .� ,�-� � ; �'- � �� srR,acMFr � Strategie RaiE Corridor 9Vetwark Figure 2- 3 Strategic Rail Corridor Network in North Carolina Lengths of double track, sidings, and numbers of yards along Class I-operated freight corridors are presented by corridor in Table 2-1 (based on existing GIS data, not adjusted for ongoing projects). The length, number, and placement of double tracic segments, passing sidings and other ►-ail network improvements add to overall capacity. The effect on capacity is difficult to measure and is directly impacted by the freight mix and operating practices along the line. Five classes of tracks, defined by operating speed limits for freight and passenger trains, are established by the Surface Transportation Board in 49 CFR 213.9. Higher class tracks have higher operating speed limits. As noted in the Southeast Rail Operations Study (SEROps)� the majority of the Class I system H SEROps was funded by the 1-95 Corridor Coalition with the initial goal of examining the rail transportation system in the southeastern states (northeastern and mid-Atlantic states were done , Norlina i 1 ,� _ _ - � j �uor ro suue � � 1 � --� — - ' I 1 - � - GP@BI15�1iSf0 � r �"y.., _ �� i ,� � � �� ' �urham i � Burlington Rocky Mount „ � � � Parmele-�,��. P�ymoufh �t -- 4--- .- Raleigh - > j �a� Wilson �--� � Gre/ enville `� — Gulf, - �~y Goldsboro � `��, � S ' - Lee�Creek � - -.� � � �; - - r ,a _� �� '- "' '-� Kinston New Bern -� �Fayetteville � I r j, � � a �\ �r"i l I� J � Hamlet ,� �_ r �r�lla�ce , � ��MoreheadCity Pembr'oke �, j��, Jacksonville v _ — `� � ��^ � 4 ,- Wilmington can accommodate 286,000 lb. rail cars. The majority of Corridors 6, 9, and 15 are Class 4 track (Corridor 6 from Charlotte to the Virginia State line, Corridor 9 fi�om Greensboro to Raleigh, and Corridor 15) rated for maximum speeds of 60 mph and 80 mph for freight and passenger trains, respectively.9 These corridors carry the Crescent, Silver Meteor, Palmetto, Piedmont, and Carolinian passenger services. Corridor 13, the S Line, carries the Silver Star but the corridor is rated for maximum operating speeds of 60 mph. Some segments may be rated between 15 and 30 mph. Actual speeds will vary with the traffic mix and overall operating conditions for the segment and near network conditions. Traffic may in NEROps and MAROps, respectively). Next the study developed corridor-level information for rail initiatives with a short list oFprojects mutually beneficial to the states and railroads to focus ongoing multi-state planning and funding activities. [paraphrased from i95coalition.org] � FRA Class 4 track is 80 mph for passenger services. Both freight and passenger services typically operate at top speeds less than the maximum permitted. August 2015 2-5 at times move at lower speeds in the range of 6 to 15 mph and are reported as the minimum encot►ntered. Average speeds and the frequencies or percentage of time traveled at lower speeds can also provide an insight as to how rail traffic moves along a segment or corridor. The balance of the system is comprised of Tab➢e �- 1 NoIl�tQi G�arolina Rail Corrid�i• Cl�ai�actei�ist6cs S�iu�in�a��y �v��o?��u��a�,�� aT� 9��oi �i �:.P�� Class [, II, and III tracks. Most of the system is single track with associated sidings. The Piedmont Improvement Program is adding 32 miles of second track which will complete double-tracking of the NS mainline between Greensboro and Charlotte (Corridor 06). CORRIDOR OPERATOR OWNER BRANCH TRACK LENGTH DOUBLE TRACK SIDINGS YARDS Milea e Milea e Percent Total Count Milea e Percent of Miles Total Count 01 NS NS S 45.9 8.5 18.6% 4 4.5 10% 1 02 CSXT CSXT SF, Z 173.4 0.0 0.0% 22 25.1 14% 1 03 NS NS S 148.2 0.0 0.0% 24 28.7 19% 2 04 NS NS 0, L, R 129.2 0.0 0.0% 19 10.9 8% 3 O5 NS NS K 39.4 0.0 0.0% 7 5.9 15% 2 06 NS NCRR NS* MAIN 186.2 83.3 44.7% 21 50.7 27% 5 07 CSXT CSXT SF, Z 28.9 0.0 0.0% 7 5.7 20% 1 08 NS NS R 25.1 0.0 0.0% 3 4.2 17% 1 09 NS NCRR NS* H 114.9 0.0 0.0% 16 20.3 18% 3 10 NS NS CF 43.0 0.0 0.0% 9 2.7 6% 1 11 CSXT CSXT SF, SE 84.2 0.0 0.0% 12 23.1 27% 2 12 CSXT CSXT S 57.6 0.0 0.0% 5 4.0 7% 1 13 CSXT CSXT S 101.7 0.0 0.0% 12 19.0 19% 2 14 NS NS NS, VF 62.8 0.0 0.0% 7 3.0 5% 2 15 CSXT CSXT A 182.0 0.0 0.0% 17 105.1 58% 3 16 CLNA NS NS 81.2 0.0 0.0% 7 5.7 7% 2 17 NS NCRR/NS* EC, H 113.5 0.0 0.0% 13 5.8 5% 3 18 CSXT CSXT AC 70.7 0.0 0.0% 10 12.6 18% 5 19 CSXT CSXT SE 73.0 0.0 O.Oa/o 9 8.0 11% 2 20 CLNA NS NS 45.4 0.0 0.0% 4 4.6 10% � 21 CSXT CSXT ABC, AB 65.1 0.0 0.0% 4 3.1 5% 1 22 CSXT CSXT AA 38.8 0.0 0.0% 6 3.0 8% 0 23 CSXT CSXT Z 18.8 0.0 0.0% 0 0.0 0% 1 24 NS NS S, HG 2.9 0.0 0.0% 1 0.5 18% 0 August 2015 2-6 ��P'PIWG-?�fu f�;V�;➢�� Tif'�.T�, u:;"sll�_IF��_t"-.�'�9 CORRIDOR OPERATOR OWNER BRANCH TRACK LENGTH DOUBLE TRACK SIDINGS YARDS Milea e Milea e Percent Total Count Milea e Percent of Miles Total Count 25 NS NS HG 7.9 0.0 0.0% 0 0.0 0% 0 26 CSXT CSXT SFE 24.0 0.0 0.0% 1 1.6 7% 0 27 NS NS N 28.7 0.0 0.0% 4 1.0 4% 0 28 NS NS M 26.9 0.0 0.0% 5 2.7 10% 1 29 NS NS L 11.9 0.0 0.0% 3 1.7 14% 0 30 NS NS L 14.4 0.0 0.0% 1 0.2 1% 0 31 NS NS J 10.7 0.0 0.0% 0 0.0 0% 0 32 NS NS D 31.1 0.0 0.0% 0 2.5 8% 2 33 NS NS NS, CF 38.4 0.0 0.0% 5 2.3 6% 0 34 CSXT CSXT SH 11.3 0.0 0.0% 1 0.9 8% 0 35 CSXT CSXT AE 7.9 0.0 0.0% 0 0.0 0% 2 36 CSXT CSXT AF 7.6 0.0 0.0% 2 0.8 11% Z 37 CSXT CSXT SE 21.5 0.0 0.0% 0 0.0 0% 0 38 CSXT CSXT SA 17.7 0.0 0.0% 2 2.0 11% 0 39 CSXT CSXT ACA 9.9 0.0 0.0% 2 0.4 5% 1 40 CSXT Federal AC 21.8 0.0 0.0% 2 1.6 8% 3 41 NS NS NB 31.7 0.0 0.0% 2 2.0 6% 2 42 CSXT CSXT SDS 19.6 0.0 0.0% 8 3.7 19% 2 44 NS Federal CL, CK 29.1 0.0 0.0% 1 1.0 3% 1 TOTAL 2,303.7 91.9 4.0% 278.0 381.0 17% 60 * NCKK owns the corridor trom Charlotte to Greensboro to Morehead Ciry; it leases operatSng rights to NS. NS owns the mainline corridor south ot Charlotte and north ot Greensboro. Railroad operation on proprietary networks and connections are governed by adopted operating rules and communication protocols. The raili�oads have adopted operating rules often modified to fit their individual circumstances. The operating rules are complemented and modified by schedules and special notices, as well as requirements proposed by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and the Transportation Security Administration. The Norfolk Southern System Timetable, Timetable Number 1(Effective Date January 1, 2012) System Wide Instruction 444-1 is a speed and block protection for passenger trains operating on the NS system. The additional empry block spacing for passengei� trains may be available for scheduling with technology improvements such as those proposed with Positive Train Control (PTC). The potential improvement will be particularly important for bi-directional and overtaking traffic. The operating rules are coded and applied to segments of the respective railroad system as in Table 2- 2, and the i•ules are briefly defined in Table 2- 3. The signal control rules that apply to each corridor are shown in Figure 2 - 4. August 2015 2-7 <<<, �� o?� fl� r ��e�s n�� r��r�.�� ;� o��Ea-.��A Table 2 - 2 '1'rain Signals SIGNAL CONTROL RAILROAD LENGTH PERCENTAGE CSXT NS (miles) OF TRACK Rule 261 (WHITE) 435.4 365.8 801.3 36.5% Rule 171 PINK 0.9 526.5 527.4 24.0% DTC (RED) 421.5 0.1 421.7 19.2% Rule 271 GREY BLUE 0.0 139.6 139.6 6.4% Rule 193 BLUE 27.2 0.0 27.2 1.2% Rule 93 PURPLE 0.0 17.5 17.5 0.8% Rule 96 GREEN) 12.2 0.0 12.2 0.6% Rttle 105 (YELLOW) 8.4 0.0 8.4 0.4% Not Identified 153.0 85.2 238.3 10.9% TOTAL 1,058.7 1,134.8 2,193.5 100.0% 7'z�bVe 2 - ;� �'raaia� Si��u9 �ca�atia��a Rru�es SIGNAL DEFINITION CONTROL RULE 271 Track Authority rules authorize train and engine movements and ABS rules apply. ABS signals indicated condition of the block. 171 Use of the main track is authorized by issuance of a Mandatory Directive, under the direction of the Train Dispatcher/Control Operator. DTC Direct Traffic Control is a verbal authorization system that divides the line into fixed DTC blocks. Trains are authorized to occupy only specific DTC blocks. 193 An Authority must not be considered in effect by the Train Dispatcher/Control Operator until acknowledgment of the "OK" is received. 261 Signal indication will be the authority for trains and engines to operate in either direction on the same tracic and ABS rules apply. 96 Movement on a siding other than controlled sidings must be made at restricted speed. 105 When an engine is to be detached, equipment left standing must be properly secured with a sufficient number of effective hand brakes. Air bralces must not be de ended upon to hold cars or an unattended en ine. 93 All trains and engines within yard limits must move at restricted speed unless main track is known to be clear by automatic block signal indication. A train or engine must not move against the current of traffic within yard limits until provision has been made for the protection of the movement. System Wide The Train Dispatcher/Control Operator must maintain at least 1 unoccupied block between non-passenger trains and occupied uses as identified Instruction 444-1 in the schedule, while notin exce tions and conditions. August 2015 2-8 r` �.�' _' � x -. r .� ✓G !"�- – : -.� —.-..,,_ . , y �1.ri� `� � � �/� ei9F �' /J � . � �` / / �� rJ1 ',.:,_' . -..r � YlA�" I' /% � �j�_ �'. ' COMPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN �' � Not Identified Figure 2- 4 Corridors Designated by Train Signal Rules NpT TO SGILE August 2015 2-9 2.1.1.4 Freighf -Class 111(Short LinesJ The state also has 20 short line railroads that serve businesses and industries in North Carolina. Refer to Figure 2- 1 and Table 2-4 for locations and route miles. Generally, short lines along with lower volume Class I branch lines, provide access from industries, transload facilities, and ports in NC to the higher volume north-south Class I network. According to the Southeast Rail Operations Study, much of the short line network in the southeast is not capable of handling 286,000 pound i-ail cars. This is often due to needed bridge and rail upgrades. Railroad freight movements are directly affected by the ease of connections and switching operations at State ports, barge and ocean terminals and transload facilities, as well as connections with short lines and their industrial customers. Ti�ansload facilities and short lines are shown in Figure 2-7. Continued efforts to monitor performance can build upon Class I railroad, short line programs, and port utilization studies that have been undertaken. These operations ai-e also important to the shippers and carriers for schedule reliability. 'Cable 2 - 4 C:C;f�f�E��@-G�i�95V1,�'� w G�,TL �AVi Pi E-.P�� Railg�o�xd [�ialeage in Nortl� Cai-olin� RAIL OPERATOR LENGTH % OF NC RAIL (miles) NETWORK Class l 0 erators 2,323.4 70.4% CSXT 1,081.7 32.8% NS 1,241.7 37.6% Short Line 0 erators 956.4 29.0% Aberdeen & Rockfish RR 45.8 1.4% Aberdeen Carolina & Western Railwa 138.8 4.2% Alexander RR 18.5 0.6% Atlantic & Western Railwa 11.0 0.3% Blue Rid e Southern Railroad 71.5 2.2% Caldwell Coun RR 22.1 0.7% Cape Fear Railwa s 10.5 0.3% Carolina Coastal Railway 172.2 5.2% Carolina Southern Railroad 35.8 1.1% Chesapeake & Albemarle RR 52.7 1.6% Clinton Terminal RR 3.4 0.1% Great Smo Mountain RR 52.2 1.6% Hi h Point, Thomasville & Denton RR 31.8 1.0% Laurinbur & Southern Com an 27.9 0.8% North Carolina & Vir inia RR 54.7 1.7% Piedmont & Northern Railwa 14.7 0.4% Thermal Belt Railwa 8.4 0.3% Wilmin ton Terminal RR 3.6 0.1% Winston-Salem Southbound Railwa 86.8 2.6% Yadkin Valle RR 94.0 2.9% Non-Class l, Non-Short Line Operators 18,9 0.6% Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) 18.9 0.6% Total NC Milea e 3,298.7 100.0% Source: NCDOT Rail Track shapefile, 2014 2.1.1.5 Intercity Passenger Rail Services North Carolina is served by six intercity passenger routes (14 daily trains) with stops in 16 communities. Five of the routes are interstate services and the other route provides two daily roundtrips along the Raleigh to Charlotte Piedmont corrido�: Table 2- 5 and Figure 2- 5 provide an overview of intercity passenger services. An additional Amtrak train, the Auto Train runs from Lorton, VA to August 2015 2-10 Sanford, FL along the CSXT A Line, passing through North Carolina without stopping. These passenger services can be grouped into two categories: • The state-supported Piedmont and Carolinian services connecting the state's most heavily populated corridor between Raleigh and Charlotte, and • Other interstate passenger rail services, consisting of the Atntrak operated Crescent, Silver Star, Silver Meteor and Palmetto. The Carolinran (trains 79 and 80) operates between Charlotte and New York and began revenue service in 1990. In 1995, NCDOT and Amtrak began the Piedmont (trains 73 and 74) as a complementing service to the Carolinian between Raleigh and Charlotte. Starting in 2010, NCDOT and Arntrak added a second Piedmont train pair (trains 75 and 76) between Charlotte and Raleigh as a mid-day sei-vice. The curi-ent North Cai-olina service schedule for these ti-ains is available at ncbytrain.org or Amtrak.com. NCDOT funds the Piedrnont through a state subsidy and passenger revenues. NCDOT also finances the Carolinian service between Washington, DC and Charlotte not covered through passengei� revenues (ticketing, food service). For the Piedmont trains, NCDOT provides financial support as well as rolling stock (locomotives, baggage cars and coaches), layover operations in Charlotte (refueling, cleaning, and crew base) and a layover operations and NCDOT's Capital Yard Mechanical Faciliry in Raleigh. Amtrak provides funds for costs that ai-e not coverec� by revenues, including overhead and capital expenses. Amtrak's Crescent (trains 19 and 20) serves the same corridor as the Carolinian and Piedmont trains between Greensboro and Charlotte. The Palmetto (trains 89 and 90) operates daily along the CSXT A Line with North Carolina stops in Rocky Mount, Wilson, Selma and Fayetteville. Amtral� s Silver Stcrr (trains 91 and 92) serves Rocky Mount on the CSXT A Line and Raleigh, Ca►y, Southern Pines and Hamlet along the CSXT S Line. The Silver Meteor (trains 91 and 90) provides stops in Rocky Mount and Fayetteville on the CSXT A Line in North Carolina. C��i�P��-��i��N ;n�l� `> oF�,T� ��tlL �;. ;-.��n Table 2- 5 shows the existing services of these trains in North Carolina. The schedules for these trains are available at Amtrak.com and ncbytrain.org. Figure 2- 5 shows the existing passenger train services in North Carolina. August 2015 2-11 ��NiF'�2E1-IE�J�IV'E �TraTl� rL'�IL PLAf�7 TabOe 2- 5 Characteristics of Amtrak Services in NortY� Carolina ROUTE NAME HOST ON TIME CORRIDORS (Train Nos.) SERVICE TYPE NC STATIONS SERVED �ILROADS RIDERSHIP 2013* PERFORMANCE SERVED 2013 Rocky Mount, Wilson, Selma, Raleigh, Cary, Durham, Daily, New York City - CSXT, NS, Carolinian (79/80) Burlington, Greensboro, High 317,550 65.2% I-95, I-40, [-85 Charlotte NCRR Point, Salisbury, Kannapolis, Charlotte Raleigh, Cary, Durham, Piedmont (73, 74, 75, Twice Daily, Raleigh- Burlington, Greensboro, High CSXT, NS, 170,266 90.5% I-40, I-85 76) Charlotte Point, Salisbury, Kannapolis, NCRR Charlotte Greensboro, High Point, Daily, New York City - Crescent (19, 20) Salisbury, Kannapolis, NS, NCRR 306,733 67.8% I-85, US-29 New Orleans, LA Charlotte, Gastonia Daily, New York City - Rocky Mount, Wilson, Selma, Palmetto (89, 90) Miami, FL (via CSXT 207,915 71.2% I-95 Savannah) Fayetteville Daily, New York City - Rocky Mount, Raleigh, Cary, Silver Star (91, 92) CSXT 414,077 55.3% I-95, US-1 Miami, FL Southern Pines, Hainlet Daily, New York City - Silver Meteor (97, 98) Rocky Mount, Fayetteville CSXT 373,162 49.2o/o I-95 Miami, FL *Except for Piedmont, ridership is for all stations, including those outside North Carolina Source: Amtrak August 2015 27699 f�.aif►� c�r��dz�i-oe�v5i�,�e sT�,T� rai� ��as� N�rth ��rolin� Pass�ng�r �rain S�rv►i�� Riedmont – Trains 73, 74, 75, T6 R�leigh — Charlotte (NC stops or�,+�.� Raleigh, Cary, Durham. 8urlingtora, Greerrsbora. Nigh Point Salisburu, ,Karrnapo!!s, Charlc�tte) Carolinian – Trains 99, 80 CharJatte — New York (NC stops incl�^de Rocky Ndpun£, 'Wrtson, Se1ma, Ralergh, Ca,y, Durharri, B�rrdingion; noonnm�nni �if�e?f75�fJCJCJ, /i1L)'1�7 �0IC1t $c7�15�JUf�y; Kafll7c��CTd�FS, �hc7!"JO�eJ NC Amtrak Connector – RART Route 5 High Araint— tiN"inston-Salern (PART-Piedrrlont Authorrty for Rpgional 7ransportation Shu�ile 4an,+ Amtrak Thru Trains* and Amtrak Bus Service* (see belovv} Gastonia � � _ _ IC to Atlanta areri Nc°w Qrfcans !�7 Crescerrt*—Trains 19, 20 New York — New Orleatzs (North Carofina st€�ps 1r�cfucfe Grc�ns6o�a, High Poi�t Salrs6un; Char�oite, Gastonr�) ND�Jti! C.LFT`D�IYI�'S ��m ncbytrain.�rg Winston-Salem 5ilver Star*–Trains 91, 92 New York — Florirla (Norfh CarQlrna st�ps irrclude Rocky Nkx�nt, Ra�ergh. Cary, Southern Plnes, FlamleU Source: NCDOT Rail Division Figure 2- 5 North Carolina Passenger Rail Se►vice to Wasl:i�a,��tnn, IlC nird N�w York Bvrlington Greensboro High Point eary, Salis6ury Kannapnlis Charlatte Souther Pines Hamlet to CoJr.sr�rbin, Savan�zah curd � F2uridie ./ to CPzar�ston, Snvarzrtah artd Fl�ridc� to WirslTirigtan, ➢C a�ad New York � `.,,_, 1�'� ; �`.��.� , Durham � �–�5�' � Raleigh Rocky Mount i_�rSJ � Wilson �y B � ~i.^ } Selma � � '��Greenville L,/ �Galdsbaro �F �� ; ,�Kinston� � '�� i � �� Ncuv�, ,.i , � Fayetteville 4 Bern �`'. � � Havelock�'''"�S� � MaeeheadR� — �j Jacksonville � �ix�, � �1 a ��r .� � ., � � ,, ; Wilmingtan Q, Amtrak Zhruway Bus Seivice* Eastern NC #a Vl/ifsan Amtrak Statran -- ; (N'C 5tops rracfude Grezrrvif{e, N�rv Bern, Silrrer Metear*–Trains 97, 98 New York — Florrda �.+orth CaroJina sEops inelude Roeky Mount FayettevilfeJ Palmetto* – Trains 89, 9(} New YorJc — Savannah (Nor�th Caroflna stops indude Racky Moun� �Nilsor�, Sefma, Fa�e�iean7fe) NavePock Maehead Ciry; Gofd'striru, Krhstan, iar_ksonvr!!�, �.�rrfmtn,gtc�n? August 2015 2-13 Amtrak currently serves 16 cities across North Carolina. During the North Carolina State Fair in Raleigh (held 10 days in October) both the Piedmont and the Carolinian make a special stop for fairgoers. NCDOT also adds a special stop in Lexington during the Barbeque Festival (held one Saturday in October) for the Piedmont and Carolinian trains. Since 1990, ridership on Amtrak in North Carolina has tripled and ridership since 2001 has doubled. In 2013, there were nearly one million trips originating or ending in North Carolina. Over the past three years (2011-2013), passenger rail activity at North Carolina stations has increased 8.3 percei�t. This includes a 9.1 percent increase in ridership on the state sponsored Carolinian and Piedmont services during this same time pei•iod. Nearly every station had an inct•ease during this period, with the exception of Raleigh, Fayetteville and Selma and the two seasonal stops (Lexington and North Carolina State Fair). The large decrease in Raleigh and the increase in Cary between 2011 and 2013 are due primarily to the Cary station expansion which was completed in 2011. These two stations are only 8 miles apart and many passengers choose to use the Cary station which now has better amenities than the Raleigh station; the existing Raleigh station also suffers from a parking shortage and overcrowding during peak periods. The largest ridership gains were seen in the Chai•lotte to Raleigh corridor, which is the state's most populated corridor, has the most frequent service, and is the terminus for the Piedmonttrains. Table 2- 6 shows the station totals and ridership changes from 2011 to 2013. NCDOT has plans to introduce additional frequencies along the Charlotte to Raleigh corridor within the next five years, as well as long-term plans for upgrading the corridor to accommodate additional service frequencies. In addition, NCDOT has been studying options to extend services to western and eastern portions of the state currently without passenger rail service. More detail on these future plans are described in Section 2.1.3. T<�t>9e 2 - C� �c��o?��u��a�,�� =��,T� �aaoi �i �:.�� r@a��7Ka<�6 &2ieN�s-stnoq> i7y �t�atuer�a iir �l��t6� C�a�'e�Vi67� PERCENT CHANGE, CITY 2011 2012 2013 2011-2013 Burlington 22,476 25,851 25,452 13.2% Cary 44,962 78,278 88,669 97.2% Charlotte 181,566 193,144 201,481 11.0% Durham 74,783 79,292 83,232 11.3% Fayetteville 55,758 53,510 53,590 -3.9% Gastonia 1,664 1,565 1,741 4.6% Greensboro 124,396 134,888 139,869 12.4% Hamlet 4,820 4,826 4,882 1.3% High Point 33,744 38,358 40,302 19.4% Kannapolis 16,951 18,748 19,205 13.3�/0 Lexin to�1* 580 608 542 -6.6% NC State Fair* 2,788 3,010 2,672 -4.2% Raleigh 192,434 163,698 159,584 -17.1% Rocicy Mount 56,400 53,779 52,631 -6.7% S�lisbur 26,109 27,606 31,539 20.8�/0 Selma 13,248 13,388 13,222 -0.2% Southern Pines 7,234 7,092 7,554 4.4% Wilson 43,845 44,158 52,692 20.2% TOTALS 903,758 941,799 978,859 8.3% * Special Seasonal Stop Source: Amtrak & NCDOT 2.1.1.6 Connecting Bus Services Amtrak operates daily Thruway Bus Connections to Morehead City and Wilmington from the Wilson station. These connections allow passengers to connect with both the Carolinian and Palmetto trains. In addition, the Piedmont Authority for Regional Transit (PART) operates Route 5(marketed as the NC Amtrak Connector) between downtown Winston-Salem and High Point, allowing patrons to connect to the Piedmont and Carolinian trains. NCDOT subsidizes this service in a partnership with PART. Figure 2- 5 shows the existing passenger train services in North Carolina. August 2015 2-14 2.1.1.7 Proposed Rail Services The NCDOT has studied and planned for additional passenger rail services across the state and with adjoining states. These planned enhancements include reducing travel times and increasing frequencies along the Piedmont corridor (connecting the Charlotte, Triad and Ti-iangle regions), extending passenger rail to westei-n and southeaste►-n North Carolina and other metropolitan areas, and implementing the federally-designated Southeast Corridor. Mot-e details on these proposed services are provided in Section 2.1.3 below and in Chapter 3. 2.1.1.8 Rail Stations The NCDOT has played an instrumental role in building and renovating North Carolina rail stations over the past two decades. A brief summary of NCDOT's program of building and enhancing stations, along with improvements planned and underway, is provided in this section. In the 1990s, after partnering with Amtrak to start the Carolinian and Piedmont routes, NCDOT began partnering with local governments to plan station improvement and multi-modal transportation centers. NCDOT utilized various resources to fund these projects including fede�-al transportation Enhancement Funds, federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Funds, Federal Transit Authority (FTA) discretionary formula funds and the portion of the State Highway Trust Fund set aside for economical alternatives to highway construction. MPOs and local ti•ansit authorities are also partners in funding stations, especially when a station is part of a multi-modal transportation centei: Major renovations and new station construction began in the 1990s with a large number of projects completed in the early 2000s. A second wave of station improvements, including renovations, occurred in Cary, High Point, Burlington and Kannapolis as part of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funded Piedmont Improvement Program for projects along the Raleigh to Charlotte "Piedmont" corridor. An overview of North Carolina rail station characteristics is provided ii7 Table 2- 7 along with summaries of major station renovations. c�r��dz�i-oe�v�i�.�e sT�,T� raai� ��as� 2.1.1.8.1 Existing Active Stations There are 16 active passengei- stations in North Carolina. Most active passenger stations are housed in original train stations. These include the stations in Fayetteville, Greensboro, Hamlet, High Point, Raleigh, Rocky Mount, Salisbury, Selma, Southern Pines, and Wilson. The remaining stations are either in modern buildings (Cary, Charlotte, Gastonia, and Kannapolis) or reuse existing structures such as a tobacco warehouse in Durham and the North Carolina Railroad Company Shops building in Bui�lington.lo 2.1.1.8.2 Station Planning for Existing Service Plans are underway to move three existing Amtrak stations into new multi- modal transportation centers, which will consolidate a variety of transportation options in a central facility. The Charlotte Amtrak station will be moved from its current location, roughly a mile north of downtown, to the Charlotte Gateway Station in downtown Charlotte. The new multi-modal center will house the new intercity passenger rail station in addition to Charlotte Area Transportation System (CATS) buses, Greyhound intercity bus service, the proposed Red Line commuter rail, the Center City Streetcar and future transit connections to West and Southeast Charlotte. The station is expected to be funded using federal funds, state funds, and possibly private sector funds. Plans are also underway for a new multi-modal transit center in the City of Raleigh. The first phase of the Raleigh Union Station (RUS) is set to open in 2017 and will include a new train station in a renovated downtown warehouse. The first phase is funded using federal Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grants, FRA planning grants, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds, local funds, and NCDOT funds. Subsequent phases will add accommodations for buses, parking, commuter and light rail and possibly intercity bus service.11 loAmtrak. The Great American Stations Project - Station Listing. Accessed March 6, 2014. http: //www.greatamericanstations. com/ Stati o ns/statio n-I isting ��City of Raleigh. Union Station: Raleigh's Multi-Modal Transit Center. February 24, 2014. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://www.raleighnc.gov/business/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Articles/UnionStation.html August 2015 2-15 The City of Gastonia has begun the planning process for a new multi-modal transportation center in its downtown. The multi-modal transportation center will house Amtrak, Greyhound, local and regional bus service, and include accommodations for a possible future commuter rail line to Charlotte.1z A master plan for the center was developed in 2012 and was awaiting adoption by the City at the time of release of the Draft 2014 Metropolitan Transportation Plan.13 The Town of Hillsborough is actively planning for an Amtrak station along the existing passenger rail route. In 2010 Hillsborough identified a location and small area plan for the proposed station. In 2014 the rail station and surrounding developments were selected by the American Architectural Foundation for participation in its 2014 Sustainable Cities Design Academy.14 In 2010 the Town of Lexington received a grant from the National Infrastructure Investment Grant Program to use toward planning and development of a passenger rail station.is The primary goal identified for the City Council in 2014 is to work with NCDOT on the planning and development of the rail station.lb Both the Town and NCDOT have pursued grants for this purpose. 2.1.1.8.3 Station Planning for Future Service Station planning has also occurred along potential future intercity passenger rail corridors from Raleigh to Wilmington and from Salisbury to Asheville. Several stations along the Salisbury to Asheville route, including Conover, Marion, Morganton, Old Fort, and Statesville; have already been renovated and 1zGaston Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. Gastonia Multi-Modal Center Executive Summary. May 2009. Accessed March 6, 2014. http: //www.gasto nmp o.org/documents/exe cs ummary.pdf 1iGaston Cleveland Lincoln Metropolitan Planning Organization. "The Way Forward: 2014 Metropolitan Transportation Plan." February 2014. Available: http://vwvw.gclmpo.org/documents/DRAFT2040MTP.pdE Visited 23 Apri12014. �`�City of Hillsborough. "Hi1lsUorough's Proposed Boone/Collins/Train Station Plan Selected for Expert Design Help." Available: Hillsborough's Proposed Boone/Collins/Train Station Plan Selected for Expert Design Help. Visited 23 Apri12014. 'sSullivan, Ryan. "City Awarded $700,000 to Develop Railway Station." FOX 8 News. Available: http://lexington.myfox8.com/content/city-awarded-700000-develop-railway-station. Visited: 23 April 2014. ��City Council Goals and Accomplishments Fiscal Year 2013-2014. City of Lexington. Available: https://www.lexingtonnc.net/index.aspx?page=579. Visited 23 April 2014. c:��a��-a��`a�,�� w�aT� r�o� ��E-.P�� are housing other uses until the new passenger service comes online.l� In Asheville, Valdese, and Black Mountain, future station sites have been identified and preliminary planning has been completed.18 Similarly, station planning is underway in eastern North Carolina to complement future passenger service in the region. Wilmington included space for a future train station at their multi-modal transportation center in the north part of downtown.19 Goldsboro also designed their multi-moda] transportation center to accommodate future potential passenger rail seivice.20 NCDOT has an unfunded pi-oject that will evaluate various alternative track alignments to serve the Goldsboro Station. The 2005 study to determine the feasibility of passenger rail service between Raleigh and Wilmington evaluated a corridor that included Goldsboro multi-modal transportation center. The study will need to be updated to determine the final corridor alignment.21 A Transportation Enhancement program grant and local funds have been used to preserve the histoi•ic stations in Wallace and Burgaw. Additionally, the (PART) has acquired land for a future multi-modal transportation center between Greensboi�o and Winston-Salem adjacent to a potential commuter rail corridor. Development of the multi-inodal center is on hold until new project phasing and funding are finalized.z2 17North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. Web Archive Version September 18, 2013. http://web.archive.org/web/20130918175506/http://www.bytrain.org/istation/default.html 18City of Asheville. Asheville Transit Master Plan. October 2009. Accessed March 6, 2014. http: //www.ashevillenc.gov/Po rtals/ 0/city-docume nts/Transit/Transit%20Master%2 0 Plan%20 - %20Final.pdf 1yTransit Needs Study for the Wilmington Multi-Modal Transportation Center. Martin Alexiou Bryson. May 2009. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://www.wmpo.org/PDF/2009- 05_WMTC_TransitNeedsStudy[FINAL].pdf 20Tuner, Walter R, North Carolina Transportation Museum Historian. "The Future is Arriving." July 2012. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/cats/planning/red/Documents/TheFutureisArriving.pdF 21 North Carolina Department of Transportation. Southeastern North Carolina Passenger Rail Feasibility Study. July 2005. zzPiedmont Authority for Regional Transportation. Request for Qualifications - Update of the PART Intermodal Facility Project Management Plan. October 31, 2013. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://www.partnc.o�g/documents/Intermodal_Facility_RFQ.pdf August 2015 2-16 �c�r�i��z[ia��v�iv� sT�T� rzao� ��ra 'i'�l�d� 2- i �dor�� ;�r��fir�� IZ:�i� S[��KAa�ao Cd��•�c�ea�ds�ucs=s,z�e.zs RENOVATIONS STATION R[DERSHIP YEAR YEAR pROJECT FUNDING AMOUNT AND SOURCE ROUTES SERVED MULTI-MODAL (FY 13) BUILT COMPLETED CONIVECTIONS Burlington 25,452 1868 2003 Building renovation $3,000,000 (NCRR) Carolinian, Piedmont No 2003 U lift of waitin room $20,000 NCDOT 2011 Platform extension $337,000 (ARRA) Cary 88,669 1996 2006 Platform construction $270,000 (NCDOT) Carolinian, Piedmont, Regional and local bus $30,000 (Town of Car ) SilverStar hub 2011 Station expansion $1,700,000 (ARRA) Charlotte 201,481 1964 2002 Station renovations Not available (NCDOT, Amtrak) Carolininn, Piedmont, Bus route 2018 Planned Gateway Station Crescent Future: streetcar, commuter rail, bus hub, Greyhound Conover None Building purchase, $8,100,000 (Federal, State, Local, None - Preserved for renovation, platform private) future use construction Durham 83,232 1897 2009 New station construction $1,250,000 (FHWA) Carolinian, Piedmont Bus huU (nearby), $1,150,000 (State funds) Greyllound (nearby) Future: light rail, comm�rter rail Fayetteville 53,590 1911 2006 Platform reconstruction, $626,400 (NCDOT) SilverMeteor/ Palmetto Greyhound (nearby), ADA compliance, waiting $69,600 (Ciry of Fayetteville) bus hub (nearby) room renovation Gastonia 1,741 1987 Planning New multimodal center to Crescent No underway replace current building Firture: Greyhound, Bus hu�, com�nuter rail Goldsboro None 1909 2007 NCDOT purchase and $2,309,600 (FHWA, State, City of None - studies No stabilization of the hisCoi�ic Goldsboro) underway building. Greensboro 139,869 1927 2005 Depot renovation and $32,000,000 (FHWA, FTA, State, City Carolrnian, Piedmont, Local and regional bus conversion to a multi-modal of Greensboro) Crescent hub, Greyhotmd center Hamlet 4,882 1900 2004 Move of building to new $9,708,000 (FHWA, NCDOT, HUD, Cole Silver Star No location, renovations Foundation, Great American Station Foundation, rivate funds 23 Amtrak. 2013 Amtrak Fact Sheet for North Carolina. November 2013. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://www.amtrak.com/pdf/factsheets/NORTHCAROLINA13.pdf z4 Amtralc. The Great American Stations Project - Station Listing. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://www.greatamericanstations,com/Stations/station-listing zs McBrayer, Sharon. "Conover's rail depot gets more Funding." Hickory Daily Record. 10 October 2012. Available: http://conoverstation.com/pdfs/hickoryrecordl0_11_12.pdf. Visited 24 April 2014. August 2015 2-17 8�'FII�4i� i f��R�;➢'�� l'�.T , s"-klli l� :'-,ff�9 RENOVATIONS STATION RIDERSHIP YEAR YEAR pROJECT FUNDING AMOUNT AND SOURCE ROUTES SERVED MULTI-MODAL (FY 13) BUILT COMPLETED CONNECTIONS 2012 Parking expansion Not available (ARRA) High Point 40,302 1907 2003 Complete station $5,458,640 (Federal Enhancement Carolinian, Piedmont, Regional and local bus rehabilitation funds) Crescent hub $682,330 (State) $682,330 (local) 2012 Slope stabilization, $2,036,500 (ARRA) landscaping, parking Kannapolis 19,205 2004 2013 Canopy $300,000 (ARRA) Caroli��ian, Piedmont Bus routes Marion None 1868 2005 Not available $1,604,700 (FHWA, NCDOT, and Town None - preserved for of Marion) future use Morganton None 1886 2004 Not available $970,000 (FHWA, NCDOT, and Town None - preserved for of Mor anton) future use Old Fort None 1881 2005 Not available $1,370,000 (FHWA, NCDOT, and Town None - preserved for of Old Fort) future use Raleigh 159,584 1950 1986 Not available Not available Carolr��ian, Piedmont, Future: light rail, regional 2000 Expanded waiting room, $580,000 (Not available) Silver Service/ Palmetto rail parkin 2017 Planned new station $15,000,000 (ARRA) $36,500,000 (TIGER) $6,000,000 (TIGER match from Raleigh) $9,000,000 (TIGER match from NCDOT) Rocky 52,631 1893 2000 New entryway, station $6,300,000 (Federal Enhancement Carolinian, Silver Bus hub, Greyhound Mount rehabilitation, ADA funds) Service/Palmetto compliance projects $630,000 (State) $1,435,000 (Local) $630,000 (FTA) Salisbury 31,539 1908 1984 Building restoration $3,000,000 (Private) Carolinian, Piedmont, Bus routes $1,000,000 (NCDOT) Crescent 1999 Park, pa�-king lot and waiting $4,033,653 (FHWA, NCDOT, Ciry of room improvement Salisbury) 2009 New latform and cano y Not available Selma 13,222 1924 1981 Cuived connection track Not available Carolinian, Si/ver No 2002 Renovated waiting room $2,734,400 (Federal) Service/Palmetto $341,800 (State) $341,800 (Local) August 2015 2-18 8�'FII�4i� i f��R�;➢'�� l'�.T , s"-klli l� :'-,ff�9 RENOVATIONS STATION RIDERSHIP YEAR YEAR pROJECT FUNDING AMOUNT AND SOURCE ROUTES SERVED MULTI-MODAL (FY 13) BUILT COMPLETED CONNECTIONS Southern 7,554 1948 2004 Station restoration and $800,000 (State) SilverStnr No Pines inodernization Wilson 52,692 1929 1998 Rebuilding and $1,342,000 (Enhancement funds) Carolinian, Silver Bus, Gi•eyhound (nearby) modernization Service/Palmetto 2003 Parlcing, landscaping $1,150,000 (Enhancement funds) renovations to adjacent building 2.1.1.9 Tourist Railroads Excursion trains and tourist railroads offer patrons the chance to ride the train along scenic routes or to simply experience older railroad equipment. These trains are often part of a museum or other attractions and scenic areas. North Carolina is home to four tourist railroads. 1. The Great Smoky Mountain Railroad (GSMR), which operates in western North Carolina along the Great Smoky Mountains, runs two routes along the Nantahala Gorge and the Tuckasegee River, both departing from Bryson City. The excursions are approximately four hours long and include layovers at the Nantahala Outdoor Center and Dillsboro, respectively, where passengers can explore the area, shop, and dine before returning to Bryson City. The tours are particularly popular during the fall to see the colorful foliage and beautiful mountain scenery. 2. The New Hope Valley Railroad operates in New Hill, south of Raleigh, over a former Southern railway branch line and is home to the North Carolina Railroad Museum. 3. An excursion railroad that operates at the North Carolina Transportation Museum in Spencer. 4. The Tweetsie Railroad, which operates within a theme park in Blowing Rock.zb z� http://www.touristrailways.com/namerica/NORTH_CAROLINA/. Accessed September 2014. 2.1.1.10 Out of Service and State-Owned Corridors The railroad network in North Carolina has seen significant consolidation and change in the 20t�� century, which has led to abandonment of over 990 miles of track, or 27 percent of the system since 1977. Prior to abandonment, the rail corridor is sometimes "out of service" - meaning that the railroad still owns the corridor, but is not operating traffic on the corridor. Railroads often stop using corridors - or portions of corridors - when there is a lack of traffic that warrants the costs of operating and maintaining the tracks and structures. It should be noted two out of service corridors have been designated for statewide importance under the NC Transportation Network (NCTN) - the CSXT S Line north of Norlina to the VA-NC state line due to plans to use this line for the federally-designated Southeast Corridor and the Wallace to Castle Hayne corridor which could be used for future passenger rail service to Wilmington and as a second freight rail route to the State Port in Wilmington. Figure 2- 6 illustrates which corridors are currently out-of service. The Rail Coi-ridor Preservation Act, passed by the NC General Assembly in 1988, gave NCDOT authority to purchase railroads and preserve i•ail corridors, and declared it a public purpose for NCDOT to reassemble critically important lost portions of rail corridors. The Rail Division also provides technical assistance to local governments and economic development groups to preserve freight-rail service to customers along light-density branch lines. In addition, state and federal funds are used to assist short line railroads in making improvements to tracks and bridges, thereby helping to keep these lines active. August 2015 2-19 COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN NCDOT has acquired more than 100 miles of rail through the state's Corridor Preservation program. Some are out of service while others have freight business through trackage rights agreements. Others have been developed as rail-trail corridors. Table 2- 8 lists these state-owned corridors. � 5tate �wneq Kaii �ines Figure 2- 6 NCDOT-Owned and Out-of-Service Rail Corridors uor ro scn�e August 2015 2-20 COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL,AN >��. Table 2- 8 NCDOT-Owned Rail Corridors CORRIDOR LOCATION DATE LENGTH (miles) USES ACQUIRED Murphy Branch Andrews to Murphy 7-18-1988 14.23 Reserved for future transportation purposes Franklin County Franklinton to LouisUurg 11-2-1990 9.6 Reserved for future transportation purposes Piedmont & Northern (Charlotte) Charlotte 11-27-1991 0.77 Temporary trail Piedmont & Northern (Mt. Holly, 10.6 (main) Mt. Holly to Gastonia & Belmont 12-5-1991 Temporary trail (partial) / Leased for freight service Gastonia, & Belmont) 3.0 (spur) Maiden Branch S. Newton to Lincoln Co. line 4-13-1993 6.3 Reserved foi- future transportation purposes Wilmington & Weldon Wallace to Castle Hayne 8-4-1994 26.3 Reserved for future transportation purposes 5.07 (main) Durham & South Carolina Durham to NC 54 8-18-1995 Temporary trail 3.07 (spur) Durham & South Carolina Chatham-Wake Co. line to New Hill 8-18-1995 7.35 Temporary trail Lincolnton (C&NW) Lincolnton 1-27-1997 0.61 Temporary trail Fayetteville Street to Chatham-Wake Co. Durhain & South Carolina 8-6-1998 6.44 Temporary trail line Wilmington Lead Fourth Street to McRae Street 6-12-2002 0.25 Reserved for future transportation purposes Nash County Railroad Momeyer to Spring Hope 11-02-2005 4.7 Leased for freight service Winston-Salein R-Line Downtown Winston-Salem 12-26-2006 2.0 Temporary trail Global Trans Park (GTP) Kinston, NC 9-30-2012 5.7 Freight service to GTP (currently inactive) Source: NCDOT Rail Division 2.1.2 Major Freight and Passenger Terminals and Intermodal Connections This section describes the major freight and passenger terminals and intermodal/multimodal centers in North Carolina. North Carolina's rail network includes two major classification yards, three intermodal terminals, two deep-water ports, and numerous transload facilities. The rail served sites include proprietary industrial facilities and third-party for- hire terminals that may have their respective waterfront facilities, as well as more concentrated operations at inland locations. The traffic associated with the diverse mix of industries as railroad customers leads to more intricate supply chains, less transparent due to the number of participants involved. Figure 2- 7 displays the locations of these facilities with respect to the rail network. August 2015 2-21 COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � «� M ��.� 1 / � r�-�_ ' � 3. 7 '3r �� t �'r �r',.,' . � � _� c..�/�, =��-,� .. J° , - � o —� �Noraina—,�, -, ,�: � � ' ' � i i ' :� !�� .�.� ��- `; . � - - � _ ,� p p _ _ � � t��J - � Greensboro� — �_ ; - - " �', - �� . _ I - �` - � - , Wi'ston Salem: _ � �� ; n _ � , I Durham RocYty Nhount `�� \ �(�•'�. �i i l — � I� J Q � � - Buriington ! � `� � i � < - � � �` ; '' '`, �-+�l\ ''�-... � O �� &ii hvoint Ral�lgh -' ' � �� , 1`'`` `, �`� L �NS L� d Y'� d � Gulf �a�'`'}� QjlNilson Greenuille — r Railropd Operator CSX Transportation inwoo ar J �- , �-`�;Conover _ - c�'+ � J - - � �� j � ( _: Asheville Coneard�— -- �> �� O . �r x < Golldsbor�o �Cr� � �� - - -._- - � i Gastonia' p J �( q. �' ,I , � � � ,� � � - Q . _ i � �� >�0�,,�..: -- Fay�tteville ` � ' -r� - CharE tte �NYonroe' ' � � t%�� y,� � �} � ;�1 - � CSX HamOet Yard '•'�� 'i� `� ;-{�ew Bern ' � � �. 1 r` `� � ��- " . - - � `�"Uallace� � �, _ _ Moi� Hamle't "'� Pembroke . � `.�J � `�Jacksonvillea � ti t � �� _ - .,�' . � ` � � � � �'��'� �I�tl1111gt011 Rail Fac�llties p Intermodal � Seaport �� '� _ Port of Narfolk Southern p Transload Short Li�ne � Magor Rail Yard • Other F�ail Yard Figure 2- i Nlajo►• Rail Facilities Acr-oss Nortl� Carolina 2.1.2.1 Major Rail Vards Rail classification yards are facilities where freight cars are sorted and made into trains based on their origin and destination. CSXT's primary rail classification yard in North Carolina is located in Hamlet near the intersection of the Chai•lotte to Wilmington line and the Hamlet to Raleigh S Line. Other CSXT classification yards in North Carolina include the Rocky Mount Yard and Fayetteville's Milan Yard along the busy A Line, Pinoca Yard serving the Charlotte area, the Raleigh Yard along the local route serving Hamlet to Norlina, and Davis Yard which serves the Wilmington area. Linwood Yard, on the busy Atlanta, Georgia to Washington, DC mainline, is the hub for NS' operations in North Carolina. Other NS classification yards include Wilrruir�g�an � of k�ead Goxy r+or ro scacF Asheville, Charlotte, Pomona Yard serving Greensboro, Glenwood Yard serving the Raleigh area, and Selma, which serves eastern North Carolina. 2.1.2.2 Intermodal Facilities Intermodal facilities are locations whei-e containers and trailers are transferred between trains and some other form of transportation, usually trucks or ships. Norfolk Southern (NS) operates two of the three intermodal facilities in North Carolina - one in Greensboro, and a new facility located on the Charlotte- Douglas International Airport property in Charlotte. CSXT also operates an intermodal terminal located in Charlotte. Figure 2- 8 presents the locations of these intermodal facilities and how they are situated within the core intermodal networks of both Class I railroads. Table 2- 9 presents their current lift August 2015 2-22 capacities and locations. Intermodal facilities in neighboring states can provide North Carolina industries additional access to interstate and global commerce. In particular, the intermodal termii�als in the Norfolk area and in Greer, South Carolina provide access to and support future development for North Carolina industries which are located closer to those facilities than the ones in Charlotte or Greensboro. By supporting rail ai�d highway infrastructure investments that maintain or increase the accessibility to intermodal facilities, North Carolina's industries are better able to take advantage of transportation efficiencies and be competitive in the greater economy. Tra��e �-� (:�p�acities ca&� �:xis�iYig Inte��a��Adz�l 'Teo-nri�a�s ia� NC INTERMODAL CLASS I RAIL CAPACITY TERMINAL NETWORK LOCATION (container lifts per ear Charlotte CSXT 5430 Hovis Road, 122,000' Charlotte, NC 5710 West Charlotte NS Boulevard, 200,OOOz Charlotte, NC Greensboro NS 1105 Merritt Drive, 44,0003 Greensboro, NC Sources: 1. CSXT Intermodal Facility Expansion - Twenty-year Impact Analysis - Analysis of Economic, Employment, and Tax Revenue Impact, Insight Research Corporation, January 2014; 2. Rail Yard at Charlotte Douglas to Move 200,000 a Year, Ely Portillo, Charlotte Observer, January 9, 2014; 3. Derived from Rail STI Comprehensive Scoring Matrix, NCDOT. Though Figure 2- 8 shows the core infrastructure used to carry intermodal trains in the eastern US, a review of NS and CSXT intei-modal schedules associated with the North Carolina facilities helps to illustrate the reach that these services provide to shippers in the state. Developed using the online schedules,27 Figure 2- 9 through Figure 2- 12 show the available intermodal facility destinations for goods originating and terminating in North Carolina. Intermodal service to western US markets is provided through partnerships with western US railroads. 27 http://www.nscorp.com/content/nscorp/en/ship-with-norfolk-southern/shipping- options/intermodal/terminals-and-schedules.ht�nl COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL GL�.rJ Norfolk Southern intermodal services from Charlotte provide access to the ports of Savannah and Charleston. The Greensboro terminal provides intermodal service to the Virginia ports. Both NS terminals provide direct intermodal service to the New York and Chicago markets. Intei•modal service to Los Angeles is provided through their partnerships with western railroads. CSXT also pi-ovides intermodal service to the Chicago market. CSXT's intermodal service from Charlotte provides access to the southeastern ports of Charleston, Savannah, Jacksonville, and Miami. Access to west coast ports and markets is also provided through partnerships with western railroads. August 2015 2-23 Chicago To Kansas � Evansvil Greer e�� Ta 6allas � Orieans lntermodal Rail Networks _ csxT NS Ycinity of lnlermodaf Termrnals � CSxT � NS �';) csxT ar,a Ms Toronto � BC-�f Fron4 Montreal', } 'i/ I . Charleston J Jacksomill� Lauderdale Source: CSXT Intermodal Netwoek, Oc[o�ber 2012; NS Intermudal Nelwork, June 2014 New York hiJ Terminals - Morrisville yhiladelphia more Figure 2- 8 Existing Intermodal Rail Networks & Facilities of CSXT and NS COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN �- �; I � ��: J r: � s� �� -; ry~- � a >.. I ' � �� _ 4� `� �� ..� �--- f . . � �...., I_ ...� ..... . . . :i` Ir��. CraMl�n. M9 .- ( ....' ., - , . .. Chiraqo.IL � . S �� ,: _ �� ~ Norfulh, NA P nsmovtli. VA _ - �yGrt� ora. WC I .. j� ,. . . .. . ... � aroRe.NC 'Losq�es.CA � . .. . � � .' MvnP„in; TH � Cha�leaAvn, S� � Un�las.IB �. � `�SarannaM,GA _ , '�l7 ,� �.. ,.� � , . � `_ �� , I '- � Mianii.FL Figure 2 - 9 NS Outbound Intermodal from Charlotte and Greensboro r��S1J�:J�. , . : ;��' ; --�_ - r , _ .! . i � .��n�,� .��. .��.,.._ � � .r� ` . f �--� , ...� ,_'�� ,,... � cro,�an.t�J f ci,icago. IL ` . ... � ... �� ., �el r+orfa�, va , . . . ��Portsmouth, VA - -- .r uimro. NC . . - . .. .. IINIe. NC �4oaM9Hea,CA . . �..-� . � Da41aa. TX �� Rossville. TN V�+ eston, SL 1 Savannah,GR i � � � y lar.ksanville, Fl � New Orleanls, LA � � . __ ;\ — . `_ . . � . . .. . , y Miacni. FL Figure 2-10 NS Inbound Intermodal to Charlotte and Greensboro August 2015 2-24 % F. 1 1 �, J'r, pa�ks. NY Salt Lake Ciry,�Ut Chiu9o, IL . �i��,F. b�� CeuiFol Bluff- I.� V .�J 'ti � � �' �' a_ . � � v . � rAoene�,n:�` � Tucsan,AZv�r�y $AnIAT@RS2,Nb . .. .� $anAnlorvlP,lx, ;��'� LoreGo� T%'y' � �Rlo ualleY. Tz arl�ite. �1L' � �!y ��l�rleston. SC , �, i V�a��;aY� �ah. GA _ �jJacV�bdyllle_FL �. w,��w�. _ �«�f�F� �'�� , j�mu�.LtlaI�.�L 3 �]r�.wm ri_ Figure 2- 11 CSXT Outbow�d Intermodal fi•om Charlotte ��.il�_�r. I acoma,_ WA �o�t��a-o .. � � Sparl�. M✓ Salt L.eke t, ty. lf� Ci�i¢ago.11 alhr .CA y qenvar C�'w°��BIURs.IA" �, `'�,.. \_ "' � � = � i �� ta�. �sr—,,� s�.a,.'Terasa. 7 sa� nrno�i� x � •� Lo redo. T:� "Rlo Yalley, T Figure 2 - 12 .;;: ,. �V .... '�h?CUutta-. WE ., r ' �• ��to�.5� �e�sa �a�gina}�. GA t yJ hsomflle. R fi4�y a � � �� CSXT Inbound Intermodal to Charlotte COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLACJ 2.1.2.3 Port Facilities The North Carolina State Ports Authority (NCSPA) operates two facilities, located in Wilmington and Morehead City. Figure 2- 7 shows the location of the Port of Wilmington (POW) and the Port of Morehead Ciry (MHC) with respect to the existing rail network in North Carolina. CSXT provides rail service to the Port of Wilmington and terminal switching on the port property is conducted by the Wilmington Terminal Railway. NS provides rail service to the Port of Moi-ehead City and terminal switching is conducted by Carolina Coastal Railway (CNLA). The Port of Morehead City primarily handles bulk and breakbulk freight and has no container cranes on site. The Port of Wilmington also serves bulk and breakbulk commodities. Moreover, it has two berths dedicated to container service. The capacity of the container terminal at the Port of Wilmington is estimated at 530,000 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs). Over the last five years, an average of 267,000 TEUs has been moved through the container facility for an approxiinate 50 percent utilization. By 2022, container volumes are anticipated to increase to 421,000 TEUs. Although it has container ship service, the Port of Wilmington does not currently have dedicated intermodal rail service. It should be noted that the rail corridor from Charlotte to Wilmington has been cleared for double-stack containers and has been designated as part of CSXT's future National Gateway Corridor. As noted previously, CSXT's and NS' intermodal terminals in Charlotte and Greensboro provide access to container port facilities in Norfolk, Charleston, Savannah, Jacksonville, and Mia►ni. The capacity of port facilities for bulk and breakbulk goods is more difficult to estimate. Both the Ports of Wilmington and Morehead City have room to expand and dedicate to the handling of bulk and breakbulk goods. Depending on port configuration and equipment implemented, the bulk and breakbulk capacity can be fluid. Figure 2- 13 presents volumes of goods moved in the last five years and the projected volumes anticipated through the year 2022. August 2015 2-25 4500000 4000000 3500000 � 3000000 0 = 2500000 a � 2000000 j 1500000 1000000 500000 0 ,y0 titi .y'L �'� tiP ,yh ��o ti'� ,y4� ,y�i .ti0 ,ti'y .y'L ,y0 ,ti0 ,ti0 ,ti0 ,ti0 ,ti0 ,LO ,LO ,LO ,LO ,ti0 ,LO ,y0 —POW - Breakbulk —POW - Bulk MHC- ereakbulk —MHC-Bulk Figure 2- 13 Historical and Projected Bulk and Breakbulk Tonnage at NC Ports The spike in bulk goods moving through the Port of Wilmington in 2013 was due to the import of approximately 1.5 million tons of grain. The growth in bulk goods at the Port of Wilmington is due to modest increases in chemicals, cement, woodchips, direct reduced iron, and fertilizer products. Grain and wood pellet volumes are anticipated to have more substantial increases. The growth in breakbulk goods at the Port of Wilmington is due to increases in commodities that are curi•ently shipped through the port: metal products, wood pulp, and forest products. Figure 2- 14 through Figure 2- 17 present the top five commodities moving through the Ports of Morehead City and Wilmington over the last eleven years of available data (2003-2013). The NCSPA plans to continue to service a growing container business at the Port of Wilmington, but anticipates targeting bulk and breakbulk markets for captui�e. To date, howevei; only a small percentage of volumes processed through the ports are being moved by rail. As cited in the North Carolina Maritime Strategy, only 0.3 percent of goods by weight that are being exported from North Carolina ports are moved by rail only. Much of the bulk phosphates being exported are barged to the Port of Morehead City. The percentage of goods moving only by rail being imported through North Carolina poi�ts is 4.6 percent. COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN � Port of Morehead City - Trends of Top 5 Imports i,soo,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 R 1,000,000 C � � 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Year ■ Vehicles, Equipment ■ Sulfur Products ■ Scrap Metal Rubber Potash Ores & Minerals Ore, Mica, Schist Metal Products Gen. Merch./ Misc. Forest Products ■ Asphalt ■ Aggregate Figure 2- 14 Top Five Imported Commodities by Year - Morehead City Port of Morehead City - Trends of Top 5 Exports i,soo,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 i,zoo,000 � Z,000,00a c � 800,000 600,000 400,000 zoo,000 o -- — — — 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Year ■ Woodchips ■ Urea ■ Scrap Metal Pulp & Paper Produtts Phosphate Ores & Minerals ii� Military Metal Products Gen. Merch./ Misc. Forest Products Food ■ Aggregate �igure 2- 15 Top Five Exported Commodities By Year - Morehead City August 2015 2-26 Port of Wilmington - Trends of Top 5 Imports 3,000,000 ■ Urea ■ rools 2,500,000 2,000,000 v m � Z,soo,000 0 � � 1,000,000 - — — — — — - 500,000 — — - . 0 — — — 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Year — — �— - Ores & Minerals Ore, Mica, Schist Metal Products Machinery/ Pts. Grains Gen. Merch./ Misc. Forest Products Fertilizers Equip Mach, Parts - Coal e Chemicals Cement ■ Animal Feed Figure 2- 16 Top Five Imported Commodities By Year - Wilmington Port of Wilmington - Trends of Top 5 Exports 3,000,000 z,soo,00a z,000,000 m � � 1,500,000 � 1,000,000 soo,000 0 Figure 2 - 17 August2015 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Year ■ Woodpulp ■ Woodchips ■ Scrap Metal �� Military Gen. Merch./ Misc. Forest Products Food Products i� Chemicals Top Five Exported Commodities By Year - Wilmington COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN 2.1.2.4 Passenger Multimodal Terminals The characteristics of intercity passenger rail stations were discussed in Section 2.1.1.8. Figures 1-12 and 1-13 presented the location of the rail stations, major airports, and multimodal facilities. The NCDOT has been working with local governments, transit agencies, and intercity bus operators (Greyhound and Carolina Trailways) to develop multimodal centers whenever possible, particularly in large cities that have a number of possible connecting services. At this time Noi-th Carolina has no commuter rail service or stations. Currently, Greensboro has the only major multimodal transit center in North Carolina. The historic Greensboro Southern Railway Station located in downtown Greensboro was reopened in 2005 as the J. Douglas Galyon Depot after a$32 million rehabilitation that created a multimodal center that includes an Amtrak station, a Greyhound station, and the main bus transfer center for the Greensboro Transit Authority. The new transit center is also served by the Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART). The pedestrian tunnels that lead to the intercity rail platforms were also designed to allow for an eventual extension to serve commutei• rail platforms if needed. The Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) and NCDOT have been planning for a new multimodal transit center in downtown Charlotte for several years. This new station - known as the Charlotte Gateway Station - would replace the existing Charlotte Amtrak station located within the NS freight yard on North Tryon Street. Charlotte Gateway Station would also serve the proposed CATS Red Line commuter rail and other commuter rail services for the Charlotte region, as the station will be at the convergence of all five rail corridors in Mecklenburg Counry. The site will also house a second bus transfer center for CATS and will be serviced by the proposed CATS CityLYNX Streetcar line to be constructed on Trade Street. As of 2014, an Environmental Assessment for the center has been completed and NCDOT has secured nearly all of the real estate for the station. NCDOT and the City of Raleigh have recently completed plans for the new Raleigh Union Station, which will replace the current Raleigh Amtrak station downtown and serve as a true multimodal hub connecting bus, intercity rail, future commuter rail and light rail, and possible streetcar and intercity bus f�.b.1/1 services. The station has also been designed to accommodate restored intercity passenger rail services on the CSXT S Line, which is part of the Southeast Corridor plans. The project's Environmental Assessment was completed in 2014. Currently, NCDOT and the City have secw•ed $66 million of the $73 million needed for phase lof the project.zfl The first phase of the project will construct the main intercity rail (Amtrak) station and platform, parking and public space. Subsequent phases will consti•uct bus connections as well as future commuter rail and light rail connections, and a second intercity/commuter rail platform.29 The first phase is anticipated to be opened in 2017. The recently expanded suburban Cary station includes an enclosed bus passenger waiting room and bus loading area that serves Cary Transit and Ti�iangle Transit. The recently completed downtown Durham Station is across the street from a new (2008) Durham Transportation Station, which sei�ves Durham Area Transit Authority (DATA) buses, Triangle Transit buses, and Greyhound. As noted in Section 2.1.1, other intercity passenger rail stations in North Carolina also have local bus connections, including Salisbury, High Point, Rocky Mount and Wilson. The City of Gastonia is studying the feasibility of a new downtown multimodal center that will serve CATS, Gastonia Transit, and Amtrak. Wilson and High Point also serve as important connector stations. High Point is the connection for the van service provided by PART between the High Point station and downtown Winston-Salem and includes a pedestrian bridge across the tracks to the Hi-Tran facility. Wilson is the connector for two Amtrak Thruway motor coach services to Morehead City and Wilmington. 2.13 Passenger Rail Service Objectives The NCDOT's long-term passenger rail goals are to implement the Federally- Designated Southeast Corridor through incremental steps of improved zallorth Carolina Department of Transportation. April 2014. http: //www.ncdot.gov/projects/raleigh unionstation/ ZvCity of Raleigh. May 2014. http://www.raleighnc.gov/business/content/P]anUrbanDesign/Articles/UnionStation.html COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN infrastructure and service frequencies while also expanding services to population centers in North Carolina that currently do not have rail service. Specifically, the objectives to meet these goals are: 1. Increase ridership and revenue on the Piedmont and Carolinian services and reduce the operating assistance provided to Amtrak by NCDOT. 2. Impi•ove On-Time Performance (OTP) to FRA standards for passenger service trains serving the state, with particular attention for the state- suppo►�ted Carolinian and Piedmont services. Once the Piedmont Improvement Program is coinpleted, the objective foi- OTP is 80 percent. 3. Increase the service along the Charlotte to Raleigh corridor from the existing three daily round trip trains to as many as six to eight round trips, depending on market demand. 4. Increase the number of daily round trips from Charlotte to Raleigh and Washington DC from one daily round trip to five daily round trips. This includes restoring service on the CSXT S Line between Raleigh and Collier, VA to allow for additional frequencies connecting to the Northeast Corridor and reduced travel times between Raleigh and Richmond, VA as recommended in the Southeast Corridor plan. 5. Reduce travel time between Charlotte and Raleigh from the current 3 hours 15 minutes to less than 3 hours. 6. Extend new daily passenger rail services to western North Carolina and to southeastern North Carolina, with service that will connect to other intercity passenger rail trains. 7. Work with loca] communities to enhance and develop multimodal connections that will expand the rail service markets by linking bus, light rail and commuter rail services to the intercity rail stations. 2.13.1 Improving Services The NCDOT Rail Division was awarded ARRA funding in 2010 to increase passenger rail services between Charlotte and Raleigh. These corridor improvements (Piedmont Improvement Program) will allow NCDOT to increase the number of daily round trips between the two largest cities in North Carolina from three to five over the next few years. The Piedmont Improvement Program (PIP) will increase the capacity and improve safety along the Charlotte to August 2015 2-28 Raleigh corridor, refurbish and add new rail cars, improve reliability and allow for the introduction of a third and fourth Piedmont frequency. Once the PIP is completed, per the Definitive Services Outcomes Agreement between the NCRR, NS, FRA and Amtrak, the minimum end-point on-time performance should be 80 percent. Starting in 2018, NCDOT will add a third Piedmont train (fourth daily frequency). A fourth Piedmont train (fifth daily frequency) will be added sometime when demand warrants. These additional frequencies will provide multiple departures connecting North Carolina's largest metropolitan areas. With the foui'th and fifth frequencies, ridership is in North Carolina projected to increase by 50 percent. While the state's long-term objective is implementation of the Southeast Corridor services, the state's more iminediate objectives are to increase ridership and revenue on the state-supported sei•vices Piedmont and Carolinian services. This objective is partially needed because under the PRIIA, the NCDOT and Amtrak wei-e required to negotiate a new cost-sharing agreement with new formulas mandated by the Act. These new pricing formulas came into effect in October 2013 and now require the states to reimburse Amtrak for capital expenses in addition to operating and overhead expenses. Under this new agreement, the direct costs prescribed to the Piedmont and Carolinian will increase approximately 20 percent or $6.7 million over the next two fiscal years.�� These increases do not include additional costs for implementing the fourth and fifth frequencies. NCDOT is currently investigating other ways to improve revenue and ridership thi�ough other short- and intermediate-term service and amenity improvements. These include adding wireless internet to the Piedmont trains, adjusting fares, crew and staffing levels, revising ticket reservation and sales strategies, and looking at liability insurance options. NCDOT will also need to construct a maintenance facility in the Charlotte region to service, clean and refuel trains that terminate or turn in Charlotte. Currently Predmont and Carolinian trains are serviced on a spur within the existing 3�'Worley, Paul. NCDOT Rail Division. Presentation to the NC General Assembly Joint Legislative Transportation Oversight Committee, February 7, 2014. CdMPtl2�E-�P��SIVE 5T�4TE RAIL F�L�.V�9 Amtrak station, adjacent to the NS Charlotte yard. NCDOT has acquired property for a new maintenance facility in Charlotte, and will use ARRA funds to construct the first phase of the facility that will allow existing trainsets to be cleaned and refueled. 2.1.3.2 Implementing the Southeast Corridor As part of the planning efforts for the Southeast Corridor, the NCDOT has completed extensive ridership and revenue projections for enhanced services along the Charlotte-Raleigh-Richmond, VA corridor. These projections include new services proposed by the Commonwealth of Virginia that connect with the Southeast Corridor, since the services require scheduling coordination and will be part of a future passenger rail network in the southeast. The Southeast Corridor services assume speeds up to 90 MPH Maximum Allowable Speed (MAS) between Charlotte and Raleigh, 110 MPH MAS seivice on the restored S Line from Raleigh to Petersburg, and 90 MPH MAS from Petet•sburg to Richmond. Ridership and revenue are projected to increase significantly once the Southeast Corridor is operational, with additional frequencies, reduced travel times and increased connections to the Northeast Corridor. A 1997 FRA study projected that the revenue generated by the Southeast Corridor would cover annual operating costs. NCDOT's projections also indicate that ticket revenues would be greater than annual operating costs once the entire Charlotte to Richmond Southeast Corridor we►-e constructed and operating. More detail on the ridership and revenue projections for the Southeast Corridor are provided in Chapter 3. The Commonwealth of Virginia is leading the effort for the development of the Richmond to Washington, DC corridor. And a Tier II EIS for that section is anticipated for completion in 2017. As noted above, North Carolina is taking an incremental approach to implementing the Southeast Corridor, by first adding frequencies, and reducing travel times and improving on-time performance (OTP) along the current Charlotte to Raleigh corridor. Extending additional North Carolina trains to markets north of Raleigh (Richmond, Washington, DC and New York) is dependent upon restoring service on the CSXT S Line north of Raleigh. NCDOT and Virginia's Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) have August 2015 2-29 completed a Tier II EIS for the Raleigh to Richmond segment of the Southeast Corridor, and anticipate receiving a Record of Decision (ROD) from USDOT by 2015. North Carolina and South Carolina are cooperating. with the Georgia Department of Transportation's study of improved passenger rail connections Uetween Atlanta, Georgia and Charlotte, which is also part of the federally- designated Southeast Corridor. The alternatives analysis and Draft EIS are currently underway, with a ROD anticipated by 2015. 2,1.3.3 Expanding Rail Service ta Unserved Markets in North Carolina Another major passenger rail goal is to extend sei-vice to the most populated areas of North Carolina currently not served by rail - including to Asheville and to Wilmington. In March 2001, NCDOT adopted a phased plan to extend passenger rail service to Asheville and other points in western North Carolina. The plan includes renovating or building train stations that incorporate other communiry uses; several of these station sites have been secured (see Rail Stations under Section 2.1.1 above). The department continues to woi-k with communities on station and highway-railroad crossing safety improvements while working to identify funding to restore passenger rail service to Western N C.31 In May 2001, NCDOT released results of a feasibility study that indicated there is a feasible passenger rail market to and from Wilmington. In July 2005, the department released the results of more detailed studies that identified costs and some needed i►nprovements for re-establishing service to Southeastern North Carolina. Studies such as these should be updated to ensure the greatest accuracy given current conditions. The study recommended implementing passenger rail service from Raleigh to Wilmington via either Fayetteville or Goldsboro in phases as funding becomes available.32 Additional information, including ridership and revenue projections for these services, are provided in Chapter 3. 31 NCDOT Rail Division, April 2014. http://www.ncbytrain.org/projects/ft�tw•e.html 32North Carolina Department of Transportation Southeast North Carolina Passenger Rail Study, July 2005. COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL GL�.rJ As part of its long-range passenger rail planning efforts, NCDOT modeled the ridei•ship and revenue impacts of implementing daily round trip conventional passenger rail service from Asheville to Salisbury (Western North Carolina) and from Wilmington to Raleigh (Southeastern North Carolina). NCDOT also partnered with NS to complete a capacity modeling exercise that identified capacity and safety improvements along the Salisbury to Asheville corridor. Projected ridership and revenue from the implementation of the Southeast Corridor and new western and southeastern North Carolina services are shown in Table 2- 10. Note that the introduction of additional intrastate services to eastern and western North Carolina may cause a shift in traffic fi-om Amtrak's long-distance trains to connections to the Southeast Corridor trains. Howeve►; overall, the additional services not only provide passenger rail service to communities that currently do not have service, but the additional connecting service would have a net positive effect on ridership and revenue for all passengei- rail services in North Carolina. August 2015 2-30 Table 2- 10 Projected Services, Additional Piedmont/Caroln�ian Frequency, Southeast Corridoi�, S�tatheas�ern NC (SE�IC) and WesterII� NC (WNC� Services 5 5 FULL BUILD* FREQUENCIES* FREQUENCIES* FULL BUILD* witli SENC 2017 �'ith SENC and 2025 and WNC WNC 2017 2025 RIDERSHIP Piedrno��t/Carolinian Trains 733,900 767,100 1,866,700 1,911,200 Amtrak Lon Distance Trains** 199,900 201,400 224,000 222,300 Ralei h-Wilmin ton Trains -- 28,900 -- 37,000 Salisbuiy-Asheville Trains -- 23,800 -- 29,700 TICKET REVENUES Piedmont Caroliniai� Trains $29,829,000 $31,138,000 $126,215,000 $129,038,000 Amh•alc Long Distance Trains** $25,375,000 $25,534,000 $28,303,000 $28,228,000 Ralei h-Wilmin ton Trains -- $426,000 -- $665,000 Salisbur -Asheville Trains -- $360,000 -- $508,000 PASSENGER M[LES Piedrno��t Carolinian Trains 149,550,000 157,910,000 495,310,000 507,820,000 Amtrak Lon Distance Ti•ains** 89,490,000 90,400,000 99,940,000 100,270,000 Ralei h-Wilmin ton Trains -- 2,530,000 -- 3,230,000 SalisUur -AshevilleTrains -- 2,060,000 -- 2,610,000 *5 frequencies = 1 Carolinian round trip train, Charlotte to New York via the CSXT A Line plus 4 Piedmont round trip trains, Charlotte to Raleigh, with 79 MPH Maximum Allowable Speed (MAS). Full Build = Federally-Designated Southeast Corridor service For 8 round trips Charlotte to Raleigh, with 3 continuing to New York via S Line between Raleigh and Petersburg (and a 4th round trip that operates only Raleigh to New York via S Line between Petersburg & Raleigh), and 1(the Carolinian) continuing to New York via the A Line. Full Build assumes up to 90 MPH MAS operations between Charlotte and Raleigh, up to 110 MPH MAS between Raleigh and Petersburg via the S-Line, and 90 MPH MAS between Petersburg and Richmond, and premium fares. **Amtrak Long Distance Trains: Crescent, Palmetto, Silver Meteor, and Silver Star Sources: NCDOT and AECOM, September 2013 The NCDOT is also evaluating the feasibility of adding additional stops along both the Piedmont and Carolinian routes. Communities such as Hillsborough, Lexington, Gastonia and Greenville have all expressed interest in having new or expanded intercity passenger rail service, with many of these communities conducting studies that have identified sites for stations and constructing local transit centers in locations that also can be served by intercity rail. While a major goal of NCDOT is to increase average speeds and reduce travel times along the future Southeast Corridor, adding stops may be appropriate to serve emerging or untapped markets and increase ridership and revenue. The new stops will be evaluated to ensure that they do not interfere with freight operations, are spaced appropriately, and do not substantially impact the overall schedule of the trains serving them. COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�C�J 2.1.4 Passenger Rail Performance Evaluation Under Section 207 of the PRIIA, the State Rail Plan must include a performance evaluation of the passenger services operating in the state according to metrics established under PRIIA and by the FRA. The FRA publishes quarterly perforrnance and service quality reports for all Amtrak routes using metrics established under Section 207 of PRIIA.33 For the purposes of the evaluation of the routes serving North Carolina, most of the analysis will compare the Carolinian and Piedmont separately (state-supported services that seive most of the major population centers in the state) and other Amtrak train seivices (Crescent, Palmetto, Silver Meteor and Silver Star). 2.1.4.1 Passenger Miles/Train Miles The first measure of train performance is passenger miles (where a passenger traveling one mile equals one passenger mile) and train miles (where a train traveling one mile equals one train mile). This acts as a measure of efficiency — the greater the number of passenger miles per train mile, the more efficient the service. The result of this calculation represents average load factor. As seen in Figure 2- 18, all the passenger trains serving North Carolina have seen improvement in passenger mile per train mile efficiency over the past four years. The Carolinian is the most efficient train in the group, with the Piedmont showing the lowest figures in the group due in part to its shorter service market. It is important to note that the Carolinian statistic also includes all passenger miles that occur over the non-state supported Northeast Corridor, but does not include the train miles for this segment. Therefore, adjusted performance would be somewhat lower. [n addition, the Carolinian's efficiency has remained flat in recent years due largely to capacity constraints during peak travel periods. 3i The Federal Railroad Administration in 2010 began publishing quarterly reports on Amtrak's performance and service quality pursuant to Section 207 of PRI[A. August 2015 2-31 d 300 � 25i] .� s. F^ 20d L m a. � 150 d � 100 m en m 50 y �n �s °' 0 �� s7� . � � � � _ _ _ _ _ � � � � � r0 �Q �O �O rCJ r0 .O �O rd r0 �D .O n'� r0 �O w a r n� w � r n� w :� N n� w � � N N N N N N N N N N l+J N N N N O O O O O O d O O O O O O d O F-� F-' F-� F-t F-� F-� F-� F-` F-t F-` F-� F-" F-` F-` F-� O O F-� F-� � I--� N N N N G�.7 W W W A Source: FR1L Rail Sen�ice Melz�ies and Perfo�znance Repcarts t Carolinian tPiedmant �—Crescent — Paln�etto —I— Silve r Meteor � Silver Star Figure 2- 18 Passenger Miles Per Train Mile, NC Trains, 2010-2014 2.1.4.2 On-Time Performance On-Time Performance for both the Carolinian and Piedmont are below the industry standard of 80 percent. The Carolinian's performance has seen improvement over the past four years, while the Piedmont's on-time performance has decreased (see Figure 2- 19). The other long distance trains serving the state have also seen decreases in end-point on-time performance over the past four years (see Figure 2- 20). These deci•eases in end-point on- time performances may be due to recent increases in freight traffic, which is creating additional scheduling conflicts between the passenger and freight trains in the CSXT and NS corridors. These declines in on-time performance are also due to the construction of the Piedmont Iinprovement Plan (PIP), which will continue through 2017. Once the PIP is completed, per an agreement with the NCRR, NS, FRA and Amtrak, the minimum end-point on-time performance should be 80 percent. Table 2- 11 includes all of the quarterly on-time performance data published to-date for all of the trains serving North Carolina. 100.Qa/u 9�l.0% 80.Oa/o � 7�1A% c ro E GO.Oa/o a W a`'i 5i1.0% a v E 40.O�i'o F O 30.0% 2 �'.�4�0 1�DAa/o 0.4°1a COMPREHEN51'VE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN '�. ,o ,o �o ,o �o �a Ro �o �o � ,o �c ,o �o -'� F-� N G7 �P F-� N W � F-� N W � F-� N M17 N hS N N N N ht N N N N N O O G O O O O O O O O O Q O I--'� F-� N F-+ F-� F-+ F-� F-+ N F-+ N I--� F+ O I--� I--� F-� F-t N N N N J} W W W .? Source: FRA RailService MeTrics and Performance Renorts � Carolinian �—Piedmont Figure 2- 19 On-Ti�ne Performance, Cc�rolinian and Piedmont Trains August 2015 2-32 10d?.Oofa 90.a% 80.0% � � �a.a% � i 6�J.0% W `w 50.0% a v � 40.0�/a F a 3fl.0% 0 2fl.OQfo 10.0 �/a 0.0% r0 � FJ � i0 � rQ � rC� � r4 � !J � r0 � F.� � ,G r0 � ,O , � � FJ ',.� r' N W w,-'� F-� N W �P I--� N 4J .,-'� F-t N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O C Q O O O O F-� I--� F-� F-� F-� F-� F-� F-� F-� F-� F-� F-� F-� F-� O �+ �+ �+ I--� N N N N W W W W .7 Sn�rce: FRA Rail Service Metrics and Performance Reg�orts +Crescent #Pahnetto �= Silver Meteor Silwer 5tar Figure 2- 20 On-Time Performance, Long Distance Trains Serving North Carolina COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�CJ FRA and Amtrak also collect data on average overall operating speed and nearly all of the passenger trains serving North Carolina have seen no decrease in overall operating speed since 2008. This indicates that the passenger trains are not traveling more slowly, but have become less consistent in keeping to their end-point schedules. These schedules include a recovery time (e.g., 10 minutes, 30 minutes, depending on the train's route miles). Looking more closely at the data, a vast majority of the delay for all of the interstate passenger trains serving the state occurs south of the Northeast Cori-idor (NEC). The data for the Carolinian also indicate that most of the delays for this train occur between Richmond and Raleigh on the CSXT A Line (see Figure 2 - 21). Table 2- 11 Avera�e Qi3�rterlv ��c�-Poin�� D�i-Tinie Y'e�-form�unce, 91l Trains Service N�rtl� Carolina Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2010 2011 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2013 2013 2013 2013 2014 Carolinian 53.3% I 59.2% I 75.6% 61.0% 57.8% 76.1% 83.0% 69.8% 65.8% 70.7% 72.2% 62.1% 60.9% 67.2% Piedmont 86.3% 78.9% I 79.6% 81.2% 81.4% 73.1% 76.1% 68.5% 72.1% 76.1% 79.3% 70.1% 75.2% 71.2% Crescent 73.4% 76.6% I 75.6% 65.4% 70.5% 88.0% 82.4% 81.9% 76.6% 83.3% 78.9% 76.4% 59.2% 67.9% Palmetto 69.0% 75.5% I 91.7% 75.8% 56.2% 85.3% 79.6% 70.9% 72.8% 79.5% 77.9% 66.1% 69.6% 59.8% Silver 71.2% 79.9% 85.4% 79.1% 61.8% 78.3% 64.8% 64.8% 55.4% 61.7% 48.3% 61.5% 53.3% 56.0% Meteor SilverStar 75.4% 73.9% 66.1% 70.3% 70.7% 76.6% 65.4% 65.9% 59.2% 61.2% 58.9% 61.5% 58.7% 58.2% Source: b'KA Kail Service Metr[cs and YerYormance Heport August 2015 2-33 � � .� F a 0 0 �, v a a � p `o � � 1,84)0 1,b4)0 i,4ao i,zao i,00a 800 600 400 2aa �O rG r0 �O FJ r0 r0 �O �O �'i �C,' r0 r0 rO � r n� w � N ni w .P �' n� w � N hY N N R1 N N N N N N N hY N N o� o 0 0 0� o 0 0 0 0� o F-t F-� F-t F-� N F-t N F-� F-� N F-� F-t F-� � O F- I--° I--` I--� N N N N W W W W � Source: FRA RailService Metries and Ferformance Repo�rts �—Carolinian [CSX) fCarolinian (Ns) —�—Piedniont Figure 2- 21 Off-NEC Host Responsible Delays, Carolir�ian and PiedrnontTrains FRA's quarterly reports state that conflicts with freight traffic is the most frequent cause and creates the longest delay for the Carolinian between Raleigh and Washington, DC. Between Raleigh and Charlotte, however, the largest contributor to delay for the Carolinian was loading and unloading passengers. This mirrors the delay data for the Piedmont, where passenger loading and unloading is the largest delay category, followed by slow orders, signal work and maintenance of way. The last three categories are likely due in part to the Piedmont Improvement Program work underway that will improve speeds and capacity in the Raleigh to Charlotte corridor. The passenger loading delays are most likely to due to these trains using high-level equipment serving low-level platforms that require passengers to navigate steps and use wheelchair lifts to enter and exit the trains, compounded by the dramatic growth in ridership on these services. COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�P�J 2.1.4.3 Customer Satisfaction Amtrak conducts regular surveys of passengers, asking them to rate their satisfaction of the train travel experience in areas including overall service, on- board comfort, food, cleanliness, Amtrak personnel, and information given. The FRA standard for overall customer satisfaction is an overall scot-e of 82 out of 100. As seen in Figure 2- 22, most of the trains serving North Carolina are just Uelow this threshold, with only the Piedmont consistently scoring 90 or more. During the most recent customer satisfaction survey, the lowest scores for the Carolii7ian were for on-board cleanliness (62) and on-board food service (75).34 As required under Section 210 of PRIIA, Amtrak has developed a service improvement plan for the Crescent and Silver Service (Silver Star, Silver Meteor and Palmetto) to boost customer satisfaction, ridership and revenue. Plan recommendations include adding an additional coach to the Silver Meteor during the peak travel seasons and adding Thruway bus sei-vices in eastern North Carolina (which began in 2012), and adding stops in Virginia. Other recommendations include a greater focus on customer service through improvements such as cleaner facilities in coaches and stations and better signage.3s 34 Federal Railroad Administration, Quarterly Report on the Performance and Service Quality of Intercity Passenger Train Operatimis (First Quarter Fiscal Year 2014). 3s Amtrak. PRIIA Section 210 FYl l Performance [mprovement Plan., Crescent, Lake Shore Limited, and SilverService, September 2011. August 2015 2-34 � it�� 9p I U c g� ' 0 � �O rs � (,p � 50 � � �, E 4�1 �° v 3� I � zd I �, o' 10 I oI� J��4,1 ��`�� `'�`l ��,` y��` C,`�t�� e'`�� ,5 4��fi ��,E �ayt �y 5 Source: FRA RailSereice Metncs and Performance Reports � � FY 2011 ■ FY 2012 �� FY 2Q13 Figure 2- 22 Annual Overall Customer Satisfaction Scores for NC Trains 2.1.4.4 Financial Evaluation of State-Supported Services The NCDOT provides financial support for the Carolinian and Piedrnont trains. Table 2- 12 shows the state's level of financial support over the past five years. It should be noted that starting in 2012 North Carolina began a new operating contract with Amtrak for the Carolinian and Piedmont trains, which altered the state's accounting for these services. TaUle 2- 12 State Support for Carolinian and Piedrnont Services (2014 dollars) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Operations & Facilities $5,719,828 $7,275,000 $1,706,666 $1,706,666 $1,706,666 Contracted Services $8,100,000 $8,100,000 $8,517,073 Source: NCllO`I' Rail llivision CC:MPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�G�J Under PRIIA, the NCDOT and Amtrak were required to negotiate a new cost- sharing agreement with new formulas mandated by the Act. These new pricing formulas came into effect in October 2013 and now require the states to reimburse Amt►-ak for capital and overhead expenses in addition to operating expenses. For the past three years, the Carolinia�� has consistently been one of the most financially successful non-Acela Amtrak routes in the US. As seen in Figure 2- 23, the Carolinian currently recovers approximately 93 percent of its operating costs fi-om passenger i-evenue (farebox recovery ratio). The Piedmont currently recovers approximately 40 percent of its costs from passenger revenue. The lower cost recovery for the Piedmont is due to the shorter trips offered, which are less lucrative than longer haul trips. It should be noted however that the Piedmont's cost recovery ratio is similar to those of the other long distance trains serving North Carolina (see Figure 2- 23). As a comparison, the national farebox recovery ratio was 56 percent for Amtrak state corridors in 2011.3� 3f "Long Distance Trains are Federal ResponsiUility," Amtrak News Release, May 21, 2013, Accessible at: http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/605/21/Amtrak-Operates-LD-Trains-Direction-of- Congress-ATK-13-044.pdf August 2015 2-35 a � v v x � v � v z � a � v � � :a a a � b � > 0 � L � 0 U � a .� v a 0 iaa�io - so�io so�io aaoio 60% 5 ��lo 4aoio 3odio : 20�% . sa�io : 0% Caroliniac� Pied�narit Cc�escetlt Palmetto Silver Silvei Star Meteor Source: FR.4 Rail Seivice Me�trSrs and Perfm-mance Repo�Ys ■ FY1�1-EYl l ■ FYl2-FY13 * The Piedmont ctiirrently recovers approximately 40 percent of its costs, which include payments to Amtrak by NCDOT, from passenger revenue. Figure 2- 23 Percent of Fully Allocated Operating Costs Covered by Passenger Related Revenue Because North Carolina does not have commuter rail seivices, no operating subsidy is available. 2.1.5 Public Financing of Rail Projects and Services With the passage of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA) and the development of the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) discretionary program, for which freight and passenger rail projects are eligible, federal options for rail funding expanded. In particular, PRIIA, enacted in 2008, provided a multi-year capital funding framework which emphasized the role of the states in national passenger rail development. CG9"'31F'M2R�E��9V'IE"v��,^+'�� Bd;tiVL�'L�.4�� This section highlights the major federal funding programs as well as the other selected federal funding programs available for freight and passenger rail projects in North Carolina. Existing state funding programs that have been used to fund state rail projects and to match available federal funding are also described and summarized below. 2.1.5.1 Federal Rail Funding Programs Since 2008, the United States federal government has taken a greater role in investing in the nation's passenger rail network. The passage of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA) in 2008 established the fi�amework and authorized funding for a national passenger rail program. It was the first major passenger rail reauthorization since the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act in 1997. In the subsequent span of time, a significant amount of funding has been made available for passenger rail projects, both through ARRA and PRIIA. With one of the most developed state rail programs in the U.S., North Carolina has succeeded obtaining funding through these programs to support both incremental corridor improvements and station redevelopment. As many federal rail programs available to states are a comparatively new element of the surface transportation program, they are evolving and undergoing changes as the national rail program matures. Each federal program is described below. It should be noted that if any federal rail project or program requires either a state match on a project application or future operation and maintenance costs are expected to exceed $3,000,000, a report must be provided to the North Carolina Joint Legislative Oversight Committee or the NC House Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation and the NC Senate Committee on Appropriations for the Department of Transportation. If either the match on the project application or the future operation and maintenance expenditures are expected to exceed $5,000,000, then legislative approval is required for acceptance of the grant. For most programs that require a local or state match, those funds may be secured through the State Highway Trust Fund; however, the matching funds now must be secured through North Carolina's Strategic Investment Act prioritization process (STI). This process and state funding sources are described in Section 2.1.5.3. Notes regarding eligibility for matching funds are described in each federal program section. August 2015 2-36 2.1.5.1.1 The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) Congress passed PRIIA in October 2008. This legislation reauthorized and reformed Amtrak, but notably, it provided a new statutory framework for a federal/state partnership to fund and develop United States high-speed and intercity passenger rail service using 80/20 federal/state capital grants. PRIIA legislation authorized $3.4 billion in capital grants over five years. This legislation required Congressional action each year to appropriate the amounts authorized. Section 301 of the Act provided grants for Intercity Passenger Rail Service Capital Assistance. Section 501 provided capital grants for High-speed Rail Corridor Development for federally-designated corridors with planned speeds of 110 mph or more. Section 302 Congestion Grants focused on relieving rail congestion bottlenecks. Section 303 required each state develop and maintain a State Rail Plan to be eligible for the funding provided in Sections 301 and 501. A five-year bill, the 2008 PRIIA legislation is now overdue for reauthorization in 2014. As the bill came up for consideration in 2013, the House and Senate committees with jurisdiction over the legislation agreed to address PRIIA as part of the overall surface transportation reauthorization scheduled for 2014, allowing the surface transportation bill to be more multimodal in its approach. As of mid-2014, however, it appears that reauthorization of the surface transportation bill may be delayed beyond 2014. 2.1.5.1.2 Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) in February 2009. ARRA included an appropriation of $8 billion in 100 percent federal funding providing "capital assistance for high-speed rail corridors and intercity passenger rail service." ARRA also provided $1.5 billion in 100 percent flexible multi-modal funding to be distributed through a discretionary grant program. Since then, there have been five subsequent rounds of this discretionary grant program. The TIGER grant program provides funding for both passenger and freight rail projects. As the program has evobed, typical grant amounts have not exceeded $20 million in recent years. A local match is required; 20 percent is the minimum non-federal share (which may be waived by DOT for rural areas). Raleigh Union Station has received funding from this program. The TIGER program is authorized annually as part of USDOT's CC9'�'!��f2�R�lE��9VIE �TATE �,�VL 0-'��.4�� appropriation legislation; this may change as part of the reauthorization of the five-year surface transportation bill. 2.1.5.1.3 The FRA High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Program (HSIPR) In developing guidance for ARRA grants as well as grants offered under subsequent PRIIA appropriations, an initial program structure was created. The program was revised in subsequent notices of funding availability. The program was last active in 2011 but the Federal Railroad Administration continues to list this program with the description that the program "periodically solicits applications and proposals." Based on the 2011 guidance, a minimum 20 percent non-federal share would be required although new notices of funding availability could change this requirement. Eligible activities include service development programs (a set of inter-related capital projects that will result in the introduction of new or substantially improved high-speed or intercity passenger rail services) and individual projects (discrete capital projects that will result in service or other tangible improvements). While this program has historically had no predetermined minimum or maximum dollar threshold for awards, FRA has sought to make multiple awards from the funding available and has prioritized those applications whose match percentage exceeded the minimum. 2.1.5.1.4 FRA Rail Line Relocation and Improvement Capital Grant Program Section 9002 of SAFETEA-LU authorized $350 million per year for the purpose of providing financial assistance for local rail line route and infrastructure improvement projects. From FY 2008 through FY 2011, Congress appropriated just over $90 million for the program through both Congressionally-directed spending and competitive grant opportunities. Congress did not appropriate any funding for the Rail Line Relocation program in FY 2012 or subsequent years. The status of this program is uncertain in 2014. 2.1.5.1.5 FHWA Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) and Section 130 Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Program The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Section 130 Highway-Rail Grade Safety Crossing program provides grants for the improvement of highway- railroad grade crossings that enhance safety. FY2014 funding for this program was $220 million across the U.S. Of this amount, North Carolina received $6.4 August 2015 2-37 million. Funds from the FHWA Section 130 program can be used for freight and passenger rail projects, provided that the projects improve safety at grade crossings. The amount of federal funds available for Section 130 is dependent on annual appropriations. Federal funds for grade-crossing safety improvements are available at a 90 percent federal share, with the remaining 10 percent to be paid by state and/or local authorities and/or the railroad. The federal share may amount to 100 percent for the following projects: signing; pavement markings; active warning devices; the elimination of hazards; and crossing closures. The decision on whether to allow 100 percent federal funding rests with the individual states. The local match is not subject to the STI prioritization process, though the funds committed are accounted for in the total funding allocations by region and division. Most funding programs controlled by the FHWA focus on roadway projects, however, several programs have funds may be used for rail projects under special conditions. • The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Management (CMAQ) program pays for transportation projects or programs that will contribute to attainment of national ambient air quality standards. CMAQ funds may be used for intercity passenger rail projects located in a nonattainment or maintenance area if they reduce emissions and meet the program's other eligibility criteria. Capital costs as well as operating expenses, are eligible as long as the project contributes to the attainment or maintenance of the air quality standard through reduction in vehicle miles traveled, fuel consumption or through other factors. North Carolina has seven counties in non-attainment status, all part of the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC metropolitan area. Local matching funds can be secured from the State Highway Trust Fund, provided they are secured through STI. • The Surface Transportation Program (STP) provides flexible funding that can be used for rail highway grade crossings and selected other project elements, typically as part of a larger program. • The Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) provides funding that can be used for the historic preservation and/or enhancement of rail stations. It can also be used to convert abandoned ►-ailroad corridors to CG9"!�'f'2�@�IE�S9�tIE'a��,�'iL 82�VL �'I_�.Y�� trails for pedestrians, bicycles, and other non-motorized transportation. It typically requires a 20 percent local match. After June 30, 2015, state funds cannot be used to provide these matching funds. • State Planning and Research (SP&R) funds consist of set asides from four programs: the National Highway Performance Program, the Surface Transportation Program, HSIP, and the CMAQ program. Rail projects are eligible for all but the National Highway Pei�formance Program. Typically, this program requires a 20 percent local match. The 20 percent local matching funds can be secured from the State Highway Trust Fund, provided they are secured through STI. 2.1.5.2 Federal Loan Programs There are also two federal programs that provide loans for projects, although they do not provide direct funding. These loans must be collateralized and paid back by a local funding source. 2.1.5.2.1 Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) The Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program provides direct federal loans and loan guarantees to finance development of railroad infrastructure. Under this program, the FRA can authorize direct loans and loan guarantees to acquire, improve, or rehabilitate intermodal or rail equipment or facilities, including track, track components, bridges, yards, buildings and shops. It can be used to refinance outstanding debt incurred for the purposes listed above as well as for developing or establishing new intermodal or railroad facilities. While the program has been used largely for freight rail projects, it can be used for passenger rail and transit projects. In the case of passenger rail projects, RRIF funding would require investment grade revenue and operating cost forecasts that demonstrate that the project has the potential to provide a substantial revenue stream typically after a significant public investment is made in infrastructure and/or equipment. As the reauthorization of MAP-21 is being debated in 2014, there are proposals to revise the RRIF program to make it applicable to a wider range of rail projects. NCDOT assisted the Great Smoky Mountain Railroad in obtaining a RRIF loan of $7,500,000 in 2005. August 2015 2-38 2.1.5.2.2 Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) The Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) administered by the Federal Highway Administration, authorizes credit assistance on flexible terms in the form of secured loans, loan guarantees, and standby lines of credit. TIFIA financial assistance is provided directly to public/private sponsors of surface transportation projects of national significance. TIFIA was created because state and local governments that sought to finance large-scale transportation projects with tolls, other forms of user-backed revenue, or innovative revenue sources such as tax increment financing, often faced high borrowing rates due to the uncertainties associated with such revenue streams. The TIFIA's credit assistance helps borrowers obtain more favorable rates, allowing many projects to advance. TIFIA credit program may be used by States, localities, or other public authorities, as well as private entities undertaking projects sponsored by public authorities. The TIFIA credit program's fundamental goal is to leverage federal funds by attracting substantial private and other non-federal investment in critical improvements to the nation's surface transportation system. [t can be used for both freight and passenger rail projects. A wide variety of intermodal and rail infrastructure projects are eligible and can include equipment, facilities, track, bridges, yards, buildings and shops. Though not a rail program, North Carolina has experience with the TIFIA program as it utilized TIFIA for the Triangle Expressway project. Many of the eligible rail uses are present in North Carolina including: • Intercity passenger bus or rail facilities and vehicles, including those owned by Amtrak. • Public freight rail projects • Private freight rail projects that provide public benefit for highway users by way of direct highway-rail freight interchange (this is modification of the SAFETEA-LU eligibility criterion) • Intermodal freight transfer facilities • Projects providing access to, or improving the service of, the freight rail projects and transfer facilities described above CC:MPRCI-9� �59�.�P� STATE RAIL PLAN • Surface transportation infrastructure modifications necessary to facilitate direct intermodal interchange, transfer and access into and out of a port 2.1.5.2.3 Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle (GARVEE) Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle (GARVEE) bonds can be issued by states for transportation projects receiving federal funding and the project details must be approved by the FHWA. States repay the funds using anticipated federal funds. Grant Anticipation Bonds are useful when it is desirable to bring a project to construction more quickly than otherwise would be possible. North Carolina has experience with this program having utilized GARVEE on several occasions including the Monroe Connector Bypass as well as numerous smaller projects bundled together into a program of investments. GARVEEs have seldom been used to fund rail projects, but in 2006 Rhode Island issued GARVEE bonds for constructing a freight-dedicated track along Amtrak's Northeast Corridor. 2.1.5.2.4 Railroad Tracl< Maintenance Credit Program This program was authorized within the Internal Revenue Code to provide tax credits to qualified entities for an amount equal to 50 percent of qualified railroad maintenance expenditures on railroad tracks owned or leased by Class II or Class III railroads. The maximum credit amount allowed was $3,500 per mile of track. Legislation was enacted in December 2010 to extend the tax credit program for an additional two-year period through December 2013, maintaining the credit limitation at $3,500 per mile. The program was recently extended through 2014.37 2.1.5.2.5 Railroad Safety Technology Grants Program Under the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA), the program was authorized to provide grants to passenger and freight carriers, railroad suppliers, and public sector projects that improve railroad safety and efficiency. The program aimed to facilitate technology advancements and safety systems in 37 Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014, H.R. 5771, Sec. 116, https://www.govtracic.us/congress/bills/ 113/hr5771/text August 2015 2-39 the railroad industry such as "the deployment of train control technologies, train control component technologies, processor-based technologies, electronically controlled pneumatic brakes, rail integrity inspection systems, rail integrity warning systems, switch position indicators and monitors, remote control power switch technologies, track integrity circuit technologies, and othei- new or i�ovel railroad safety technology."38 In 2013, $550,000 became available but the application period ended in February 2014. The private match requirement is a minimum of ZO percent. 2.1.5.2.6 Railroad Rehabilitation and Repair Program (Disaster Assistance) The Railroad Rehabilitation and Repair Program (RRRP) provides up to $20 million in grant assistance for repairs for Classes II and III railroad infrastructure that are the result of natural disasters in areas declared a major disaster by the President. Awarded competitively, the gr•ants can be used to cover up to 80 percent of the repair costs but other state and fede►•al sources must be exhausted before applying for RRRP grants. Eligible infrastructure includes track, signals, bridges, and any other infrastructure used to move freight. To date, there have been three solicitations for applications. Under the first solicitation in 2009, the NCDOT was awarded $11,101 for CLNA repairs to washouts and debris removal. 2.1.5.3 North Carolina State Rail Funding Programs 2.1.5.3.1 North Carolina Highway Fund North Carolina's Highway Fund is used to maintain the state road network, fund NCDOT and Division of Motor Vehicles administrative costs, and support multimodal programs such as public transportation, rail, bicycle/pedestrian, and ferry programs. The Highway Fund dates back to 1921, when the North Carolina General Assembly first imposed the gasoline tax of .01 cents per gallon on all motor vehicles fuels sold or distributed in the state. Revenue for the Highway Fund comes from a variety of sources, including the state gas tax, motor vehicle registration fees, title fees and federal-aid reimbursements. 3" Federal Railroad Administration, Railroad Safety Grants Program, http://www.fi a.dot.gov/Page/P0553 CGNf�'M2R�g-91EP�`��GV'IE ��fi�lL �2�VL �'L,,`"-.4�� Though originally created to fund highway construction and maintenance, the State Highway Patrol and the Division of Motor Vehicles, in the 1990s, the fund also began supporting public transportation and rail programs. 2.1.5.3.2 Annual Legislative Appropriations In 2013, the North Carolina General Assembly passed the Strategic Transportation Investments Law (STI) to direct investment of capital into the state's infrastructure. STI funds projects within three tiers or categories: statewide, regional, and division. Forty percent of revenues are distributed to statewide mobility projects, 30 percent to projects of regional impact, and 30 percent to projects representing division needs. North Carolina is divided into 14 multi-county divisions for NCDOT administrative purposes. Economic regions consist of pairs of divisions. Figure 2- 24 depicts the draft preliminary projects within the three tiers. August 2015 2-40 COMPREHENSI'VE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN � Ci�� Lexinc�to�n �� Richmond � � '�� :�. , , , , , , � -- , , -� , _, _ -. __- �-- I-----.-� ----- Ken#ucky C� �pa„o,�� Virginia --� -- _ - ',�� , - -- Norfiolk � � � i� �. _ ` _-. �'� -�------------ ----------- // '� --- ----- -------- --� ---- ---- f �� _, 1 � � `��_y \ //�(` .�.r.fl�<i 1� i,��tA e y�..��—�" �� , ! f"-/� S' , , � r I �� \ l-��rr �.��//^� } �� f �y� . /�� '_` /�• 1 `t-�' � ��. � A�, \ l t_ i� : ��` 1, �j / ,' , , • �� ` �� l4 � � �, �� `� ,.. — � �,�� Knoxvllle � �+��-,��, � ( f1' � � • � ,. � .. c-''`� i � �d ,_. , � , � �..- ., ;''� `; _ -i � � S � , �� - ;,� � � , ��- �� -� r - � �:�� - .,._ �, '� (�. : : � ; r z s �� , � k ,, �- �. Te n n e s s e e � �� .�� _.f1�� > -.�� ~�} � � �,�. � ` � �� ,.. �. � �;��,. -'� __��k .-� � . � d` •,� � :; K. ,��` .. _ � -�-� �� ;,�', �� .� � - .- �-��. _ �� 1 �i , ,-� , �� , � . ` �k �^ � , . . . � r -1 �- °` - f � � � �, , v _ � _ �1� �,��f : % — �� , f _ . �^ ; v .�at+- �',.. i' � l. ' �ti � - a�� J� �I J� /i �''`� . . 1 ' x - � �` � � 1. F \ `�'�! s �. ' r�._ � �'� . �. t , r> - , � • n� �'� ,. r.. �.,,` . ! J ' /� e,� i • �' �� "" '� /�''.� I .��,� � ., i l^ � .. ..... ' �' r �-7 .- � t��j f. �/� .'_- � f` ,� 1��. . . . .�, - _ k I ti :.. �r •�x. 2� :' � � _ _ .. I . � .,. 1 . :.. .\ : ��. . . - . � . - y�� ' 4 -�-�� ,--,�,�. ' '--- ;� ' ,? 4. � k ' � ' ' } . . `,. � , ,.-.: i, _ �i.:. � � .� .;'��._� �• �`��. 1 ., �' �� , t � r i � I �/�+ 7 , Y� �` "`�� ir- -.. �.:;�v r� . � — � — '' - � �(/ r � "�- f � b. f '�- , - � ' � ✓ - •,�. �`-T- ..`!:� y�'t� � , �` I�4�-_,�. �`-,rr,' ` :/ 1 '�.`� �� - ��`�: � f; .�'\ 'a� I s � t ' � ,.� .� S --- `\�`i�� S�ertanburg � t � �', ,�. �� s - i�� . � j �j .� � , � �'`� `�~ �r /, �• t J ! /l i �''\ /k� � ' � � � - � � r �� 1 Greenvflle �,- t , �� f. �\ l \ � -� ��-� � K �`" T �' �� / j� �� i: � a � ;� � .�. . � ;•: J f �, �� •r, `�`\�� ` 1� � �� , �1 �' I - _\h��', Geoc ia ,-:� g I,��ij�l Colvmbia ��' � ,'-,;� �' :� _ � ,'' North Carolir�a ,�� .� ��, ' � �F_FA�iTMFf�JT Or iR�r�:SPc��TAr�ON ��II Atlarta � . '��'�� -�� a��ta i � ; Sou�h Carolina C�� A�-, NC Department of Commerce Drafit Preliminary Projects ProsperiYy Zorues ��,.IF'+:�u11Ff�H!.;JE(:.o Ivii;lll'�:�iLSi N • o-�,�L1"d�IJi:�=F,�I:C:EPHO.IEC._ �P:'�9T�-RIa �FE:��ONd� i u,O�FCTS .�Ji,T�WE:I � `- • REGIpNF�L¢�,AIGOEF'ROJECiS r-1CD�A�rJT�RI.� '�.�;�iYFi EC4�MOMIC �pIVtlSEONP'AOJEGTS N�aRTIHOENTFAL � - -� GFNfFRS 9.;NIJI-1iLL5 - • C�IVISIUN P.RVCK,'E PF�JJECTS i � � MAJOH TR��NSITIGN PROJErTS NOAT� 1�45T ��„ '� R: U rNF,A37 ,- __• .......- I KTr G 6T�T� MF.I'•1-C I�!A:^L_ E .- .,,I.�.l..��,,�... .. �_�.,. .. .. r. Source: NCDOT STI 2015 Draft State Map Fig�n�e 2- 24 Strategic Transportation [nvestments August 2015 2-41 Through a Strategic Mobiliry Formula (SMF), STI provides access for non- highway modes to the State Highway Trust Fund. A workgroup comprised of representatives of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO's), Rural Planning Organizations (RPO's), NCDOT planning staff, Division Engineers, and transportation advocacy organizations provided recommendations for scoring methodologies to support the law. Board of Transportation - Prioritization 3.0: Scoring Criteria, Weights, and Normalization forAll Modes,39 and Prioritization 3.0: Rail Division Scoring Criteria Summary Report (May, 2014)40 fully describe the criteria used. Projects funded at the statewide level are prioritized wholly by the data and criteria established. Regional and division levels still use data- driven criteria, but afford local input into project rankings. The following table (Table 2- 13) outlines the types of rail projects that are eligible for each tier within STI. Short lines are not eligible for funding under STI. Scoring for the statewide mobility projects has been completed and the new scoring forinula is scheduled to be fully implemented after July 1, 2015. Based on the established criteria, no rail projects received funding at the statewide level. Ranking of projects for the regional and division tiers are ongoing as of this draft, so a final determination of the level of funding for rail through STI has not been established. A minimum floor for funding of non-highway modes was established. In 2013-2014, the $1.105 billion in the Highway Trust Fund was distributed by allocating $937 million to SMF, $73 million for debt service, and $46 million to administration. The floor for non-highway modes is calculated as $37,480,000 and is distributed through the SMF. It should also be noted that the SMF associated with STI is being reviewed and could be modified for future funding cycles. 39 Available at http: //www.ncdot.gov/download/strategictransportationinvestments/Prioritization.pdf '�' Available at https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/STIData/Rail_CriteriaSummaryReport.pdf T�t�9e 2-73 C GC�f �� M2R� E-91� � S 9� I� 'a��fi�'i L 8�� V L��I_�.Y�� RaiO �'o�cj�ct'�'S��e� by �Td Ca�eQ�ei��T PROJECT TYPES STI FUNDING FREIGHT TRACK INTERCITY INTERCITY CATEGORY A�p FREIGHT PASSENGER PASSENGER STRUCTURES INTERMODAL TRACK AND SERVICE AND STRUCTURES STATIONS Statewide Class [ sidings, Not eligible Not eligible Not eligible (100% double-tracl<, Criteria gr�de Score) separations, new improved access Regional Same as Not eligible Rail lines Rail lines (70% Criteria Statewide crossing a crossing a Score) county line: county line: sidings, intercity double-traclt, passenger grade se�vice separation, curve reali nment Division Same as Class I Same as Same as (50% Criteria Statewide intermodal Regional Regiona] plus Score) ortransload interciry facilities passenger stations Source: NCDOT, Prioritization 3.0: Rail Division Scoring Criteria Summary Report (May, 2014J 2.1.5.3.3 North Carolina Railroad Dividends An additional funding source available is the Freight Rail and Rail Crossing Safety Improvement Fund (FRRCSI). The fund was established under North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 124-5.1 and is funded by annual North Carolina Railroad Company dividends. In 2014, FRRCSI received a one-time dividend of $19.2 million. There is $3.5 million budgeted for FRRCSI in state fiscal year 2015. Eligible freight and rail-highway crossing safety projects include: track and associated infrastructure projects, grade crossing protection, elimination, hazard removal, signalization improvements, and rail access improvements to industrial, port, military, and intermodal facilities. Class I and short lines that carry freight are eligible for FRRCSI. The Great Smoky Mountain Railroad is not eligible for either STI or FRRCSI as it does not carry freight. August 2015 2-42 Historically, North Carolina has been recognized as a national leader in working with private railroads and other public agencies to expand the transportation system by leveraging state and federal grants with private investments. The establishment of FRRCSI will help continue two of these programs - the Rail Industrial Access Program (RIAP) and the Short line Infrastructure Assistance Program (SIAP). • Rail Industrial Access Program (RIAP): This program was traditionally funded by annual state legislative action at a level ranging from $119,000 to $1 million annually. It has invested over $9 million to leverage over $2.6 billion in projects since its creation in 1994. FRRCSI will provide funding in 2014 and 2015. NCDOT began the Rail Industrial Access Program to provide an incentive to locate or expand their facilities in North Carolina. This funding helps ensure that companies have the railroad tracks needed to transport freight and materials. The program uses state funds to assist in constructing or refurbishing tracks required by a new or expanding industry to encourage economic development. Funding for the projects is contingent upon application approval prior to the industry making their decision to locate or expand their facility in North Carolina and a private and/or local source providing matching funds. • Short Line Infrastructure Assistance Program [SIAP): This program was also previously funded by an annual state legislative allocation. Allocations ranged from zero to $2 million annually. FRRCSI will fund the program in 2014 and 2015. This program requires a 50 percent match by the private railroads for improvements to short line railroad infrastructure. In May 2014, forty FRRCSI projects estimated at a combined $16,596,108 were approved by the Board of Transportation. The balance of the $19.2 million will be available as other economic development and safety opportunities arise. Additional innovative transportation funding solutions employed by NCDOT and local agencies include the following options: . . �Ci9'�'!��f2�@�IEI�`��GV'IE "v��t'�TE R�41L PLA�J North Carolina Railroad Capital Projects: The operating and maintenance agreement payments from Norfolk Southern to the North Carolina Railroad Company (NCRR) have historically been used by the NCRR to upgrade infrastructure, improve economic development, and protect the railroad corridor for future uses. While this continues, a portion of lease payments are also applied to support the FRRCSI Program, as described above. Value Capture: For major transit capital investments such as commuter rail projects, NCDOT is working with local governments and regional transit agencies to create new mechanisms that capture public revenues from increased pi•ivate land values resulting from public investment. For projects like commuter rail, "value capture" could provide a portion of the project costs, demonstrating how station-area investments can result in significant impacts when used as catalysts for public and private development. Tax Incentives for Railroad Intermodal Facilities: Intermodal railroad facilities are eligible for tax credits. These credits are against sales and use taxes (§105-164.13) and up to 50 percent of construction cost or lease (§105-129.96). The credits are eligible until 2038 unless extended and have provided savings for CSXT and NS intermodal facilities. The program should be reviewed to determine whether additional private investment by the freight railroads can be leveraged. The continued public investment in the state's intercity passenger rail services, as well as long-term investment in high-speed rail, will improve mobility across the state. The NCDOT Seven Portals Study noted the importance the new passenger routes would have on logistics in the state. Improved passenger rail services should also benefit freight rail through added network capacity and enhanced safety. 2.1.5.3.4 Local Option Fuel, Sales or Property Tax Counties and cities have limited financial resources for making capital improvements, but still may be able to contribute modestly to project funding. North Carolina allows counties (but not cities) to levy four local option sales taxes (LOST) upon the approval of public referendum. The four LOST are the August 2015 2-43 Article 39 one-cent tax, the Article 40 half-cent tax, the Article 42 half-cent tax, and the Article 44 half-cent tax. The 100 North Carolina counties now levy the full amount -- 2.5 percent. As the state levies a 4.5 percent sales tax, the total sales tax rate is now 7 percent statewide (except in Mecklenburg, Durham and Orange Counties which levy an additional 0.5 percent LOST for mass transit). The North Carolina General Assembly has recently considered legislation that would restrict local government's ability to levy LOST for transit. The local option fuel tax has a transportation nexus and the advantage that a portion of the tax burden can be exported to tourists and visitors to the coastal counties. As other transportation needs are ongoing in these counties, one possibility would be to dedicate a portion of the tax to stations or rail projects for a period of time. An alternative option would be to raise the tax and dedicate all or part of the additional tax to rail projects. Depending on the size of the increase, the additional revenues could be split among other needs in the counties such as education, in order to gain broader support for the project. Legislative action would be required to raise the tax. North Carolina's fuel tax is a combination of a fixed and variable rate. The fixed portion is 17.5 cents; the remainder is variable - indexed to 7 percent of the wholesale rate of fuel with a minimum yield of 3.5 cents. There is similarly a ceiling on the top rate—the combined total fixed and variable rate is 37.5 cents. Given that fuel prices are expected to hold at a rate that maxes out the top variable rate, North Carolina's fuel taxes are effectively flat going forward. 2.1.5.4 Opportunities For Private Sector lnvestment This section describes potential strategies to attract and link private sector funding for rail projects. [n most cases the unique project and business opportunity will determine the most effective strategy available to the participants if a consensus can be reached. Participants may include each of the thi•ee railroad classes, as well as other infrastructure investors and operators. There are three considerations when negotiating funding shares for rail-related improvements: ability to contribute, receipt of benefits in return for contribution, and willingness to pay. In terms of ability to contribute, both of the Class I rail►-oads that operate in the state have large capital investment budgets and have partnered nationally with public sponsors to secure federal funding, such as for Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�P�J funding. In terms of willingness to pay, this is a matter of negotiation rather than a stand-alone analysis. There may be instances where a project yields operational savings to the raih-oad and other identified stakeholders, thereby enaUling a proportional contribution by the railroad and other stakeholders. 2.1.5.4.1 User Fees In some instances, an intermodal transfer facility for example, fees can be charged to the users. These fees can then be used to cover the cost of operating and maintaining the facility, with the balance applied to repaying construction debt. An advantage of the user fee approach is that railroads can transfer at least some of this cost to shippers, who are also beneficiaries of the improved rail service afforded by the improved rail line. 2.1.5.4.2 Sale/Leaseback of Rail Assets The railroads own numerous assets within the state, including but not limited to track, intermodal facilities, and land. The utilization of these assets may decline with the raili•oads' evolving network patterns and changing traffic volumes. Also, some railroads may lack the short-term investment capital that may be needed to upgrade and sustain roadbed, structures, and equipment for optimal operation. In such cases, the railroad could sell the asset to the state who could then repurposes it or lease the right to use it, to perhaps a short line, providing a revenue stream to the state (after accounting for the capital expense). Because the state would enter into a coiztractual agreement with the lessee for a set period of time, the rental income would help to offset the expense of the railroad purchase. Over time, the state could cover its expenses and may even link the sale/leasebacic effort to other grant and public purposes to further leverage the investment. For example, the North Carolina Railroad Company leases track to Norfolk Southern, whose lease revenues are used to support improvements along the corridor as well as fund the FRRCSI program. Another example of a sale/leaseback arrangement with NCDOT as the owner was with the Great Smoky Mountains Railroad, which leased a segment of the Murphy Branch from NCDOT starting in 1988 for $40,000 per year for 25 years. August 2015 2-44 4� In the end the lease payments to the state reduced the incentive for the Great Smoky Mountains Railroad to invest more in infrastructure. Thus, NCDOT sold a portion of the line back to them in 1996, which helped spur new investment and, later, a stock sale of the company.4z 2.1.5.4.3 Public-Private Partnerships Public-Private Partnerships (P3s) have become more readily utilized over the past decade as another tool in the project development and delivery toolbox, as well as providing financing options. NCDOT's public-private partnership legislation (October 2012) applies to the planning, development, design, consti-uction, operation or maintenance of roads, bridges, highways, or other Department of Transportation infrastructure. The state legislature provided additional clarification in subsequent acts, but P3s are not authorized for rail purposes. However, P3 legislation could be amended to include rail, thereby allowing rail partnerships for station area development projects. The absence of P3 authority prevented NCDOT from entering into an agreement to complete the Charlotte Gateway Station and developing the air rights of the surrounding NCDOT-owned property. The P3 approach for railroad projects in North Carolina will prove effective where project attributes align with the short- and long-term interests of the participants. The Class I railroads, operating ±2,290 miles, 70 percent of the state system, will retain ownership and contro] of their existing infrastructure. However, there may be innovative means to commit future public funds for the public sector share of joint improvements, such as those seen with grade crossing upgrades. There may exist other P3 opportunities in the state with the ±1,130 miles of track owned and operated by the state's Class II and III railroads. Projects with the Class II and III railroads ►nay be more localized and l�ave specific private and public benefits that can be attributable to the results of the project implementation. Large traffic generators may also be candidates foi- public-private projects in participation with state and local agencies. Ports and large industrial companies with significant rail freight traffic volumes are ^i Poole, Cary Franklin. A History or Railroading in Western North Carolina, 1995, p. 43. ^� Great Smoky Mountain Railroad Website, Accessed on 1/30/15: http: //www.ncrailways.o rg/rai lroa ds/great-smokey-mou ntain CdMPo2�E-E��dSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL F�L�.rJ candidates. Each project would still be required to meet the state's solicitation and procurement requirements. With or without formal P3 approaches to project delivery, collaboration and partnership between the public and private sectors in providing rail service in North Carolina will benefit both parties due to the overlapping participation in project approval and implementation. The state's Rail Industrial Access Program provides funds to local governments, economic development agencies, railroad companies and industries seeking to improve rail access. Dividend payments from the NCRR to the State of North Carolina are used to improve railroad infrastructure and support railroad improvements in the state. The state has an active State Infrastructure Bank (S[B) which has supported rail investment in the state (the City of Greensboro rail depot for example). In North Carolina, municipal borrowers may have debt limits and SIB loans can fulfill a unique credit assistance niche by lending funds to accelerate project delivery in advance of the required local project match. North Carolina's Department of Transportation has the ability to enter into contractual agreements with private companies to construct, operate and/or maintain public infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and other assets. Separately, other elements of the state's freight network such as the Ports and the Global TransPark also have this capability. Expanding this ability to include rail would allow for greater development potential. Public-Private Partnerships can offer project sponsors several benefits when administered carefully. Among the lcey potential benefits are: Risk Transfer: The P3 arrangement can be structured to transfer risk from the public sector to the private sector. Risks include revenue shortfall, construction cost overruns, greater than expected growth in 0&M costs. This risk transfer can be accomplished because the private sector has the flexibility to manage complex risks. Also, the multiparty transaction (banks, concessionaire, and public sponsor) all work to identify, quantify and mitigate risk—ensuring a disciplined financial risk approach and a comprehensive review of project assumptions and details. August 2015 2-45 Timely Delivery of Projects: Data from the UK National Audit Office found that a higher percentage of privately financed projects were delivered early or on-time at the agreed upon price, compared with pure public projects. Preservation of Public Borrowing Capacity: By privately financing a project, the public sector can leverage its finite bonding capacity and apply this bonding capacity to other projects. In implementing a P3, framing the Concession Agreement is essential to having a successful project. A concern for the public and for public agencies, for example, is that the public authority or agency will lose control over pricing policy once the asset is operated by a private concessionaire. The Concession Agreement can cover details of how the facility will be operated. For example it can include Operating Standards that describe minimum levels of service, minimum asset condition, and intervention times for snow removal, accidents and other events. The public agency can retain the ability to resume full control in the event of default.43 2.1.6 Safety and Security Programs NCDOT's Rail Division coordinates safety efforts through their Engineering Coordination and Safety Branch. Safety initiatives include planning and implementing crossing safety programs, inspecting and overseeing infrastructure, and promoting rai] safery through public awareness and education. An overoiew of these efforts is provided in this section along with a brief explanation of the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) national oversight of railroad safety. 2.1.6.1 Nationa/ Railroad Safety Oversight The FRA has authority over rail safery across the nation. In this role, the FRA partners with the NCDOT to inspect rail infrastructure in five safety disciplines: hazardous materials, motive power and equipment, operating practices, signal and train control, and track. The NCDOT participates in the safety program and exercises inspections through a multi-year agreement with FRA. In addition, the 43 The next session of the NCGA is expected to review NC's PPP authority and consider changes. COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�P�J FRA supports rail safety programs through grants and loans, collects and maintains safety-related data, investigates incidents, conducts training and education, develops and shares safety-related infor�nation, and develops and enforces safety regulations.''� Training is a major component of FRA's safety program. FRA training helps States to develop rail safety programs and helps inspectors to maintain technical pi�oficiency.4s The NCDOT's safety programs conform to rules and regulations implemented by FRA including 49 CFR Part 234, Grade Crossing Safety, Including Signal Systems, State Action Plans, and Emergency Notification Systems and 49 CFR Part 212 State Safety Participation Regulations. In 2008, Congress passed the Rail Safety Improvement Act (RSIA), the first authorization of FRA's safety programs since 1994. The RSIA directs FRA to issue safety regulations for different areas related to railroad safety such as hours of service requirements for railroad workers, positive train control implementation, standards for track inspections, certification of locomotive conductors, and safety at highway-rail grade crossings.4� In July 2010, FRA ��eleased a Bridge Safety Standards Final Rule requiring i-ailroad track owners to adopt and follow specific procedures to protect the safety of their bridges and to strengthen federal oversight of railroad bridge programs. The final rule requires rail carriers to: • Implement bridge management programs that include at minimum annual inspections of railroad bridges • Conduct special inspections if the weather or other conditions warrant such inspections • Maintain an inventory of all railroad bridges and know their safe load capacities 4'� Federal Railroad Administration. 'Railroad Safety". Available: http://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0010. Visited: 24 Apri12014. 4s Federal Railroad Administration. State Rail Safety Participation. Available: http :// www. fra. d ot. go v/ Page/ P 0 014 4� Federal Railroad Administration. "Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA)." Available: http://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0395. Visited: 24 April 2014. August 2015 2-46 • Maintain design documents and document all repairs, rnodifications, and inspections of each bridge • Ensure bridge engineers, inspectors, and supervisors meet minimum qualifications • Make sure bridge inspections are conducted under the direct supervision of a designated railroad bridge inspector • Conduct internal audits of bridge management programs and inspections47 The FRA has a number of grants and loans to support state safety programs. For example, the Railway-Highway Crossing Hazard Elimination Program provides funding for safety improvements at both public and private highway-rail grade crossings along federally-designated high-speed rail corridors. The FRA also supports a dedicated grant for Operation Lifesaver, a national not-for-pi-ofit rail safety organization. 2.1.6.2 P/anning and /mplementing Crossing Safety Programs The Rail Division's Crossing Hazard Elimination Program is responsible for maintaining a crossing inventory and analyzing data to identify the state's most pressing needs for crossing safety improvements. The program takes into account factors such as train volume, train speed, average daily vehicle traffic, school bus frequency, existing warning devices, the number of main-line tracks and side tracks in use, and the crossing's 10-year accident history (which is available from FRA Office of Safety Analysis)�8. Information on each crossing is updated annually. The crossings with the highest indices are selected as candidates for improvement. Available funding dictates how many crossings are selected and assigned priorities for improvements. After the selected crossings have been added to the Crossing Hazard Elimination Program, the new projects " United States Department of Transportation. °Federal Railroad Administration Railroad Bridge Safety Fact Sheet." FeUruary 2013. ^� Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Analysis. Accessed June 5, 2014. http://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/OfficeofSafety/default.aspx Gv�'t��!'1� R�IEI��9�''IE � �l�TE R�41L F�L�.Y�� are submitted to the North Carolina Board of Transportation for approval as additions to the State Transportation Improvement Program (TIP),49 Traffic Separation Studies (TSS) is a nationally recommended practice in which NCDOT coordinates with Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), local communities, and affected businesses to develop recommendations for railroad- highway crossings. Short-term improvements (1-2 years) may include installing traffic control devices, realigning roadways or closing crossings. Mid-term recommendations (2-5 years) might include building connector roads, realigning roadways, closing crossings or relocating crossings. Long-term recommendations may include building bridges, underpasses or connector i-oads and closing crossings.so The NCDOT continues to make significant headways to improve crossing safety along the Federally-Designated Southeast Corridor from Raleigh to Charlotte. NCDOT partnered with Norfolk Southern to implement the Sealed Corridor Initiative in 1995 between Raleigh and Charlotte. i1 Together, the organizations have been working to install traffic control devices and implement crossing closures. In addition, in 2010 approximately $520 million American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds were secured for the Pied�nont Improvement Program, a series of planned rail and roadway investments between Raleigh and Charlotte aimed at improving safety and passenger rail travel times. The program is funding 23 crossing closures and 12 grade separation projects, in addition to other improvements.52 All projects are planned to be completed by 2017.s3 The NCDOT also uses funds from the Freight Rail and Rail Crossing Safety Improvement Fund (FRRCSI) to implement safety improvements on eligible 49North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. Train Crossing Program. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://www.ncbytrain.org/safety/crossings.html soNorth Carolina Department of Transportation. North Carolina Rail Plan 2000. January 2001. S�North Carolina Department of Transportation. Sealed Corridor Program. Accessed March 6, 2014. http: //www.ncbytrai n.org/sa fety/s eal ed.htm l SzNorth Carolina Department of Transportation. Piedmont Improvement Program. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://www.ncdot.gov/projects/pip/ 5i North Carolina Department of Transportation. "Piedmont Improvement Program." Available: http://www.piedmontrail.biz/. Accessed 24 April 2014. August 2015 2-47 rail/highway safety projects that are not funded by other programs. The Rail Division staff uses quantitative analysis to determine funding and to prioritize the projects.S4 Crossing closure and crossing signalization projects are paying off in reducing the number of crashes between trains and automobiles. Between 2002 and 2013, NCDOT implemented 1,090 crossing signalization projects. As of 2013 NCDOT had completed 189 rail-highway crossing closure projects since 1992.ss These projects and increased public awareness have led to substantial crash reductions. The number of annual crashes decreased 79 percent from 244 in 1988 to 51 in 2014 (Figure 2- 25); in contrast, the State population increased by 49 percent over the last 23 years, from 6.6 million people in 1990 to 9.8 million people in 2013 (see Figure 2- 32 for population and Figure 2- 68 for a comparison to vehicle miles traveled). Train accident casualties have also decreased over time and appear to have leveled off over the past few years. The Piedmont Improvement Program and other planned pi�ojects will continue to improve safety conditions. 54Worley, Paul. Presentation to the NC Board of Transportation, FeUruaiy 5, 2014. Ss IVorth Carolina Department of Transportation - Paul Worley. North Carolina Projects Update NCAMPO Presentation. May, 17, 2013. C GC�f �� M2R� g-91E �� 9\! IE ��fi�l � 8�� V L��I_�. N� Train-Car Gollisions Rai'd crossing incidents are declining in North Carolina as NCDOT impro�es crossing safety 250 �_�� 200 \/� 4r � 150 100 50 „m, l� � Collisions � Fatalities 5Il •ss •s� •�o ��i •sx ��a •�n •gs •�s •�� a •�� roa •oi •mz •ns �tia •os •ew •07 �os •os •so •u �i3 •is •sa ['ogiu•e 2-'l5 North Carolina Traiu-Car Crashes: 1988 - 2014�� 2.1.6.3 /nspection and Oversight In addition to promoting railroad-highway crossing safety, the Rail Division promotes safety through inspecting rail infrastructure and vehicles. The Rail Division's Railroad Safety Enforcement Program partners with the FRA to inspect traffic control devices, thousands of rail cars and locomotives, and over 3,300 miles of railroad tracks in North Carolina. The Division also coordinates with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and local transit agencies to ensure existing and proposed local rail projects meet safety standards as part of the State Safety Oversight Program for Fixed Guideway and Rail Systems.s� Currently the Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) is the only transit agency operating a rail transit system (CATS Blue Line light rail), with an extension under construction. 5� Federal Railroad Administration. Office of Safety Analysis Website. http: //safetydata. fra.dot.gov/0 fficeofSafety/default.aspx 57North Carolina Department of Transportation. North Carolina Rail Plan 2009 Executive Summary. August 2015 2-48 2.1.6.4 Public Awareness and Education NCDOT promotes i-ail safety public awareness through the Rail Division's BeRailSafe program. The program publishes informational materials and offers presentations.58 BeRailSafe materials address safety around railroad tracks and it stress the message that railroads are not a shortcut, a trail, or a resting place. Presentations are typically targeted to school bus drivers, commercial drivers, sportsmen, adults, and children. NCDOT also promotes rail safery awareness through training law enforcement and emei-gency responders in railroad emergency and passenger equipment safety procedui-es.s� The NCDOT BeRailSafe program complements ongoing public awareness activities of national gi-oups such as Operation Lifesaver and its North Carolina Operation Lifesaver affiliate. Similar to BeRailSafe, Operation Lifesaver is a public information pi•ogram dedicated to reducing injuries and fatalities at highway- rail crossings and on active rail lines. Operation Lifesaver maintains and publishes statistics about rail trespassing and crossing collisions and offers materials, videos, presentations, and training about education, enforcement, and engineering to promote rail safety.�� NCDOT is an active Board member of Operation Lifesavei: NCDOT also conducts safety blitzes at crossings to advise motorists and trucicing companies prior to implementing MAS (train control and monitoring system) increases. Figure 2- 26 shows the number of trespasser incidents over the last 15 years. s&North Carolina Department of Transportation. BeRailSafe. Accessed March 6, 2014. http: //www.berailsafe.org/ 59North Carolina Department of Transportation - Paul Worley. North Carolina Projects Update NCAMPO Presentation. May, 17, Z013. «'Operation Lifesaver. Operation Lifesaver - About Us. Accessed March 6, 2014. http://oli.org/about-us COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�P�J Trespassing Incidents have nat declined. 20 trespassers died on NC �ailroads in 2�13. 20 ,88 '&4 'FO '41 '92 '43 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '49 '09 "@7 '02 "03 '64 'OS 'O6 '07 '08 "09 '10 "17 '12 '93 F'�gw-e 2- 26 Trespassiiig Incidents in North Caroliva 1988 - 2013�� 2.1.7 Economic and Environmental Impacts of Rail This section provides a general analysis of rail transportation's economic and environmental impacts in the State including congestion mitigation, safety impacts, trade and economic development, air quality, land use, energy use, resiliency to climate change impacts, and community impacts. Public investment in rail offers North Carolina travelers a cost effective and environmentally friendly means to move people and products that enhance quality of life and support economic growth. On the passenger side, rail transportation offers a reliable and efficient alternative in congested travel corridors that fosters commerce. On the freight side, rail transportation offers a cost effective means to move large cargoes and diverts trucks from highways— benefiting both freight and passenger travelers that remain. Strategic rail investment allows NCDOT to maximize the economic growth, job creation and 61 Federal Railroad Administration. Office of Safety Analysis Website. http://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/OfficeofSafety/default,aspx August 2015 2-49 quality of life benefits associated with investments to enhance the state's multimodal transportation network, consistent with the Strategic Transportation [nvestments (STI) Law (NCGS Chapter 136 Article 14(b)) 2.1.7.1 Economic Impacts of Rail North Carolina's passenger and freight traffic have increased with the growing demands of its economy. As the state's economy evolves with this growth, prioritizing and selecting the best suited modes of travel for the state's key corridors is critical to fostering the state's economic competitiveness over the long-term. Transportation infrastructure is an investment with a long life that plays an important role in shaping the state's future economy. Careful and selective investments now have the potential to yield economic benefits for decades. The state's dominant population centers are leading the state's economic expansion and account for a disproportionate share of the state's economy. Between April 2010 and July 2012, North Carolina's population grew by 2.2 percent, Greensboro by 2.9 percent, Raleigh by 4.8 pei-cent, and Charlotte by 5.3 percent6z. The majority of the state's economic growth has occurred along the routes connecting those three major metropolitan areas as a result of being along important highway and rail coi�ridors and home to the state's largest populations. The cost of congestion is of concern as these economies not only contain nearly half of the state's population, but a similar share of the state's employment (45.7 percent in 2012)��3, and delays and costs impose economic inefficiencies. When the state's transportation infrastructure investments are not maintained, performance on those assets deteriorates contributing to decreased productiviry, and tempering economic growth, because businesses must spend resources on mitigating rising operating costs instead of increasing wages and employmentb`�. 62 Census State & County QuickFacts 63 gw�eau of Economic Analysis tables CA30 Regional Economic Profiles 64 The Boston Foundation, The Cost of Doing Nothing: The Economic Case for Transportation Investment in Massachusetts, January 2013, http://www.abettercity.org/docs/The%20Cost%20ot%20Doing%20Nothing%20Final%20with%2 OTOC.pdf COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�C�J Existing rail corridors connect the state's economic centers to one another and majoi• economic centers beyond the state's borders, creating a vital travel alternative for shippers and passengers. The recent success of Charlotte's new light rail system, with ridership significantly over projections, shows that North Carolinians welcome transportation alternatives. Similarly, Amtrak ridership in the state is up nearly 90 percent between 2005 and 2013, according to Amtrak and NCDOT statistics. In fact, FRA states that the Piedmont route from Charlotte to Raleigh has seen ridership increase by nearly 240 percent since 20076s, further emphasizing the importance passenger rail plays in residents' transportation choices. The state's major population centers are readily accessible to each other as well as Washington, DC and to a more limited degree, Atlanta, Georgia via passenger rail service provided by state-supported services and Amtrak. Amtrak spent $76 million on goods and services in North Carolina in FY2013 and employed 172 North Carolinians with average wages totaling $70,21066. To compare, the freight railroads in North Carolina employed 2,900 in 2013�' at an average wage of $104,050�$ in 2011. In addition to passenger rail, freight rail operated by Norfolk Southern connects the state's three main population centers as well as the Port of Morehead City, and CSXT connects the Port of Wilmington, Raleigh, and Charlotte to national and international markets. The state's rail network offers a relief to highway traffic by providing an alternative route for passengers and fi•eight. North Carolina has the largest state-maintained highway network in the counti-y at nearly 79,000 miles in 20126`'. Rapid and concentrated economic expansion is straining highway networks that are rapidly approaching the end of their C5 Kanady, Robin, Nation's Top Railroad Official Visits Harrisbuig as Rail Construction Continues, Fox 46 Carolinas, August 14, 2014, http://www.myfoxcarolinas.com/story/26284148/nations-top- railroad-official-visits-harrisburg-as-rail-construction-continues 6G Amtrak Fact Sheet, Fiscal Year 2013 State of North Carolina, http://www.amtrak.com/pdf/factsheets/NORTHCAROLINA13.pdf 67 U.S. Railroad Retirement Board, Active Employees and Railroad Retirement Act Beneficiaries by State, 2013, http://www.rrb.gov/pdf/act/statedataCY2013.pdf 6B American Association of Railroads, 2011, State Snapshot 6� NCDOT State Maintained Mileages, http://www.ncdot.gov/travel/statemapping/NCDOTMileageBySystem/OfficialStateMileage.pdf August 2015 2-50 useful life and require expensive infrastructure improvements. Transportation budgets are stretched to maintain the existing assets in a state of good repair while building new capacity to support the state's expansion. Added highway capacity from shifting trucks to rail would be particularly beneficial in the Piedmont region (I-40/I-85 corridor) of North Carolina, where most of the population is located and the highways are already congested with trucks. Shifting trucks to rail would also be beneficial along the I-95 corridor, Though North Carolina's population along this corridor is not as high as in the Piedmont region, 1-95 carries a significant amount of through truck and vehicular volumes that add to the congestion and contribute to pavement deterioration. Moreover, the state has a number of freight-dependent industries that rely on the efficiency of the transportation network to access international markets through the state's ports as well as other domestic and international markets. The state's agriculture and wood products industries—industries that anchor the non-metropolitan portion of the state—depend heavily on the rail and highway networks to stay competitive. The freight and passenger rail networks contribute approximately $1.88 billion in direct economic impacts per year for North Carolina. The impacts are calculated based on the additional economic costs that would result if rail were no longer an option for freight or passengers in the state. For freight, this means that all rail freight would be diverted to trucks, resulting in additional shipping costs (rail is cheaper than truck), pavement costs (i.e. wear and tear on the roads), and congestion costs (travel time impacts for other vehicles fi-om the increased number of trucks on the road). For passenger rail, Amtrak and the Great Smoky Mountain Railroad service would no longer be available in North Carolina, resulting in the loss of direct operator jobs, purchases of goods and services, and tourist spending in the state (for those passengers who only talce the trip with rail), as well as pavement and congestion savings from increased auto vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Table 2- 14 summarizes the annual direct economic impacts associated with freight and passenger rail in North Carolina. Table 2 - 14 COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN �_.�. Direct Economic Impacts of Rail Services in North Carolina ($2014M) FREIGHT PASSENGER User Cost Savings (Shipper) $ 1,496M $ - Amtrak Wages and Purchases $ - $ 89M Incremental Tourist Spending $ - $ 2M Great Smoky Mountains Railroad (GSMR) Direct Wages and Purchases $ - $ 6M GSMR Tourist Direct Spending $ - $ 16M Pavement Savings** $ 96M $ 4M Congestion Savings** $ 162M $ 4M Total $ 1,754M $ 121M Source: AECOM anatysis of Class 1"LO11 Waybill, Amtrak ZO1Z and Z014, Southeast Corridor, and GSMR 2007 data. Tourist spending, pavement savings, congestion savings, auto emissions, and safety for passenger rail are based on trips to North Carolina that would not have been made without rail. ** Excludes GSMR impacts. The direct econoinic impacts of fi•eight rail are estimated using a methodology similar to that applied by NCRR in a 2014 study�� that estimated its impacts to the North Carolina economy, with a few important differences. The primary diffei�ence is that the NCRR estimate only reflects the impacts for NCRR, while the impacts shown in Table 2- 14 are for the entire state. In addition, the statewide estimate of shipper savings utilizes more conservative assumptions on cost savings than those applied in the NCRR report. The NCRR report estimates a cost savings of 58 percent per ton-mile for shipping intermodal freight via rail rather than truck and an overall cost savings of 78 percent per �� RTI International, Measuring the North Carolina Railroad Company's Impact on North Carolina, 2014, http://www.ncrr.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/1030-am_RTl.pdf August 2015 2-51 ton-mile for rail freight compared to truck. The shipper savings shown in Table 2- 14 assumes a 20 percent savings for rail shipped via rail instead of truck, based on discussions with railroads and analyst findings that railroads charge between 10 percent and 30 percent less for rail services than trucks in the same shipping lanes.71 In addition, the statewide estimates include pavement savings (reduced wear and tear on the state's roadways resulting in 0&M savings for the state) and congestion savings (time savings experienced by other roadways users) in the direct impacts. The methodology used to estimate the statewide economic impact of rail in North Carolina is included in Appendix G. In addition to the direct economic impacts, broader social impacts generate approximately $311 million in emissions and safety impacts. The additional emissions and safety impacts a�,e generated as a result of the truck and auto VMT avoided in North Carolina due to the use of freight and Amtrak passenger rail in the state. These emissions and safety impacts are monetized using recommended economic values or proxies associated with avoiding these negative externalities. These broader social impacts are different from the direct impacts shown in Table 2- 14 because they do not translate into spendable dollars in the North Carolina economy. Table 2- 15 summarizes the annual broader social impacts avoided due to the use of freight and Amtrak passenger rail in North Carolina. 71 Schoonmalcer, Keith, "UP produced record revenue and operating income in 2013, and we expect the trend to continue," July 1, 2014, http://analysisreport.morningstar.com/stock/research?t=UN P&region=USA&culture=en- US&productcode=MLE TaUle 2 - 15 COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN =��. Broader Social Economic Impacts of Amtralc Passenger Rail Services io� North CaIl•olina ($2014�M) FREIGHT Amtrakl PASSENGER (2011) (2012) Auto and Truck Emissions $ 118M $ 2M Auto and Truck Safety $ 173M $ 18M Total $ 291M $ 20M � Yassenger emissions and satety impacts exGude GSMK trips avoided Source: AECOM analysis The broader social impacts of rail were estimated using a methodology based on truck and auto VMT avoided within North Carolina due to the presence of rail. The methodology based on VMT avoided was applied for the statewide impacts so that comparable savings for both Amtrak passenger and freight rail could be obtained, based on estiinates of the number of vehicles removed from North Carolina's roadways and the miles they ti-avel within North Carolina. The presence of rail in North Carolina also contributes to direct jobs, employing residents who work for freight and passenger railroads. The total estimated direct employment in the state is 2,800 as shown in Table 2- 16, resulting from approximately 2,600 in freight railroads and over 200 in passenger and excursion railroads. These impacts are estimated independently of the dollar values in Tables 2- 14 and 2- 15. August 2015 2-52 Table 2- 16 Direct Jobs from Rail in North Carolina FREIGHT AMTRAK GSMR NCRR (2012) (FY 2014) (2007) (2015) Estimated Direct NC 2,600 162 65 13 Employment Note these impacts are estimated ulciependently oY the dollar values in'1'ables Z- 14 and Z- 15. Sources: Freight: NC Maritime Strategy Technical Memorandum - North Carolina Railroads Existing and Planned Infrastructure, AECOM May 2012 (for Class Is and short lines). Amtral<: Amtrak Fact Sheet, Fiscal Year 2014, http://vwvw.amtrak.com/pdf/factsheets/NORTHCAROLINA14.pdf GSMR: (nhyuck "Steve" Ha, Hillary M. Sherman, and Jessica Hollars, "Smoky Mountain Host Highway 19 Corridor Study Phase 1," March 2009. NCRR: NCRR, 2015. 2.1.7.2 Freight Rail The freight rail system in North Carolina comprises more than 3,200 miles of rail trackage owned by 22 railroads, including two Class I raili-oads (CSXT and Norfolk Southern). The system provides services to ports, power plants, mines, military installations, and to industries including agriculture, forestry, plastics, furniture, coal, food production, and chemicals. By providing services to many important industries in the state, the raili•oad supports employment in those industries as well as employs about 2,600 in the railroads itself72. Wages and salaries for rail transportation in 2009 totaled $192 million, or an average of about $74,500 per job in the industry73. Freight-dependent industries74 contributed $185,238 million in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for the state in 2013, up 36 percent from 200475. These industries represent nearly 40 percent of the state's GDP in total, and a higher propoi•tion in the i-ural areas. On a national scale, each $1 billion in rail investments supports over 17,000 jobs and 7z NC Maritime Strategy Technical Memorandum - North Carolina Railroads Existing and Planned Infrastructure, AECOM May 2012 (for Class Is, shot lines, and NCRR) " Bureau of Economic Analysis, Table SA07N Wages and salai•ies by NAICS industry 802 74 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting; Mining; Construction; Manufactm-ing; Wholesale Trade; Retail Trade; Transportation and Warehousing 75 Bureau of Labor Statistics Giross Domestic Product COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�CJ each job in freight supports another 4.5 jobs76. Demonstrating the value of freight infrastructure investments, the new NS intermodal facility at the Charlotte Douglas International Airport, capable of 200,000 lifts per year, opened recently, where it is expected to result in $7.6 billion in economic development over the next 20 years in addition to 7,000 jobs by 2030". The freight network allows goods to move more efficiently and at a lower cost than by trucking. An important impact of investments in freight rail, particularly for short lines and operators in small urban and rural areas in the state, is the opportunity for balancing growth in those locations. Investments in freight tend to be prioritized based on the locations of the Class [s and the population centers, but small investments in short lines can ensure stable employment in areas of the state that have been experiencing declines in both jobs and population. Without these short lines, existing customers could be forced to relocate their facilities either within the state, to other states, or even internationally. Relocating the facility, likely to an urbanized area, could therefore contribute to continued employment loss in the rural parts of the state and increased highway congestion in the already-congested parts of the state. 2.1.7.3 Passenger/ Freight Rail and Quality of Space Passenger rail has afforded North Carolina's residents with a more affordable transportation alternative on a cost per mile basis. According to an NCRR report fi�om 2007, passengers saved $35 million by using rail and an additional output of $223 million was produced by the state's industries78. These cost savings result in increases in economic competitiveness and thereby provide better opportunities for employment in the state. In addition to the lower costs of transportation, passengers switching from autos to rail also avoid emitting pollutants into the air. Assuming that without Amtrak, passengers would have '� American Association of Railroads, 2011, State Snapshot "Charlotte Douglass Internarional Airport, Fast Facts: Charlotte Regional Intermodal Facility at CLT, http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/Airport/News/Pages/IntermodalFacilityFastFacts.aspx �" RTI International, The Economic Impact of the Na�th Carolina RaiL•oad: Summaiy of Findings, May 2007, http://cai-dev.com/�ncrr/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Exec-Summaiy- final_printingl.pdf August 2015 2-53 driven an automobile for the trip79, 175 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were avoided in FY201380 which averages to approximately 251 miles per rider. These VMT avoided also result in reductions of the pollutants associated with automobile travel including 3,236 short tons of carbon monoxide (CO), 176 short tons of nitrogen oxide (NOx), 116 short tons of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), 2 short tons of particulate �natter (PM2.5), and 93,115 metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2)�1. The reduction in pollutants and emissions in the state improves the quality of life for residents and makes the state a more attractive, safer, and healthier place to live. As a vital part of the supply chain and an economic driver for the state, North Carolina has had great success in attracting and retaining highly-educated and skilled woi-kers, which are necessary to attract high value-added and knowledge-based industries. The success of Research Triangle Park (RTP), as well as the state's university and community college systems, is emblematic of the state's strength in these industries. RTP, located between Raleigh and Durham, is a hub of human capital and expertise in specialized industries including life sciences, inforination technology, business services, engineering, and financial firms. Some of the largest employers conducting business in the park include Cisco Systems, G1axoSmithKline, and IBM Corporation, as well as national agencies including the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the United States Environmental Protection Agency82. RTP has been successful in attracting highly educated employees, with 46 percent of the Research Triangle Region employees having a bachelor's degree or higher compared to the national average of 36 percent83, and the nation's highest concentration of PhDs.�4 '� Auto occupancy rate of 1.40 persons per vehicle from National Household Travel Survey data from 2009 e0 Amtralc 81 Using MOVES 2010a emissions rates for current year autos based on VMT avoided �'- RTP 2014 Company Directory, http://www.rtp.org/sites/default/files/RTP_Directory_2014.pdf B3 ResearchTriangle.org, 2013 State of the Research Triangle Region, May 2013, http://files.www.researchtriangle.org/sor2013event/RTRP_SOR_2013_Book_for_Web.pdf R4 RTP.org, http://www.rtp.org/choose-rtp/triangle-region/workforce-education COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN The employees who take positions here are highly sought Uy industry and can readily obtain jobs in other states because of their education and skill. Quality of life, which includes an efficient transportation network, a cleai� environment and access to recreational and leisure options, is an important factor in retaining skilled workers and the firms that ►-ecruit them. The ability of the state's rail network to support lower costs of living and additional transportation options assists in att►-acting these highly-skilled employees, which in turn increases the economic strength and productivity of the region. Young professionals, in particulai; are part of the generation that has reversed the trend of suburban living and instead prefers city living, with the access to restaurants, shopping, and other entertainment that a downtown location offers. A survey of Millennials (born between 1982 and 2003) reported that this generation values access to a variety of transportation options while simultaneously aspiring to be less reliant on automobiles: over half (54 percent) would consider moving to another city if it had better options to get aroundss. As a result, rail service and rail/transit-oriented development are becoming increasingly important for providing housing and transportation options for these groups of young professionals that represent a growing share of the labor force. Station-area projects have also contributed to quality of life improvements aci-oss the state. NCDOT has invested millions in passenger rail station improvements over the past decade. Typically located in central urban locations, revitalized stations can serve as a catalyst for private development in the adjacent properties. For example, the Town of Hillsborough is investing to reestablish service and connect to the town's bus network. The station plan for Hillsborough will provide enhanced connectivity and walkability to an area of the town that will provide space for new developments between downtown and the river. The town aims for the station to be a new gathering space that provides a social benefit for residents°6. Stations including Raleigh Union as Streetsblog USA, "Survey: Millennials Willi�g to Relocate for Better Transportation Options," April 23, 2014, http://usa.streetsblog.org/2014/04/23/survey-millennials-willing-to-relocate-for-better- transportation-options/ fl� Hillsborough Capital Improvement Plan, http://www.ci.hillsborough.nc.us/sites/default/files/images/Capital_Improvement_Plan_FY14.pdf August 2015 2-54 Station, Rocky Mount, Lexington, Durham, Cary, Salisbury, Greensboro, Burlington, and Hamlet, among others, have found success with leveraging public and private investments at or adjacent to station projects. Investing in station area improvements will provide better passenger access to more of the state for town residents, as well as renew the sense of pride in downtown areas and hopefully encourage economic growth and a greater sense of community.87 Supply chains among industries and ultimate consumers are enhanced by improvements in connectivity. Proximity of the stakeholders often provides favorable connectivity, yet investment along the railroad networks may provide as great an improvement. Investment in rural areas will enable industries to stay or locate in these areas while rebalancing their respective factors of production while avoiding known congestion in more urban areas. Rural and regional employment is also enhanced. Changing patterns of energy production and distribution, agricultural production and yields, population migration and similar events in adjacent states provide an increasing number of locational choices for industries. Taken together, the rail freight improvements can add to communiry and regional quality of like metrics. 2.1.7.4 An Additional Transportation Option With access to passenger rail service comes increased accessibility and mobility for passengers, particularly those who have limited transportation options available. Low-income and elderly riders, also called the transportation disadvantaged, typically depend on transit to get froin place to place on a daily basis, including work, school, errands, and to make recreational trips. The state's elderly population is expected to increase from 13.8 percent in 201288 to 17 percent of the population being 65 or older by 2020. Some counties will have up to 31 percent of the population as 65 or older, and 76 of the 100 counties will have a proportion higher than the state average��. With the A' Station investments help leverage adjoining public and private investments. This is most successful in communities that have adopted this as a fi-ameworlc. See also BNC, Cary, DNC, GRO, HAM, LEX, RMT, RUS, SAL, and more. 88 Census State & County QuickFacts �9 UNC: Carolina Population Center, "Population Growth & Population Aging in North Carolina Counties,° OctoUer 14, 2013, http://demography.cpc.tmc.edu/2013/10/14/population-growth- population-aging-in-north-carolina-counties/ CdMPo2�6-��SIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�P�J passenger rail services, transportation disadvantaged populations are able to access locations outside of the cities and towns where they live, which benefits them by increasing their access to employment, educational, and i-ecreational opportunities. 2.1.7.5 Tourism and Recreation Rail supports an efficient travel network, which is important for attracting and maintaining the tourism industiy. With so many other choices of destinations, tourists will not return to places that waste their valuable leisui•e time in travel snarls and delays. One of the most important industries in the state, tourists spent $20 billion in 2013, thereby supporting nearly 200,000 jobs and contributing $3 billion to state taxes90. With six intercity passenger rail routes serving 16 stations across the state, rail tourists can visit a variety of cities and towns in North Carolina. While traveling, visitors can enjoy the local sights, i•estaurants, shopping, and other recreational activities that result in local spending and support jobs. Expanding passenger services to connect Wilmington and Asheville to the state's largest population centers would provide those popular tourist destinations with another transpoi-tation alternative. 2.1.7.6 Environmental lmpacts of Rail Rail is one of the most fuel efficient modes for both freight and passenger. One study estimated that freight rail is as ir�uch as four times more fuel efficient than trucks.97 In 2010, US freight railroads on average move one ton of freight an average of 413 miles per gallon of fue1.92 Freight rail has also doubled its fuel 90 NC Department of Commerce, Fast Facts: 2013 [mpact of Visitor Spending, http://www.nccommerce.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=UgSN dkfheFw%3d&tabid=636&mid=4669 �i Federal Railroad Administration. Comparative Evaluation of Rail and Truck Fuel Efficiency on Comperitive Corridors. November 2009. http://www.ontrackamerica.org/files/Comparative_Evaluation_Rail_Truck_Fuel_Efficiency.pdf 92 USDOT, FRA National Rail Plan Moving Forward, September 2010, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j &q=&esrc=s&so urce=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0 CFUQFjAB&url=httpo/o3A%2F%2Fwww.fra.dot.gov%2FElib%2FDocument%2F1336&ei=lkFqU4fPJ 8PHoASt6oHIDw&usg=AFQjCNFn6FfsrJklel<c6w3ovNV9MlhxB6g&sig2=sF[cQIDwqK7EtTJEW- 3 Z Pw&bvm=bv.6611102 2,d.cGU August 2015 2-55 efficiency in the past 30 years.93 Intercity passenger rail uses less energy per passenger mile than air, private automobile and transit buses.94 Source: FRA National Rail Plan Progress Report, September 2010 Figure 2- 27 Ton Miles per Gallon by Mode As cited in the FRA 2010 Progress Report, on one gallon of fuel, railroads can move one ton of freight 413 miles compared to 110 miles by truck95 as seen in Figure 2- 27. The fuel savings results in transportation cost savings for shippers and manufacturers, who in turn can pass a portion of those savings along to consumers as well as expand operations and thereby providing additional employment. Further, freight demand in North Carolina will increase 9i Association of American Railroads. The Environmental Benefits of Moving Freight by Rail. )une 2012. �^ Table 2.12, Transportation Data Energy Book, Edition 32. US Department of Energy. July 2013. See also Table 1.1, Updated Comparison of Energy Use & COz Emissions from Different Transportation Modes, April Z014. 9s USDOT, FRA National Rail Plan Moving Forward, SeptemUer 2010. COMPREHENSIVE STATE FL41L PL�rJ as population increases. The FRA 2010 Progress Report indicates that, on average, Americans require the freight system to move 40 tons of freight per person, annually. Fuel efficient movements can keep pricing competitive for shippers and customers. Shifting freight from truck to rail contributes to environmental quality as well as economic competitiveness. By switching from truck to rail, shippers can utilize a mode that emits fewer pollutants per ton moved and thus results in cleaner air. Greenhouse gases (GHG) that contribute to climate change have been tied to fuel consumption. GHG production is reduced when goods travel by rail because trucks consume more fuel per ton-mile than rail. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has also recently issued sti•ingent new locomotive emission standards. The EPA estimates that these new standards will cut particulate matter emissions by as much as 90 percent and nitrogen oxide emissions by as much as 80 percent when fully implemented.96 The NCDOT Rail Division and Amtrak have al►•eady begun to use these new stringent Tier 3 and Tier 4 compliant locomotives. Increased rail traffic for both freight and passenger helps North Carolina with meeting air quality standards. Portions of North Carolina are in non-attainment for 8-Hour ozone and particulate matter, as well as in maintenance for carbon monoxide.97 Figure 2- 28 and Figure 2- 29 illustrate the locations for these air quality non-attainment and maintenance areas. 9� United States Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/locomotives.htm " North Carolina Department of Transportation. https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/Pages/AirQualityTransportationConformity.aspx. Accessed June 2014. August 2015 2-56 �� :r" -`� `� �� °� �.s Air Quality Non-Attarnment 8-Hour �zc�ne (2008) C�ass J Rar'Irvads CSX Transportation Norfolk Southern Figure 'L - 28 Ai►• Quality Non-Ateain�nenc Arec�s COMPREHENSIVE STATE FL41L PLAN � 7-� — o� —T �noroina I i� ' • J j � >> � �� -� — � - ,� . � _: �-., ' — — - � � � ' � Greensborol I � � ~--~��. �� 'Winstom-Salem;,J � Qu ` ; • .-. _ � , ,� rham Rocky'NBaunt `�� r i _ �J � Buriington ; � '� � r Y� Wigh Point � � -�, s � t_� � � � � I Gulf CarY`',-)�Ral�lgh_.- � Wilson � �� -� .� Greenuille nover- - - , I � '-� - ' ``�,. J Concord \ � ; �'� '�` Golldsbor4 Gastonia `J ,` :� �-�-- , 4 � - . �� '� i .�l ` � n'��,� �� :� Fayetteville { � � �,. ��-,,-i� � � .. _..,CMa otte Monroe' � , } � '� ; `� � �'� � `;-New Bern "�'..�� ,- �' -- Hamlaf ""� I�embroke � 4� �'�allace� : ) ,`, The possible environmental impacts from rail include noise and vibration from trains, as well as noise from trains blowing their horns when passing at-grade crossings as required by federal law. Othei� possible impacts include noise and vibration as well as emissions from train activiry at rail freight and intermodal yards.�s Most future changes in rail traffic (volume, speed, etc.) occur along existing railroad corridoi-s and yards, and thus impacts are rypically minor increases above existing levels. Emissions and some noise and vibration impacts can be y8 . Environinental Defense Fund, The Good Haul: ]nnovations that Improve Freight Transportation and Protect the Environment, Chapter 5. r+or ro scntF mitigated by the transition to Tier IV EPA-mandated locomotives. There are other mitigations that can be implemented, if warranted in specific locations. In the Tier II Environmental Impact Statement for the Raleigh to Richmond segment of the Federally-Designated Southeast Corridor, possible mitigation strategies include relocation of specific ti�ackwork away from sensitive areas, and special ballast and ties, or other infrastructure that can minimize impacts99. �� Tier Il Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Section 4(� Evaluation, Chapter 4. May 2010. August 2015 2-57 �.s �� :r" -`� `� �� °� Particulate Matter 2.5 Maintenance Area Carbon Monoxide Maintenanc� Area C�ass J Rar'Irvads CSX Transportation Norfolk Southern Figure 'l - 29 Ai►• Quality IVIaintenance Areas COMPREHENSIVE STATE FL41L PLAN � � 7-� — o� —T noroina ,.,t i i � �' �;� j�`� I_ - � � - -��-- � � � �i Gree�s�boroi � � �� --~�:., Winston-Salem' ' `'- ---- ��--,,, J I `-y I'� I []urham . Racky`NBaunt i '�� Bur�ington � � J `�� _ � � - High Point - _ f � ` ca ��Raleigh . — � ; y � Gulf �' - .)��gQ� Greenuille �ver_ _ � ' .� � . ` , ` J - Concord- - ,�9� - Golldsbor4 Gastonia J �� ' ;� �-.� - �k' � - - �� --i-�' .r1 >_� r.,l� : Fayettewille i:L ,,-�, ' '�-_� CMarlotte ��nrae' � � I ', .; � -s}_. � -i ,� � ` -New Bern " �,..�'� � , - � ' - - Hamlaf ""� I�embroke , 4� �,'�allace� � �;_� With regards to land use, businesses served by freight rail will likely continue to be adjacent to existing rail corridors, in locations zoned for commercial or industrial use. Most likely any new industry that might warrant new rail service would be along existing rail corridors, or could be within larger vacant site being proposed for a new manufacturing plant, separated from other non- compatible land uses. Passenger rail usually has positive land use impacts, since most stops are within existing urbanized areas where passenger rail traffic supports higher density and more intensive land uses. Most if not all cities and towns with existing passenger rail service reference and support passenger rail seivice in their local land use plans. r+or ro scntF 2.1.7.7 Health Impacts of Rail Passenger rail can contribute to a healthier lifestyle, by having stations in more mixed-use environments that promote walking and transit. A recent study in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine found that individuals in Charlotte who started using the light rail system when sei•vice began had lower odds of obesity and higher odds of ineeting recommended guidelines for physical activity than those who did not switch travel modes.loo The more passenger rail can support connections to non-motorized transportation choices such as transit and walking, the greater the health benefits. Other research has shown �� John M MacDonald., PhD et.al. The Effect of Light Rail Transit on Body Mass Index and Physical Activity. American Journa] of Preventative Medicine, August 2010. August 2015 2-58 that obesity rates are inversely related to the use of alternative transportation modes, such as walking, cycling and transit, including rail.lol A 2005 study found that subjects who recently switched from driving to using commuter rail showed reduced signs of stress and other benefits.ioz 2.2 TRENDS AND FORECASTS This section identifies various trends and forecasts (demographic, economic, transportation,) that will help establish future passenger and freight rail markets and unmet needs in North Carolina, which in turn will help the State Rail Plan determine projects and future service to meet these unmet needs and emerging marlcets. 2.2.1 Demographic and Economic Trends Understanding existing demographic and economic conditions and projected trends is an essential step in evaluating how North Carolina's rail system currently supports passenger and freight movement, identifying where there are gaps in rail service, and anticipating future needs. The following sections provide the foundation for the identification of rail service needs and opportunities in Section 2.3. 2.2.1.1 Demographics Demographic trends and projections including growth trends, density, race and ethnic composition, age, and other demographic variables are described in the context of how they relate to North Carolina's rail system. 2.2.1.1.1 Population Trends North Carolina continues to experience substantial population growth and urbanization. The State population increased by 49 percent over the last 23 years, from 6.6 million people in 1990 to 9.8 million people in 2013. The State 'ol Todd Litman. Evaluating Public Transportation Health Benefits. Victory Transport Policy institute. June 14, 2010; Rail Transit in America: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Benefits. Victory Transport Policy Institute. Jairuary 16, 2012. 111z Richard Werner, et aL Commuting Stress: Psychophysiological Effects of a Trip and Spillover into the Worlcplace. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, Volume 124. 2005. CdMPI2�B-9@��BSIVE STATE FL41L PLAN population is expected to grow an additional 22 percent, to 12 million people, in 2033.1�3 All regions of IVorth Carolina have grown in population over the same time period, with the most dramatic growth in the Triangle (Raleigh-Durham- Chapel Hill) and Charlotte. Counties home to North Carolina's other urban centers have experienced moderate growth and include Asheville, Winston- Salem, Greensboro, Fayetteville, Wilmington, and Jacksonville. Slow growth or population loss is projected for several rural counties across the state, particularly those in the northeast. Historic regional and statewide population trends are shown in Figure 2- 30. The geographic extent of North Carolina's regions is shown in Figure 2- 31. Projected population changes between 2012 and 2033 for each county are shown in Figure 2- 32. i�,oao,000 i�,oao,000 o s,oao,000 � � ; G,OGO,nOi� L �,or�o,ocr; �,00a,oc�; is�o ��„ „ ��s a� n i �v��r�r hsr.��,i�e FzrFn�:�;u« � ��Nestem ac E'i5i �e�� TyC Y�iad t har�une i9so �990 z000 zaro zoz�� z��o Year Figure 2- 30 North Carolina and Regional Population Trends and Projections (1970-2030)loa '�3 NC Office of State Management and Budget. 2033 County Population Projections. Accessed April 2, 2014. http://www.osbm.state.nc.us/ncosbtn/facts_and_figures/socioeconomic_data/population_estimate s/demog/countytotals_2030_2033.html 1�4 North Carolina Office of State Management and Budget, North Carolina Population Estimates and Projections. littp://www.osbm.state.nc.us/ncosbm/facts_and_figures/socioeconomic_data/population_estimate s.shtm August 2015 2-59 r.r�..� ay�1 - �r.f �E,.:.�- . � r � �P �J �i#� 1.�/. �� ,.�-.J '� � .,.� � r/ .� " I I {1�; /� '�,� •^ , i•�i t �", J� � -:. � . _ i� �., I .. - /— +,.:%'� �; WiiistoirSalemGreens6oro — -' �-�-i � � ��-� _ � ) _� � Durha�m_ ' RockyNNo'unt � � -` Burlington J ' � � � ��-^ ' - _� `�.`Hickary Hic�h Point � _Gar ` ^, L� � � y Ashewlle �� ^ �� J �., � J , Geeenville�,� �� :� �._.� � _� ',, � �; !"f`,� _M ��y I c Concord — � - -.._� Goldsboro , ��S .F ` ��r_ � 7 ,�`} ! Gastonie� J 1 _ J - �.r�\��,`�'t +3�'� ./ � `� �; ', /Fayette`ville i _ _ � , ��New�Bern 4� Charlotte �w � �.� t � .wl� 1 �� V f� � ,5 'i �` I Jaeksonville_, ��?��,�-' � `�, � �y ��--=ai-�`m� I� cS Geo ra �hvc Re ion �� 4 P 4 �� l 4Ylmin ton Ashe�ilhe Triad 9. Charl�tte TriangRe �� li' _ `�+' East�rn NC Westem Nt Fayetteville - Sandhills WIInSI�lgtOn Source: Re�ions adapfed from Combined 5fafisticalArea (CSAsJ from the US Census 6�rreau 7fG€R shapefiles Figure 2- 31 Geographic Extent of North Carolina R�gions `� � �r .rr� �. �,�.�.�-1_: � .�y`� i '` � �'6�� . ��c � ��"�� .s�� f I j I _` `{z- � „+'�'�:�" �� /J" - . . _ J � � , / ' .� �a � -1 � �i".�.�f �� ~ Winston-Salem G ensb6ro — � 't-, �.{s -- � ��, ��-, �- � i �urham Rocky Mo'u�t ,_ l�, � � ,'-�. Hicka � � Burlington 1SCary � �- ��' `_ n' H�gM Pvintl � Asheville .J � � '' -, I Greenwlle�__ ` � N I _ ,. - =� Eoncord ''+ I _ I _1 �.. �',_,.. Goldsbaro � ,� � = _ - s� l,! � �` ' Gastonia � 1 _'� � �' �F�*s"'�u ' 1't \ ; � , ��.,—.�� Fayetteville _ l New�Be�n �,,�s � � �'harPo,Yte "`�, �.'" j �� '� � � S � � .y.�a�"n3ille � � � ' �— 'f'�`' �1 V Populafion Gha�ge � �- �;Wi�m`ington 5000 - � �_ 50,000 100,OQ0 �-`` i I�, 0- 25,ODd � lOQ,000 - 200,600 --t� �I 25,000 - 50,000 - 20�,000 - 500,000 Source: OYBce of State haanagement and &udget. Populatron Est6nates and Projections Figure 2- 32 Projected Change in County Population (2012-2033) August2015 COMPREHENSIVE STATE FL41L PLAN � �� yY.'t ��, ��, �� „�,�E i �r f�.a11 COMPREHENSIVE STATE FL41L PL�CJ 2.2.1.1.2 Population Density North Carolina's population is concentrated in the "Piedmont Crescent;' the urbanized arch that follows Interstates 40 and 85 as they connect Charlotte, the Triad (Greensboro, Winston-Salem, and High Point) and the Triangle. These three regions account for 60 percent of the state's population,ios populations are also concentrated in and around the cities of Fayetteville, Asheville, Wilmington, Hickory, Gi•eenville, and Jacksonville. Figure 2- 33 shows 2012 population by square mile and Figure 2- 34 shows 2012 population by county, as well as passenger rail ridership by station. The Amtrak stations with the greatest ridership numbers are located in areas with the highest population densities.lob Existing intercity and commuter rail systems are shown in Figure 2- 35 with projected county populations for 2033. ios US Census. American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates, 2008-2012. Total Population, Table B01003. Data analyzed to calculate percentage. iur, Amtralc. North Carolina 2013 Amtrak Fact Sheet. http://www.amtrak.com/pdf/factsheets/NORTHCAROLINA13.pdf August 2015 2-61 A� r ''�'�� l �f� � ' i "�J ¢: �l �� _._ : BurlingtomDur� h m' Rocky Mvunt � � High Point Ralei h � 9 .�,- �� y Cary"� WilsQn � Salis6u f - --_,r� � - Kannapolis — Selmfa � �� _ �� // Gastonoa`. / . . f .. ' ' ' 1 ^ o.�� ^�,� �.... / i Charlotte`�?'- ' �authern Pines� � -,ti-� `� -- " Fayetteville � i �_ Fiam�ec, I "r Popr�lniion per Square Mi1e lntercity and Cornmuter lini! :�� 0- SQ 500 -�,000 .� Existing Amtrak Skatian �. I� 50 100 1,fl0a - 2,500 Existing Amtrak Route �� - YOfl - 250 2,504+ 2 SO � 500 SUurce: 2012 fimeercan Community Surve y, 5 Year Estimates Figure "l - 33 Worth Carolina Populatian Density by Square Mile (2012) ;s: .?.� Amb Rid e O � . / � � ��,�� . � Amtrak Route _ 500.�60 - 1„000,000 Saurce' 2012 Amencan Conimunity Sur✓ey 5 Year Estlmates 8 2073 NG Amtrak Fact Sheet �) � 1` i�� 1 ��, rvu. m ,._ue Figure 2- 34 Population Density (2012) and Passenger Rail Ridership (2013) August2015 N COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � f�.a'y� ��-.,;_._�; � .� _ u%',�S�,s-��" �fr ��? _ I _ � ! _ - ti Burlingkc*n _t�`_ a i � �' Durham Racky Mount V'� High Point,,: �al'�eigh I / Gar,y �'`� Salislau� � Wiison � � Kannapolis -- Selma,� �l `o-. , � , � .harlo�te �.S,outli�rmPir�es�, � ` i �Fa ettevillef�"�� I x I' Hamlet.�y _ / a. 1 `� Arajected 2033 County Population lntercity and Commuter R�ri1 �' `— � 0- SO,ODO ��, 25�,OOd - 500,000 J Existing Amtrak Station I SO,ODO - 125,000 — 500,(}DQ - 1,�DO,OOD Existing Amtrak Route -'� � 125,004 - 250,000 _ 1,00�,000 - 9.,500,000 Souree: Office o(S[afe hPanagement and Budyet. Popufelran Eshinates and Profections Figure 2- 35 Projected Population by County (2033) and Passenger Rail Facilities 2.2.1.1.3 Commuting Patterns Figure 2- 36 shows the average travel time for each counry in North Carolina. The greatest average travel times are in the northeast, especially in the counties belonging to the Virginia Beach - Norfolk metropolitan area. The other noticeable pattern is that the suburban counties of the Triad, the Triangle, and Charlotte regions have relatively longer average commute times than the urban counties of their regions. This is likely due to the longer distances traveled and congestion encountered to access the employment centers in each region's urban counties. Lastly, there are some rural counties with relatively longer average commutes likely due to the need to drive further to access einployment opportunities. A review of census data from the state's largest metropolitan areas show that more workers are commuting across county and state boundaries. Over the past 20 years, the number and percent of workers who cross county lines and state lines in their daily commutes has increased. Table 2- 17 shows the percent COMPREHEN51'VE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN � of employees who work outside of the state and county of residence in the Charlotte, Triad and Triangle regions since 1990. Table 2- 17 Percent of Employees Woricing Outside County of Residence 1i1i 1990 2000 2011 Triangle Region 22.1% 27.6% 27.8% Triad Region 23.8% 27.9% 30.0% Charlotte Re ion 20.7% 25.1% 27.7% Source: US Census Data compiled by the North Carolina Department of Commerce 107 Analysis of 1990, 2000 and 2011 Census Data for the Council of Governments boundary areas for Centralina, Triangle and Triad. North Carolina Department of Commerce AccessNC website. September 2014. http://accessnc.commerce.state.nc.us/EDIS/demographics.html August 2015 2-63 � Ashewlle� `, �� [� � � �u. �~ '- �\�� r �� . �� _: �"`�_. Nlean Truvel Teme (minutes% � 19-2J 21-24 24 - 27 �_ 27 - 3� - 32 - 39 Soiirce: 20?2 American Commurory - � ;� � 1Niilstoii-Salem Greeas6ora - - � _ Durham'. Rocky�Mount Burlington �` ' � �' � Hickory Hic�h Poirrt ' Car � ,Geeenuille - Concord, — � , �.._ Goldsboro �'� , � Gastania �i � J - �`�` , r _� � . � , Fa ette'valle New:Be�n- \.r ¢ -- — �� Y I ' a . Gharlotle � � �; ;,}.I ` ti J�cksanVille ` 1 _�_�^. � — - ;� _'� 4Vilmingtan Survey 5 Year EstimaPes Figure 2- 36 Mean Travel Tiine by County (2012) 2.2.1.1.4 Population Characteristics Trends in North Carolina's population characteristics contribute to the State's rail needs and opportunities. Certain characteristics may indicate a greater demand for passenger or commuter rail services. For example, older populations, disadvantaged populations (low-income and minority), and limited English proficiency populations may be more likely to depend on rail due to health, cost, convenience, or language barriers to owning and operating a personal vehicle. This section examines some of the population characteristics that may indicate a higher need or demand for rail services. COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � N Similar to national trends, North Carolina has become more diverse over the last two decades. Table 2- 18 shows the Hispanic, Asian and the Other Race population percentages increased the most between 1990 and 2010. Minority residents are primarily concentrated in urban areas and in the rural areas in the south-central and northeastern portions of the state (Figure 2- 37). Trends of increased ethnic and racial diversity are expected to continue as North Carolina's population continues to grow. August 2015 2-64 COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN =`=�=-: Table 2- lII Race Percentage Trencis�� RACE/ETHNICITY 1990 2000 2010 CHANGE (%) White 75.6 72.1 68.5 - 7.1 African American 22.0 21.6 21.5 - 0.5 Asian 0.8 1.4 2.2 + 1.4 Native American 1.2 1.2 1.3 + 0.1 Other Race 0.5 2.3 4.3 + 3.8 His anic1o9 1.2 4.7 8.4 + 7.2 Approximately 8.4 percent of North Carolina residents identify as ethnically Hispanic (2012).11� An estimated 6.5 percent of North Carolina's adult population speaks Spanish. Roughly 3.9 percent speak English "less than veiy well" as estimated by the 2012 American Community Survey. Figure 2- 38 shows that most of this population is in urban areas or in the piedmont and coastal plain agricultural and manufacturing ai-eas. ill An estimated 16.8 percent of North Carolina's population is below the federal poverty threshold.11z While poverty is more concentrated in urban areas, the counties with the highest overall percent of residents below poverty thresholds are in rural counties in the mountains and in the south-central and eastern counties of North Carolina (Figure 2- 39). ��'� US Census, Summary File 1 for 1990, 2000 and 2010 Censuses. ' The US Census identifies five race categories (White, African American, Asian, Narive American, Other) and identifies Hispanic as an ethnicity that can belong to any of the five race categories. �� US Census. 2012 American CommLmity Survey 5 Year Estimates, 2008-2012. Demographic and Housing Estimates, Table DP05. 'il US Census. 2012 American Community Swvey 5 Year Estimates, 2008-2012. Table B16004 Age by language spoken at home Uy aUility to speak English for the population 5 years and over. 11z US Census. American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates, 2008-2012. Table C17002 Ratio of Income to Poverty Level in the Past 12 Months. August 2015 2-65 COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � s, ��+1 � l - . .. . . , ��/'"'�% � I . ,� � �� `-- � , -�- , . ' + ' '� G ; i � Wmston-SalemGreensboro , '_-,�� `• ` � - -` � � ,� ` Durhar� _ -_ Rocky Mloun� �r"'� ''1� �u �� .�," '�-'_! �' , Hicko ''.� - Burlington ��Cary 1� =� r � q ; �s�� ". �' High Painti } -� �Ashewille{��` ��` '�J � �"--:� I ' ii�r �-�� M� -- Greenuill'e�_. �f. a � � ` � � ` ,��J�� T � Concord - � GoldEbora `��'` � ,'—� \ :}r� ,. �i ��GasYpnia�� . S �/ ` ,��,� �rS�a, . r - � Y r l�._ t .. . 1 � ` 1 � � � � o�=-�� -J _ �} ;- �: f�,,,, , Fayettevulle � New,Beim � /� •-,� -1-- Charlo'tte, f .,_>a ,.j:i �y" ;; / Percenf Minorit i -f � �` y � j�- � Jacksonville ��" y� �� _ i _ '� �j'� 0 - 15% , 15 - 30% � , j ,;,:� � -Wilrriington 30 , 50% t .�y � 50 - 75%a � �l - 75 - 1�0% Sourc�: 20t1 Amerlcan Gommu�ity sunrey 5 vear Fstimates Figure 2- 37 Minoruty Populations in North Carolina shown by US Census Tracts �,: S�` J � ,r--.'` .: - - - . .<>. _ : : . F��/ � i }� �' _ �� , �r�� 1 rti„� o � o � � � � i � �� i/ , ,�" ,� �' � � I o j c_� ��'' . .; - � � — — — ,��—,� , �`�,��. I a� i � "� � _ i �u, ,� ,_« 1 * , �_.� _ C � ` � 4 � ea / ., i^ `�• ` o --�—�� i m � � i�� l\ �� I � L---- -� I � 4 / ! � .ya':. � Y'�,�� Y i-'� ��f � � �_ + � ^ � � � � � : �� B � O �- � � �� D \:' ` ? -_,-� ' � - �-�`--i � _ � � . ,--_ - �,," � o � � _� �, _i��--� �� - �° ' � ,� �`2 � � <,�o � � �`;� � i � �y �, � �-,��.�,�,,� ` `,, _ 4 -� ;� � `,, � ° j � � 0 � ---,�-� I � ..��'� � � � �., � w � r- /�-�� f j A � � _ r ; `, '_ . ! �� S o ; ° �_ � \. 'i �.. ; _,,,�� z � o , � �} - - '�x-� ��„�s' ; ;� �v '� � ? j` � �� °� Adults Speaking English "less than Very �ll/e1!" p + : f�' � : �;''' a 1,000 - S,OOD � �� ' - -__ -� �� _ �. • 5,000 - 10.00fl � -- � '� o �� 1 Q,000 - 20,Ofl0 � 2�.�0'� - 4�J,Qfl� Source: 201 i American Commu�ity Survey 5 Year Estinrates Figure 2- 38 Adults Speaking English "Less than Very Well" August 2015 Asheville �, � � _.;r ! � _ �. ,.�� Percent Below Pvwerty Threshold � - ia°� 1i0 - 15% � 15 - 20% � 20 - 25% - 25-31%a Wiilstoii-SalenS Greens6oro Durliam Burlington ' Hickory Hic�h Point I Cary Concord ! Gastonia _ � / Fayettev i l l e Charlotte,,,�� Y` � _a- __ Source: 2PI4 American Cammurrtty Survey 5 Yea� Estimetes �� G� � '`N ...:�y ��'` 1' Rocky Mount' "� r �� Greenville � �� _. � _: `> Goldsboro "` _ �,. _ New�Bern �:�' � _,,�� Jacksonville k�R� ) y�Y Figure 2- 39 Percent of Population Uelow Poverty Th�-eshoVds by County Figure 2- 40 shows that median household income in North Carolina has steadily increased from 1990 to 2012 with some fluctuations that mirror national economic trends. Census-estimated median household income in North Carolina adjusted to 2012 dollars (Figure 2- 41) has been relatively constant over the last two decades.113 113 US Census. Estimated Household Income 1984 — 2012. https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/statemedian/ i3gtan r N COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � The population pyramid of North Carolina (Figure 2- 42) shows the percent of the population over 65 will increase substantially in coming years given the large proportion of middle-aged residents in North Carolina. Older adults are less likely to drive in their later years and stand to benefit from increased mobility options provided by intercity passenger rail. August 2015 2-67 50,000 40,000 30,000 � . . , .. �. �� oi0 �'l' �R �<° oi'b 00 O'l' O�` Oc° O�b 'y0 'y'1' ,y� ,y� ,y�i �� ,y�i ,ti0 ,ti0 ,LO ,LO ,ti0 ,LO ,ti0 Figure 2- 40 Median Household Income 1990 - 2012 50,000 I - 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 � , �° ati �,°` a`O a�' o° oti o°` o`O o`� ti° titi ti� ti� ti� ti� ti� tio ,yo ,�o ,yo ,yo ,yo tio Figure 2- 41 Adjusted Median Household Income 1990 - 2012 (2012 dollars) August2015 . 35 SL - 84 75 - 7� 70-74 65-69 GO-64 55 - 59 50-s4 v �l5 - 49 e�o `Z 4l7 - 44 3,-39 3C;-34 25 - 2� 20-24 I5-19 10- 1� COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN � Male ■ Female , Er�. � c��;. „ r:. . < � � Paparlation � o) Figure 2- 42 Population Pyramid showing Age and Gender for North Carolina's Population in 2012 2.2.1.2 Economics Employment trends and projections for economic sectors in North Carolina as well as analysis of economic conditions in North Carolina between 2013 and 2014 are addressed in the next sections. 2.2.1.2.1 Employment by Sector A comparison of employment by sector for North Carolina and the nation is provided in Table 2- 19. North Carolina has highei- employment in industries that potentially use rail such as construction, manufacturing, trade/ transportation/ utilities and leisure and hospitality. The only potential rail- dependent industry where North Carolina is below the national percentage is mining and logging. f��:f:3 Table 2- 19 NC and US Industry Sector Comparison� �`� INDUSTRY SECTOR PERCENT OF TOTAL EMPLOYMENT NC % US % I Minin and Lo in 0.1% 0.6% Construction 4.4% 3.9% Manufacturin 10.8% 8.2% Trade, Trans ortation, and Utilities 18.6% 17.5% Information 1.7% 1.8% Financial Activities 5.1% 5.4% Professional & Business Services 13.7% 12.3% Education & Health Services 13.9% 14.0% Leisure & Hos itali 10.5% 9.5% Other Services 3.7% 4.2% Government 17.5% 15% Figure 2- 43 shows trends in North Carolina's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by industry sector. Manufacturing continues to be the top industry by GDP. Trends in other potential rail-dependent industries include modest increases in construction and agriculture after the economic recession. Mining output is relatively stable over the last decade. It should be noted that certain industries are captured by more than one of these sectors. For instance, agriculture would be reflected in the agriculture sector for commodities grown, manufacturing for any food processing, manufacturing, and trade. Figure 2- 46 includes another way to look at industries' link to the economy through the number of jobs. 114 Bureau of Labor Statistics. North Carolina Economy at a Glance. January 2014. Accessed March 31, 2014. http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.nc.htm COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN � 120000 I i00000 ,�, 80000 - a 0 d ve0000 - E 0 0 0 � n0000 20000 � � a 0 - — 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 200fi 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Year � Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting � Mimng — uc�rc�es — Construc[ion � Manufacmring � Wholesaletrade � Retail trade � Transportation and warehousing � Information Finance, insurance, real estate, rental, and leasing Professional and business services Educational services, health care, and sotial assistance Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, and food services Other services, ezcept government Government Figure 2- 43 Trends in North Carolina's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Looking at the state's metropolitan areas demonstrates that each region has one or more industries that are substantially higher than the state average. Charlotte and the Ti�iangle lead the state in Professional and Business Services. The Triad, the Triangle, and Asheville al] have large Education and Health Services employment percentages. Asheville and Wilmington's thriving tourism industries explain their region's larger percentages in the Leisure and Hospitaliry sectors. Other industry sector concentrations include Government in Fayetteville due to Fort Bragg, Financial Activities in Charlotte due to the banking industry, and Manufacturing in the Triad due to its historic manufacturing industries of furniture, tobacco, and textiles among other manufactured goods.11s A notable change in the state's employment over the past two decades is the transition from manufacturing employment to service and professional �is Bureau of Labor Statistics. Economy at a Glance for select NC Metropolitan Areas. http: //www.bls.gov/eag/eag. nc.htm August 2015 2-69 industries. In 1990, North Carolina was the most manufacturing-intensive state, with this sector employing 26 percent of all workers. North Carolina currently ranks 12th in the country for manufacturing employinent, with 10.8 percent of the state's workers employed in manufacturing.11b Manufacturing remains important to North Carolina's economy, constituting 20 percent of the state's Gross Domestic Product.11' Figure 2- 44 shows employment trends in North Carolina over the last decade.118 Manufacturing employment continued declining until leveling off around 2010. Several sectors were negatively impacted during the economic recession, particularly Construction; Professional and Business Services; and Trade, Transportation and Utilities sectors. Of these sectors, the Professional and Business Services sectoi- has seen the most growth since 2009 and has surpassed pre-recession employment levels. Most of the sectors appear to have either surpassed or have almost returned to pre-recession levels except for Manufacturing and Construction. Manufacturing is less apt to fully recover due to outsourcing and manufacturing trends that favor high-skill, capital-intensive manufacturing.11� Construction will likely continue to improve at a slow rate as the state's economy continues recovering. lib National Association of Manufacturers. Manufacturing Employment by State. Accessed April 10, 2014. http://www.nam.org/�/media/B8256BOODElE48BAADC4A24166BF8B67/MFG_employment_NO V2013.pdf 117 North Carolina Economic Development Board. North Carolina Jobs Plan. December 2013. Accessed April 9, 2014. http://www.nccommerce.com/Portals/0/Documents/AboutOurDepartment/BoardsCommissions/ NC%20Jobs%20Plan°/n20Report_Final.pdf "s Bureau of Labor Statistics. Economy at a Glance employment data from 2004-2013. http: //www.Uls.gov/eag/eag.nc.htm "' Wells Fargo Securities. North Carolina Economic Outlook: April 2014. Apri13, 2014. Accessed April 9, 2014. 900,000 aoo,000 �oo,000 600,000 soo,000 400,000 300,000 zoo,000 ioo,000 COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN � 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Year —Trade, Transportation, Utilities —Education & Health Services —Construction Information —Government Manufacturing —Professional & Business Services —Leisure & Hospitality Financial Activities �Other Services Mining and Logging r�giu-e 2- 44- North Carotona �►npioyment T►•ends by Industry (2004-2013) Despite years of manufacturing job losses, North Carolina is beginning to see modest manufacturing growth. More than 40 new manufacturing facilities were announced during 2013. Many of the announcements were for western North Carolina. Manufacturing still employs 18.4 percent of all workers in this region despite losses to furniture and textiles in recent years. While the high-skill and capital-intensive jobs are not a substitute for jobs lost, they are still important for maintaining the region's manufacturing economic base. North Cai-olina's future manufacturing growth will likely continue to be in high-skill, capital- intensive industries such as chemicals and polymers, pharmaceuticals, aviation equipment, computers and electronics, and industrial machinery.lzo Other potential rail-dependent industries are seeing recoveries as well. Construction employment is beginning to rise due to increased commercial and 1z� Wells Fargo Securities. North Carolina Economic Outloolc Apri12014. April 3, 2014. Accessed April 9, 2014. August 2015 2-70 residential building activities. The majority of new construction is concentrated in Charlotte and the Triangle where there has been recent growth in multi- family housing and to a lesser extei�t, single-family homes. The Greensboro and Winston-Salem regions are challenged with past manufacturing losses and have not returned to post recession employment levels. As the overall economic climate continues to recover in North Carolina, growth will continue to spill over to residents' discretionary income and boost employment in the Trade, Transportation and Utilities and the Leisure and Hospitality sectors.lzl Figure 2- 45 shows the projected economic trends until 2040. Z,zoo,aoo Z,00q000 � aoo,000 � > 0 � 600,000 a � 400,000 zoo,000 0 2013 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Years —Transp., Trade, & Utilities —Government —Educational & Health Svcs —Professional & Business Svcs �Manufacturing —Leisure & Hospitality - FinancialAdivities —Construction —OtherServices clnformation Natural Resources & Mining Figure 2- 45 North Carolina Employment Projections by Industry (2015-2040) 11' Wells Fargo Securities. North Carolina Economic Outlook: April 2014. Apri13, 2014. Accessed April 9, 2014. COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�P�J 2.2.1.2.2 Geographic Distribution of Rail-Dependent Sectors Manufacturing is a major generator of rail freight. As Figure 2- 46 shows, manufacturing employers are located throughout the state, with the greatest concentrations in Hickory, Charlotte, the Triad and the Triangle. Manufacturers are responsible for generating the majority of commodities within and from North Carolina. The top commodities by value produced in North Carolina include machinery, tobacco, textiles, pharmaceuticals, electronics, gasoline, and plastics/rubber.12z Additionally, manufactured foodstuffs, nonmetal mineral products, and wood p►•oducts are top manufacturing commodities shipped within or from North Carolina by weight. Freight rail rypically ships a nuinber of these commodities or their product inputs, particularly machinery, chemicals, and minerals.iz3 The Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting sector and Mining and Quarrying sector are othei- industries that utilize rai1.124 The map of Agriculture, Manufacturing, and Mining jobs in Figure 2- 46 shows a concentration of employers in the eastern part of the state where logging, hog farming, chickens, fishing and crop production are present. Several of the top commodities shipped to, within, or from North Carolina by weight include agricultural products such as timber, wood pellets, soybeans, cereal grains, animal feed and meat and seafood.1zS Freight rail typically transports bulk agricultural products such as grains and lumber as well as meats, prepared food, and other farm products.126 Figure 2- 46 shows the concentration of mining and quarrying employers in North Carolina. Gravel is the top commodity shipped within North Carolina by weight. Several mining operations are located on rail lines. lzz NCDOT Rail Division Presentation to State Rail Plain Technical Advisory Committee. April 17, 2014. Data from Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Freight Data and Statistics. lz3 Federal Railroad Administration. Freight Rail Background. March 1, 2012. http://www.fra.dot.gov/eLiU/Details/L03011 124 National Cooperative Freight Research Program. Freight Trip Generation and Land Use Report. Table 9- NAICS Codes for freight-related sectors. 2012. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/ncfrp/ncfrp_rpt_019.pdf izs NCDOT Rai] Division Presentation to State Rail Plain Technical Advisory Committee. April 17, 2014. Data from Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Freight Data and Statistics. 1z�Union Pacific Railroad. Commodities Shipped website. Accessed April 11, 2014. https://www.uprr.com/customers/businessgroups.htm August 2015 2-71 The energy market is one of the shifts underway that will directly affect the current petrochemical and petroleum resource / production / processing alignment. Crude oil by rail is oi�ly one dimension of the change. The emergence of Quebec and Louisiana as trading partners with North Carolina is due to the major shifts underway in crude oil and natural gas markets. The well-documented, long-term supply sources are now coming online at stable to increasing product prices. Reduced energy costs related to more domestically- produced energy are anticipated to help drive growth in manufacturing in NC. ��. �;::¢:_. ' Employer >25 Minir�g Jobs Employer >10 Agriculture Jobs Employ✓er �25 Manufacturi�ng Jobs Source: US Cens[es, 20ii Longitud7nal Employer-Nousehold Dynamres data displayrng NA1GS lndustry 31-33: Manufacturirrg Figure 2 - 46 Employers in North Carolina (Manufacturing, Agriculture, and Mining) CCih'?P7CHENSIVE 5Ti4TE RAIL f�L�=.4�� North Carolina is home to a niche chemicals industry, principally manufacturing packaging film converters and rigid packaging. Other products include synthetic fibers. Soine of the plastics manufacturing is located in Asheville at Printpack, which manufactures rigid plastics packaging; CMI Plastics at Ayden which manufactures plastics for consumer products; Arclin in Moncure which inanufactures building and construction plastic products, agriculture products and floor surfaces. These are some of the many plastics manufacturers in North Carolina, and each of them has a good rail connection. August 2015 2-72 For intermodal container traffic, California and Illinois are the two most significant trading partners127 for North Carolina by volume and value. Each represents significant rail network connections. We also see the growth in importance for North Baltimore, Maryland; Columbus, Ohio; Nashville, Tennessee; Memphis, Tennessee; and Atlanta, Georgia that are cities with strategic rail facilities and network connections. The needs and opportunities in freight rail arise from the supply chain focus associated with goods movement. The infi-astructure conditions affect how much and how fast. The freight supply chain necessitates the State monitor the effectiveness of Origin - Destination pairs, both railroad and industry perspectives, by velocity, timeliness and efficiency. Outbound rail freight movements are important to distinguish whether the move is ultimately to ports or industrial sites. The distinction helps to develop closer ties to attraction and retention for industrial companies in the State. Rail offers a mix of volume, speed and value for ti�ansporting goods long distances across networks with a well-defined opei•ational history. Many of the raw materials required to produce energy, supply food, and construction rely on rail for at least one step of the resource to consumption production cycle. North Carolina is in a position to verify potential changes in freight flows with the Class I, regional and short line railroads, as well as potential adaptive strategies for handling the volumes. Chemicals constitute an important share of non-container freight, especially when measured by value (accounting for approximately 10 percent of the total value). North Carolina plays an important role in chemical supply chains as a consumer of chemical feedstocks for manufacturing inputs (e.g., plastics, pacicaging and fertilizer). North Carolina can also explore opportunities for expanding high-value chemicals manufacturing. The overall energy market contributes significantly to the shifts in petrochemical and petroleum resource / production / processing. Crude oil by rail is has received substantial attention but is only one dimension. 12� Includes through-traffic COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�CJ 2.2.2 Freight Trends Existing freight flows, inclusive of trucks, were researched via the Freight Analysis Framework (FAF); this is discussed in Section 2.2.2.1. Following on from this is a discussion in the Sections 2.2.2.2 and 2.2.2.3 on the overall rail freight trends with respect to North Carolina as researched by IHS Global Insight for the project team. The time period of year 2011 to year 2040 was examined. Based on the trend analysis, some emerging markets are also noted. The rail freight ti•end analysis was divided into intermodal flows (containers) and non-intermodal flows (carloads) since these two segments are served by distinct facilities and markets. Within these segments, rail traffic flows traveling through or across North Carolina (through), into NC (inbound), out of NC (outbound), and within NC (local) are distinguished. 2.2.2.1 Existing Freight Flows A review of Freight Analysis Framework data compiled by the Federal Highway Administration and the 10-year Waybill sample provided by the Surface Transportation Board shows general freight movement trends for North Carolina. The volume and types of commodities originating and terminating in North Carolina are presented below. August 2015 2-73 Origina�ed in NC i4.4 million tons/204,20Q carloads Tert�minat�ed �r� NC 47.4 million tons/591,2�Q earloads Through volumes averaged 38 million tons (615,000 carloads) over last IOyears. Source: Association ofAmerican Railroads, 2012. Figw�e 2- 47 ST13 WayUill Swnmary - Commodities Carried by Rail Originating and Ter�ninating in NC (2012) Figure 2- 2 presented approximate volumes on each corridor of the network, and Figure 2- 43 presented trends in North Carolina's Gross Domestic Product. Figure 2- 48 through Figure 2- 51 pi-esent North Carolina's top trading partners (inclusive of all modes). A quick review of trading partner data by weight (most likely inclusive of rail-served commodities) shows that North Carolina's top trading partners for goods oi-iginating in the state ai-e in the southeast, though Pennsylvania and Texas are also high on the list. It should be noted that the highest volumes remain within the state when considering all modes. For trade to North Carolina, top partners, besides intrastate commei-ce, also include nearby states. Evaluating trading partners by weight shipped is an important metric since trade by weight can be translated into truckloads and used to identify corridors where truck-to-rail diversion might be studied to relieve highway congestion. COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�C�J A review of trading partners by value still shows the southeastern state dominance. But, additional states included are Texas, California, and some Midwest and Northeast states. As noted previously in Chapter 1 and Section 2.1, in addition to the tonnage originating or terminating in North Carolina, North Carolina's network has also suppoi•ted approximately 38 million tons (615,000 carloads) of through traffic, primarily on the north-south Norfolk Southern Crescent Corridor and CSXT's A Line. Generally, lower volume east-west Class I branch lines and short lines help connect NC industries to the primary north-south Class I network. These branch lines-to-Class I-connections provide important national and international economic and transportation linkages for industries located in rural and small urban areas. The balance of Section 2.2.2 describes freight trends in North Carolina and includes figures that compare existing and projected flows (Figures 2- 61 through 2- 63). August 2015 2-74 rigure �- 4u rop � raair�g t�artners - ra•�ae tro�n tvL ny we�gnt _ _� : _ �_ ` �� .,.,- J�. ' _ �, ,o. .,,. ... , , . ., "'�.`_ )� - - -_ .,... � � ftt I�. .. -- - � ��;` 1�.. ..., .,.- ..�.. . J `=J'i'• _ - ~ �' 'S: . .. � . ` ' '��., : �.� .... � � � {�� .- . � ��`'.. . , . v 4 : � J�t�' , . taae�nrmnc�a�i�� •^� `1, "�,� %� _ NJeN�+��ntl�euwmdiaas(✓evF]011l — � <r�.M1'earx¢iil � iG' S.-18 A ' � �_y'1� I_ C:y� _9Sa5 . ` � _- J C°._w _ - � C z+ 9'_ z" �' T� -k., , - i Figure 2- 49 Top Trading Partners - Trade to NC Uy Weight August2015 ;_L:��i��;`2�_@ pp��..��,o��P� .t..tlta.�..f_';�;t9L �'L,r'�,q�� i�ugure �- 5u rop ► rac�n�g ra�-t►ae�s -► raue tron� n�� y vaiue - _ �� . I a A J :-A �{� �� i —� ✓, .,,...., , , ; �e� ..... . .., - ,�M ,. � ,..._. .-r.r .... _ '� ; � .,.. .. . ,... �J'i-. = jI' FdFS,�'V . ., ..,.,..�, .,.,.. '��r ., , �... . . •��`°J�� ; � ..... ^�,, � p, . - \ r�dE �.o ra�r�n carnl:ina� �`��1�� ' • > > . � mill�onU'SWtWr,�IV.ai:lllil / +�rslre_a�zni�l �1n12.v.@i 4/ I JS �._J I 699 - _.5FF ` � � ��:Fti5�1s.S3 �' � -- - CI ieooa �.�.� � � � -�s - r� e�: ' n w. . Figure 2- 51 Top Trading Partners - Trade to NC by Value 2-75 Currently there is a strong base in North Carolina for plastics and rigid packaging manufacturing. Due to natural gas developments in Marcellus shale, especially in very active area at the southern tip of the area closest to West Virginia and developments in Utica markets, North Carolina will enjoy benefits of cheaper natural gas in close proximity. This will help fuel up the development in chemical manufactui-ing with the low cost of opei-ating facilities and nearby supplies, sometimes displaced fi•om newly producing areas. Similarly, across the United States scrap metal exports via West Coast ports to Asia (e.g., China, Japan and South Koi-ea) are increasing. A number of factors contribute to an increasing use of re-engineered steel from energy, emissions and sustainability considerations to shortening the production and supply chain schedules. Nucor is based in North Carolina with several plant sites and operations. There is a potential to follow the manufacturing trend with more direct scrap steel exports as Asian manufacturing continues to move south and west to Indonesia and [ndia, creating more Suez Canal traffic over cross-Pacific routes. NCDOT is in a position, as are many of their state peers, to align the public and private sector response to freight transportation growth and changes. Higher volume corridors concentrate a focus on freight and passenger joint operations. Lower volume corridors may raise a state of good repair focus due to the balancing of revenue, cost and rate of return. Overall, a corridor prioritization approach with an allowance for adaptability to change may be the most effective means to balance the analysis of traffic and rail served freight movements. The intermodal market is growing faster than GDP in the United States. Historical bulk products, such as corn and soybeans, are moving to intermodal containers adding to the containers used to ship manufactured goods and products consumed by the growing population. Figure Z- 52 shows California and Illinois by volume and it is also borne out in value as well. Port facilities and rail networks across North America are important for North Carolina's inbound and outbound freight movements. Through traffic depicts the importance of Chicago, North Baltimore, and Columbus. COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN _ '-�=.- Figure 2- 52 NC Outbound and Inbound Flows across the US August 2015 2-76 The following figure (Figure 2- 53) displays the outbound rail tonnage from North Carolina in 2011. �o�rth Carolina Outbound Rail 2011 Tons < i o�,aoro - 100.000 - 250.000 — z�o,000 - soo,oaa — soo,00n -1,000,000 > i,aoo,oaQ Figure 2- 53 Outbound Rail Flows from North Carolina, 2011 2.2.2.2 Rail Freight: Non-Intermoda/ Flows versus Intermodal Flows Overall, non-container freight flows are expected to increase in North Carolina from 84.462 million tons in 2011 to 105.327 million tons in 2040 (Figure 2- 54) or on average 0.8 percent per year with the dollar value increasing at a faster rate of 1.8 percent per year (Table 2- 20). Intermodal rail flows are expected to grow from 6.138 million tons in 2011 to 10.549 million tons in 2040 (Figure 2- 56) - an average rate of 1.9 percent per year which closely matches the growth in value of 2.1 percent per year (Table 2- 21). Inbound traffic makes up the largest share of rail freight movement within North Carolina, accounting for almost two-thirds of non-container tonnage (Figure 2- 54). However, outbound traffic is expected to grow much faster than inbound non-container traffic, and only slightly faster than container inbound COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL f�L�.V�9 traffic over the next twenty-nine years. Outbound tonnage will grow by 2.4 percent per year between 2011 and 2040 (total value will grow by 2.2 percent); while inbound tonnage remains relatively flat (but the value climbs at approximately 1.7 percent annually). Container outbound tons will grow fastei• than inbound tons, especially in terms of value at 2.5 percent compared to 2.2 percent for inbound value, as shown in Table 2- 21. This is due to significant amounts of heavy-weight coal moved in 2011, which is forecasted to decline significantly by 2040. Coal traffic is expected to decline in part because of emissioi�s constraints on power plants iinpacting CSXT's route over the North Carolina mountains and NS routes; hence, this is partly why they are moving to capture more intermodal business. Reduction in coal shipments passing through and terminating in North Carolina provides network capacity to accommodate growth in other commodities. Through traffic makes up about one-third of non-container traffic, both in terms of tons and value (Table 2- 20), and just under 50 percent of container traffic (Table 2- 21). Through traffic will grow at about 1.7 percent both in terms of tons and value for container and non-container traffic. Most of the container traffic is north-south or south-north in North Carolina and that will continue with future infrastructure developinents such as the Crescent Corridor and the National Gateway Corridor. Development of intermodal traffic in North Carolina will likely intensify with the development of these two corridors. The Crescent Corridor is more than a$2.5 billion rail infrastructure project that spans 11 states (Figure 2- 58) and was proposed by NS in 2007, as a means of reducing truck traffic on I-81. In its initial stages NS had to build intermodal terminals along the corridor so that it could handle increases in intermodal traffic. Charlotte Regional Intermodal Facility was built in 2014, and it is capable of handling 200,000 lifts per year. Similarly, the National Gateway Corridor (Figure 2- 59) on CSXT's networlt is an $850 million project that will enable the use of double-stack trains to connect Mid-Atlantic ports, including, but not limited to, the Port of Wilmington with Midwestern markets. It will also reduce transit times for freight coming to NC fi-om the West Coast via Chicago. CSXT is also planning to expand their intermodal terminal in Charlotte to accommodate 246,000 lifts per year. August 2015 2-77 120,000 � c 0 a 100,000 � N = 8��0�� m 60,000 - - - - - - 3 a 40,000 - - - - - N 3 �° 20,000 , -. _ - l;-i I-;, ,- � _ �.� �� 2011 2012 2014 I 2015 2020 2025 I 2030 I 2035 I 2040 Local 1 2,391 I 2,339 I 2,554 I 2,744 3,115 3,224 I 3,371 I 3,568 3,912 i Through I 23,317 I 22,625 I 24,120 I 25,006 I 26,575 II 26,907 27,484 I 28,510 I 30,306 Inbound I 51,208 48,060 51,273 52,354 53,413 51,939 I 52,522 53,872 56,087 ■ Outbound 7,546 I 7,514 I 8,172 I 8,681 I 10,196 11,304 I 12,196 I 13,489 I 15,022 Forecast Years Figure 2- 54 North Carolina Rail Flows by Weight 70,000 � 60,000 0 �� so,000 � ; 40,000 � � 30,000 - - � o zo,000 .- - - - - � 10,000 - - - - u - I 2011 2012 2014 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 ■ Loca� 1,016 999 1,060 1,107 1,300 I 1,395 1,435 1,481 1,558 ■Through 12,189 12,391 I 13,220I 13,888 I 16,074 I 17,547 18,253 I 19,120 20,642 Inbound 16,744 17,591 19,115 19,911 23,226 I 25,317 25,810 25,909 27,006 ■ Outbound I 4,923 4,911 I 5,270 I 5,535 I 6,556 I 7,305 7,757 8,350 9,219 Forecast Years Figure 2- 55 North Carolina Rail Flows by Value August2015 COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN _��. TaUle 2- 20 Summary of North Carolina Rail Flows North Carolina Traffic Totals for 2011 THOUSAND THOUSAND % MILLION TONS % TONS UNITS UNITS USD °�a VALUE Loca] 2,391 2.8°/o I 27 I 3.2% I 1,016 I 2.9% Through 23,317 27.6% 240 I 28.3°/a 12,189 35.0°/a Inbound 51,208 60.6% 496 I 58.5% 16,744 48.0% Outbound I 7,546 8.9% I 85 I 10.0°/a I 4,923 14.1% Total 84,462 847 34,871 fiail Flow Forecast CAGR 2011- By Weight By Value 2040 Local 1.7% 1.5% Through 0.9% 1.8°/a [nbound 0.3% 1.7% Outbound 2.4% 2.2°/a Total 0.8% 1.8% CAGR - Compound Annual Growdl Rate Note: For Figures 2- 54 through 2- 57, 2013 data are unavailable. f4�►L:3 12,000 � 10,000 .� 3 � 8,000 � o N Y O m 6��0� LL � � 7 m o o � 4,000 E ` a c 2,000 I 2011 2012 I 2014 2015 I 2020 I 2025 � 2030 I 2035 2040 ■ Through 2,990 � 3,047 I 3,213 3,330 I 3,680 I 3,986 4,262 I 4,560 4,949 Inbound 1,408 I 1,460 � 1,525 1,580 � 1,750 I 1,908 2,053 2,218 2,449 ■ Outbound I 1,739 I 1,784 I 1,898 1,969 I 2,199 I 2,402 2,600 I 2,834 I 3,150 Forecast Years Figure 2- 56 North Carolina Intermodal Rail Flows by Weight 60,000 3 50,000 m > � _ 40,000 N 3 0 ° = 30,000 LL 'c � � �� `" zo,000 v = io,000 I 2011 2012 I 2014 I 2015 I 2020 I 2025 2030 I 2035 I 2040 ■Through 11,854 � 12,138 I 12,795 I 13,246 I 14,612 I 15,752 16,711 I 17,731 19,082 Inbound 6,776 I 6,993 I 7,322 I 7,596 I 8,448 9,298 I 10,138I 11,313 12,795 ■ Outbound I 8,818 I 9,013 I 9,697 I 10,051 I 11,496 I 12,825 I 14,256 16,046 I 18,222 Forecast Years Figure 2- 57 NortU Carolina Intermodal Rail Flows by Value August2015 COMPREHEN51'VE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN >`��=. TaUle 2- 21 Summary of North Carolina Intermodal Rail Flows Intermodal Traffic Totals for 2011 THOUSAND % TONS THOUSAND % MILLION % VALUE TONS UNITS UNITS USD Through 2,990 48.7�/0 252 50.6% 11,854 43.2% Inbound 1,408 22.9°/a 118 23.6% 6,776 24.7% Outbound 1,739 28.3°/u 128 25.7a/o 8,818 32.1�/u Total 6,138 498 27,448 Intermodal Forecast by Weight CAGR 2011- By Weight By Value 2040 Through 1.8% 1.7% Inbound 1.9% 2.2% Outbound 2.1�/0 2.5% Total 1.9% 2.1% CAGR - Compound Annual Growth Rate Note: For Figures 2- 54 through 2- 57, 2013 data are unavailable. As Norfolk Southern and CSX Transportation invest more money into the Crescent Corridor and National Gateway Corridor, respectively, with rehabilitation of rail tracics to achieve faster delivery times, improve capacity, and run more efficient trains, North Carolina will experience growth in intermodal traffic. Currently intermodal traffic is forecasted to grow at approximately 2 percent CAGR from 2011 to 2040. Fi�ure � - 5�3 Source: http://www.nscorp.com Nou•a`m�� S��athea-r�'s Crescerat �oE��oi• $t. w�- t � ' Chambersburg �-'� PiHs6urgh . E J`.. _ - � 5 �—T- CFI§ilotte � ;-Ci�'S�'f2�R�lEP�`��G�''IE ��aA'�� ;tiVL�'L�.4�� Roads ngton � National Gateway I�rojec[ F�isting Douhlestack Clearance Routes Source: Canstruction In Progress http://www.mdot.maryland.gov/sebi �NW Ohio Intertnodal Transler Hu6 n/d/a/National_Gateway_Map.jpg Figuy��e 'L -�9 CSX Transl�os•tatim��'s Natianal Gatevuay Cor�•ici�r 2.2.2.3 Emerging Freight Trends Over the course of the next 25 or more years, there are spatially-related and commodiry-related trends emerging for North Carolina. Spatially, changes in rail flows are p►•esented in Figure 2- 61, Figure 2- 62, and Figure 2- 63. Outbound rail flows are expected to grow on rail lines across the state with significantly more tonnage traversing the Greensboro to Charlotte corridor as well as most major corridors in the western part of the state (Figure 2- 61). Outbound intermodal flows are high and continue to increase along the two primary north-south routes in NC (Figure 2- 61). Inbound flows increase mainly from the Virginia border to Greensboro and between Greensboro and Raleigh; whereas inbound intermodal flows are expected to increase on the Greensboro to Charlotte corridor (Figure 2- 62). Througl� rail traffic is not August 2015 2-80 expected to change significantly in terms of routes; however, there is growth in flow between Asheville and Salisbury (Figure 2- 63). Overall there is an ex�ected increase in freight voluines originating in NC destined for locations outside of the State. In terms of commodity flows, Illinois, Louisiana and Canada grow in importance for plastics and chemical products shipped to support a growing plastics and packaging industry. North Carolina rail freight will experience increased rail flows to South Carolina and Georgia. Some of these flows, such as plastics, dyes, metal scrap and broken stone relate to increased production in North Carolina. With the exception of coal, most other inbound non-container traffic originates from nearby states in the Northeast and Southern states, while non-container outbound cargo follows a different pattern. More proximate States are still among the most important destinations, especially South Carolina, Georgia and Virginia, but other large international trade centers such as ports in Virginia and Midwest states receive substantial flows originating in North Carolina. The top outbound goods, respectively to these destinations, ai-e metal scrap, plastics, chemicals, dyes and wood products. One of the near-tei�m examples of commodity trends taking place is seen for natural gas and crude oil fracking in areas previously passed by due to the information available on formations, as well as technological and economic limitations. Shale formations are most likely present in several North Carolina formations, including the Deep River Basin, a 150-mile long fault in central North Carolina. The following figure (Figure 2- 60) depicts these potential formations in North Carolina. Legislation was passed in North Carolina in 2012 and 2014 to allow hydraulic fracturing. The potential exists for further investments in rail and pipelines to move North Carolina and Marcellus/Utica gas to markets in the Southeast. Significant investinents are underway now and in the near future centered on upgrading/ extending/ reversing interstate gas pipelines to allow north-to-south flows. Several extensions are targeting North Carolina in particular. The fracking development techniques utilized for these formations often brings a significant change to the existing land use, transportation and economic base for the development zones. North Dakota has COMPRCI-9P��S9l�P� ST�4TE RAIL PL�P�J seen a 17 percent growth in the state's population in the past 12 years largely attributable to the growth from the petroleum sector expansion. The equivalent growth, were it to be seen in North Carolina, would add 1.6 million residei�ts. Quickly comparing the two states in Table 2- 22, the significant natural gas developments will create different uses for existing infrastructure and create additional planning and investment requirements, particularly for freight transportation. T�IA�SI� �IFT BA�INS ��1��5"ill Irl �i�lJ? di�r t�l!.' h��Gft�l l,df0�llld S�IB�� k��951i1� fr��ir� th� Tf185SIC I?�fjfii� ;3�ii�IJt Lt�' Illllll�711 .k'e iCS B�Q, ii7iJ a prc�p�_,�k�l. �:�r �ina �s?��se�J. I�a�ii7 in �:�r,�n�e. , ,,_ 5m k.es Qavle hesln T��C �CP�? RIG�?I�B�1�If�'=��'��!'i.�, �5�� Ofj('�,if:f�� 311!I � stretr_.hes 1�� mil?s. It c�:�ntsinti diy gas. heliuin anrl � g��ck.ingf�m � �;•;�i ��35. r,l' 113tL1Y31 E;3`s IIC�UId3, 311J �)�SSIL�I'y' nll. �: � . �,;: I h� F�QRQ 54�6-BASIN Pa �k.i n � ■ F�.,rt of C:��: F.i��;�r 6asin lies �.in�_Lr L��. �v1�,nrF - _— :ill'.� �:�Idt�ldlll CGLfIItIES ■l,Gllt�ill}g�l'ifi df_i8l1�J��l1��J ��,�35�5'J�Ilsin Leerai_int,r :�� L�avie 6urf�m ■ Th� shale ful'n�8tiun c��n Y�efGul'id at deptlls' � I':ifl�,lfl� ffnllll,l�JU f��tt�l !�,C�JC� freX I_lr��'�et ��iiLlll��. -- � ■TI-��fonr!atior�hisarnaximi_irnthi�_kr�Fssc�f;ab��irt �' cs�J��t�atar�dai7�vera6athicknrssranrir�;y.fr��n� � � 1�o t�� 5ac� r�et. Figure 2 - 60 r � �� Ellarhe ��In YYariashoro suh-�sln � � .�' Lee a 6loore Hoke . Fad�son �ranvi I le –f� .� 'dlake � ,, Harn�:tt _� �nh�tan SamFsnn Cum6erHnd C14�16ERlANU-MARLB4R� BASIN ■ C,rologisrs C�elie•�;e �,is-ri�,h 51181� 1718'p' �i(ISt h8Y?. T��tV��11581'r �7I,,f7fleCl tl-�IS 4'edf. Sourc�: LI.S. �eologic_al �un�ey, Pa.C. Geolo�ical Surre; N r. G�aartmznt r,f Emw�iranmentand IJatural R��uurc� Triassic Rift Basins in North Carolina sL�rf graphic August 2015 2-81 COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL,AN >�� Table 2- 2"l Coinparison of North Caro�ina and No�-th Dakota STATE AREA 2013 HOUSING DENSITY (sq. mi.) POPULATION UNITS (po ./sq. mi. North Ca1-olina 48,618 9,850,000 4,400,000 202.6 North Dakota 69,000 723,000 339,000 10.5 Complementing the fi-eight trends is the overall railroad network performance as the traffic volumes are carried on the netwoi�k. The impact is equally important for Class I and Class III railroads. The 286,000 pound loaded railcar is the industry standard, though the industry is shifting to the 312,000 pound loaded railcar. It is important for industry to have shipments delivered the full trip reinforcing the importance of the "first and last mile" of freight movement. With the average Class III line length of ±45 miles, the service track speed is far less important than the ability to schedule frequent service for a fully loaded railcar. The Railway Association of North Carolina estimated the cost to bring their collective system up to industry standards was approximately $120 million for track and bridges. August 2015 2-82 ;�.�r - ,.,� � � � 4Yin�toKn-�Sa`I�in �,rei F [> � � — - _ - -. Hickory I High Poi�� ;-�ewlle ` Con ord _ ` '�' � G,as��`i nia- ' + - - C/_ i � " , �"_` � Cha o��,. North Carolina Outbound Roil �� 2011 tons 2035 tons < 1��,000 �<�00,000 100,000 - 250,000 � 1fl0,OD0 - 250,000 250,�00 - SOO,OOfl 250,000 - 500,000 500,0�0 - 1,ODQ,040 SOO,D00 - 1,a00,000 >1,ODO,Q00 � > 1,d00, Q00 .: � - ��-� ... � � . �.-,,;r � . � f �� f �' d'' �� '- . � ; 1. �A'ISY9��I1-.�d �C I17 � .. ... .'`A . �� 0�1 � I� i I � � Burlington �� I 1 � ,� +�� N ��! \� ��r�� yettevelle � �I , , �� - ,,: _ 4 � `l Wilm ni gt n I ^� N�srt�a �rolin� �utb�ound lrarermo�da� Rard ��o ' r, f .�'��i�� 'A t 2U11 tons 2f}3� tc�ns °� � �`� � � <iL,00i1 ��10.000 �yy+ilmin�rt n 10,d�� - 3�,000 �;1L1.Q0(l - 3(1,(ld� �,�` 30.000 - 1�]a,��00 30.�OQ - 1Q�,00� �f 1Qp.40�-20�.OQ� 1QQ.�04-2�4.�OQ �2�0,0�0 ��20�,�0� Figure 2- 61 North Carolina Outbodadrd R�ail Flows, Carload and lntermodal (top, bottom), 2011 and 2035 COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � August 2015 2-83 � `J -- � i . . �.�,..-. . y �� l� ' "�' �� / e I � � 1 _ 1 � wn to�n-Sale�m G'� ieen�boro � _, :�' ` _,' � ' �/� Durham RocNy N4ount -- � �Burlington ' � ` 9dickory High Paint � Raleigh 'j As eville Greenwile-__.l - �7 I Gary �, - - �� - �i Con�Cortl "�boro �— `�l : Gas1i nia5 �t. �+ � . � � ,r� i New �erh-- � �,�,,•. � U�_ , -- - - - = Fayettevall i -�; -. �--__,_ _ ._„-.-<".>' Charlotte � I.-� ? -- IVurth CarolFnaylnbound Rail 0 1 .�a�kso�y�u � , ,- - 2011 tans 2035 tons �,. ; � <SQ0,000 ^�<SOQd00 - ,` � - 4Yilr'�ii'ngtein soo,00a - i,000,caoo �soo,oao - i,000,000 - % � Z,aoo,aoo - s,oao,00a s,000,000 - �,000,000 � s,000,000 - ia,oao,000 s,000,000 - �o,000,000 >io,000,000 �>io,000,000 ,L:'�s+/ = -� .�`' ,;�%�: �. ,� .' i � ' � �-� ; "�T ` Winston=Salem �reenst ro �j I � '- Y '� �� - ' �� --�- i 'J �- �� Durha�m,�� RockyNiount - � ' , -- --��Burlington -�, �' \'�_._ 4 Yy � �-'-� HickorY.' � H�gliPdin �Raleigh. ' `"� , Rsheville ,� � �- ! � � � �� ,_C�Peenwille� � � , J � ` � y � ` Cary , i. - - ' � t , -'_ I Con csrd-: � oldsboro �� `' � _ --�- - �� , � �`Gastonia= � '� - J = � _.;;� I �.( _ . , , - lti .;Fayetteville ; �--- , I i NewtBer� � -- ---`>a-. Charlotte : I ` ; _ I j , Nrrrth Caral�na lnbound Intermodal Rail �_ _ ,._ � .�'a�kso�vm �� z011xons � `-'— 2035 torns 1 � �' < 25,000 " � �, � <25,Q00 �� Wilmingt n 25,OD0 - 75,000 —25,d00 - 75,Oa0 �,�, 75,000 - 150,Q00 75,fl00 - 15Q,QOd � 150,D0� - 250,004 �50,000 - ZSO,OdO >250, OL+O �>2 50, 000 Figure 2- 62 North Carolina Inbound Rail Flows, Carload and Intermodal (top, bottom), 2011 and 2035 August2015 COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � � COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � y �� 1 �� / . . ��,.. �. .,�('/'F l: ��u �l - � .. . y�' � ( i ' ' �- 1 y Wmston=Salem reensboro -I ``-:� ` ` ' � � -,' i � _ w. Nu. �� ._,�E r __I - I � I Durham__ , RocNy ount ,r' ' � -- -�-�Burlingtan J--' ti i � �^� ` ' ��. Hickaa�' ,^r Hi fiP irnt, � � - � `l_ i � �—` ��R+�lel'gh_. i t�As evill ' I �; .,Greenville� -_ _ '` { - ` Con ord I �-.n'' ea�� _ L,� J � � � � _ �j-�\ ,� �i ;� ` olds6oro _�._ _ 5 l��' \ Gaston�a� _. � O � - ' ,,\ � ,r� - `� i � ��. U��"`� � ��_ _ - _� �Fayetteville � _ ; � � � New Ber"h� -.� - _ _ _ . _ _ . : °¢ `;" CharPorie _ � � �� - lUorth Carolina 7�hrough Ftoi1 '� t�`� .�ackso�v�ue_ r- , E ,, , - — ZO11 tans 2035 tons �' `�i ,:'� � ,. <300,000 �<300,000 ;';- � � �J�Wilmingtan 3m0,000 - 1,OOO,CY(7� � 300,OQ� - 1,000,000 ^� 1,000,0�0 - 2,SOO,OOQ 1,(�00,000 6 2,500,000 � 2,5d0,d00- S,OOO,OOQ 2,500,000 - S,OOO,DO� >5,000,000 �5„000,600 �. < � �` y � ,+L`'.� - � � �� S_ � � � � � 1 "t � `� � �� _, I � � I � � � " 5 � � � Winston-Salem �reenst ro �j I �� '--(� � ' �� ' �'� _,- i � �j I_ � �� Durha�m, � Rocky ount _, ,� � � ' �`� __�Burlin ton -� �' ' � ''-� : � HickorY . � Hegli P in 9 �Ralelgh. � L� i , Rsheville � � l � � � �� ,_C��eenwille�_ L; - � � Cary _, i� 'J _ 7��- ; � - ' � t , --- '-Gon crrd-: y olds6oro �� , -- --s� l_ r � `Gastonia- _ -� I� ` , __,� I' � �� '.� , �feyettevill , � C� New�Ber�r--"" - -.. Charlotte _ i f� � �t;_. � [I I ..__ Norch Caroflna Thraugh fncermoda! Rai! �__ ' .� _ � ;� .�'a�kso�vm �_ r _ 2011 tons 2035 tons j ,�, �� .` l < �S,OOQ ! <15,000 t ��`J` yyilmingt n �s,000 - so,00� � �s,00a - so,000 r'` �— 50,OOd - 2(?O,OflO 50,000 - ZOD,QflO 1 zoo,oao - sso,oao zoo,o�o - �sa,000 > 650,Od0 ��650,d00 Figure 2- 63 North Carolina Through Rail Flows, Carload and Intermodal (top, bottom), 2011 and 2035 August 2015 2-85 C G9`�3 �� M2R� g-91E �� 9\! IE ��fi�l � 8�� V L��I_�. N� Chemicals constitute an important share of non-container freight, especially when measui•ed by value (accounting for approximately 10 percent of the total value). North Carolina plays an iinportant role in chemical supply chains as a consumer of chemical feedstocks as manufacturing inputs (e.g., plastics, packaging and fertilizer). North Carolina can also explore opportunities for expanding high-value chemicals manufacturing. Currently there is a strong base in North Carolina for plastics and rigid packaging manufacturing as can be seen in Figure 2- 64 showing where to and how many tons of chemical-related commodities are flowing. Due to natural gas developments in the Marcellus and Utica shale formations, as well as North Carolina's potential resources in the Deep River and Dan River Basins, North Carolina will enjoy benefits of cheaper natural gas in close proximity to existing and future state industries and consumers. This will help fuel the development in chemical manufacturing with the low cost of operating facilities as natural gas prices are currently low. Coal ash is expected to be transported by rail within or out of the state, but no specific site has been designated; as such, no improvements or projects have been identified to support the future traffic flows. August 2015 2-86 West Virginfa Kentucky Virginia . nr�a n . � . � . � � .— � . _ . . . . .. � Tennessre � � � � Cau(i�lford '-� � _ � � :s � � �6avitlsanU C�Iham ��e � - � ,� . � _ Rnntlolph I] � '� HeY'�ooC � - Johnsinn BenWoet 7 � o � � + e . - � � Mecklenburg � �, � � � - ' � Cart�rel �� New Hanover South Caeolina Georgia - � In6ound Rail (Tons) � � Cyulic_intermediates_cr_Dycs � ' Misc_InEu=t�ial_Organic_qhemicals . I Mfsc_Indus_Inorga.nk_Ghemicals �, Plastic Mater_pr_Synth_�Mas ! � Fe�rt�lrzers :,� r� i� �,�6 u, u��t,9�� 'a�➢� B��VL ��1_��J Wegt Yrgi nia Kentucky Virgirtia . ; 7ennessee ' � � ' .. � r1 Caunit�Ford '� ` � � � . . — I � ^'r� netlson I-J .7 , � � � ... _ : �y ' T �� . `� Ra�dalph ChaMam � , �I�J " " . . R .lohnaton � � � � � � � .. -- - - hkcklervbur9 � � : � 7 � � A South Carnlina Georgia p , i Figure 2- 64 Destinations of NC Chemical/Plastic-Related Inbound Rail Flows, 2011 and 2035 Inbound and outbound coal shipments will likely decline with the growth in natural gas energy production and decreasiizg coal usage from retiring and converted coal fired power plants. There is currently a drop forecast in total coal shipments on rail at 1.0 percent CAGR up to 2040 inclusive of the remaining coal plants. Shale formations are most likely present in North Carolina's Deep River Basin, a 150 mile long fault in central North Carolina. Legislation was passed in North Carolina in 2012 and 2014 to allow hydraulic fracturing. The potential exists for further investments in rail and pipelines to move North Carolina and MarcellLis/Utica gas to markets in the Southeast. A lot of activity now and in the near future will be centered on upgrading/extending/reversing interstate gas pipelines to allow north-to-south flows. Several extensions are targeting North Carolina in particular. .e � ,�Nv�v Hano�av 20401nbound Rail�Tons�) � � CycPic_IntermEdiaies_or_Dyes � Misc Industrial Organic Chemicals � Misc_Irvdus_Irwrgarvic_Chemi�rals � Plas[ie_Mater_ar SynN_Fihres � Fert�cee�� Scrap metal rail flows in North Carolina are increasing, due to an increased need for scrap metals to feed steel production. Nucor has its corporate office in Charlotte and plants in three other locations in North Carolina. Other locations with scrap metal concentrations in the state include Wilmington and Raleigh. Increasing demand for scrap metal is associated with auto manufacturing, principally in the Southeast and Midwest. Scrap exports to Asia will account for a smaller share of overall outbound flows. Metal scrap rail flows are forecast to grow at 5.5 percent CAGR from 2011 to 2040. Many of the recent investments in wood pellet capacity in the U.S. have occurred along the Atlantic coast, with Enviva and Fram Renewables expanding production in North Carolina, Georgia and Virginia. Wood pellet industry expansion is primarily driven by demand for biomass in Europe, as a means to find alternatives to coal. [n 2013, Europe imported about 3 million tons of wood August 2015 2-87 pellets, and by 2020 that number is expected to grow rapidly to 20 million tons. Wood pellet production levels are, however, subject to uncertainties such as raw material supply. Wood pellets for energy use are closely interlinked with otller industries whose outputs comes from sawmill and forestry production. For example, US wood pellet production is strongly led by the country's demand for timber to generate wood i-esiduals and biomass, which is subject to constructioi� industry activity. Enviva and International Wood Fuel are expanding wood pellet production terminal capacity at the ports of Wilmington and Morehead City. Wood pellet rail flows in North Carolina are expected to grow at 2.1 percent CAGR frorn 2011 to 2040 (Appendix, B). Auto manufacturing is currently growing in South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, and other southern states. According to the North Carolina Department of Commerce (NCDOC), NC continues to actively pursue opportunities with the automotive industry and related products. An increasing percentage of motor vehicles (by total value) are expected to be shipped into North Carolina between now and 2025 after which the percentage drops sharply off through year 2040 (Appendix, B). The role for intermodal terminals continues to grow as more products are shipped via container, including agricultural products and other materials previously shipped in bulk. Bulk products may be loaded and unloaded at customer facilities or with dedicated purpose built connections for transloading. Coal, petroleum, chemicals, plastics and pape►; pulp and paper products each fall into this category of freight products. Minerals and project cargoes, such as militai-y equipment and machinery, will be transported as well. Intermodal commodities can be difficult to tease apart; FAK, or Freight All Kinds is by far the largest category. FAK is a mix of commodities being shipped together. Often FAK shipments are intended for a particulai� retailer (eg. Lowe's, Wal-Mai-t). Beyond this general intermodal category, pharmaceuticals are the major outbound commodity by value, now and through 2040. Growth for inbound freight flows includes such commodities as necessary textile goods, missile or space vehicle parts, and liquor (See Appendix B for more detail). COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN 2.2.3 Passenger Rail Trends This section discusses the ovei-all passenger rail trends in North Carolina, as well as specific trends gleaned from data from the state-supported trains, the Piedmont and Carolinian, and other transportation related trends in North Carolina, such as transit i-idership and automobile driving trends. 2.2.3.1 North Carolina Passenger Rail Ridership Trends North Carolina has seen tremendous growth in the demand for passengei� rail. In the past 12 years, Amtrak boardings in North Carolina grew by 93 percent, from just over 500,000 boardings in 2001 to nearly 979,000 in 2013 (see Figure 2- 65). Charlotte has almost consistently been the busiest station during that timeframe, with the other large metropolitan areas of Raleigh, Greensboro, Cary and Durham rounding out the top five stations (Table 2- 23). 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 NC Rail Boardings, 2001-2013 0, � � � � � c�� t�� y�� c��h t�� t�� t�� c�� t��o t�� t�� t�� Note: Ridership includes ons and offs for 14 daily passenger trains in North Carolina. Mid-day Piedmont service added June 5, 2010. Source: NCDOT avd Amtrak Figure 2- 65 Total North Carolina Passenger Rail Boardings, 2001-2013 August 2015 2-88 Table 2-"L"3 Idot-th Carolina Rail Boardings by Station (2001-2013) Change,2001- FY2001 FY2013 2013 Burlin ton 12,524 25,452 103% Car 16,690 88,669 431% Charlotte 115,132 201,481 75% Durham 32,650 83,232 155% Fayetteville 28,072 53,590 91% Gastonia 2,544 1,741 -32% Greensboro 58,107 139,869 141% Hamlet 3,237 4,882 51% Hi h Point 14,444 40,302 179% Kanna olis 8,500 19,205 126% Lexin ton S ecial Sto 149 542 264% State Fair S ecial Sto 2,312 2,672 16% Ralei h 111,623 159,584 43% Rock Mount 39,696 52,631 33% Salisbur 18,973 31,539 66% Selma-Smithfield 6,810 13,222 94% Southern Pines 3,025 7,554 150% Wilson 31,951 52,692 65% Note: Nidership includes ons and otts tor 14 daily passenger trains in North Ca�rolina. Mid-day Piedmont service added June 5, 2010. Data Source: Amtrak and NCDOT The stations with the largest growth in ridership over the past 12 years consist of Cary, High Point, Durham, Southern Pines, Greensboro, and Kannapolis. All of these stations have had substantial renovations in the past 10 years. High Point and Cary were also at one time unstaffed stations, and are now full service stations (ticket agents, baggage check, etc.) since their renovations. These operating and service enhancements have contributed to the substantia] increase in patronage. It should also be noted that the recent improvements at Kannapolis and Cary have allowed some patrons to use these stations in lieu of Charlotte and Raleigh, both of which have experienced overcrowding and over or at-capacity parking lots in the past few years. 2.2.3.2 Piedmont and Carolinian Trends The stations with the highest usage (and most of the stations with the highest growth) are served by the two NCDOT supported trains, the Cc�rolinian and COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL GL�.rJ Piedmont. Ridership on the Carolinian is up 40 percent since 2005, outpacing growth in population and VMT. Piedmont ridership is up 280 percent since 2004. There are likely two factors that contributed to the higher percent i�idership increase for the Piedmont. NCDOT and Amtrak introduced a mid-day Piedmont train in 2010, which effectively increased available service by 50 percent in the corridor. Moreover, the average train travel time in the Charlotte to Raleigh (Piedmont) corridor has decreased in the past 10 years, making the Piedrnont train more competitive with automobile travel time. Figure 2- 66 shows the total annual ridership on the Piedmont and Carolinian over the past 10 years, which has increased from over 274,000 to almost 500,OOO.Iza � v tu � v y � � a. � a � � @ 5��,000 450,d0� 4�O,OQO 35�,Q00 3�Q,d0� 250,0[70 2�0,�)afl 150,�00 1(}0,000 50,000 0 Annual Ridership, Carolinian & Pied�a�t Trains FY04 FY�5 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Source: Amtrak an�1 NCDOT Note: Mid-day Piedmont service added June 5, 2010. ■ Piedmont ■ Ca►°olinian Figdu•e 2- 66 Aunua➢ Ridership, Cnr-olininn and Piedmont Trains, 2004-2013 1z� All historic ridership data from NCDOT and Amtrak. August 2015 2-89 The ridership trends for the Carolinian indicate that North Carolina plays a critical role in supporting this route. The Carolinian serves 24 stations and runs 704 iniles from Chai-lotte to New York City. Nearly half of the stations and route miles are within North Carolina, yet North Carolina stations make up at least one part of 18 of the top 25 station pairs for the Carolinian, both for ridership and revenue. Six of the top ten station pairs for ridership and eight of the top ten station pairs for revenue are from North Carolina to Washington, DC and points north. 2.2.3.3 Amtrak Thruway Bus Trends Amtrak offers Thruway Bus services between Wilson and Morehead Ciry (with stops in Greenville, New Bern, Havelock) and between Wilson and Wilmington (with stops in Goldsboro, Kinston, Jacksonville). Both of these buses connect in Wilson with Amtrak's Palmetto, which provides service between New York City and Savannah, GA. According to FY 2014 ridership data from Amtrak, both bus routes average approximately 430 monthly riders, with stops in Greenville and Jacksonville having the largest share. 2.2.3.4 Other Rail Trends While North Cai-olina does not have any commuter rail services, Charlotte is served by a light rail line that opened in 2006. The CATS Blue Line currently has 16,100 daily ridei•s,12y almost doubling ridership since opening, which is ahead of projections. And the 9.3-mile LYNX Blue Line Extensioi7 is to open for service in 2017.13u The Charlotte region is encouraging transit-oriented development via the 2030 Transit Corridor System Plan and the TransitArea Joint Development Principles and Policies Guidelines131 which can be models for future NC urban development. The Triangle region is the other area working toward light rail implementation. NCDOT had considered commuter rail as an alternative to highway re-construction for the I-440 Fortify project. Moreover, Triangle Transit received notice from the FTA in February 2014 to develop the Durham- Orange Corridor LRT plan; Triangle Transit has until 2016 to complete the EIS to 1z� American Public Transportation Association, Fourth Quarter 2013 Ridership Report. http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/Ridership/2013-q3-ridership-APTA.pdf 13o charmeck.org/city/charlotte/cats/planning/ble/Pages/default.aspx �31 charmeck.org/city/charlotte/cats/planning/Pages/LandUse.aspx CdMPo2�6-��SIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�CJ enter the FTAs full-funding grant agreement pipeline.t3z Related to this plan, the Wake-Durham commuter rail plans to use bus service to connect RDU aii-port to a nearby rail station until further deinand warrants a direct connection.133 2.2.3.5 Other Statewide Travel Trends Given the substantial growth in passenger rail ridership from 2001 to 2013 (93 percent), a further analysis was undertalcen to determine if the growth was due in part to population growth and mirrored other travel trends in the state. North Carolina's population has increased 20.1 percent during the same period (2001 to 2013), or less than one-foui�th of the growth seen by passenger rail. Population growth in the counties served by Amtrak grew at a slightly faster rate, reflecting a trend towards greater population growth and density within the Charlotte-Greensboro-Raleigh corridor. Therefore, passenger rail ridership growth is far outpacing growth in North Carolina's population. Next, the rail ridership trends were compared to trends in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and other vehicle use trends for the state. In the last 12 years, per capita VMT has decreased 4.3 percent. These North Carolina figures mirror a national trend, which shows that "peak driving" leveled off in the 1990's and began to decline prior to the recession of 2008-2010, and is showing no immediate sign of increasing, even with improving employment.13� The decline in per capita VMT also reflects a trend in changing driver behavior among young people, who are less likely to obtain their driver's license, and are more likely to use transit and other modes of transportation than previous generations. For example, in the last 12 year, North Carolina licensed drivers under the age of 25 have increased by 4.6 percent.13s This reflects a national 13z ourtransitfuture.com/projects/durham-orange ,33 Raleigh-Durham [nternational Airport Triangle Transit Rail Link to RDU. Accessed May 15, 2014. http://www.rdu.com/airportdev/ttraillink.html 13' See nationwide per capita VMT analysis from Doug Short, http://www.Uusinessinsider.com/population-adjusted-vehicle-miles-2012-11#i�czz2DLsSBIKO lis Federal Highway Administration, Highway Statistics Series Publications http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics.cfin August 2015 2-90 trend that Millennials are more likely to use transit, ride share, or walk/bike.136 137 While there is uncertainty if these downward trends in driving will continue, the figures are evidence that any growth in VMT will likely be at the rates seen in previous decades. iz,000 . ii,aoo � ii,600 v > F 11,400 d � 11,200 v � 11,000 � m 10,800 v � u � 10,600 0 a ¢ 1Q400 io,zoo lD,000 11,586 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Year Source: NCDOT and US Census Figure 2- 67 North Carolina per Capita Driving Trends, 2001-2013 It should be noted that the growth in North Carolina rail ridership is nearly identical to the growth in transit ridership across North Carolina. While statewide passenger rail ridership grew by 93 percent in the period from 2001 to 2013, North Carolina transit ridership grew by 95 percent during almost the 137 *How Millennials Move: The Car-less Trends. National Association of Realtors, August 2, 2012. http://www.realtor.org/articles/how-millennials-move-the-car-less-trends. Millennial Generation Desires Multi-Modal Transportation System. American Public Transportation Association, October 1, 2013. http://www.apta.com/mediacenter/pressreleases/2013/Pages/131001_Millennials.aspx COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL F�L�.V�9 same time period.��8 Transit and passenger rail are growing at a faster rate than driving and population in North Carolina. During this nearly identical time period, North Carolina's population only grew by 20 percent, and VMT grew by only 14 percent - meaning that per capita VMT actually decreased, as discussed above.139 Figure 2- 68 shows various transportation trends in North Carolina since 2001. Transit ridership and licensed drivers data shown is only to 2012, since 2013 data are not yet available. d � ❑ R � V C d u s. d a 100.0% 80.0% 60.0% �}�.�% 20.0% 0.0% -20.0% 93.3% 95.0% Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent changein changein changein changein changein changein NC licensed per capita NC VMT NC NC Rail NC transit drivers NC VMT 2001-2013 Population Boardings ridership, under 25 2001-2013 2001-2013 2001-2013 2001-2012 Y0, 2001- 2012 Source: NCDOT, US Census, Amtrak Figru•e 2- 68 Nortlr Carolina T��ansportation Trends, 2001-2013 13s AECOM analysis of North Carolina transit data from National Transit Database, http: //www.ntdprogram.gov/ ntdprogram/data.htm 13� AECOM analysis of data from the following sources: NC passenger rail ridership, Amtrak/NCDOT; NC transit ridership, National Transit Database; Vehicle Miles Traveled, NCDOT and US Census; NC licensed drivers, FHWA August 2015 2-91 North Carolina's tourism economy hit a record level of visitor spending in 2013. Of the overnight visitors, an estimated 30 percent were from North Carolina. The states with the next highest percei�tages of visitors were: South Carolina (8 percent), Florida (8 pei•cent), Virginia (7 percent) and Georgia (7 percent). Eighty percent of overnight visitors arrived by car, 11 percent by plane and 5 percent by rental car. Passenger rail has potential to increase the overnight visitor mode share given the majority of visitors come from North Carolina or surrounding states. Several communities along the proposed western North Carolina passenger rail service have also noted the seivice's potential to boost tourism in those communities.14° 2.2.4 Fuel Cost Trends Fuel cost and consumption trends in North Carolina, along with potential implications for NCDOT program revenues and on passenger and freight rail, are examined in this section. 2.2.4.1 Fuel Cost As shown in Figure 2- 69 fuel costs in North Carolina gradually increased between 2001 and 2007, spiked in 2008, then decreased during the economic recession. While decreased consumer demand lowered fuel costs at the beginning of the recession, costs have since exceeded pre-recession levels and have not varied as much over the past three years.14i The general trend of rising fuels costs is due to many factors including the declining value of the US dollar, declines in petroleum production, and concerns over peak oil and oil price speculation. Figure 2- 69 also shows North Carolina ridership and fuel consumption. iao NC Department of Commerce. 2013 Visitor and Trip Profile http://www.nccommerce.com/LinkClick.aspx?Fileticket=dkaK6ipfX8o%3 d&tabid=636&mid=4669 14�U.S. Department of Energy. Historical Gas Prices 1929-2011. August 20, 2012. Visited 18 February 2014. Available: https://wwwl.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/facts/2012_fotw741.htm1 1 0.9 0.8 � 0.7 �' 0.6 � N 0.5 � 0.4 L Z 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 COMPREHEN51'VE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN � lD I� 00 01 O �--I N M �' ul l0 I� 00 Ol O a--1 N M Ol Ql Ol Ol O O O O O O O O O O �--i � � � Ol Ol 01 01 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O .--I c-I c-I c-1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Rail Boardings Motor Fuel Consumption Fuel Prices Figure 2- 69 North Carolina Ridership, Motor Fuel Consumption, and Fuel Cost Trends14z 21.4.2 Fuel Consumption Trends in fuel consumption are shown in Figure 2- 69. The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) tracks fuel consumption data in the State Energy Data System (SEDS). The figure shows available information for the Transportation Sector in North Carolina between 1996 and 2011 (the most recent year available). Values in SEDS for Distillate Fuel Oil and Motor Gasoline were summed to create the chart. The trends demonstrate a steady increase in fuel consumption prior to 2008, and a general decline since that time. While motor fuel consumption projection data is not available from the EIA for North Carolina, the August 2012 "Financial Plan and Strategies" report prepared for the North Carolina Statewide Transportation Plan used national fuel consumption projections as a proxy. These projections show a decline in fuel l42 North Carolina Department of Transportation. Asphalt and Fuel Prices. Visited 18 February 2014. Available: https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/construction/Pages/Pavement-Construction- Prices.aspx?&&p_Date=20130201%2005%3a00%3a00&&PageFirstRow=1&&View={5961 DD43- OAEC-4136-69F5-3C24COD08A27} August 2015 2-92 consumption due to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, which require improved motor vehicle fuel efficiency.�43 2,2.4.3 Motor Fuel Tax The federal motor fuel tax is levied on every gallon of gasoline, diesel, and other special fuels, and is deposited into the Federal Highway Trust Fund (HTF). Current federal motor fuel tax rates are shown in Table 2- 24. Tlie tax rates on gasoline and diesel fuel have remained unchanged since 1993.144 In North Carolina the tax levied on each gallon of motor fuel (gasoline and diesel) is capped at 37.5 cents.l�s TaUle 2- 24 Tedea�al Motor Fuel Tax Rate �and Dis�ribution146 TYPE OF EXCISE TAX TAX RATE (CENTS) HIGHWAY MASS TRANSIT ACCOUNT ACCOUNT I Gasoline 18.3 er allon 84%, 16% Diesel � 24.3 er allon 84% 12% Gasohol 18.3 er allon 84% 16% Li uefied etroleum as 13.6 er allon 84% 16% Li uefied natural as 11.9 er allon 84% 16% M85 (from natural gas) 9.15 per gallon 84% 16% Compressed natural gas 48.54 per thousand cubic feet 80% 20% ��i NCDOT 2040 Plan from Policy to Projects, North Carolina Statewide Transportation Plan. "Financial Plan and Investment Strategies." Prepared by The PFM Group and Atkins. Visitecl: 8 Apri] 2014. Available: http://www.nedot.gov/download/performance/2040_financereport.pdf 14 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. "AASHTO Center for Excellence in Project Finance. Federal Motor Fuel Taxes." Visited: 8 April 2014. Available: http://www.transp ortati o n- fi nance.org/fundin�financing/funding/fe deral_fundi ng/motor_Fu el_taxes.aspx �`�s Foster, Mark L. "NCDOT Revenues Future Revenue Options." Presentation given to the North Carolina Board of Transportation Finance and Programming Committee. 7 August 2013. Visited: 8 April 2014. Available: http://www.letsgetmoving.org/images/uploads/pages/NJT-revenues-slides- for-Tri-MAP-081613.pdf 146 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. "AASHTO Center for Excellence in Project Finance. "Federal Motor Fuel Taxes." Visited: 8 April 2014. Available: http: //www.transportation- finance.org/fundin�financing/funding/federal_funding/motor_fuel_taxes.aspx COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�CJ 2.2.4.4 /mplications for Revenue Seventy percent of NCDOT's revenue (from Federal and State sources) is dependent on motor fuel consumption.147 Revenue from motor fuel taxes is expected to decrease. At the same time, the increased cost of fuel drives up the cost of construction (asphalt is a by-pi-oduct of crude oil), ineaning every dollar of revenue has less buying power.198 An unaudited report showed that in 2013- 2014, 9.6 percent of NCDOT appropriations were allocated to "Other Modes," including $171.3 Million to i'ai1.149 All modes of travel, including rail, would be impacted by revenue shortfalls. NCDOT is actively considering alternative sources of revenue. 21.4.5 Implications for Rail The implications of increased fuel costs and decreased revenue from motor fuel taxes on the demand for rail is complicated and is affected by many factors. Because freight rail is about four times more efficient than tractor-trailer trucking,�s�' a logical assumption is that increasing fuel costs and decreasing i•evenue for transportation projects will make movement of goods and people by rail increasingly popular. In fact, some fi-eight railroads have already seen companies shift from tractor-trailer trucking to rail as a result of fuel prices rising.lsl However, a study conducted by Norbridge, Inc. in March of 2009 found that, during the first half of 2008, when fuel costs drastically increased, domestic intermodal growth of rail only eqtiialed that of truck — and rail carload's market share declined. To find out why, Norbridge conducted a survey 147 Poster, Mark L. "NCDOT Revenues Future Revenue Options." Presentation given to the North Carolina Board of Transportation Finance and Programming Committee. 7 August 2013. Visited: 8 April 2014. Available: http://www.letsgetmoving.org/images/uploads/pages/NJT-revenues-slides- fo r-Tri-MAP-081613.p df 148 North Carolina Department of Transportation, Fiscal Research Division. "Q&A: North Carolina Motor Fuels Taxes." January 2013. �^� Foster, Marlc, Chief Financial Officer. North Carolina Department of Transportation Financial Update. 3 April 2014. Visited: 8 April 2014. Available: http://www.ncdot.gov/aUout/board/bot/ isoAssociation of American Railroads. "The Environmental Benefits of Moving Freight by Rail." June 2012. Visited: 11 March 2014. Available: https://www.aar.org/keyissues/Documents/Bacicground- Pap ers/The-E nvironmental-Benefits-o f-Rail.p df �S�New York Times. "Shippers May Raise Fuel Prices." Apri126, 2011. Visited: 18 February 2014. Available: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/business/27surcharge.html?pagewanted=all&_i =1& August 2015 2-93 of 40 major transportation buyers across bulk, industrial, and consumer products and found that there were non-price inhibitors, including service offerii�gs and supply chain issues.lsz While rising fuel costs have the potential to increase the use of rail for freight movement, there are non-price factors that will influence the extent of growth. In another analysis, Dr. Jean Paul Rodrigue and Dr. Claude Comtois of Hofstra University, concluded that rail ...is set to benefit substantially from highei- energy prices as it is the most energy efficient land transportation mode...The level of substitution for passengers and freight remains uncertain and will depend on the current market share and level of service they offer. In North America, passenger rail has limited potential while in Europe and Pacific Asia passenger rail already assume a significant market share. Foi- rail freight, North American freight distribution has an advantage since rail account for a dominant share of tons-km while this figure is less significant for other regions of the world, mainly due to the distances involved and the fi-agmentation of the system...Thus, growing energy prices are lilcely to affect long distance rail transportation differently depending on the geographical setting and the conditions of the existing system.ls3 Increasing fuel costs may have the most significant implications for passenger rail in the more congested areas of North Carolina, particularly the Piedmont. As North Carolina continues to experience rapid growth in the Piedmont region, congested highways and increasing fuel costs could lead more residents to use intercity passenger rail. This trend is especially likely since continued track �Sz NorUridge [ncorporated. "Study: The Impact of Higher Fuel Costs on Rail Carload and Intermodal Marketshare." Progressive Railroading. March 2009. Visited: 8 April 2014. Available: http://www.progressiverailroading.com/rail_industry_trends/article/Study-The-[mpact-of-Higher- Fuel-Costs-on-Rail-Carload-and-Intermodal-Marlcetshare--19844 is3 Rodrigue, Dr. Jean Paul and Dr. Claude Comtois. The Geography of TransportSystems, Third Edition. "Chapter 8: Transportation and Energy." ISBN# 978-0-415-82254-1. New York: Routledge. 2013. Visited: 9 April 2014. Available: https://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch8en/conc8en/ch8c2en.html COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL F�L�.��9 improvements will make travel times faster than driving between Raleigh and Charlotte.154 The main lesson that can be d►•awn from current trends and studies is that rising fuel costs provide an opportunity for rail to be used as an efficient alternative to other modes of transportation, but other factors including the level of service and location and availability of stations will need to be addressed. 2.2.5 Rail Congestion Trends There are a number of factors that drive freight movement and will shape the changes in rail volumes over time. Changes in port capacities, from draft of vessels served to the mix of intermodal and bulk traffic, will have implications for the rail service to and from North Carolina and across the east and Gulf coasts. One emerging factor is the shift for Asian freight movements to use the Suez Canal and Atlantic routes to the US and Canada rather than trans-Pacific routes. Two additional rail congestion trends are anticipated. The overall congestion on railroad networks may affect North Carolina. Both of the Class I i•ailroads continually examine their respective networks to adapt and improve capacity as freight movements grow and change in response to mat-ket conditions and trade flows, as demonstrated by the Crescent Corridor and National Gateway initiatives. Responding to these changes takes time, and may be further complicated by cost and complexity. The second source of potential congestion is a result of shared use with passenger services that require freight and passenger movements to be coordinated and separated temporally. As demand continues to grow for intercity and commuter rail services, there is the potential for more congestion along the freight rail network. The congestion may be complicated by the fact that many industrial customers served by railroads are located in cities and counties that also house their workforce, thLis shaping competing land use demands in the future. Section 2.1.4.2 presented On-Time Performance (OTP) data for both the Carolinian and Piedmont for each quarter between the fourth quarter of 2010 isa Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor. Frequently Asked Questions. February 2010. Visited: 11 March 2014. Available: http://www.sehsr.org/faq.html August 2015 2-94 and the first quarter of 2014. These services travel along the busiest freight corridors in North Carolina. The Carolinian travels along the CSXT A Line and then along the NCRR corridor betweei� Selma, Raleigh, Greensboro, and Charlotte, a portion of which is part of Norfolk Southern's Crescent Corridor (Greensboro to Charlotte). The Piedmont travels exclusively on the cori•idor that connects Raleigh, Greensboro, and Charlotte. Though this On-Time Performance data is gathered by Amtrak for passenger seivices, it can be used to help identify areas where conflicts between passenger and freight trains occur and result in delay. Though not exclusively a capacity issue, the conflicts can indicate potential congestion issues. Figures 2- 19, 2- 20, 2- 21 and Table 2 - 11 present average quarterly end point OTP data for state-supported and long- distance trains. This information is derived from quarterly reports provided by Amtrak to FRA in accordance with Section 207 of PRIIA. Table 2- 25 summarizes the causes of host railroad delays encountered by state-supported passenger services over the same 14 quarters described in Section 2.1.4.2. The table presents the number of times a host railroad-responsible delay occurred as a top 2 delay cause and tl�e average minutes of train delay per 10,000 train- miles. As noted in Section 2.1.4.2, On-Time Performance for both the Carolinian and Piedmont is below the industry standard of 80 percent. The Carolinian's performance has seen improvement over the past four years, while the Piedmont's on-time performance has decreased (see Figure 2- 19). The other long distance trains serving the state have also seen decreases in end-point OTP over the past four years (see Figure 2- 20). These decreases in end-point OTP may be due to recent increases in freight traffic, which is creating additiona] scheduling conflicts between the passenger and freight trains in the CSXT and NS corridors. COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN _��. Table 2- 25 Summary of Top Two Host Railroad-Responsible Delays for Passenger Sei-vices by Quarte�• (Q� �=�Y �Ofl 0 tFarougi� Q��1 O�Y �0'14) Carolinian Carolinian Piedmont (CSXT) (NS) (NS) Commuter Train Average Delay 0 0 0 Interference (CTI) Count 0 0 0 Signal Delays (DCS) Avera: Count Slow Order Delays Avera: (DSR) Count Debris (DBS) Avera; Count Freight Train Avera; Interference (FTI) Count Passenger Train Avera; Interference (PTI) 343 2 299 4 0 0 453 11 314 Count 11 Note: Average Delay measured as minutes per 10,000 train-miles 106 3 162 13 0 0 146 1 150 11 123 8 205 14 0 0 106 6 0 0 The data for the Carolinian indicates that most of the delays for this train occur between Richmond and Selma on the CSXT A Line, rather than along the portion of the route between Selma and Charlotte. Table 2- 25 shows that conflict with freight traffic is the most frequent cause and creates the longest delay for the Carolinian between Selma and Washington, DC. Interference with other passenger trains is also heavily reported. Between Selma and Charlotte, however, the largest contributor to host-railroad related delays for the Carolinian were slow orders. This mirrors the delay data for the Piedmont, where slow orders are the largest contributor of host railroad delays. The latter is likely due in part to the construction related to the Piedmont Improveinent Program (PIP) which will ultimately improve speeds and capacity along the Raleigh to Charlotte corridor. There are three additional ARRA-funded projects to install double cross-overs on the double-tracked portions of CSXT's A Line in Halifax, which will help to alleviate some freight-passenger conflicts along that corridor. However, more detailed study of capacity needs along the A Line should be conducted. August 2015 2-95 2.2.6 Highway and Airport Congestion Trends Highway and airport congestion and how these modes interact with freight and passenger rail are addressed in this section, including general airport passenger and cargo trends as well as how future plans will stimulate growth. Existing and projected highway congestion and the location of planned passenger rail projects within congested corridors are identified. 2.2.6.1 Highway Congestion Highway congestion is an important variable in planning for rail, as freight and passenger rail both have the capacity to alleviate highway congestion in certain circumstances. This section examines existing and projected highway congestion and looks at how fi-eight and passenger rail might complement Table 2- 26 What Congestion Means to the Local Economy, "2011 CdMPo2�6-��SIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�P�J planned capacity improvements to help reduce the exclusive use of congested highway corridors. 2.2.6.2 Existing and Projected Highway Congestion Highway congestion in North Carolina is generally concentrated in the state's urban areas. The state's growing population and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) contribute to increasing road delays, fuel costs, and congestion which are measured by the Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI). North Carolina's thi•ee major population centers, as shown in Table 2- 26, were all included in the 101 cities and towns in TTI's report, and Charlotte had the worst overall total cost of congestion in the state amounting to $653 million in 2011. That represents an annual drain on North Carolina's economy. Travel Delay Excess Fuel Consumed Truck Congestion Cost Total Congestion Cost (1,000 Hours) Rank (1,000 Gallons) Rank ($ million) Rank ($ million) Rank Charlotte, NC-SC 28,974 38 14,599 37 $ 168 30 $ 653 37 Raleigh-Durham, NC 17,923 54 8,407 55 $ 96 50 $ 396 55 Greensboro, NC 6,625 84 3,005 84 $ 35 82 $ 146 83 Source: TTI's 2012 Urban Mobility Report�ss Note: Rank is out of 101 listed areas; 498 areas analyzed in total. iss TTI's 2012 Urban Mobility Report Table 2. What Congestion Means to Your Town, 2011, http://dZdtlSnnlpfrOr.cloudfront.net/tti.tamu.edu/documents/ums/congestion-data/national/national-table2.pdf August 2015 2-96 Figure 2- 70 shows peak travel time congestion on all state-maintained interstate highways and US and NC highway routes in North Carolina. Volume- to-capacity ratios are calculated for these roadways to indicate congestion. On a regional level, Charlotte is the most congested followed by the Triangle and then the Triad. Smaller concentrations of congestion are visible in Asheville, Fayetteville, Wilmington and Jacksonville. Figure 2- 71 through Figure 2- 73 include volume-to-capacity congestion maps for the Charlotte, Triad and Triangle regions which appear to llave the most substantial concentrations of roadway congestion. Table 2- 27 P Y r' .� •'�� . � �/, /''� � � J � � ) ' � , � ,��w �� U,�<•_�, ° �.' . -"�-. Volume to Capacity Ratio 1.2+ {Highly Congested) 1.0 � 1.2 (Congestedj 0.8 - 1.0 (Apprnaching Cang�stion) l, "�� i� � COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL F�L�.PJ Table 2- 27 includes Travel Time Index and Total Peak Period Travel Time measures and rankings. The Travel Time Index is the ratio of travel time in the peak period to the travel time at free-flow conditions. For example, Charlotte's value of 1.20 indicates that on average a 45 minute trip would take 54 minutes during peak hours. The Table 2- 27 Travel Time Index rankings and Peak Period Travel Times are fairly consistent with the map of volume to capacity ratios and MSA populations. �--�� i � � / �/ I I � u�.�w n V�S 1 � _ — � �`-� � ��n �a� _ Lonov.er � y,�y ti � - - � � \ `\ . Concord� Gastonia�f � . � � t ... .. j . . �i L_.� Charlot4e ;��nroe j -� J � �1mt�-ak Rou�e Int�rstat�s Source: North Carolina �epartment of Transportatfon, Tra�c Survey Unat 2012 Tra�c Counts Figure 'l - 70 Statewide Highway Congestion Map � ;ns6oro i I ' % I�_, ♦- i � ��' *�r»�,D�Yham � _ � Burlingto�n',��, Cary � ' � Gulf �: ' -- . � � _ • .` �'�'� ,.` _ - - ;!: Fayetteville � ` . I� HamletJ • t� � � � �` . /%�, �`�. � r ina 3 �� \ , � ': ; � ``�. `t. '�, , , � �� .�__�_�""4_ • ,�?� "4 1 , '�.\ '�'�, ivor ro sca�e � Rocky Mount : ��:z , �, -. /. \ �: i � �' � � 1 hNilsan , _ �. � � I ' Greenv�lle - �� —� r � _� � �k � Goldshoro �- " � r � - n` L"ee�CreekTt,�'�'�� \ �,,?`�T� Y � � t �. Ne`w�Bern -�� ' ,�..� � k � � ;,-s� ,d? a _ ta .;, '{r, ; JacksQnville �or�ehead City°`� ,Wallace , � t - •� � � - `��,-�--�.�` � �, �� _.__.. .�- _•,o: August 2015 2-97 TabBe 2 - _?7 ��egior�al Cc�c�g;estion N�ez�srba�es�� REG[ON TRAVEL TRAVEL TOTAL TOTAL METROPOLITAN TIME TIME PEAK PEAK STATISTICAL AREA INDEX INDEX pERIOD PERIOD POPULATION RANK TRAVEL TRAVEL RANKis� TIME TIME RANK Charlotte 1.20 27 45 min 18 23 Raleigh- 1.14 61 43 min 30 38 Durham Greensboro 1.10 87 43 min 30 41 Winston- l.11 79 39 min 52 41 Salem The North Carolina State Demographers Office estimates that these regions will continue to grow with a i-esulting effect of increased congestion. The geographic regions for these estimates are taken from Figure 2- 32 in the Demographic and Economic Factors section. Figure 2- 71 shows congested highways in the Charlotte region. The interstates and other highways connecting Charlotte to its suburbs are most congested. These facilities include I-85 in Gaston, Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties, I-77 in Iredell and Mecklenburg Counties and I-485 in southeastern Mecklenburg County. Congestion is also heavy on US 74 in Mecklenburg and Union Counties, NC 16 in Mecklenburg and Union Counties and NC 73 in Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties. Figure 2- 72 shows congested highways in the Triad region. Congestion in the Triad is both contained within Greensboro, Winston-Salem and High Point and along portions of interstate connecting the region. Congestion in Winston- Salem is concentrated along US 52, NC 67 (Silas Creek Parkway) and portions of US 421 and I-40. Congestion in Greensboro is concentrated along US 220, I-40, West Wendover Avenue and NC 68 between Greensboro and High Point. The Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization's Long Range 'sb Texas Transportation Instiriite. 2012 Urban Mobility Report. December 2012. http://d2dt15nn1pfrOr.cloudfront.net/tti.tamu.edu/documents/mobility-report-2012.pdf �s� U.S. Census. Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2013. Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area: 2013 Population Estimates. http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=61<mk COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�CJ Transportation Plan shows congestion worsening on interstates in the Greensboro and High Point i•egion.158 Table 2- 28 Regional Projected Gi-oti�tt�: 201.3-2033 i-�� PROJECTED GROWTH INCREASE METROPOLITAN REGION FROM 2013 TO 2033 PRO]ECTED GROWTH RATE Asheville 63,065 13.0% Charlotte 596,739 27.5% Eastern NC 213,582 13.6% Fayetteville/Sandhills 114,501 16.7% Triad 226,371 13.6o/0 Trian le 735,090 35.7% I Western NC 67,961 8.2% Wilmin ton 135,191 35.2% State 2,152,500 � 21.9% Note: congestion measures tor these regions Yaken trom the'1'exas "I'ransportation lnstitute's'L01"l Urban Mobility Report. The table follows the report's convention of grouping Raleigh-Durham but separating GreensUoro and Winston-Salem. Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) population was added to the table to give a population reference point to the congestion indicator ranlcings. For MSA rankings, Greensboro and Winston-Salem are combined to give a better sense of the region's population influence. Figure 2- 73 shows congested highways in the Triangle region. Congestion is heaviest on the roadways linking the Triangle communities (I-40, US 70, US 15- 501, NC 54, NC 55) and on the highways linking Raleigh to suburban areas (I-40, 1-440, NC 50, US 1, US 70, US 401). The commuting congestion reflects the region's scattered employment hubs centered in Raleigh, Cary, Research Triangle Park, Durham and Chapel Hill. The joint Long Range Transportation Plan for the region shows congestion persisting into 2035 with the most congested corridors being I-440 and interstates connecting to I-440.160 isa Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan - Roadway Chapter. http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?docume��tid=18313 ls9 North Carolina State Demographers Office. Population Projections for 2033. http: //www.o sbm. state.nc. us/nco sb m/fa cts_and_figures /socio eco nomi c_data/pop ulatio n_estimate s/demog/countytotals_2030_2034.htm1 �« Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Transportation Organization. 2035 LRTP PM Peak Hour V/C Ratio Map. http://www.dchcmpo.org/dmdocuments/2035LRTPVoverCMap.pdf August 2015 2-98 `A'shevi'� Ile � . \ . ��_ -- ` • '� Hickory -�------ _ - 21 29 � - _� szi �� i - �___ � oi � a21 � � `�.,-" , ` - — 1V Cv�ic�,id - -- 21- - - --- �-1 21 C, � '�� ' ` � � � 1 �— � 1' �-- /�� e�: �e.c� V� � � �� OV �� N COMPREHEN51'VE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN � � `` 29' GastonF� � � � �� Cliar.lotte � , � � � � ; .,�,t�� = �i `��J_, ��? �./ �.—� Volume to Capacity Ratio � ' � -- r1 � � 52 `V � 1.2+(HighlyCangestedj AmtrakRoute �,0� �` � J � i 1 �, i� 1.0 - 1.2 {Congested) Rail Lines !J ��, � 0.8 - 1.0 (Approachkng Congestioroj Major Highways �T'-;'` � �{; � �� 52 ! 521 � r��" 801 1� I MunlCipalBoUndafies Sou. o�Caro'�aDepart nto(Tra�sporlatlon.TraKc rveyL'ni1z092Tra�cG�aurzfs _ I Figure 2- 71 Charlotte Region 2012 Congestion Map i i _ _ �'- i i i - - _ _ 56 _ 29 � I � ---- --�-- ----- �E I . � n�r r� >� .r� `� . z� � - 2a � � � azi � as � , 4liinston=S�l€m � �ti�-� � �urlin ton = t ' ��eensboTa r � ��4urha`m• _ ..--^�-,i'�_r� - - - - - � - - 311 �� - i 1 z9 3 1 B p , 01 . I High Point � I azi ' I i 64 �4 52 29 ' �� - - - - 1 VoJ�me to Copacity Ratio 5z � a21 I �';. --- 1.2+ (HighEy Cortgestedj Amtrak Route � qyl� 1.0 - 1.2 {Congested� Rail Lines 64 15 � 220 I ��' 0.8 - 1.0 {Approaching Conges4ion) Major Highways Source: No Ca'rofina DepaRment I MunicipalBoundaries atrraRSF�nrta�,�r.atr�suNeyu�rt � . . r v .F ... a7zTr� counts Fig�u�e 2- 7Z Triad 2012 Congestion Map August2015 f►bI' , Winston-�alem , .s 311 . � k-iigto� Volume to Ccrp�ucity Ratio 1.2+ (Highly Car�gestedj ' l.d - 1.2 {Congested} ' 0.8 - 1.0 (Approaching Congestion) ' Ir��Cj~'� I 501 ' �� ;a � � � Diarham — / � I 421 i 15 ; � 64 64 Arntrak Route Rail Lines Major Highways Municipal Boundaries 421 ��Sauree: NorthC Figu►•e 2- 73 Triangle 2012 Congestion Map / ;� COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�CJ �,o� .a �.�E � f�ock; •f��ount , 64 ��1 � i 64' `-� 3d1 � � ru � -- —... � . `i �� \ 0� J �, 3rTQ7ent of Trar�s ion, ira i urvey Unif 2042 �a�c o�esldsboro , \ 7 . e� Travel congestion is anticipated to remain a challenge to North Carolina's competitiveness in the future. Expanding the state's highway network in these rapidly urbanizing corridors will become increasingly costly and difficult as the surrounding area becomes more and more developed. 2.2.6.3 Highway Congestion and Passenger Rail Intercity passenger rail has the opportuniry to divert automobile trips to passenger rail in congested corridors and when train trave] times are competitive. The Piedmont Crescent I-40/I-85 corridoi� contains the state's most congested regions (Charlotte, Triad, and Triangle) and the state's most frequent passenger train service, the Piedmont and Carolinian routes. These two routes provide the corridor with three trips pei- day total, with five additional daily trips planned by 2020. These routes travel between Raleigh and Charlotte, also serving Cary, Durham, Burlington, Greensboro, High Point, Salisbury and Kannapolis with future stations proposed for Lexington and Hillsborough.161 The train currently takes between 3 hours and 10 minutes and 3 hours and 22 minutes to travel between Raleigh and Charlotte depending on the departure time (Table 2- 29). Driving between downtown Raleigh and downtown Charlotte takes roughly 2 hours and 40 minutes without congestion.16z There are several traffic bottlenecks along that corridor that could lengthen driving times including I-85 in Mecklenburg County and Cabarrus County (Figure 2- 71), I-40 in Greensboro and Burlington (Figure 2- 72) and I-40 in the Triangle (Figure 2- 73). Congestion delay and the ability to relax or be productive on the �� News and Observer, Bruce Siceloff."$520 M puts fast trains on fast track." January 28, 2010. Accessed June 26, 2014. http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/O1/28/308621/520m-puts-fast- trains-on-fast.html lbz Google Maps. Directions between Raleigh, NC and Charlotte, NC. https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Raleigh,+NC/Charlotte,+NC/@35.7869205,- 79.7049938,1Oz/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5! 1m1!1sOx89ac5a2f9f51e0f7:Ox6790b6528a11f0ad!2m2! 1d-78.6381787!2d35.7795897! lm5! lml! 1sOx88541fc4Fc381a81:Ox884650e6bf43d164!2m2! ld- 80.8431267!2d35.2270869 August 2015 2-100 train still makes the longer passenger rail trave] time competitive for many travelers. The target travel time between Raleigh and Cha►•lotte is under 3 hours, with some future routes making limited stops between Raleigh and Charlotte. The target travel time is competitive with the current highway travel time of 2 hours and 40 minutes, even without considering existing and future highway congestion. Table 2- 29 Amtrak Piecfmont and Cnrolininn Tr2vel Times CURRENT TRAVEL TIMES Ralei h to Charlotte 6:45 am - 9:55 am 3 hours 10 minutes 11:45 am - 2:55 pm 3 hours 10 minutes 4:50 m- 8:12 m 3 hours 22 minutes Charlotte to Ralei h 7:00 am - 10:17 am 3 hours 17 minutes 12:00 m- 3:11 m I 3 hours 11 minutes 5:15 pm - 8:26 pm I 3 hours 11 minutes 2.2.6.4 Highway Congestion and Freight Rail Congested highway corridors may create conditions for commodities to be more effectively shipped by freight rail in cases where the commodity, rail capacity and rail travel times permit. Figure 2- 74 and Figure 2- 75 show interstate freight truck volumes in 2007 and projected for 2040, respectively. Truck volumes are heaviest along I-40/I-85 in the Piedmont Crescent, I-40 in western North Carolina, I-77 and I-95. The projected truck volume increases for 2040 are in the same corridors. There are long range plans to expand the highway capacity of all of these corridors.163 Several states have undertaken studies to examine how truck to rail diversion might accommodate existing and future freight growth. The Virginia Department of Transportation conducted this type lv3 North Carolina Department of Transportation. Strategic Transportation [mitative Results Map. https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/Pages/STI-Results.aspx CCih'?P7CHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL F�L�.rJ of analysis for the I-81 Corridor Improvement Analysis - Freight Diversion and Forecast Report. I-81 is the heavily trafficked truck route located northwest of North Carolina in Figure 2- 74 and Figure 2- 75.1�4 Figure 2- 76 presents 2040 volume-to-capacity ►-atios on major highway corridors. Future congestion on highways could serve to incent more movement of goods on rail; however, it should be noted that highway congestion can also negatively affect truck movements associated with intermodal systems. As all three intermodal facilities in North Carolina are located in Charlotte and Greensboro, the state inust consider the impact of futui-e congestion on [-40 and I-95 on the Triangle's and Eastern North Carolina's access to the intermodal system. Utilizing rail is a cost-effective way to gain travel capacity in high-use corridors and helps diminish the depreciation of highway assets by removing trucks from the highway network. The option of transferring goods from truck to rail for transporting within North Carolina and among its neighboring states provides a means to reduce truck VMT and the associated costs of congestion, maintenance, fuel, and emissions. By removing some trucks from the roads, highway capacity increases without spending state funds for the construction of additional lane-miles, which is often not feasible or desirable, and also saves money on highway maintenance because trucks cause more damage than automobiles. ��4 Virgi�lia Department of Transportation. I-81 Corridor Imp�rovement Study - Freight Diversion and Forecast Report. http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/resources/freight.pdf August 2015 2-101 � Figure 2- 74 Average Daily Long-Haul Interstate Freight Trucl< Traffic (2007)�6S (Figure Source: FHWA) ��s Federal Highway Administration - Freight Management and Operations. Average Daily Long- Haul Freight Traf�c on the National Highway System: 2007 Map. Accessed June 26, 2014. http: //www.ops.fhwa. dot.gov/Freigh t/freight_a nalysis/nat_fre ight_stats/nh savgl hft2007.htm COMPREHEN51'VE 5Tr4TE RAIL PLAN -`-'�� Figure 2- 75 Projected Average Daily Long-Haul Interstate Freight Truck Traffic (2040)166 �Figure Source: FHWA) ��F Federal Highway Administration - Freight Management and Operations. Average Daily Long- Haul Freight Traffic on the National Highway System: 2040 Map. Accessed June 26, 2014. http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/nhsavg1hft2040.ht�n August 2015 2-102 COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PLAN � Fi�c�urri�ng Peak-R�ri�d Cvn�esti�� 8,�'a Tru�9�5 — Urocangested HigEe-w�olurne �arngesled Hegh�hiolaam� — HkghfyCang�ste�High•Volurne IVat�s: Hf�h=val�mc ��r�ck portia�ns �f ih�e PJa�ior�ah Highrwa�r 5yske� �rry rr�are Chan- 8,5�H7 tr�acks per day_ in�{u�kinc� fred�l�k-he�ulunc� Ion�-distan�c� Iru�'�s, freaghC-hauling IacaM Eru��c�, an� c�kN��r tnpck.s w7kh �ix c�r rn�re �ir��. Hi��ly� errog��ked s�g��o[s ar� st�aq-��-g� ccandii��,ns wl�h +ralum�Ise�r�� fl+�Wv ra�i�s �reak�r th�n �.�3�, ��n��i��J segments I��v� r�duce�l tcaffi� s��ds vu,th volu�rncrs�.o�vicG I�c�nx rati�a� b•e.ti�^e�n 4.75 and 4.�5. Th� valurne,'s��vi:Ce i1p'�+ r�tia is es�irr?�4ed u�d�s� cl�c pr�iuE�s €�uU�n�ed in th� Yi�?�1� Fie�d hfl�nr�al, J�PP�n€bix M1f SU�rG�_ �V. �. CJCpc�rtonCnt pf Tr�nS�O��Qn, F�dCr�l Hd�Fa�+;�y ,4da��irrislr�#iqw7. �iFee t�f FrCic�hrt� M�nagCr��rct 8nd C��3Cr�lierons, FrCoght Anfil�is Fr�ni�wt3rk, v�r&i9n 3.4, �fj12 Figure 2- 76 Peak-Period Congestion on High-Volume Truck Portions of the National Highway System: 2040 August 2015 2-103 2.2.6.5 Airport Passenger Service North Carolina is home to 72 publicly-owned and operated airports. Nine of these airports have regularly-scheduled passenger service (Charlotte-Douglas, Raleigh-Durham, Piedmont Triad, Wilmington International, Fayetteville Regional, Albert Ellis (Jacksonville), Coastal Carolina (New Bern) and Pitt- Greenville).167 Charlotte-Douglas accounted for 75 percent of all enplanements (total number of passengers boarding aircraft) in North Carolina in 2012 (Figure 2- 77), followed by Raleigh-Durham (17 percent) and Piedmont Triad (3 percent).168 Other airports each account for 1 percent or less of enplanements. Charlotte-Douglas is also routinely ranlced one of the busiest airports in the United States, partly due to it being a US Airways hub, and for having one the lowest costs per enplaned passenger in the United States.169 Charlotte-Douglas International Airport is a top destination for Wilmington, Greenville, Jacksonville, and New Bern and the second most popular destination for Raleigh-Durham, Fayetteville, Asheville and Greensboro.l'o Intercity passenger rail has potential to capture some of the Raleigh-Durham and Piedmont Triad transfer flights to Charlotte-Douglas given Amti•ak lines run in front of the airport. This is more likely for the Greensboro to Charlotte train trips since it is roughly a one and one-half hour trip and Raleigh to Charlotte train trips are double that time. Table 2- 30 includes a comparison of rail and air travel for NC destinations. 'v' North Carolina Department of Transportation. Division of Aviation. General Aviation Airport Development Plan. October 2006. ��$Federal Aviation Administration. Enplanements at All Airports by State and Airport. CY 2012. http://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/passenger_allcargo_stats/passenger/media/CY12 AllEnplanements.pdf 169City of Charlotte. Charlotte Airport Governance Sriidy. May 6, 2013. http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/documents/airport%20governance%20study/airport%20gov ernance%20presentation%20c1t�/o2020130506.pdf 171Research and Innovative Technology Administration. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Top 10 Destination Airports data as of May 14, 2014. http://www.transtats.bts.gov/airports.asp zn.�on,r�uu , 15.9ur�:nti�o r., � `� ia,00a,00a � � S,nnn,ny�o Figure 2 - 77 T�ble 7 - 30 CCih'?Po2�E-E�I�dSIVE 5Ti4TE RAIL F�L�.rJ � � — — `,e. . ;o �o ��c `�e �.� , "�e � � �;.,•Sc � � �` 3• �• �''•` `3 4_ . �`' `�� e ec C� ` � ayt` �. ,, `-_ a�" ; � v` v \ �' �ubitc as� pod�r Enplaneinents by Airport (2012) ['ompariso�o of Rail �►�d Air Travel foi• NG Destiiiatio��s LOWEST TRAIN FLIGHT DEPARTURE DESTINATION �IL TICKET TIME TIME PRICE (fastest) (non- (round tri ) sto ) Ralei h Charlotte $58 3 hr 10 min 58 min Ralei h Greensboro $27 1 hr 31 min NA Greensboro Charlotte $36 1 hr 37 min 50 min Greensboro Raleigh $27 1 hr 37 min NA Charlotte Greensboro $36 1 hr 32 min 45 min Charlotte Raleigh $58 3 hr 11 min 49 min August 2015 2-104 T�ble 2- 31 Comparison of Rail and Air Travel for Atlant�, Georgia and 1h/as��ing��s, �}C' ! LOWEST EXISTING RAIL .�,��N FLIGHT DEPARTURE DESTINATION pR CEE TIME �rionE (round (future stop) trip) time) Chai-lotte Atlanta, Georgia $58 5 hi- 28 mii� 1 hr 8 min (TBD) Raleigh Washington, DC $27 6 hr 20 min 1 hr 4 min (3 hr 50 min -4hr The federally-designated Southeast Corridor will likely provide alternatives to persons considering flying from North Carolina to Atlanta, Georgia and Washington, D.C. Passenger rail would not be time effective for eliminating transfer flights but would be a feasible alternative to flights where Atlanta, Georgia and Washington are the final destinations from North Carolina. 2.2.6.6 Airport Passenger Expansion P/ans Charlotte's passenger traffic has nearly doubled from 11 million enplanements in 2002 to almost 20 million enplanements in 2012. The airport has sevei�al projects underway to keep up with increased demand including new parking and rental car facilities, improved roadway connections, additional lanes at the pick-up - drop off area, a taxiway extension and an expansion to the westside terminal.17z The airport also has plans over the next few years to add approximately 24 additional gates to Concourses A, B, and E.173 Longer-term 11 NCDOT Rail Division. http://wvwv.ncbytrain.org/tickets/ Estimated Flight Travel Times: Kayak.com South East High Speed Rail FAQ: http://www.sehsr.org/faq.html Amtrak.com for Rail Travel Times 1z Charlotte-Douglas Inte�roational Airport. CLT 2015 Underway. Accessed May 15, 2014. http://charmeckorg/city/charlotte/airport/pages/c1t2015.aspx 173 Charlotte-Douglas International Airport. Upcoming Construction Projects. Accessed May 15, 2014. http://charmecic.org/city/charlotte/Airport/Pages/CLT2015UpcomingProjects.aspx COMPREHENS9it�'��",�T[ �2�VL F�LACJ projects include expanding the terminal lobby, constructing a new international terminal building and building a fifth runway.1�4 Raleigh-Durham Intei�national Airport recently completed an expansion and renovation project for Terminal 2 in 2011 and completed a modernization project for Terminal 1 in 2014. Plans to add a fourth runway were tabled after air traffic slowed following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.175 The Piedmont Triad, Wilmington, Asheville and Fayetteville airports currently have excess capacity so future plans tend to focus on modernizing facilities rather than expansion.l'6,�",1's 2.2.6.7 Airport-Transit Expansion Plans The three largest commercial airports in the state all have plans for high capacity transit that will link up to their airports. The Wake - Durham Cominuter Rail will use bus service to connect the airport to a nearby rail stop until future demand warrants a direct connection.19 Charlotte's 2030 Transit Corridor System Plan calls for a high capacity transit connection between downtowil Charlotte and Charlotte-Douglas.180 The Piedmoilt Authority for Regional Transit (PART) has studied Bus Rapid Ti•ansit and commuter rail for connecting Greensboro and Winston-Salein. The proposed routes call for 174 Charlotte-Douglas [nternational Airport. Proposed Future Construction Projects. Accessed May 15, 2014. http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/Airport/Pages/CLT2015 FutureProposedProjects.aspx 1's Raleigh-Durham International Airport. RDU History. Accessed May 15, 2014. http: //www.rd u.co m/authority/history.html 17� Payetteville Regional Airport. Payetteville Regional Airport Master Plan (2007). Accessed May 15, 2014. http://www.flyfay.com/Files/FAYExecSummary.pdf "' Asheville Regional Airport. Asheville Regional Airport Master Plan (2003). Accessed May 15, 2014. http://flyavl.com/media/PDFs/Master%20Plan.pdf ""Piedmont Triad International Airport. Airport Master Plan Update and Strategic Long Range Vision (2010). Accessed May 15, 2014. http://airportmasterplan.homestead.com/Executive_Summary_Final.pdf 179Raleigh-Durham fnternational Airport. Triangle Transit Rail Link to RDU. Accessed May 15, 2014. http: // www.rd u.co m/airportdev/ttra illink.html ��Charlotte Area Transit System. 2030 Transit Corridor System Plan. November 2006. http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/cats/planning/2030p1an/Pages/default.aspx August 2015 2-105 connections at PART's proposed regional transit facility, located between PTI and the proposed passenger rail line.lal 2,2.6.8 Conclusion Airport and highway congestion will continue to occur in North Carolina given the state's projected population increases and the projected future freight traffic expected for the United States and North Carolina. Improvements to passenger and freight rail offer opportunities to complement the highway and airport network. 2.2.7 Land Use Trends The relationship between land use and rail is explored in this section - particularly how passenger and freight rail can shape surrounding land uses and what land uses support the use of rail. This analysis provides a foundation for the assessment of rail service needs and opportunities in Section 2.3. 2.2.7.1 The Role of Rail in Shaping North Carolina's Land Use To understand the role of rail in shaping North Carolina's land uses, it is important to take a brief look at the history of railroad development in the state. The first railroads were built in the United States dui�ing the 1830s with the majority of the rail network built during the second half of the 19t�� Century.1s2 Several of North Carolina's larger cities, such as Durham and High Point originated as railroad stops and went from being small outposts to growing manufacturing cities because of the railroad. ls3,ls4 The existing cities of Charlotte, Greensboro, Winston-Salem, Wilmington, Raleigh, and Asheville also experienced growth after the arrival of the railroad. The railroad's role in city rel piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation. Request For Qualifications - Update of the PART Intermodal Facility Project Management Plan (2013). http://www.partnc.org/documents/Intermodal_Facility_RFQ.pdf iez Association of American Railroads. A Short History of U.S. Freight Railroads. April 2013. https://www.aar.org/keyissues/Documents/Background-Papers/A-short-history-of-US-Freight.pdf 's3 City of Durham. Durham Histoiy at a Glance. Accessed April 15, 2014 http://www.durham- nc. com/ab o ut/overview-facts-hi story/history_gla nce. ph p la4 High Point Museum. High Point and Furniture. Accessed April 15, 2014. http://highpointmuseum.org/furniture-history/ COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL F�L�.��9 development is especially important for North Carolina since navigable rivers played only a minor role in the development of the state's cities.iss Approximately 83 percent of North Carolina municipalities incorporated before 1900 have railroads intersecting their current-day municipal boundaries.l�� The cities of Charlotte, Greensboro, and Wilmington were important railroad hubs at this time. In 1900 a large number of small towns were evenly spaced along railroads throughout North Carolina. Many of these towns remain important commercial and civic land uses to this day. The arrival of the railroad also changed the land uses of the areas surrounding early North Carolina cities and towns as they adapted to producing cotton, tobacco, timber, and other profitable commodities that could be easily shipped by rail to markets and manufacturers.1�' 2.2.7.2 Freight Rail Traffic Generators Some of the early industries that relied on rail are still present in North Carolina. Figure 2- 78 shows the primary rail freight traffic generators in each metropolitan planning organization (MPO) region. Land uses that are current or potential freight rail generators, including manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing, and mining and quarrying, are mapped in Figure 2- 79. The figure shows employers in these sectors with greater than the indicated number of employees.l�8 Manufacturing employers are generally concentrated in urban areas, particularly in the western Piedmont. Agriculture and forestry operations are spread throughout the state but are most heavily concentrated in the fertile Coastal Plain. Mining and quarrying operations are scattered throughout the state. 1"s Burke, James. North Carolina's Pirst Railroads, A Study in Historical Geography. 2008. http://liUres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/Burke_uncg_0154D_10006.pdf �� Analysis on municipality data from North Carolina Department of Transportation GIS and railroad data from US DOT National Transportation Atlas Database. 187Association of American Railroads. A Short History of U.S. Freight Raih�oads. April 2013. https://www.aar.org/keyissues/Documents/Background-Papers/A-short-history-of-US-Freight.pdf �ft� National Cooperative Freight Research Program. Freight Trip Generation and Land Use Report. Table 9- NAICS Codes for fi•eight-related sectors. 2012. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/ncfrp/ncfrp_rpt_019.pdf August 2015 2-106 � �r �, "�r �; - i i�. �. "`_ — . _�� C� i�`� �_ /�� :: � _. }' �� - � .r' �c ' � � ��<A� , - r' _ . � �,,. }� ::', _ ,o HYCO WE6Dt]N � � ,` �� B€L€WS CREEK � MAYO CREEK �. G RIVER? ; i � � �^ GR'EENSBOR�� I' �`""`,.-, ' __ ,WINSTdN-SAL�EM � . i 'Ll I I r i , �ATAWBA` ASH@BO JI ' ' �o �Raleigh - � � �� CANT�N � � '�� -� �i� � Freight Statinns Amount of Carloads _s� * •SKYLANp ' � TERRELL� - _ j � �� ELMA =_ � ;�� _ _ - - — 7 � ��:�� I �'z _ . � RIV�RB�ND'. �� 7 '��B'RICE � � ��HAR�O�TTE .. � �.�e.��LM�(�.NY , -- � `_.:.'A" " �,;� �' PINEVIL�E �� ' � '; Rpilrpad OpEr�ttor � �RdCKINGHAM . - �, • 5,013 - 11,636 CSX Transportation Norfolk Sauthern Shortlic�e � 11,637 - 2i,704 Q 21,705 - 33,513 � 33,514 - 66,555 S66,556 - 231,53Q Figure 'l - i8 Prin�ai�y �'reight Zaii Traffic Generators Figure 2- 79 also shows that the state's intermodal facilities, ports, transloads, and military installations are located along rail lines. North Carolina's major military bases are all connected to the Strategic Rail Corridor Network (STRACNET), the coordinated network of railroads and militaiy installations needed for moving heavy vehicles to seaports for defense deployment and peacetime needs.ls9•1�o Fort Bragg, Camp Lejeune, Seymour '&� Milita�y Sw•face Deployment and Distribution Commend - Transportation Engineering Agency. Railroads for National Defense. Accessed May 12, 2014. http://www.tea.army.mil/DODProg/RND/default.htm �v" Federal Railroad Administration. FRA's GIS Application - Rail STRACNET layer. Accessed May 12, 2014. COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � r+or ro scacF Johnson Air Force Base, Militaty Ocean Terminal—Sunny Point and Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station are all sited along the network. 2.1.7.3 Passenger Rail Traffic Generators At a state level, urbanized areas that are current or potential passenger rail traffic generators are mapped in Figure 2- 80. Two-thirds of Amtrak stations in the state are located within the Piedmont Crescent urbanized area that stretches from Charlotte to Raleigh. The Piedmont Crescent's population and employment densities (see Section 2.2.1) currently support three daily intercity passenger rail routes. The other third of the stations are in small- to mid-sized cities in the Sandhills and Eastern North Carolina. Potential future intercity passenger rail routes may connect the remaining urban areas in Western North August 2015 2-107 COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�CJ Carolina (Asheville, Conover) and Eastern North Carolina (Goldsboro, Wilmington) to the existing network.191 The map also shows that there are a number of land uses within the ui-banized areas that are typically associated with supporting public transit and passenger ►-ail including airports and colleges. A survey of MPOs and RPOs support the findings that the existing urban areas are the key generators for current passenger rail traffic. Survey responders also indicated strong support for extending passenger rail service to Western North Carolina and Eastern North Carolina, as well as some type of passenger rail service to Winston-Salem. Others recommended additional stops along existing routes in growing communities such as Lexington and in Orange County, and support for commuter rail connecting to existing Aintrak stops. In order to be considered for near-term projects or studies, locations can receive highei� scoring in future rounds of STI by identifying and securing local funding matches. �y� North Carolina Department of Transportation. Future Service. Accessed April 15, 2014. http: //www.ncbytrain, org/p roj ects/futu re.html August 2015 2-108 COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � a ,-. [ � �+ tJorlina _ � • . . �� ,.2_ � � � � � �, � � • --`. • � � ��f � Winatan- alemGreens'tiorofi _ _»I� o .f_ � �(a� ��`�r�. ` � �_�-.�Durham- � dt,� �Rocky�Maunt� _�i � � fi _�� `.` � ��, �� .,�,�E , •'�� Hl� � �y _ ,�. Burlingto� . i , ��" � `.,�r' � %� :�+T . �`. � Gonover gh P4mt � - — �Cary yWdson '.. � r �, . � � ' l . { >� ; `.Asheville ;'� � �� - 0° � i GYuIF � y� - •":Gree�n�ville � �� . � .. • + � � �. �� • � __-- - 1..� on�ord ` _ G�oldshoro � T e �LeeCree�k�.��• �� ,�� .\... . �' Gasloiaia�: ,�, '.� _ "" � �. , —.M � _,'� '�,�i'-�'�,�- � � �^ � � �� . c=, � �' � -_� _�/ c� .� �. --� � R ��Fayettev�Bleyi �.._ . � �JJaw�Bern ,�. �--s .,.,_ .�:.-��,. Charlotte- M�onroe ;�� e �, i '"" ;F �Hamlet �� _ � � �.'�, � Em,ployerSector �1 r�,m ' � ` � �cksonGillel � t�� - YNallace �a„� Morehead�City`"� Pembroke ,' � \ ` ' �"/� � ��,�_ �� t� �''+�' -.. ��'Port of Ernployer >25 Mining Jobs � Siate Port �� e � �s . � �p � Morehead City � E�nployer >10 Agriculture Jobs �' Intermodal Termirt�al ` n� a� � � Wilming�dn . E�nployer >25 Manufacturing Jobs o Transload Facility \� r�-' u;,- Port of • � i 4Nilmirrgton Rail L'unes ,P.-��'`"�=x MI li t8f y$85E Sou��e.- US Census. LongRudinaY Employer-Household D�ynamics ar�d VJatlonal Transportaifon Atlas Database Figure 2- 79 Map of Freight Rail-OrientecY Land Uses Y �-f v`a di�_ ; �,s.. ,yyr.. . � r1�� i/�`��/��.. '� I (' 1- � .�:. � �-�_, ,✓�'' . '�s. � I � � I - �� `�f _ .. 1 �.��.- � i. ��. �— .._. _ I I ' . f (�; - J k.� a 3 r`,-r' I i i � � , \`' �`_K�'i'� � �ti �—� B�rli�gton �� Rock �Mount `� � W�„u _C4� �� High�Pomt I Dur�ham_ y� ��' ��.,� �, �t l�, � r� .+� - �Raleigh � '? � ° 3.i � " ' - i Cary J Wilson �- , ,� Salisbu� - �✓' l.� ;� -1� , `� _ `�,-- - � I _ �_ - � � �T'_ ' Kannapolis � / Selma:� \{� \� �� '� � :� �-zr-' � n`� - � - - ,� .- I - � Gastoni�`� � J�'�.r` - , - �� S Gh`arlotte� `-Southern Pines� ;.J%f i � �- ,-T� y� � �/ - �` Fayetteville' , I� � ��'' ,}�;� Hamlet � � i�_ � .� - �� y �� : � � � ' Amtrak Raute — Maj,or Airport ; "�`� -�_ Rail Lines College or University r� I � J Existing A�ntrak SkaYlon Urbanized Area Soc�ece� US Gensus & US DOtNaBonaf Trans,portaP�nn Atlas Database Figure 2- 80 Map of Urbanized Areas August2015 I.aiDL' 2.2.7.4 Land Use Patterns and Trends Railroads continue to have a significant relationship with land uses and settlement patterns in No►•th Carolina, especially since railroads intersect over two thirds of the state's municipalities.192 The most visible relationship is the active industrial and agricultural land uses centered along railroads. Another noticeable land use pattern is the many historic manufacturing buildings that have been repurposed as residential and commercial buildings, often contributing to downtown revitalizations, and located near rail lines. Less obvious is the role that railroads played in influencing development patterns of North Carolina's cities. Rail led to the development of streetcars and the formation of mill villages. Streetcars operated in roughly a dozen North Carolina cities in the first half of the 20t'� Century.193 Streetcar suburbs and mill villages were typically walkable and had street grids and commercial main streets. Today, their infrastructure and integrated land uses make them attractive for new mixed-use developments, which are occurring on large scales in Charlotte's Dilworth, North Davidson, and Plaza-Midwood neighborhoods and Durham's Ninth Street/Old West Durham neighborhood. With much of North Carolina's future population growth anticipated for urban areas, infill development and redevelopment of this kind will play an important role in shaping future land use patterns. Projections of future land use from the US Forest Service indicate that between 2010 and 2040 urbanized area in North Carolina will increase by approximately 50 percent fi�om about four million acres to about six million acres, with corresponding decreases in the acreages of cropland, pasture land, and forested land,194 The Piedmont will experience the greatest transition to urbanized area, with nearly ten percent of the region's acreage being converted to urban uses. �yzAnalysis on municipality data from North Carolina Department of Transportation G[S and railroad data from US DOT National Transportation Atlas Database 13Turner, Walter. NC Transportation Museum Foundation Historian. Development of Streetcar Systems in IVorth Carolina. http://www.nctrans.org/AUout-Us/History/Streetcar-Systems.aspx ��^ Wear, David N. Forecasts of County-Level Land Uses Under Three Future Scenarios: A Technical Document Supporting the Forest Service 2010 RPA Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-141. Asheville, NC: US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Soutllern Research Station. Available at: http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/gtr/gtr_srs 141.pdf COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL F�L�.PJ Cities in this region, including Charlotte, Raleigh, and Greensboro, have land use provisions in place to encourage economic development, redevelopment, and densification around existing and proposed investments in passenger rail as this transition occurs. For example, Charlotte's Integi•ated Transit/Land Use Plan and Centers, Corridors, and Wedges Framework promote redevelopment using a "coi-ridors and wedges" concept tllat focuses density in activity centers and transit corridors. Already, the completion of Charlotte's Blue Line light rail has led to considerable redevelopment and densification along its corridoi; particularly in the South End neighborhood.lgs Charlotte is also exploring the use of Tax Increment Financing to pay for a portion of its future proposed commuter rail system. This financing approach uses tax revenues resulting fi�om increased development activity at commuter rail stations, much of which would not occur in the absence of cominuter rai1.196 The projections for rail-oriented land uses in North Carolina are mixed as shown in the Appendix. Manufacturing is expected to experience a slight decline whereas construction and related aggregate industries are expected to increase over the next 25 years. Fuel costs and other variables will also factor into the future of freight-oriented land uses across the state. Stakeholders participating in the development of this plan have noted the importance of preserving sites along existing rail corridors for fi-eight rail-oriented industries. It has been noted that a program to work with regional and local land use regulators to optimize use of increasingly scarce rail-served sites is needed. Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill have land use pi-ovisions in place to encourage transit-supportive land uses in existing and proposed station areas. 19',19s,19y i's Frazier, Eric. Charlotte Observer. City officials tout South End as model for rail-oriented development. May 14, 2013. http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/05/14/4041411/city- officials-tout-south-end.html#.UO2dQBbOCgc ��Charlotte Area Transit System. Transit Funding Working Group - Recommendations to the Metropolitan Transit Commission. May 6, 2013. http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/cats/about/CATSBoard/tfwg/Presentation%20Materials/Tran sit%20Funding%20Working%20Group%20Report°/a205-20-2013.pdf 19'Triangle Transit. Dw�ham-Orange Light Rail New Starts Application. Chapter 8- Transit Supportive Land Use and Economic Development. ""Town of Cary. Comprehensive Plan - Land Use Element Maps. Amended August 13, 2009. http://www.townofcary.org/Assets/Planning+Department/Maps/Land+Use+plan+Map.pdf August 2015 2-110 C G9`�3 �� M2R� g-91E �� 9\! IE ��fi�l � 8�� V L��I_�. N� Other areas are undertaking broad land use planning projects that also promote planning principles that may further support freight or passenger rail. These efforts include federal funding planning pi-ojects such as the Piedmont Triad Sustainable Communities Planning Project and the Regional Plan for Sustainable Development in the Wilmington region.zoo zoi These plans, coupled with the station expansion ai�d renovation plai�s mentioned in Section 1.2.2, will support existing and planned passenger rail initiatives. At the same time, increased densities in urbanized areas will undoubtedly lead to increased fi•eight rail congestion from greater market demands.zoz 2.3 RAIL SERVICE NEEDS AND OPPORTUNITIES Using the data described in Sections 2.1 and 2.2 above, Section 2.3 evaluates the improvement needs, services gaps and deficits for three types of rail services: fi•eight, commuter rail, and intercity passenger. After an analysis of the needs for these three rail services areas, Section 2.3.4 also evaluates and prioritizes the needs of the various rail corridors for fi•eight, passenger and commuter rail to further geographically refine the needs. Finally a more detailed list of opportunities and needs for freight rail (Section 2.3.5) and passenger rail and commuter rail (Section 2.3.6) is developed from the data and corridor prioritization analysis. The service opportunities and needs as well as prioritized corridor needs were then used to develop a list of projects for passenger rail in Chapter 3 and freight rail in Chapter 4. Figure 2- 81 illustrates the prioritization and selection process for the State Rail Plan. 199 City of Raleigh. 2030 Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use Map. October 7, 2009http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PlanDev/Documents/LongRange/ComprehensivePlan/La nd_Use-Hi_Res.pdf zooLower Cape Fear Sustainable Communities Consortium. FOCUS Project Website. http://www.focussenc.org/about-focus/ zoi p�edmont Triad Regional Council and Piedmont Authority for Regiona] Transportation. Piedmont Triad Sustainable Communities Project weUsite. http://piedmonttogether.org/about Zoz Federal Railroad Administration. Freight Rail Futttre. Accessed April 15, 2014. https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0362#TheFuture August 2015 2-111 � ;. � State Rail Plan Figure 'l - 81 �_-v�'t��!'1�R�IEP��`_'�G�''IE �e•�!�'� � ��,=eVL 0-''�F`^-.4�� Corridor Prioritizat�on , . , ,. bdentifyr Exis#ing Ideni�Fy & Stare tonditions, Identify dweraU �� ht & P�rger Place [u�idors '�r�nds, Fa�c�sts Rail Serrice Needs Com�db� in4ie�s. . . ,- . . - . ...- TAC R�V1�'W Railroatl En�agemen# �l i � Rrojec� Select�on and Rrioritizatioro State RBII PI�[] PI'IOi'It1Z1i1011 �u�d Selection Process August 2015 2-112 2.3.1 Rail Service Needs — Freight From the freight traffic perspective for the railroad industry, the rail service needs are most often shaped by specific customer and location requirements. For example, the 2013 North Carolina Rail Forum identified an estimated 25 percent of the Class I railroad traffic begins and ends on short line railroads. In North Carolina, the agricultural and restored manufacturing markets are where regional railroads can add fluidity to the Class I railroad network. The short line railroads are able to preserve and upgrade their respective state-of-good-repair conditions with sufficient traffic volumes. However, when volumes decline, often train speed and car weight are reduced while preserving safety in operations. Hence, it remains important to aid industry locations along existing short lines to preserve and maintain traffic where commercial and logistics decisions align. To this end, the recent Railway Association of North Carolina 2014 annual meeting estimated costs to upgrade existing infrastructure to current market expectations at $120 million. Moreover, there are some instances where adjacent state(s), particularly for the supplier/customei- linked to a North Carolina industry, and nationwide factors, come into effect. With these broader factors considered, specific freight rail needs in North Carolina are as follows: 1. Maintain and improve track capacities, especially on Class I[ and [II systems, for existing and future high flow corridors. The available maximum allowable gross weight for 286,000 pound loaded cars (the industry is considering 315,000 pounds) is becoming more important for industries as they manage productivity and transportation costs. Limitations may arise with the track or with structures along the route. Individual industries served by Class II or III railroads may only have one route to their respective facilities and may become stranded if capacities fail to keep pace with macket demands or conditions deteriorate. 2. Improve safety and strive to minimize delays. The increases in roadway and rail traffic will continue to lead to greater congestion and delay at at-grade crossings. As freight trains become longer and movements of unit trains increase, tlle delay hours at crossings will continue to grow. In addition, the movement of hazardous materials creates COMPRCI-9P��S9l�P�'��.�TE RAILPL�P�J additional concerns at rail-highway crossings. Therefore, the second rail service area centers on roadway and rail at-grade crossings, including separations and closures. The selective evaluation of activity pattei-ns for roadway transportation in connection with railroad freight traffic may present candidate sites for improvement. 3. Expand freight rail infrastructure, and/or add redundancy, in select locations across the state to support economic development aligned with rail-based markets as well as supply chain reliability. This third area arises from the continued developmei�t of the Class I railroad networks. As the NS and CSXT volumes grow and shift across the respective origin and destination pairs they will move traffic across their networks in the most effective manner. The new intermodal facilities built by CSXT in North Baltimore (OH) and by NS in Rossville (TN) and Charlotte are examples that demonstrate the continual growth of theii- respective networks. The changes on other segments of their networks affect how supply chains function for North Carolina industries. NCDOT's evaluation and prioritization of programs and corridors to meet these needs are described in greater detail in Sections 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 as well as in Chapter 4. 2.3.2 Rail Service Needs — Commuter Rail Because commuter rail primarily serves the travel needs of a specific region and metropolitan area, local transit agencies have taken the lead in evaluating and planning commuter rail in North Carolina. Plans for commuter rail are underway in North Carolina's most populated regions. Both the Charlotte i•egion and the Triangle region have selected commuter rail in at least one corridor, while the Triad region has investigated commuter rail alternatives. These commuter rail efforts, including plans and development of projects, are discussed below. 2.3.2.1 Charlotte Region The Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) is the primary transit provider in the Charlotte region. CATS operates local bus routes in Charlotte and provides express service to surrounding counties. CATS also operates the LYNX light rail August 2015 2-113 Blue Line and is constructing a streetcar downtown. These rail projects and CATS's Red Line Regional Rail were recommendations in the 2030 Transit Corridor Systein Plan (2006).203 The Charlotte Red Lii�e Regional Rail is proposed to run from the planned Gateway Station in downtown Charlotte to Mooresville using the Norfolk Southern Railroad 0 Line. The 25 mile commuter rail line and 11 stations would serve downtown Charlotte, north Charlotte and the suburban municipalities of Huntersville, Cornelius, Davidson and Mooresville. The Charlotte Red Line Regional Rail project is unique in that the proposed funding sources include increased tax revenues from freight and transit oriented development.zo4 project development is currently on hold while CATS negotiates agreements with NS to use the corridor. If negotiations cannot be reached, separate right-of-way would have to be acquired, and the feasibility of the project would need to be reevaluated. There are no other commuter rail projects recommended in CATS' 2030 Transit Corridor System P1an.zo5 The Gaston-Cleveland-Lincoln Metropolitan Planning Organization explored high capacity transit connections to Charlotte in the Gastonia Rapid Transit Alternatives Study (2005). Commuter rail was studied as an option since the North Carolina Department of Transportation owns the Piedmont and Northern (P&N) line in Gaston County and a portion within the City of Charlotte. However, the study ruled out this alignment in favor of either bus rapid transit or light rail transit since these technologies could travel in corridors that would connect with CATS West Corridor which will terminate at Charlotte Douglas International Airport.z�� While the Charlotte region only has one planned commuter rail line, there may be the need for additional commuter rail services in the future. Census data show an increase in the number and percent of workers who commute across zos Charlotte Area Transit System. 2030 Transit Corridor System Plan. November 2006. http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/cats/planning/2030p1an/Pages/default.aspx z�" Charlotte Red Line Regional Rail. Accessed June 5, 2014. http://redlineregionalrail.org/ z°5 Charlotte Area Transit System interview, Brian Nadolny interviewed by Drew Spiliotis. June 11, 2014. �� Gaston-Cleveland-Lincoln Metropolitan Planning Organization. Gastonia Rapid Transit Alteiroatives Study: Corridor and Modal Options. December 2005. http://www.gastonmpo.org/documents/Final Report-GRTASwithcover.pdf COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�P�J county lines in the Charlotte region, including an increase in workers who cross state lines.207 Currently there is no multi-counry transit authority in the area, and CATS' primary local transit funding option (sales tax) is only collected within Mecklenburg County. These factors limit the amount of cross-county transit services and possibilities for developing services such as commuter rail that could serve cross-county commuters. Future funding agreements between counties without a dedicated funding source for transit would need to be reached to advance such projects. Potential congested roadway corridors with i-ail access from downtown Charlotte to suburban counties include US 74 from downtown Charlotte to Monroe (Union County), downtown Cha►-lotte to Rock Hill, SC (York County) and downtown Charlotte to Salisbury (Cabarrus and Rowan Counties). These corridors are mapped and described in greater detail in Chapter 3 (Section 3.8). 2.31.2 Triangle Region Triangle Transit is the regional transit provider fo�• the Triangle region of North Carolina. The transit agency provides regional and express bus service between the region's core cities and suburbs. Triangle Transit and the region's two Metropolitan Planning Organizations have refined plans for future increases in bus service and rail investments over the last decade. Triangle Transit has selected preferred alternatives for light rail connecting Durham and Chapel Hill, light rail connecting Raleigh and Cary, and commuter rail connecting Dui•ham and Wake Counties. The 37-►nile commuter rail line and 12 proposed stations would serve Duke University Medical Cente►; downtown Durham, Research Triangle Park, Cary, North Carolina State University, downtown Raleigh and Garner. The commuter rail line would overlap with the light rail projects in downtown Durham and between downtown Cary and downtown Raleigh.20� The project's status depends on funding from dedicated transit sales tax referendums. Durham Counry passed a dedicated 1/z cent sales tax in 2011 and 207 Analysis of 1990, 2000 and 2011 Census Data for the Centralina Council of Governments boundary area. North Carolina Department of Commerce AccessNC website. September 2014. http://accessnc.commerce.state.nc.us/EDIS/demographics.html 20� Triangle Transit. Durham-Wake County Corridor Alternatives Analysis. July 2011. http://ourri-ansitfuture.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/D-W-Vol-l-Detailed-Definition-of- Alternativesl.pdf August 2015 2-114 Orange County passed a dedicated 1/z cent sales tax in 2012.2�9 The Durham- Chapel Hill-Carrboro MPO adopted the Durham-Wake Commuter Rail as the Locally Preferred Alternative. The Capital Area MPO has not adopted the Durham-Wake Commuter Rail as the Locally Preferred Alternative and Wake County commissioners have not put a referendum to voters. Both MPOs must adopt the project as the Locally Preferred Alternative for the project to move forward in the planning p►-ocess.zlo Wake County is currently leading a partnership that includes CAMPO and key municipal, transit agency and other stakeholders to develop the Wake County Transit Strategy, which will update plans to develop new and enhanced transit se�vice in the region and inform decision-making by the county on future transit investments. While the Triangle region is planning for commuter rail and light rail connecting portions of Orange, Durham and Wake Counties (which are the boundaries for Triangle Transit), there may be the need for additional commuter rail services beyond these three counties, given the projected employment and population growth in the region, and the increase in the number of commuters who regularly cross county lines in the Triangle region. zll Triangle Transit and NCRR completed a capacity study in 2015 to evaluate multiple commuter rail operating scenarios between Mebane and Selma, and one scenario between West Durham and Greenfield (Garner). Congested highway corridors with parallel rail lines and a growing population with the potential for commuter rail service include US 1 between downtown Raleigh and Wake Forest (northeast Wake County), US 401 between downtown Raleigh and Fuquay-Varina (southern Wake County) and US 1 between downtown Raleigh and Sanford (southwest Walce Counry and Lee County). These corridors are mapped and described in detail in Chapter 3(Section 3.8). 20' Triangle Busi��ess Journal. "Triangle Transit approved sales tax increase for Durham, Orange counties." December 14, 2012. zio Triangle Transit inteiview, Juanita Shearer-Swink interviewed by Drew Spiliotis. June 13, 2014 �� Analysis of 1990, 2000 and 2011 Census Data for the Triangle J Council of Governments boundary area. North Carolina Department of Commerce AccessNC website. September 2014. http://accessnc.commerce.state.nc.us/EDIS/demographics.html COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�CJ 2.31.3 Triad Region The Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART) is the regional transit provider for the Piedmont Triad region. The transit agency provides express bus service throughout the Piedmont Triad region connecting suburban towns to major activity centers in Greensboro, High Point and Winston-Salem. PART also provides Amtralc Connector bus service between the Winston-Salem Transit Authority hub in downtown Winston-Salem and the nearby High Point Amtrak station. PART coinpleted the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) analysis Alternatives Analysis process and selected commuter rail as the preferred alternative between Greensboro and Winston-Salem in 2005. The proposed commuter rail would have used the Norfolk Southern K Line corridor between North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University (NC A&T) in Greensboro and Hanes Mall in Winston-Salem.zlz FTA analysis suggested that commuter rail was not feasible when evaluated in 2009 primarily due to existing transit ridership numbers in the corridor. PART completed a Regional Transit Development Plan in Z010 that calls for bus rapid transit to connect Greensboi-o and Winston-Salem. The plan's proposed Gold Line bus rapid transit would serve the same activity centers as the proposed commuter rail. These activity centers include NC A&T University, downtown Greensboro, the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, the Greensboro Coliseum, the Piedmont Triad International Airport, Kernersville, Winston Salem State University, downtown Winston-Salem, Baptist Medical Center and Forsyth Medical Center. PART has indicated they will continue to evaluate the potential for future commuter rail. The proposed Gold Line, if implemented, would build ridership in the corridor until commuter rail is feasible. PART is also working to locate their new regional transit center on a strategic site between the Piedmont Triad International Airport and the studied commuter rail line corridor.z13,z14 z�z Piedmont Authority For Regional Transportation. Heart of the Triad - Existing Conditimis Summaiq. March 2007. http://www.partnc.org/images/existingconditions03-29-07.pdf z'3 piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation. Forsyth and Guilford Counties Transit Vision for 2025. November 2010. littp: // www.partnc.o rg/documents/ RTD P_Fo rsyth_Guilford%20 Final%2 0 Report_Reformatted.p df Lia piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation interview, Mark Kirstner interviewed by Ann Steedly and Drew Spiliotis. June 17, 2014. August 2015 2-115 Similar to the data evaluated for the Charlotte and Triangle regions, an analysis of Census data for the Triad region show an increasing number of commuters who work outside of their county of residence, which indicates a growing market for cross-county transit services such as ►•egional bus and co►nmuter rail.21s 2.3.2.4 Hampton Roads Region Northeastern North Carolina has an increasing number of residents who commute to the Hampton Roads region in Virginia. The Hampton Roads Transit Vision Plan recommends the study of express bus and eventual commuter rail service from the Town of Edenton in Chowan County to Hampton Roads as demand warranted, perhaps after 2026.z16 The Chesapeake and Albemarle Railroad could serve as a future commuter rail corridor, connecting Edenton and Elizabeth City to Chesapeake and Norfolk, in Virginia. 2.3.3 Rail Service Needs — Intercity Passenger Rail As noted in Section 2.1, NCDOT's objectives are to continue to improve the on- time performance of the existing intercity passenger rail services in North Carolina, reduce travel times and frequencies, improve the financial and customer service performance of the state-supported services, extend services to new markets, and implement the Federally-Designated Southeast Corridor program. Specific rail service needs in North Carolina are as follows: 1. Improve service along the Piedmont corridor, which connects the state's largest metropolitan areas, through additional frequencies, reduced travel times, and improved stations and additional stations in the corridor. 2. [mprove On-Time Performance (OTP) to FRA standards for passenger service trains serving the state, with particular attention for the state- supported Carolinian and Piedmont services. zis Analysis of 1990, 2000 and 2011 Census Data for the Triad Council of Governments boundary area. North Carolina Department of Commerce AccessNC website. September 2014. http://accessnc.commerce.state.nc.us/EDIS/demographics.html �� Transit Vision Plan for Hampton Roads. March 2009. http://www.hrp.org/Site/docs/ResourceLibrary/Transit_Vision_Plan_Hampton_Roads_with_intenti onally_blanlc_040109.pdf COMPREHENSIVE 5T�4TE RAIL PL�P�J 3. Implement the Southeast Corridor, both within North Carolina and through improved connections with the Northeast Corridor and Atlanta, Georgia. 4. Extend passenger rail services to additional metropolitan areas, specifically western North Carolina and to eastern North Carolina, with service that will connect to other intercity passengei- rail trains. 5. Expand rail service markets by working with local communities to enhance and develop multimodal connections to intercity rail stations, including commuter rail. NCDOT's evaluation and prioritization of programs and corridors to meet these needs are described in greater detail in Sections 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 as well as in Chapter 3. 2.3.4 Corridor Prioritization After evaluating the existing conditions data, and trends for rail, and developing the general service needs for commuter, passenger, and freight rail, the State Rail Plan team coilducted a more specific evaluatioi� and analysis of the various i-ail corridors in the state. The first step in this corridor prioritization process was to define the various rail corridors across North Carolina. The corridors were defined by reviewing their ownership and end points of freight services within the state. Short lines were not included in the evaluation unless they were known to be under consideration for new passenger services or were the primary connection to a port, intermodal facility, etc. The corridor prioritization program serves two purposes. First it allows the rail needs to be further refined and spatially defined within corridors. For exa►nple, serving emerging freight markets has been identified as a need, and the corridor prioritization process accounts for which emerging markets are most significant for the state and are served by specific corridors. Secondly, the corridor prioritization process helps define more specific programs and projects that are opportunities to meet those needs. For example, once key passenger and commuter rail corridors are identified, specific studies or improvement programs for those corridors are identified and evaluated in Chapter 3. Table 2- 32 lists the corridors evaluated. The corridors are also shown in Figure 2- 82. August 2015 2-116 Each of the rail corridors were analyzed using a variety of data to determine the overall significance of their needs for both freight and passenger service. The data used were based upon the FRA State Rail Plan Guidance and upon readily available data that could help differentiate conditions along each corridor. Different data were used to prioritize freight and passenger corridors, as seen in Table 2- 33. A relative score was assigned for each corridor within each COMPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN category, where 1 represented the lowest score and 5 represented the highest score. The scores help to show the importance of the freight or passenger corridor to the State. More detail on the data used and the scoring methods are included in Appendix D. August 2015 2-117 E� f� ;� � � f��.i �,J��S+��'�-f��"� �- -:.�,r� '��~_ . � ; •' `g t:'s�'' ' /i`� �'`� - � 4��'^� � X l��i!�(/� S�f / ��r � �, ➢�! If . .2F. f . _ _ r, , • f � � . j.�� ¢' ,. . _ �'` 'f P [01JTN state line toAsheviYle (NS} [02] Charlotte to TN st�te line (CSXT) [63) 8alisbury toAshewille (NS) [04] Charlotie to Winston SaVem to VA sfa4e line (NS) [05J Greensboro to Winstorr Salem to Rural Wall (NS) [06] SC sta�e line ta VA skate line (NS) (d7) Charlotte to Monroe (CSXT) [08] Charlotte to Columbia (NS) [09] Greensbora to Selma (us� [10] Greensboro to Gulf (NS) [11) Monroe ta Pera�brQke (CSXT) [12] Raleigh to Norlina (CSXT) [12flp] Norlina to Weldon (CSXTj [13] Hamlet to R�,leigh {CSXT) [14j Raletgh to Fayetteviife (NS) [15j VA state line to SC state lir�e (CSX7y [16] Ral�igh to Greenville (CLNA) [17] Sedma to Morehead City (NS) �I [18J Gontentnea to Wallace (CSXT) [18pj Wallace to Wilming4on Passenger Servlce [19] Pembroke io Wilmington (CSXT) [20] Greenville tv Lee Creek (NS) [21] Rocky Mount to PlyPnouth (CSXTj [22] Parrmel2 ko Greenvil'le to Elmer (CSXT) [23] Cliffside io Boslic (CSXT) Q24] Newt�n south (NS} (2�] SC state line to Gastonia (NSj [26] Maunt Holly to Terre�l {CSXT) [27] APbemarle to Salisbury (NS} [28] As'�rebaro to High Poini (NS) [29] Eden ta VA state li�r�e (NS� [3�] Roxboro to VAstate line (NS) [31] Carrboro to Hillsborough (NS> [32j Dxford to Durham (NS) [33] Fuqvay-Varins to Gulf {NSj Figure `l - 82 North Carolina Rail Corrido►•s August2015 Wa [34] Hamlet to SC state line (CSXTj [35] Spri.ng Lake io Fort Bragg {CSXT) [3G] Stedman to Fayetteville (CSXT) [37] Sairtt PaWs to Lumberton {CSX�j [38] Weldon to VA state line (CSXT) [39] Clinion to Warsaw (CSXT) [40] Leland, NC fo Sa�nny Point (CSXT/DO�) [41] Chocowiniry to New Bem (NS) [42] D�rham to Apex (GSXY} [43] Edenton to VA Skate Line [44] Camp Lejeune to Morehead City (NSIDOD) Imimgtom COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � Ciit}f xur ru scaiF I.aIfF:3 'I'�13d� 2 - ;2 ��r�mV �:caa�u�uellob•s aab �c��•tlr Craa•ssl'r��t� Parallel Length Corridor Route Railroad Highway (miles) Route 01 Tennessee state line to NS I-40 46 Asheville Tennessee state line to 1-85, US 74, 02 Charlotte CSXT US 221, US 173 321 03 Asheville to Salisbury NS I-40, US 70 148 04 Charlotte to Winston-Salem NS I-40, I-77, 129 to VA state line US 311 05 Rural Hall to Winston-Salem NS I-40, US 52 39 to Greensboro 06 SC state line to VA state line NCRR/NS* I-85, US 29 188 07 Charlotte to Monroe CSXT I-277, US 74 29 08 SC state line (from NS I-77 25 Columbia) to Charlotte 09 Greensboro to Selma NCRR/NS* 1-40, US 70 115 10 Greensboro to Gulf NS US 421 43 (Sanford 11 Monroe to Pembroke CSXT I-74, US 74 84 12 Raleigh to Noriina CSXT US 1 58 12f/p Norlina to Weldon CSXT US 158 30 13 SC state line to Hamlet to CSXT US 1, 1-440, 102 Ralei h NC 177 14 Raleigh to Fayetteville NS US 401 63 15 SC state line to VA state line CSXT I-95 182 16 Raleigh to Greenville CLNA �-495, US 64, 81 US 264 17 Selma to Morehead Ciry NCRR/NS* US 70 113 18 Contentnea (Wilson) to CSXT I-795, US 105 P Wallace 117, US 13 19 Pembroke to Wilmington CSXT I-74, US 74 73 20 Greenville to Lee Creek CLNA/NS NC 33 45 21 Rocky Mount to Plymouth CSXT US 13, US 64 65 22 Parmele to Greenville to CSXT NC 11, US 39 Elmer 13 23 Cliffside to Bostic CSXT US 221 19 S IL�":,=� 6 u V,ti�=,G4 � u'a_;�, ?'rlll ILI ,�,��,� Parallel Length Corridor Route Railroad Highway �miles) Route 24 Newton south NS US 321 3 25 SC state line to Gastonia NS US 321 8 I-485, I-77, 26 Mount Holly to Terrell CSXT NC 150, NC 24 16 27 Albemarle to Salisbury NS US 52 29 I-73 I-74, US 28 Asheboro to High Point NS 220, US 311, 27 US 64 NC 14, NC 29 Eden to VA state line NS 49, S 87, US 12 220, US 58 30 Roxboro to VA state line NS 501 58, US 14 31 Carrboro to Hillsborough �S 501 5, US 11 32 Oxford to Durham NS I-85, US 15, 31 US 70 33 Fuquay Varina to Gulf �S NC 55, US 1, 38 US 421 34 Hamlet to SC state line CSXT �� 79, US 11 35 Spring Lake to Fort Bragg CSXT NC 87 7 36 Stedman to Fayetteville CSXT NC 24 8 37 Saint Pauls to Lumberton CSXT I-95, US 301, ZZ NC 87 38 Weldon to VA state line CSXT 158 86, US 18 39 Clinton to Warsaw CSXT NC 24 10 40 Leland NC to Sunny Point CSXT/DOD US 17, US ZZ 421, US 74 41 Chocowinity to New Bern NS US 17 32 I-40, NC 42 Durham to Apex CSXT 147, NC 55, 20 NC 540 43 Edenton to VA state line C&A 168 �' N� 56 *NCRR owns the corridor from Charlotte to Greensboro to Morehead City, and has an operating and maintenance agreement with NS. NS owns the mainline corridor south of Charlotte and north of Greensboro. August 2015 2-119 Table 2- 33 Data Used to Prioritize Corridor Needs Freight Corridors Passenger Corridors Current Data Current Data • Trucic volumes on parallel • Population within 10 and 30 highways miles of corridor • Train volumes on corridor - . Volumes on parallel highways inbound, outbound and through • Commodities important to NC . Congestion on parallel highways economy • Connections to intermodal • Connections to major activity facilities, ports, major transloads centers • Connections to major activity • Passenger trains volumes in centers corridor • Location within Strategic Corridor network (STRACNET) Future Data Future Data • 2040 truck volumes on parallel • 2030 population within 30 miles highways of corridor • Future train volumes on corridor • 2040 volumes on parallel - inbound, outbound and through highways • Emerging commodities important • 2040 congestion on parallel to NC economy highways • Inclusion along federally- designated Southeast Corridor The corridors were then grouped into three Tiers, based upon their comparative scores. • Investment Program ("Tier" cell shown in green) -corridors with the highest relative ranking • Stewardship Program ("Tier" cell shown in orange) -corridors with a medium relative ranking • Active Monitoring Program ("Tier" cell shown in crimson) -corridors with the lowest relative ranking COMPREHENSIVE ST,�l'� � tiVl_ ��I_�.rJ The [nvestment Program category indicates those corridors with existing and proposed traffic that will likely see a sustained commitment for maintenance and capital investments, by either the railroad and/or the state. Continued investments may include expansion of intermodal services and networks and ensuring North Carolina industries have access to these high capacity corridors, and capacity improvements for congestion. These are also the passenger rail corridors that are along the federally-designated Southeast Corridoi; or which show the highest scores for investigation of future commuter rail services. The Stewardship Program level is indicative of those corridors where existing and future traffic has the potential to grow and may be advanced by joint railroad and state strategies. These strategies should capitalize on public- private partnerships to ensui-e that infrastructure health is maintained and corridors are ready to capitalize on economic opportunities. These are also the corridors that show promise for connecting metropolitan areas, either through commuter rail or new intrastate services (motor coach and rail). The Active Monitoring Program level is established to actively watch how current conditions ti-ack over time. Freight movement is very dynamic, reacting to price changes and supplier / customer choices as seen by North Carolina industries. Passenger rail is not as feasible in the near-term to mid-term for these corridors, though further study and active monitoring may show a combination of these Active Monitoring Program tiered corridors might connect important passenger markets for future expansion. Figure 2- 83 shows the results of the freights needs prioritization, and Figure 2 - 84 shows the results of the passenger needs prioritization. It should be noted that this prioritization is only of possible needs, and not feasibility. A corridor that scores within the lnvestment tier or Stewardship tier for passenger only means that the corridor shows promise for passenger rail or commuter rail improvements, and does not necessarily determine the feasibility or cost-effectiveness of such services. Likewise, a lower corridor score does not necessarily mean that the State should forego the opportunity to seelc projects with economic development potential along those corridors. Additional analysis of the possible projects or programs to address each corridor's need, and the feasibility of improvements, is included in Chapters 3 and 4. August 2015 2-120 Fl� n� Hl�xr��y"�'.r,�s�;.✓r�� , �; .�' ..�-'"+ ; �' �. ' x �k�j��-�`" � '� :�` - .a'' . i'> P �; / �� !"i�✓-�..-/ : �" � �� r w ..� �" .� .�� ,� ,� ��''�:,•, ' ? F.._ COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � 04�— . S/"', \ �� • - ,� , � i �� .... � � �. . �` Y � � �.'...� � `` MUI lU S(:ALE t J NI I • • '1.� -V -, �i-_ ' '� - � '��, Win�ion-Salem i Greerys6oro � ��,,�� i ? _ ' ' � , �' ' Dur am� � � Rocky Mount '��~ i �' Bur�ington � � �\ � ' 1� � ' High Poin3 i Releegh � Parmele �'' _ �Conover . � ��'; � ' �- � , � �a ,ry � Wilsom' -�•� •�— -� Asheville .__ _ �, � i . reenville _ .t -- -- � ' � -- { � �` . / _,�,� ` � � ��! �Glulf— Goliisbora „� ,v ^ i�` �x �� '`� ' Gastoma ` Concorci `' � �� '- - _ � i �, ✓ ,_-i� � { { _ - � ' e r '�' r�� 4; •- i , - Cliarlottei ,_ _ ,� . � , Kinston New �* ��.. Monroe Fayetteville . i , � - �: � Hamlet ' _ [01 ] TN state iirre to Ashevilie {NS) y� Wa118Ce ,, . � [02] Charlotte io TEV stale line (CSXT) [18j Contentnea to'JW-allace (CSXT) Pembroke �,�� -� ��ksonV�lle,� [a3] Salisbury taAshevilYe (N5) [19] Pembroke to Wrlmington (CSXT) � _ � 1 1` [20] Greenville ta Lee Creek (NS) � ` -�_ �� [04] Charlotte rto Winston Salem to VA state line (NS) f [05] Gr�enshoro to Wanston Salem to Rural Nall (�Sy �21� F�°cky Mount to Plymouth (CSXT) �� Wilmington [OB] SC state line to WA state line (NS) I22] Parmele to Greenville to Elmer (CSXT} �� ' '� (07J Charlotte to Monroe (CSXTj [23] Cli�fside to Bastic (CSXT) [08] Charlotte to Columbia {NS) [24j Newton south (NS) City [09] Greenskrara to Selma (A15� [25] SC state line to Gastonia (NS) [35] Spring Lake to Fort Bragg (C�XT) [10] Greensboro io Gult (NS} [26] Mount I�olly to Terrell (GSXT) [3G] Stedman to Fayetteville (CSXTy [11] Monroe to Pembroke (CSXT} IZ�1 klb�rriarle to Salisbury (P�S) [37] Saint Paaals to Lumbe�ton {CSXT) Freight Carridor Frioritizat�an Tiers [N2] Raleigh to Norlina (CSXT) [�$] Asheboro to �ligh Point (NS) [38] Weidor� to VA state Yine (CSXT} ��z�7 Noriina co weiaan �csx�1 [2�] Eden to VA state line (NS) [39j Glinton to Warsaw (CSXT) I nvestment Pragram (13] Hamlet to Raleigh (CSXT) [30] Roxboro to VA state line (NS) [40] Lelarod, NC to Sunny Roink (CSXTIDOD) �14] RaleiQh to Fayetteville (NS) [31j Carrboro [o Hillsboraugh {NS) [41] Chocowiniiy to New Bern SNS) Stewa�rdshi p Program [15] VA state line to SC state line (CSXT) [�21 Qxtord to Durham (NS} [42] Durham toAp2x {CSXT) [16] Raleigh to Greenville (CLNA) [33] Fuquay-Varina ta Gulfi (f�S) [43J Edenton to VA State �4ne -Acti�e Mo�nitoring Prograrro [17] Selma to Morehead CiCy (NS} [34J Hamlet ta SC state line (CSXT} [44] Camp Lejeune to Morehead Gity {NSIDOd} Figure 2- 83 Prioritized Freigl�t Coiridor Needs August 2015 2-121 F�� H1�xr��y"�+.r,�s�;.✓'� �� ,�ev y ,2' ; � ,: � x k= -�'� F ��"`�' � _ ,rt . f �-� :�^ �'J j ..�' ~- . ��P :j .vTi7 `'�� - ��-�r�"�."--j � . � �� =��` '' � '� '�' f ' NorEina � � � � � �`�^, j � Y � � � „j �. � �l� � , i � � + ��.J— _ — - ' — � � f- '�- Winsion-Sal�m � Greerys6oro � � Durham � �` c ; � ,�=! ��- � i � -' Bur�ington i �- P2ocky.MPa� � � �. � High Poin3 i Ralelg�l r �Conover , , � w_- � � � � � �a - Wifson' � �I �y Asheville � �' `- - _ . i� ' � �' Selma� � r� � ,_ , � ��;•�,�� _ ��Gu9f_ � Goldsbaro ' 4 \ ,v i�,` ��'� �� , �_�� Gastonia ` Cancorcl �, X = � , . r . �,_-�--� Z � � i , Cliarlotte ,:,�, _. � '`�y r" '� �� t' � i � _ '` ' ' ``� , Kin"ston ._ � Monroe � Fayetteville <<. � : � Ham�le�_ -- � _ [01 ]�N st�te Itne to Asheville (NS) `�, Wallace [02j Gha�lotte to TEV state line (CSXT) [18] Contentnea to Wallace {CSXT) Pembfoke `1� ,`� �a ks� [03j Salisbury to Asheville {NS) [18p] Wallaee to WilmingYon Passenger Service �� ;, [Q4] Charlotte ta Wenstan Salem to VA state lirae (NS) [19] Pembroke to WiGmington (CSXT} � [O5] Greensboro [o �nston Saiem to Rural Hall (NS) [20] �reenville to Lee Creek {NSj � WIImingtoGl [O6] SC state line to VA state �ine (NS) [21 ] Rocky Mount to Plymouih (CSXT) � '� ' [07] Charlotte to Monroe (CSXTy [22] Permele to Greenwille to Elmer (CSXT} COMPREHENSIVE 5Tr4TE RAIL PL,AN � r .i '��.. , . a, \� . knr ru scFue [le City [08] Charlotte ko Calumbfa (NS) [23] Clidfside to Bostic {CSXT) [34] Hamlet to SG staCe line (CSXT) [09] Greensboro to Selma (N5) [24] t�ewton south (NS) [35] Spnng La4ce to Fort Bragg (CSX7} [1�] �reensboro to Gulf (NS) [25] �C state line to G�stonia (NS) [3G] Stedman to Fayetteville {CSXT) [11] Monroe to Pembroke (CSXT} [Z6] Mo�unt Ftlolly to Terreli (CSXT) [37] Saint Paaals to Lumberton (CSXT) Passenger Corridor Priorftiration Tiers [12] Raleigh to Norlina (CSXT) [27j Albemarle to Salisbury (NS} [38] Weidor� to VA state line (CSXT) [12pj Narlina, to Weldon (CSX7) [28] Asheboro to kiigh Point (NSj [39j Glinton to Warsaw (C�XT} Investmentr Program [N3] Hamlet to Raleigh (CSXT) [29] Eden to VAstate line (NS) [40] Lelarod, NC to Sunny Poir�t [CSXT/DOD) [14] Raleigh to Fayetteville {N8) [30] Roxboro to VA state lir� (NS) [41] Chocowiniiy to New Bem (NS} Stewardship Program [15] VA state line to SG state line (CSXY} [31] Carrboro to Hillsborough (N9} [42] Durham toAp2x {GSXT} [v6J Raleigh to Greanville (C�NA) [32] Qxford to Durham (NS� [43] Edenton to VAStaie Line �act[ve Moni�oring Program [�7j Selma ta Rwlorehead City (NS) [33] Fuquay-Vanna to Gul� (NS} [44] Camp Lej�une to Mae�h�ad City (NSIDOD) Figure 2- 84 Prioritized Passeuger Corridor Needs August 2015 I.aif�.i�J 2.3.4.1 Freight Corridor Prioritization The freight rail corridors in the Investment Program Tier mostly consist of the primary interstate corridors for the two Class I railroads in North Carolina, the A Line (Corridor 15), Z Line and SF Line (Corridor 02) for CSXT, and the NS Mainline (Corridor 06) as well as the NS/NCRR corridor (Corridor 09) between Raleigh and Greensboro, the NS R Line (Corridor 08) that connects Columbia with the NS intermodal yard in Charlotte, and the NS/NCRR corridor H and EC lines between Raleigh and Morehead City (Corridor 17). These Investment Tier Program corridors best exhibit characteristics that could merit public investments: they currently support freight movement and are expected to continue to move large quantities of freight, are located near existing or future activity centers, and some support existing or future intermodal activity. The Stewardship Program Tier corridors carry less freight traffic, but still connect to the state's ports, major intermodal yards, and/or are on the STRACNET network. These corridors should continue to be considered for projects that will improve these important connections. The Active Monitoring Program Tier corridors carry less freight, and are often corridors that only connect to areas with less intermodal traffic, and/or only key connections on one end. These corridors should continue to be actively monitored for possible changes in freight services, and emergence of new key markets that could signal the need for additional improvements. Specific considerations for all of the identified railroad corridors included future public investment and economic changes. Planned public investments that influence the viability of a freight rail corridor include: • Grade crossings • Grade separations • Structures and right-of-way • Industrial sidings On the private side, economic changes influence local changes. For example, if fracking occurs in North Carolina it may impact the type and quantity of freight moved along Corridors 10 and 13, which are located near potential fracking C�MPREHEN5IVE STATE RAIL PLAN sites. Improvements or changes at North Carolina ports were also considered for their impacts on the freight rail corridors. The assessment of the freight rail corridors balanced existing conditions with projected future freight movement. For future conditions, consideration was given to future events with a higher degree of certainty, the expected significance and magnitude of future events, and the ability for future corridor implementation strategies to be executed, monitored and adapted. Each Class I railroad operates across multiple states and changes influencing the freight rail corridors extend beyond North Carolina's boundary. Bi- and multi- state collaborations continue to affect freight rail traffic traveling through, in, out and within North Carolina. Inbound and outbound traffic are focused around network centers in North Carolina. The freight rail corridors connect these network centers to other major freight centers including Chicago, Illinois; Columbus, Ohio; North Baltimore, Maryland; and Atlanta, Georgia. While the relative rankings were developed with the freight considerations described above, these rail corridors do not exclusively serve freight movement. Future assessment could include aggregating the freight scoring with the passenger rail measures to help identify corridors that can support both freight and passenger rail. This may involve refining the population measurement to include a freight component or balancing service and schedule considerations for freight movements. The relative rankings may also further drive the economic development discussion of the freight rail corridors. Expected population growth to support economic growth is as important as understanding the workforce and industry sector representation of that population growth. In addition to the population growth, acreage for industrial sites and activity centers to support freight movement is also needed along the corridors. More specifically, an understanding of industrial land use areas will influence economic development discussions, including industrial acreage and floor space, occupancy rates, industry sectors, and zoning characteristics. August 2015 2-123 2.3.41 Passenqer Corridor Prioritization The passenger rail corridors in the Investment Program Tier are those corridors that have the greatest population and employment densities, as well as have the highest levels of vehicular traffic and congestion. The corridors are also of varied length, which will help shape the type of possible passenger service investments to be considered. For example, Corridors 09 and 06 (each over 100 miles) are served by the Piedmont and Carolinian, are within the Federally- Designated Southeast Corridor, and are the corridors that are receiving the bulk of the state's current PIP capacity, safety and speed improvements. Corridor 08 is currently served by the CATS Blue Line light rail, which is seeing record ridership. Long-term this corridor could be part of a commuter rail service between Charlotte and Rock Hill, SC. Corridors 07 (29 miles in length) and 05 (39 miles) have been evaluated in the past for future commuter rail service, as have portions of Corridor 04, both within Charlotte and Winston Salem. Other Investment Program Tier Corridors such as 35 (near Fayetteville) could be candidates for local transit improvements, including bus rapid transit. The shorter Investment Program Tier corridors show the highest promise for future commuter service, or as portions of future regional intrastate service, and should have priority in future studies. Corridors listed in the Stewardship Program Tier should be analyzed for expanding passenger rail and/or evaluated for commuter rail. Indeed, most of these corridors are already under consideration for either expanded intrastate/intercity passenger rail or commuter rail. Corridor 03 is on NCDOT's long-range plan for expanded intrastate passenger rail service, and Corridor 12 has been evaluated for light rail/commuter rail by Triangle Transit and is a critical link for the future Southeast Corridor. Portions of Corridor 02 parallel the Piedmont and Northern railroad between Charlotte and Gastonia, which has been under consideration for future commuter rail in the Charlotte region. Corridor 15 is an important link that carries several Amtrak trains, including the Carolinian; Amtrak also operates the Silver Star service over Corridor 13. Continued investment in this corridor should help improve on-time performance for these passenger trains as well as reduce travel times between stops. C�MPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN The Active Monitoring Program Tier represents the lowest-rated corridors for passenger rail service. Based upon the prioritization criteria used, these corridors have lower existing and future populations, lower parallel traffic volumes and highway congestion, and fewer connections to activity centers. However, portions of some corridors should be actively monitored and evaluated for expanded intrastate passenger rail; specifically, parts of Corridors 17, 18 and 19 will continue to be analyzed for future passenger rail service connecting Raleigh and Wilmington. 2.3.5 Freight Rail Needs and Opportunities After evaluating economic, freight and population data and trends, reviewing related studies, and conducting stakeholder outreach efforts, the following freight rail service needs and opportunities were identified. As recommended in the Eastern Infrastructure Improvement Study (prepared in accordance with Senate Bi11402 Section 34.23 (2013 General Assembly)), the State of North Carolina should establish the Secretary of Transportation's Freight Intermodal Advisory Council to help leverage strategic infrastructure investment to foster economic growth and create jobs. The Freight Intermodal Advisory Council should include, but not be limited to, representatives from the NC Board of Transportation and the boards of the NC Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Department of Commerce, the Global TransPark, and NC State Ports Authority. Private entities with State interest will be invited to join the Council, such as representative trucking companies or associations, the North Carolina Railroad Company, and shippers. The Secretary's Intermodal Advisory Council can lead efforts to: 1. Cultivate ongoing partnerships between metropolitan planning organizations/rural planning organizations and railroad companies serving each region to build understanding and improve economic development through coordinated transportation and land-use planning. 2. Develop a program to restore and add customers to existing lines where volumes have declined, yet some customers remain. 3. Increase transload opportunities on congested corridors to potentially divert more truck traffic to railroads by developing a state-level grant August 2015 2-124 program for transload facility development, operation, and maintenance to optimize siting based on evolving market needs and transport network congestion. Additional freight rail needs and opportunities are described below. • Prepare for the emergence of the energy industry in North Carolina that will add freight traffic. • Continue leading and investing in our nationally-recognized best practice safety program that improves at-grade highway-rail crossings and builds new grade-separated crossings. The program has helped reduce the number of train-car crashes from 244 in 1988 to 51 in 2014. • Implement the short-term solutions and plan for the long-term recommendations presented in the Eastern Infrastructure Study for GTP, the Port of Morehead City, and the Port of Wilmington. These solutions include, but are not limited to the following: Port of Wilmington and Wallace to Castle Hayne • Continue to preserve the right of way for and seek Department of Defense funding to restore the Wallace to Castle Hayne corridor. Port of Wilmington • Continue efforts to work with CSXT to identify actions that will lead to regular rail intermodal service to the Port of Wilmington. • Pursue implementation of recommendations from the ongoing Wilmington Traffic Separation Study of rail crossing consolidation and safety upgrades to improve safety and efficiency of rail and vehicular flow into the Port of Wilmington. • Pursue environmental, planning and conceptual design studies for the construction of a highway-railroad grade separated access at the North Gate of the Port of Wilmington. Separated access would improve safety, reduce vehicular congestion, and significantly increase rail capacity. C�MPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN • As future traffic volumes grow at the Port of Wilmington, investigate the feasibility of a new rail bridge across the Cape Fear River from the port area connecting to the rail network in Brunswick County. This would remove port rail traffic from Wilmington. G1obalTransPark • Lease the GTP spur (owned by NCDOT) to a private rail operator. • Examine GTP's authority to optimize its competitiveness for state and federal grant funds for capital improvement projects. • Investigate retaining State ownership of the North Carolina Railroad Company's water access property in New Bern as a potential barge transload facility for oversized cargo loads. • To prepare for the long term, conduct the environmental analysis for a CSXT spur from the GTP to railroad point "Elmer" in Kinston and obtain the advance right-of-way. Port of Morehead City • In the short term, pursue a super-street style advanced and coordinated traffic plan to reduce rail and truck Port traffic conflicts with vehicle and pedestrian traffic on US-70 Arendell Street. • Implement an on-port loop track to build/break unit trains. • Establish the GTP to Morehead City Highway and Rail Mobility Corridor and continue to evaluate a potential Northern Carteret Rail and Highway Bypass as market conditions evolve Additional Freight Rail Needs and Opportunities: Maintain short line support programs such as the Rail Industrial Access Program and Short Line Industrial Access Program via Freight Rail & Rail Crossing Safety Improvement funds (FRRCSI) to aid NC industries in accessing Class I rail networks. Continue efforts to partner with railroads to evaluate placing an intermodal facility in Eastern NC or Eastern Piedmont to help mitigate August 2015 2-125 future highway congestion's impacts on the Triangle region's access to intermodal service(s) that are currently located in Charlotte and Greensboro. A facility may also support agriculture and related industries in eastern North Carolina and enhance the ability of goods to reach domestic and international markets through North Carolina and/or regional ports Also, support the expansion of existing CSXT and NS intermodal facilities in Charlotte and Greensboro. • Leverage private sector rail capacity investments and augment them to foster truck-to-rail mode shifts. For example, mobilize collateral efforts as appropriate, such as rail training programs to offset the declining numbers of truck drivers. • Support the Secretary of Transportation's initiative to identify rail industry workforce education and training needs and meet them through the community college system. 2.3.6 Passenger Rail Needs and Opportunities 2.3.6.1 Passenger Rail Needs Assessment After evaluating the rail, highway, air, transit trends, land use, population, and employment trends and evaluating the various rail corridors in North Carolina, the following passenger rail needs and opportunities were developed. The needs were placed in these categories: existing markets, emerging markets, and operational/financial. 2.3.6.1.1 Existing Passenger Rail Market Needs 1. There is a need for additional rail services in North Carolina, as seen in the nearly doubling of rail ridership in the past 12 years. This growth in passenger rail ridership was nearly five times greater than growth of the state's population during this same time period. Moreover, during this same timeframe, per capita VMT declined in North Carolina and the US. The area with the highest ridership and greatest increases in ridership continues to be along the state's urbanized areas in the Piedmont corridor. 2. Better service to the Charlotte region which continues to be a top destination for interstate and intrastate air and rail travel for North Carolina. This is reflected in the air travel, which shows Charlotte as the first or second ranked destination for all commercial airports in North C�MPREHEN5IVE STATE RAIL PLAN Carolina. Data from the Carolinian and Piedmont also show that Charlotte and the Triangle region (Durham, Cary, and Raleigh) are the top city pairs for ticket sales. 3. Rail ridership growth is placing a strain on some existing passenger rail services. Often trains are full during peak travel periods and station overcrowding is becoming common in Charlotte and Raleigh (see operational and financial needs below for more detail). 4. Improved connections with the Northeast Corridor are needed, as cities along the Northeast Corridor continue to be top rail trip origins and destinations for North Carolinians. This is reflected in a review of the most popular rail trip pairs for the Carolinian, as well as a review of top destinations for air travelers in North Carolina. This growth in the North Carolina-Northeast Corridor rail market is despite the fact that passenger rail travel times between North Carolina cities and the Northeast Corridor (Washington, DC, New York, etc.) are currently not competitive with flying and driving. This concurs with the findings that this is an under-served travel market for rail, as reflected in the ridership and revenue studies conducted by both NCDOT and FRA. 2.3.6.1.2 Emerging Passenger Rail Market Needs 1. Most of the state's population growth outside of the Charlotte-Raleigh corridor will be in other urban areas currently without passenger rail service. Metropolitan areas such as Winston-Salem, Asheville and Wilmington are projected to capture a significant share of the state's population growth. Corridors serving these growing regions should be investigated for possible passenger rail service or motor coach connections. 2. There is a need to address growth in North Carolina's urban corridors served by I-40, I-85 and I-95 that contributes to the traffic congestion along key highways, and trains are often full during peak periods. While growth in per capita VMT may be flat, these critical highway corridors will see the lion's share of future growth in employment, residents, and traffic congestion. 3. There is a growing travel market between Charlotte and Atlanta, Georgia, as seen in a review of air travel data. More frequent and faster passenger rail service to Atlanta is also part of the Federally-Designated Southeast Corridor long-term plan. August 2015 2-126 2.3.6.1.3 Passenger Rail Operational and Financial Needs 1. The state's most popular stations - Charlotte and Raleigh - often face overcrowding. Charlotte and Raleigh have the highest ridership numbers in the state but are also the only two stations served by the Carolinian that have not seen a substantial renovation or construction of a new station. Raleigh will begin construction on the first phase of a new station in 2015. As of 2014, there is no funding available for construction of a new Charlotte station. 2. There is a clear need for better transit connections at stations. Parking shortages at stations illustrate the need for better overall connections - including pedestrian and bicycle, and transit, including commuter rail. As North Carolina's cities look to implement transit improvements, these should include multimodal connections with current or future intercity rail services. 3. On-Time Performance (OTP) has dropped nationally and for all passenger trains serving the state. This drop in OTP is due to a variety of factors, including capacity issues along key corridors, limited parking at overcrowded stations and longer dwell times at stations. 4. There is no long-term dedicated rail funding at the federal or state level for passenger rail improvements and operations. 5. Equipment expansion will be needed to meet long-term growth. NCDOT purchased and refurbished used passenger rail equipment to operate the Piedmont services. After starting service with the planned fourth and fifth Charlotte-Raleigh trains, NCDOT will have no spare equipment. Moreover, a larger maintenance facility will be needed in Charlotte to clean, service, and refuel trains that terminate and originate in the Charlotte area. 2.3.61 Passenger Rail Opportunities After evaluating the passenger rail needs, the following opportunities were developed to address the above needs. Each opportunity represents one or more potential projects, and each opportunity can help meet more than one need identified above. 1. Partner with local governments, Amtrak and others to extend bus services and explore new commuter and regional rail service to existing and emerging urban/suburban corridors. Metropolitan areas currently not C�MPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN served by passenger rail such as Winston-Salem, Asheville and Wilmington are projected to have a significant share of North Carolina's population growth. Extending rail services will help ensure the economic vitality of these regions. 2. Improve infrastructure in the Raleigh to Greensboro corridor to increase average speed and capacity, and construct a new Charlotte station (with associated track improvements) to increase capacity. 3. Add the 4th and 5th frequencies (3rd and 4th Piedmont trains) and stations at points including Hillsborough, Lexington and Harrisburg to serve the growing population in the I-40/I-85 corridors. 4. Continue to work, through regional partnerships, towards implementing the federally-designated Southeast Corridor, including the Virginia-North Carolina Interstate Rail Compact and investigating joint operations or expansion of each state's existing state-supported services. A fully operational Southeast Corridor (Charlotte-Raleigh-Richmond, Virginia- Washington, DC) is projected to have annual revenues that will exceed operating costs - which would provide a basis for a concession or franchise to operate and maintain the line. 5. Develop new multimodal stations in Charlotte and Raleigh. The Raleigh Union Station is currently under design and will start construction in 2015, and has an opportunity to be a true transportation and economic catalyst for the state's capital. NCDOT must also explore options with the Charlotte Area Transit System to develop Charlotte Gateway Station to meet projected demand. Completion of these "book-end" stations will generate a significant increase in the state's overall rail passenger ridership. 6. Evaluate service operations and collaborate with stakeholders to improve customer service, reduce costs, and find other efficiencies. 7. Cultivate station development public-private partnerships to reduce capital and operating costs to the state and evaluate new financial sources through potential local municipal, MPO, RPO, and private partnerships to fund existing and future expansion of passenger services. Partnerships with local and regional transportation agencies can help ensure that multimodal August 2015 2-127 COMPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN stations continue to provide the regional connectivity that is needed for economic growth 8. Assess near-term service improvements on existing services and at existing stations to increase ridership and revenue including new marketing opportunities. 9. Evaluate recent federal and state funding programs for passenger rail to see which have been most effective. 10. Implement a variety of improved connections at stations including transit, pedestrian and bicycle connections, and taxi. 11. With Charlotte's emergence as a major air hub, investigate extending and operating intercity passenger rail service or commuter rail service to Charlotte Douglas International Airport. 12. Invite other state within the federally-designated Southeast Corridor (South Carolina, Georgia and Florida) to join the Virginia-North Carolina Interstate Rail Compact. To join the compact, these states must adopt the identical legislation adopted by North Carolina and Virginia, and both North Carolina and Virginia would need to pass legislation to accept the new members. August 2015 2-128 3 Chapter Three - Proposed North Carolina Passenger Rail Improvements and Investments This chapter describes the proposed passenger rail improvements, including the service plans and financial components of some programs. It also describes how each proposal will address gaps in service, the benefits of the services, and financial needs identified in Chapter 2. 3.1 CORRIDOR AND PROJECT ANALYSIS Governor McCory's 25-Year Vision identified improving the public transportation network, including improving passenger rail service as a major component. Two goals in particular speak directly to the passenger rail improvements and investments identified in the Comprehensive State Rail Plan. The vision calls for the expansion of access to passenger rail options in all regions of the state to accommodate a changing demographic, address congestion issues and meet regional transportation needs. The vision also calls for expanding access to mass transit options in high-growth areas to accommodate a changing demographic and address existing and future congestion. The prioritization methodology used in Chapter 2 ensures harmony between the Governor's Vision and the recommendations for improvements and investments in our passenger rail network. The corridor prioritization results from Chapter 2 were analyzed and each corridor - or a combination of corridors - was analyzed to determine what potential passenger rail programs and projects could be implemented to help meet the transportation needs and opportunities for the state. Of the corridors in the Investment Tier (top tier), Corridors 09 and 06 are already served by Amtrak as the Piedmont corridor and are parts of the federally designated Southeast Corridor. NCDOT has invested in these corridors as part of the Piedmont Improvement Program and other programs, and will continue to do so to help implement the Southeast Corridor. Corridor 15 is an important link for both the state-supported Carolinian and Amtrak's Silver Service trains that run from the Northeast Corridor to Florida. This corridor C�MPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN also scored in the top Tier for freight as well, as it is an important north-south link paralleling I-95 (see Chapter 4). Portions of Corridor 06 in the Charlotte region should also be considered a candidate for commuter rail or other high capacity transit services. Corridor 09 has also been selected for future commuter rail in the Triangle region (see section 3.8). The remaining Investment Tier corridors are shorter in length and should be considered candidates for commuter rail or other improved transit services (Corridors 05, 08, 12, 26, 35, and 42). Of the Stewardship Tier corridors, some have either existing Amtrak service or Amtrak Thruway bus service (Corridors 13, 14, 16, and 17) and have been or are planned for evaluation for passenger rail service expansion, or are part of corridors that have been or will be studied for service expansion for either motor coach service, passenger rail, or both. The purpose of the proposed passenger rail improvements and investments is to address the passenger rail needs identified in Chapter 2. Moreover, the projects selected for inclusion in this State Rail Plan were identified because of their potential to support North Carolina's mission and objectives for a successful multimodal transportation system. Many of the projects, particularly those that expand the passenger rail network and transit options, are also consistent with the Governor's 25-Year Vision to transform our state's transportation system. As stated in Chapter 2, the Passenger Corridor Prioritization Tiers analysis is primarily based upon data showing existing or projected needs, and not feasibility or cost-effectiveness. The feasibility of some projects and programs are evaluated here and in Chapter 5. In addition to evaluating the passenger corridors, the State Rail Plan evaluated the passenger rail needs and opportunities from Chapter 2 to develop possible programs, projects and studies described in this Chapter. Figure 3-1 shows the tiered passenger rail corridors. Table 3-1 summarizes the passenger rail recommendations, and notes which rail corridors are included in the recommended projects, programs, and studies. The remaining sections of Chapter 3 describe these projects, programs and studies in greater detail. August 2015 3-1 r� i. . .r�,wV�' �,r �"�„�=�F�� VA'j'�L r f l/i :i..'�� .J F�,. -. yy �' y� it � .� � i'!� s"� ' y"%�''�� ,d ! �� _. '.:�f'�"f#.��f"`�.0 �:"?��'a��%`r"� ��..� . � — ---- —im�� : I' 1 . /�'� �' - , � ��, � ; 1' � � t. 1� 1 '� �. — � WinatornSaleim , �' �reens �,_�_ �,j �`' ' " �� , �- ) 1 ,. �--f-� Burlini �� _ Gonover �i � � ;� ,--;' AsMevil � c: , � ' Co� [pt] TN stal� iine toAsheVille (�3S1 — �--� [�2] Charlotte to'�N state line fCSXTy [18� Contentnea to lMallace (CSXT) [03] Salisbury toAsheville (NSy [18p] WUallac€ to Wiirnington Passenger Service [04] Gharlotie to Winston S�lem io VA stale line (NS) [19� Pembrake to Wilmmgton (CSXT) [05] Greensbora ta Wi�nston Salem 10 Rural I-lall (NS} (20j Greenville to Lee CreeK (NS) [O6] SC state line to VA sfiate line (NS) [21], Rocky MounT to Ply�rnouTh (CSXT) [�7j Charlotte to Monroe (CSXT) [221 Parrn�ie to Greenville lo'Elmer (CSXT) [08] Charlofte ko Golumbia (NS} [23a Cliffsid� ta Bosiic (CSXT} [09] Greensboro to Selma (NS) [24�, Newton sauth {N6y �10] Gre�nsboro to Gulf iNS) [25}' SC state line to Gastonia (NS) Q1�] Momroe [o Pembrok2 (CSXT) [26]i Maunt Hollytm Terrell (CSXT) [ti2] Raleigh to M1dorllna (CSXT) [27� Albemarle to Salistaury (NS) �1'2pj Norlina to Weldon (CSX�) [28�Asheboro to High Foint (NS} �13] Hamiel to Raleigh (GSXT} [29] Eden to VA state I�r�e (NS) [14] Raleigh to �ayetteville (NSr [3DZ Roxboro 10 VA state Ime (NS) ['b5j VA state line to SC state line iCSX7j (31� Carrboro to Hillsbwough (NS) [�6J Raleigh to G�reenville (CLNA) [32� Oxford 40 ��urham {NS) ['M7] Selma to Morehead Ciiy (NS) [33) Fuquay-Warina to G�rlf (NS) Figure 3-1 Prioritized Passenger Rail Corridors � ,��Q ;` �� *Dur am y� Raleig� '��33r 13 14 35 . - - " c 36 [34j Hamlet to SC staf� line (CSXT) [35] Spring Lake t� Fort Bragg (CSXT} [36] Stedrnan ta Fayetteville (CSXT) [37� Samt Pauls io Wmberton (CSXT} [38j Weldon to VW state line (CSXT) j39] Clinton to Warsaw (CSXT� [40) Leland, NC to Sunny Point (CSXT/D�D) �41] Chacowinity to �iew Bem (NS) �42J durham to Apex (CSXT) [43] Edenton to VA Staie Line �44J Camp Le�eune to Moreheac9 Clry {NSfD�D) :C ' .1 CC7MPREH€N�NE STAT� Rr'�II� PL�:C'�9 � . , � _ Nor ro s.:aaF City Passenger Corridor Friorft'rcation Tiers Investment Program Stewardship Rrogram �Active Mo�nitoring Prograrr� August 2015 3-2 CC?MPR�Q-9Eh951V� Sl�.l � ��.IL RL4.f� Table 3-1 Passenger Rail Corridor Tiers and Potential Projects Passenger Segment Corridor Passenger Potential Passenger Rail Pro ram Descri tion Included Corridor Route Railroad Parallel Hi hways Tier Projects Charlotte to 06 SC state line to VA state NCRR/NS I-85, US-29 Investment Travel time impi•ovements, new 3.2.1 Piedmont Greensboro line sto s, station im rovements Corridor Greensboro to 09 Greensboro to Selma NCRR/NS I-40, US-70 Investment Travel time improvements, new Ralei h sto s, station im rovements Raleigh to Re-introduce passenger rail 3'2'2 Richmond, VA 12 Raleigh to Norlina CSXT US-1 Investment service Washington, DG Charlotte to SC state line to VA state Travel time improvements, Charlotte Greensboro 06 line NCRR/NS I-85, US-29 Investment station im rovements (Southeast Corridor) Greensboi-o to 09 Greensboro to Selma NCRR/NS I-40, US-70 Investment Travel time improvements, Ralei h station im rovements Asheville, Motorcoach service expansion Western NC to 03 Asheville to Salisbury NS I-40, US-70 Stewardship (connects to Piedmont/ Salisbu►• Carolinian service Asheville to Rural Hall to Winston- Motorcoach service expansion Winston Salem to 05 Salem to Greensboro NS I-40, US-52 Investment (connects to Piedmont/ Greensboro Carolinian service Columbia, SC to Motorcoach service expansion Rock Hill, SC to OS SC state line (from NS I-77 Investment (connects to Piedmont/ Charlotte Columbia) to Charlotte Carolinian service 3.3 Statewide Raleigh to Motorcoach service expansion Thruway Fayetteville 14 Raleigh to Fayetteville NS US-401 Stewardship (connects to Piedmont/ Service Carolinian setvice) Raleigh to Motorcoach service expansion Richmond, VA 12 Raleigh to Norlina CSXT US-1 Investment (connects to Piedmont/ Carolinian service Raleigh to Motorcoach service expansion Wilmington 17 Selma to Morehead City NCRR/NS US-70 Stewardship (connects to Piedmont/ Raleigh to Carolinian service) Morehead Cit Raleigh to Contentnea (Wilson) to Active Motorcoach service expansion Wilmington 18p Wallace CSXT US-117, US-13 Monitoring (connects to Piedmont/ Carolinian service Raleigh to Selma 09 Greensboro to Selma NCRR/NS I-40, US-70 Investment Southeastern NC service 3.4 SENC ex ansion Service Selma to 17 Selma to Morehead City NCRR/NS US-70 Stewardship Southeastern NC service Extension Goldsboro ex ansion Goldsboro to Contentnea (Wilson) to Southeastern NC service Wilmin ton 18p Wallace to Wilmin ton CSXT US-117, US 13 expansion August 2015 3-3 c+�o��;—s�u��o�;r��ti�u� e��:uo_r!�:o� Passenger Segment Corridor Passenger Potential Passenger Rail Pro ram Descri tion Included Corridor Route Railroad Parallel Hi hwa s Tier Pro'ects Raleigh to Selma 09 Greensboro to Selma NCRR/NS I-40, US-70 Investment Southeastern NC service ex ansion 3.4 SENC Selma to SC state line to VA state Southeastern NC service Service Pembroke (via 15 line CSXT I-95 Investment t�pansion Extension Fayetteville) Pembroke to 19 Pembroke to Wilmington CSXT I-74/US-74 Active Southeastei-n NC service Wilmin ton M�nito�-it�� expansion 3.5 WNC Service Asheville to 03 Asheville to Salisbury NS I-40, US-70 Stewardship Western NC service expansion Extension Salisbury SC state line to VA 15 SC state line to VA state CSXT I-95 Investment Existing Amtrak service 3.6 Eastern NC state line line im rove►nents Service SC state line to 13 SC state line to Hamlet to CSXT US-1, I-440 Stewardship Existing Amtrak service Hamlet to Ralei h Ralei h im rovements Raleigh to 16 Raleigh to Greenville CLNA US-64, US-264 Stewardship Study corridor - extend Greenville Piedmont service 07 Charlotte to Monroe CSXT US-74, I-277 Stewardship Passenger rail study corridor Charlotte to 11 Monroe to Pembroke CSXT I-74/US-74 Active Passenger rail study corridor Wilmington MO111i01'lll 19 Pembroke to Wilmington CSXT I-74/US-74 Active p2ssenger rail study corridor 3.7 Potential Monitorin Intercity Charlotte to the SC state line to VA state Corridors Northeast via 06 line NCRR/NS I-85, US-29 Investment Passenger rail study corridor (Studies) L nchbur , VA 12/ Raleigh to Norlina CSXT US-1 Investment Passenger rail study corridor Raleigh to Hampton Roads, 12p Norlina to Weldon CSXT US 158 Stewardship Passenger rail study corridor Virginia Active 38 Weldon to VA state line CSXT NC 35, US-158 Passenger rail study corridor Monitoi�ing Raleigh to 17 Selma to Morehead City NCRR/NS US-70 Stewardship Passenger rail study corridor Morehead Cit Charlotte to 04 Charlotte to Winston- NS I-40, I-77, US-311 Stewardship Commuter rail Mooresville Salem to VA state line Winston-Salem to 05 Rural Hall to Winston- NS I-40, US-52 Investment Commuter rail 3.8 Commuter Greensboro Salem to Greensboro Rail Charlotte to 07 Charlotte to Monroe CSXT US-74, I-277 Stewardship Commuter rail Monroe Charlotte to Rock 08 SC state line (from NS I-77 Investment Commuter rail Hill, SC Columbia to Charlotte August 2015 3-4 C+`Jo �i � G�� e-9 �[� � V`�J �� ti�;1 d� E��"; V B_ PL�:O'� Passenger Segment Corridor Passenger Potential Passenger Rail Pro ram Descri tion Included Corridor Route Railroad Parallel Hi hwa s Tier Pro'ects Durham to 09 Greensboro to Selma NCRR/NS I-40, US-70 Investment Commuter Rail Garner Raleigh to 12 Raleigh to Norlina CSXT US-1 Investment Commuter Rail Youn sville Sanford to 13 SC state line to Hamlet to CSXT US-1, I-440 Stewardship Commuter Rail Ralei h Raleigh Raleigh to 14 Raleigh to Fayetteville NS US-401 Stewardship Commuter Rail Fu ua -Varina Mt-Holly to I-485, I-77, NC 150, Charlotte (via 26 Mt. Holly to Terrell CSXT NC 27 Investment Commuter rail Corridor 02 Durham to Apex 42 Durham to Apex CSXT I-40, NC 147, NC 55, Investment Commuter rail US-1 Edenton, Active Elizabeth City to 43 Edenton to VA state line C&A US-17, NC 168 Commuter rail Ha�npton Roads Monitoring 35 Spring Lake to Fort Bragg CSXT NC 87 Investment None* �Z Tennessee state line to CSXT I-85, US-221, US- Stewardship None Charlotte 321 01 Tennessee state line to NS I-40 Stewardship None Asheville 33 Fuquay Varina to Gulf NS NC 55, US-1, US-421 Stewardship None 32 Oxford to Durham NS I-85, US-15, US-70 Stewardship None 31 Carrboro to Hillsborough NS I-85, US-15, US-501 Stewardship None 21 Rocky Mount to Plymouth CSXT US-13, US-64 Active None Monitorin 20 Greenville to Lee Creek NS NC 33 Active Nane MOI11C01-II1�T 10 Greensboro to Gulf NS US-421 Active �one Sanfoi�d Monitorin 22 Parmele to Greenville to CSXT NC 11, US-13 Monitoring None Elmer 41 Chocowinity to New Bern NS US-17 Active None (existing Amtralt Monitorin Thruwa motor coach service 27 Albemarle to Salisbury NS US-29, US-52 Active None Monitoi�in August 2015 3-5 C+`Jo�i�'G��e-;�[�SV�J� Sti�;1G ��";09_ PLG:��ll Passenger Segment Corridor Passenger Potential Passenger Rail Pro ram Descri tion Included Corridor Route Railroad Parallel Hi hwa s Tier Pro'ects 28 Asheboro to High Point NS I-73, US-220, US Active [�one 311, US-64 Mo�iitorii� 37 Saint Pauls to Lumberton CSXT I-95, US-301, NC 87 �ctive None Monitorin 40 Leland NC to Sunny Point CSXT/DOD US-17, US-421, US- Active �one 74 Motiitorin 23 Cliffside to Bostic CSXT US-221 Active None MOI11tDI'lll 30 Roxboro to VA state line NS US-158, US-501 Active �one MO[11t01'lllg 29 Eden to VA state line NS NC 14, NC 49, NC Active �one 87, US-220, US-58 Monitorin 34 Hamlet to SC state line CSXT NC 79, US-74 Active None Monitorin 39 Clinton to Warsaw CSXT NC 24 Active None MOI11t0t'lll 25 SC state line to Gastonia NS US-29, US-321 �ctive None Monitorin 36 Stedman to Fayetteville CSXT NC 24 Active None Monitorin 24 Newton south NS US-321 Active None Monitorin 38 Weldon to VA state line CSXT NC 35, US-158 Active None MOI11t0I'llla *This railroad is only approximately seven miles, and is too short for commuter rail. The corridor might support other transit se�vices such as bus rapid transit or light rail. See Appendix D for further information. August 2015 3-6 Sections 3.2 through 3.8 describe the proposed passenger rail programs and services, including potential operations costs (if known). Section 3.9 summarizes these future services and programs and incudes the capital costs. [c�►.5.��1��1:I�_[►�r�Z�]:�:�I�Z�I:� The Southeast Corridor is a federally-designated passenger rail corridor that connects major cities in Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. The Southeast Corridor serves the growing cities in the southeastern United States, as well as connects these markets to the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak's existing high speed rail coi-ridor. As described in Chapter 2, through the Virginia-North Carolina Interstate High- Speed Rail Compact both North Carolina and Virginia have been working with the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Amtrak, and others to increase average speeds, improve reliability, reduce travel times and add frequencies to meet the growing travel demand in this corridor. Once the corridor is fully operational with maximum operating speeds and with six to eight daily round trips, the North Carolina-Virginia portion of the Southeast Corridor is projected to have annual operating revenues exceed annual operating expenses by 2025. Figure 3-2 shows the Southeast Rail Corridor. Spartanburg Greenville � � Columbia � Atlanta i i i �� Macon To 8irmingham Savannah Jacksonville Source: NCDOT �.��o��-��a�;o��r�= ��ti�.u��= ��.uo_ r+�:o� To Nev�r York/8osfor ?d i Washington, DC . Richmond �,°� Petersburg �^ �) Hamp Roads Raleigh Federally Designated Southeast Corridor Status � Tier I EIS Rf�D cornpleted 2042 �i Tier II EIS ROD completed 2015 - Tier I EIS RODcompleted 2012 � ARRAlncrementallmprovements to be completed by 2017 _ Tier II EIS begins 2014-to be completed 2017 No Scheduled Projects Tier I EIS began 2012 Figure 3-2 Federally Designated Soutlieast Corridor August 2015 3-7 The sections below describe the steps needed to implement the Southeast Corridor and meet the needs and opportunities for this coi•ridor identified in Chapter 2. 3.2.1 Piedmont Corridor: Raleigh to Charlotte �: - `- , � '� i r �-�; Winstoar,-Salem J I� ,4 __ ^ �� Conove� � - � ,J` �`�_ -__❑ � � + Figure 3-3 ��I � Greensboro M�"`��Durham 8urlingtan _,- �o��F , Cary J , J 'u � �-'`. 1Racky I �;�h �� ' n J Wilsom � � Gulf ° ,Selrtna � ��_ . -� id ' `-'�� _ ,Golds6oro � � � �� Fayetteville , ; � Kinsh � :'�Hamlet � � ' � � �� Wallace ; � T } . Piedmont Improvement Corridor The service improvements for the Southeast Corridor include upgrades to the Raleigh to Charlotte segment, known as the Piedmont corridor, which is the most densely popuulated segment in North Carolina. These service improvements ai-e key elements needed to implement the North Carolina portion and the overall vision of the federally-designated Southeast Corridor. 3.2.1.1 Fourth and Fifth Frequencies The Piedmont corridor (connecting the Charlotte, Triad and Triangle regions) is the most densely populated portion of the Southeast Corridor in North Carolina. The Piedmont corridor is currently served by three daily round trip trains via one Carolinian and two Piedmont trains. Ridership on these trains has increased around 8 percent annually from 274,000 in 2004 to 488,000 in 2013. As described in Chapter 2, the Piedmont corridor consists of two corridors (Corridors 06 from Charlotte to Greensboro, and Corridor 09 from Greensboro to Raleigh) within the top rated Tier for passenger rail needs. C�Jo�I � G?�;-��9�V�J� Sti �;1 C��";V� PLG.CJ To meet the growing demand in this corridor, NCDOT and FRA have funded the Piedmont Improvement Program (PIP) to improve safety, capacity and speed in the Piedmont corridor. The PIP began in 2009 and includes station enhancements, inf►-astructure improvements and new passenger rail equipment to support additional passenger rail services in the Piedmont corridor. As part of the PIP, NCDOT has entered an agi-eement with the FRA, Norfolk Southern (NS) Railway, the North Carolina Railroad (NCRR) Company and Amtrak to add a fourth and fifth daily round trip frequency between Charlotte and Raleigh. When completed in 2017, the PIP will allow NCDOT to increase the daily passenger rail frequencies in the corridor from three to five, with maximum allowable speeds at 79 mph for much of this corridor. Station improvements are also being undertaken as part of P[P. These include an enlai�ged station at Cary, extended platforms and canopies at Kannapolis, Salisbury and Burlington, and parking improvements at High Point. All of these station improvements have been completed. The PIP also includes partial funding for the first phase of the Raleigh Union Station (RUS), which will replace the existing undersized Raleigh Amtrak station. Because of the capacity improvements under the PIP, the fourth and fifth frequencies will operate without interference with NS freight operations and have a higher degree of reliability. The fourth and fifth fi•equencies will help meet the growing demand for service in the corridor, as evidenced by the rapid growth in ridership. By having morning, noon, afternoon and evening departures, the additional frequencies will provide a"shuttle" service that will be especially attractive for business travelers, college students and others and better connect the major urban centers in the Piedmont corridor. The additional frequencies will provide an alternative to driving the state's busiest interstates, and will service several counties that are in non-attainment for air quality. NCDOT plans to begin operating the fourth frequency in 2017, when the PIP is completed. The fifth frequency is scheduled to be implemented in 2019. Depending on the projected ridership levels and when the fifth frequency may begin service, NCDOT may need to acquire additional equipment and even expand parking and station facilities at some locations. As noted in Chapter 2, NCDOT projections indicate that adding the fourth and fifth frequency will August 2015 3-8 increase ridership on the state-sponsored trains from approximately 483,000 to over 864,000 within the next 10 years. Table 3-2 shows the projected ridership and revenue for these additional services. Table 3-2 Projected Ridersliip and Revenue, Fourth and Fifth Frequencies EXISTING (3 4 5 FREQUENCIES)* FREQUENCIES* FREQUENCIES* -2013 2018 2024 RIDERSHIP I Piedmont/Caro(inian 482,700 626,700 864,100 Trains Amtrak Long 129,100 202,400 221,200 Distance Trains** TICKET REVENUES I Piedmont/Carolinian Trains �ZZ,�46,000 $27,382,000 $34,427,000 Amtrak Long $19,170,000 $25,663,000 $27,961,000 Distance Trains** PASSENGER MILES Piedmont/Carolinian 114,220,000 137,280,000 173,020,000 Trains Amtrak Long 66,910,000 90,520,000 98,790,000 Distance Trains** *3 F'requencies = 1 Carolinian round trip train, Charlotte to New York via the CSX'C A Line, plus 2 Piedmont round trips trains, Charlotte to Raleigh. 5 frequencies = 1 Carolinian round trip train, Charlotte to New York via the CSXT A Line plus 4 Piedmont round trip trains, Charlotte to Raleigh. All services assume 79 mph Maximum Allowable Speed (MAS) Carolinian ridership is for all trips, **Amtrak Long Distance Trains: Crescent, Palmetto, Sifver Meteor, Silver Star activity from NEC through NC only; includes connecting buses Source: AECOM, Full year projections from reports produced in September 2013 and March 2014 The fourth frequency (to begin service in 2017) will be funded through a combination of ticket revenues, federal Congestion, Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds, and Rail Division operating funds. The addition of a fourth Charlotte to Raleigh frequency will increase ridership and revenues, but will also require additional state operating and CMAQ funds. Chapter 5 includes a more information on the operating and finance plan for the four frequencies. Funding for operations for the fifth frequency is unknown at this time. Section 3.9 below describes the capital needs for the fifth frequency. C+�E�1FR�E-9Eh9SIU� ST�.I � ��.IL PLp.CJ 3.2.1.2 New Stops and Improved Stations As part of an agreement entered by NCDOT aild the railroads under PIP, the state is investigating adding new stops within the Piedmont corridor at Hillsborough, Lexington, and Harrisburg. The intent of adding stations is to increase ridership ai�d revenue by serving growing markets in the corridor. The new stops would include associated tracic speed and reliability improvements so that the overall service qualiry between Charlotte and Raleigh is maintained. Once these three new stations are constructed, stations will be spaced approximately 17 miles along the Piedmont corridor. Adding these stations and frequencies are consistent with the Governot''s 25-Year Vision for improving transit options within high growth areas and expanding access to passenger rail options to additional regions. In 2014, the Hillsborough Station was selected to be funded under the Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) program. The benefit-cost of the other proposed stations will be evaluated to determine if they qualify for funding through the STI program. . To accommodate the growing ►-idership at the state's busiest station, NCDOT (in coordination with the City of Charlotte) has also been planning for a new multimodal center to replace the existing Charlotte Amtrak station. The new Charlotte Gateway Station will also serve Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) buses, and streetcar service. The long-term vision for the Charlotte Gateway Station is to also provide connections to future commuter rail service. The Environ►nental Assessment for the Gateway Station was completed in 2006, with NCDOT scheduled to complete the EA for the associated track improvements in 2015. August 2015 3-9 3.2.2 Washington, DC to Charlotte , ; _, . �: � ,---� 'W9nstan-Salem :, n � � � �- �—� � Conover High �oin� �. . ., - �, � _ _ � , , � �;� `Gastonia Concord ` �� _4harlotte l_J I I. . I IIA�.�� nonina� � ❑ _. Greensbo � ' �` ' � Qurham Burlington �Roeky Mc -I� �� Raleic�h ❑�;�, � j Wilson Cary�� /� . �� 'J I Gulf, I j5elma � l I I ', � �� _ coldstioro,� � `. { r ` Kinston , Fayerieville � � � ��1 JoHamlet {� �i � LJ �� Wallace � I , �, �: J— Figw-e 3-4 Federally Designateci Southeast Corridor in NC Through the [nterstate High-Speed Rail Compact, North Carolina and the Commonwealth of Virginia are coordinating on studies and on steps to implement improvements along the Washington, DC to Charlotte segment Southeast Corridor. Within Virginia, the primary passenger rail market for the Southeast Corridor is the Richmond to Washington, DC segment. The Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) recently completed $377 million in projects within the Washington, DC-Richmond portion of the corridor improving capacity and on-time performance which benefits freight, intercity (Amtrak) and commuter rail. In 2012, Virginia extended improvements south and implemented a state-supported extension of a Northeast Corridor Regional roundtrip from Richmond to Norfolk via Petersburg. These capacity improvements help with future Southeast Corridor seivices. In 2012, DRPT �:.�Jo�I � G?�;-��[��V�J� Sti �;1 C ��";0� PLG:��➢ began a Tier II Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Richmond to Washington, DC corridor.i 3.2.2.1 Raleiqh to Richmond A major portion of implementing the Southeast Corridor is to restore passenger rail service between Raleigh and Richmond, VA via the CSXT S Line (portions of which are unused or out of service). The CSXT S Line is shown as Corridor 12 in the State Rail Plan. Reconstructing the S Line to support 90 to 110 mph passenger rail speeds will provide a faster, more direct route (32 miles shorter) between Raleigh and Richmond. The restored S Line will provide the necessary capacity for Charlotte-Raleigh trains to continue north of Richmoncl to various Northeast Corridor destinations. This will meet the documented need to serve the growing North Carolina-Northeast Corridor travel markets. Without the restored S Line, additional capacity would need to be added to the NCRR between Raleigh and Selma and the CSXT A Line between Selma and Petersburg in order to extend additional trains connecting the lucrative North Carolina- Northeast Corridor travel markets. Routing the additional passenger trains via the A Line would limit their maximum authorized speed to 79 mph versus 90 or 110 mph along the S-line, increase the conflicts with freight trains, and result in greater environmental impacts due to the additional tracks required. The S Line right-of-way will need to be acquired and the line reconstructed along a majority of the route to support the faster passenger trains. The Raleigh Union Station will also require a secoiid platform and track to allow passenger trains to serve the station via the S Line. A new station would also be constructed at Henderson. Figure 3-5 shows the location of the future S Line services. The reactivation and upgrade of the S Line for Southeast Corridor service will provide the opportunity for existing passenger services connecting portions of the North Carolina Piedmont Corridor to the Northeast Corridor to be re-routed to reduce travel times and help ii7 reducing congestion along the A Line. The reactivation and upgrade of the S Line would also provide redundancy in the passenger rai] network connecting the Northeast Corridor to the � Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation. Virginia Statewide Rail Plan, chapter 5, November 2013. August 2015 3-10 Southeast in case of an emergency. The right-of-way and capital costs for restoring service on the S Line are included in Section 3.9. Legend � S-Line, Track Removed � � � � � � � SA-Li�e, Track Removed i Federally-designated Southeast Cmrridar .... Routa of Carolinian Trains 79 & 80 north of Raleigh Q Train Statians Not to Scale ��I�� Source: NCDOT Figiu�e 3-5 Washington Richmond ,/ Hampton • Roads '� �i��L��i� • Norlina i.�`p'/ �� LJ��fl��tf � Henderson �'� Raanoke � We1don Rapids � � � Rocky Mount • � � Wilson ;aleigh • � • � �Selrtoa FutuIl�e S Line Segnae�it of Soiatheast Cor►�idor N � C+�6�1PR[!-9Eh75N� ST�^.T� ��^.IL PLA.CJ 3.2.2.2 Raleigh to Charlotte Capacity Improvements Upoi� restoration and reactivation of the S Line, some of the Charlotte-Raleigh trains would be extended north to connect with the Northeast Corridor. However, additional capacity improvements between Greensboro and Raleigh are needed to support more than five frequencies and other infrastructure improvements a►-e needed between Charlotte and Greensboro to support more than six frequencies. The necessary projects to support six or more Frequencies include track speed and capacity improvements, grade separations, station upgrades, and the Phase 2 Expansion of the rail maintenance facility currently under construction in Charlotte. New passenger car and locomotives also are ileeded. The station upgrades needed include new platforms in Kannapolis, Salisbury, Durham, and Cary, as well as construction of the Charlotte Gateway Station and associated track improveinents. Figut-e 3-6 shows the implementation projects for the corridor. August 2015 3-11 �.��5' ��G%�'-s�bA�VVa '� V;', i!- Pr�,V�_ f'? N:f',9 Sow-ce: NCDOT Figure 3-6 Improveinent Projects for Southeast Corridor August 2015 3-12 The funding for capital to implement the improvements and to operate the additional frequencies is still undetermined at this time. Furthermore, any additional corridor improvements and frequencies are dependent upon further negotiations with NS, NCRR, and Amtrak. As noted in Chapter 2, the fully implemented Southeast Corridor is projected to produce annual passenger revenues that will exceed annual operating costs. Table 3-3 shows the projected ridership and revenue for the full Southeast Corridor. TaUle 3-3 Projected Ridership and Revenue, Ful�y-img�lemented Southeast Corridor EXISTING* FULL BUILD* FULL BUILD* 2013 2025 2040 RIDERSHIP Piedmont Carolinian Trains 482,700 1,866,700 2,526,900 Amtraic Long Distance Trains** 129,100 224,000 282,400 TICKET REVENUES Piedmont Carolinian Trains $22,746,000 $126,215,000 $165,575,000 Amtrak Long Distance Trains** $19,170,000 $28,303,000 $35,277,000 PASSENGER MILES Piedmont�Carolinian Trains 114,220,000 495,310,000 654,510,000 Amtrak Long Distance Trains** 66,910,000 99,940,000 124,900,000 "�xisting = 1 Carolinian round trip, Charlotte to New York via the CSX'f A Line, plus "L t'iedmont round trips, Charlotte to Raleigh. Full Build = Southeast Corridor service for 8 round trips Charlotte to Raleigh, with 3 continuing to New York via CSXT S Line between Raleigh and Petersburg (and a 4th round trip that operates only Raleigh to New York via S Line between PetersUurg & Raleigh), and 1(the Carofinian) continuing to New York via the A Line. Full Build assumes up to 90 mph Maximum Allowable Speed (MAS) operations between Charlotte and Raleigh and up to 110 mph MAS between Raleigh and Richmond, and premium fares. Carolinian ridership is for all trips, **Amtrak Long Distance Trains: Crescent, Palmetto, Sifver Meteor, Silver Star Activity from NEC through NC only; includes connecting buses Sow�ces: Full year projections from NCDOT and AECOM, September 2013 3.2.2.3 Carolinian Improvements Within the next five to seven years, tl�e existing equipment used on the Carolinian will have gone through its useful lifecycle and will require CC7MFRC1-I�NSIV� 5TA 1� FLAIL FL�:C� replacement. This new equipment will likely be funded by both the NCDOT and Amtrak. 3.2.3 Charlotte to Atlanta Figw•e 3-7 Charlotte to Atlanta Portion of Southeast Coo�i-idor As noted in Chapter 2, Atlanta is one of the top destinations for air travel from North Carolina airports. The Georgia Department of Transportation is cui�rently undertaking a Tier I EIS for the Charlotte to Atlanta rail corridor. The EIS includes an analysis of travel markets (to determine the project need, including potential ridership) and a project implementation plan. The draft EIS is scheduled to be completed by mid-2015, with a Final EIS and Record of Decision completed by early to mid-2016. Figure 3-8 shows the study area and possible alignments for the Charlotte to Atlanta passenger rail corridor. August 2015 3-13 Legend -- N-20 and I-77 ' � NORTH CSX and NS Athens CAROtlNA GSX and NS Augusta Southern Crescent y� _ � `,.,: �-.._.. ---------------------- Greenfeld � � ` 1 I-85 , , If1t2CState __.__._ __-_---.�-_..--- '��''' GR€ERPARTqNBUR SCBt@ ROUt� rf1'��+ GREENVIILE �I' (� GSP Study Area Ro�eucx �Itl@S GREENVILLE s� CLEhR N i Sk�kes Foururafn� .. --. --. - INN TOCCOA -- ANDERSON : � ..----., � � G�ORGIA �:l .'� ANUERSON sourH Garr�esvai� CARQLINA � � � GREENINOOD SUWANEE � z A7NENS DORAVlLLE . LAWRENC�EVILLE GEORGIA �.� TUCKER MMPF � �,arianrr.a AlRPORl COVINGT�M '� r�� f�v.�aia1 �i l�.7 � I �BS 0 25 50 I l��'� ��,E��`v �;= [ "-�.V� F! �.V`�9 rl/ GASTONIA CHARLOTTE- DOUGLAS H OlT€ ---��---- . TEWAY OUTN � GASTOfVlA `. � Rvcx HfLL I � Y� COLUlNBlA � Y� yi� aucusra � ' �� Sour�e' Esri, DdgitalGlobP, GEoEye, i-cubecf, US?JA. U5GS, AEX, Getmappin�g, Aer�grRd, VG6J, I�P s�visstopo. anq th're GIS llser Cc��nimtin�ty Source: Geoi•gia Departmeut ofTransportation, AYlanta to Charlotte Passei�ger Rail Corridor Investment Plan rigure 3-8 Charlotte to Atlanta Passenger Rail Corridor Study Area August2015 3-14 3.3 STATEWIDE THRUWAY SERVICE - � ��, Conover d ��^_a� � � �u �I Figure 3-9 � . J curi ngro� �h Pointry� �� J/ — GuIfJ �� Noriioa- C , �Durham �j/r �- �` Raleigh" Cary ❑ � �; I Golds6or�a �I `J Y e �I � 1.-1 � �,�Hamlet �� -� Pembr�oke ❑ . � . .� t u "'" . Ro AyMo�unl �`Y o �+—� �� .Parmale iyJ ,Z ils n � V � jGreenville - .._� �~ . � �ff �:ek.,,s' 1i I� Kinsfa! NewBe� I�ace Marehesd C�ty �_. J �� Corridors for Potential Thruway Service Extensions As described in Chapter 2, North Carolina currently has two intercity bus connectors sponsored by Amtrak or NCDOT that serve rail passengers. The first is a dedicated Amtrak Thruway Service that operates twice daily aloiig two routes stopping at eight locations in eastern North Carolina. The Thruway buses connect with Amtrak services in Wilson. The first route connects Wilson to Morehead Ciry, stopping in Greenville, New Bern, and Havelocic; the second route connects Wilson and Wilmington, with stops in Goldsboro, Kinston, and )acksonville. The other connector service is provided by the Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART) and the NCDOT. Marketed as the NC Amtralc Connector, the bus is also known as PART Route 5 that serves the general public with an agreement that allows ticketed Amtrak passengers to also reserve seats on the bus while making train reservations. The buses operate six times daily and connect Winston-Salem and High Point, providing connections to/from the Carolinia�� and Piedmont trains at the High Point station. �:.�Jo�I� V?�;—;�[��VU� Sti �;1 C ��";0� PLG:��➢ Similar bus feeder and connections operate across the US and provide an effective transportation service when the extensions or passenger rail routes are i�ot finai�cially feasible or when the projected ridership does not warrant expansion. The NCDOT is evaluating extending Thruway Services (motor coach services) on the following routes that would connect to the Piedmont and Carolinian passenger rail services. These include routes that have been identified for potential passenger rail services in previous studies, and connect metropolitan areas that curi-ently have no passenger rail service but are along corridors that were rated high for prioritized passenger rail services in Chapter 2. • G�•eensbo►•o-Winston-Salem-Asheville-Western, NC (or Salisbury- Asheville-Western, NC) • Raleigh-Henderson-Richmond • Charlotte-Greenville/Spartanburg • Raleigh-Goldsboro • Raleigh-Wilmington • Charlotte-Rock Hill-Columbia • Raleigh-Fayetteville For all of the above routes, intermediary stops will be evaluated as well. [t should be noted that these Thruway Services will both increase ridership on the existing state-sponsored Piedmont and Carolinian trains, and build ridership for future expansion of passenger rail service along new corridors. Most Thruway services are funded and operated by Amtrak, although some connector services are partially funded through state and local funds. The costs of these connector services are unknown at this time. NCDOT will look at the feasibility of an integrated ticket for customers traveling to and from destinations connected by combined use of bus and rail modes. The expanded Thruway Bus network is consistent with Governor McCrory's 25-Year Vision for expanding access to passenger rail options to additional regions. August 2015 3-15 COMPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN In addition to the rail corridors studied as part of the State Rail Plan, the NCDOT Rail Division is evaluating the following routes for potential expansion of Thruway Service: • Rocky Mount to Elizabeth City • Rocky Mount to Nags Head • Greensboroto Boone It should be noted that there are no active rail corridors serving Nags Head or Boone, and no rail corridor connecting Rocky Mount and Elizabeth City; therefore, these potential Thruway Services would not be candidates for conversion to passenger rail service in the future. Figure 3-10 shows the potential routes for these Thruway Services. August 2015 3-16 Source: NCDOT Figure 3-10 Bopne A5U Wilkesbora Winston- GJ.__----C}------_ Salerr� o� ``Q, � � a�� 5e oset ¢yy;� � �at`��a��a\b� o� ��a'� `'�;, J G , .C7-C�-C}_�-___C}' : ,d�C7'�� Salis6i �Q:�� o� �._8'��G?�.`�P,4;V`,lt= �u;_.iti-4i,"-'-,VP_('!i�:f',9 � �� to YVnshiu,Etun, L)C � ciud �ti'rir }brk, N} tu 61✓us)rin�7orr, U�d; � �arulNc•av S'brk, N3� i ♦ i � ♦ — i Wendersoru � , Eliaabeth Cit�,p Burlingtan �� ' , , o .-C��denton Greensboro Durham� Roc&y Mount �s _�_��_{� �ag� H6gh Point �Rale g�Forest - �.�e, '� �,C�p'��,mouth + ��a�iea Tb e��z��c? Kannapolis Psr �o �aastania �- �..� CE�arlotte �� *' i � ta.4iliull�t, (L� uri�f illericfrn�r. Yf5 ��r� Greerrville, SC �aisting NC Passenger Train Service ••••••••� Winston-$alem Conncctar �ban service) An�frak'I hru-Way 13us Servtce A�ntrak "l�hni 77ains ------ PossiUle Motnr Coach Scrti�cc Fxpansior Potential Thruway Service Extension t. � i i Se ¢ Rock Hill, SC � � � to Flurral�a � � � � � � � � r � � Columbia, SC Wilson ar aro C�ry � ; �ay WilAiamston - � • Greenville � � � � el a �� i � � � Goldsboro ✓L'" s r Southern �' �� Kinston New Bern } Pines , Fayet�e`v�'lle , � Hamlet � �iauelqck ♦ :lacksonville ` �7 � �Vlorehea�# . : Csty , � tv F�c�,-id« �Wilrnington ,��1 i.�� August 2015 3-17 3.4 SOUTHEASTERN NC SERVICE EXTENSION � n � Norlina ��—� � � � �I �J � ...� -_ - � ,._�` -- Greensboro I : I `-� �'� ❑ + Clurham _ / �' i Burlington J 'IRocky Mbunk - -� �� R81@igh 1, � '�� rmele �i: � I "� �� J � �.� Wilson - ._ � . .,Greeruvil � Gulf�... ,�. � \ma � � �: ❑ y -- �,�Eayettev�lle� f � ! l Harmlet � Goldsbor� � t � ' ��_J� �futskon --._� `New Bi � ❑ . , I � Wallace ��,I ,�e Ja�'cksondille� ,, � Vililrnington � ' I� �� I Figure 3-11 Southeastern NC Service Exteusions C�Jo�I� G��;-��G�9�VU� Sti!"-;1 C�-t�V� PLG,CJ Carolinian or Piedmont trains, future Southeast Corridor trains, as well as with the Silver Star, Silver Meteor or Palmetto trains. The return service would begin from Raleigh in the later afternoon/early evening, allowing connections fi-oin the current Carolinian and Piedmont services (and with other future Southeast Corridor trains). Travel time would be approximately between 3 hours 30 ininutes and 2 hours, 30 minutes, depending on the level of track impi-ovements and the maximum track speeds. Two potential routes are still under consideration: one would connect via Goldsboro, with potential intermediate stops at Selma, Goldsboro, Wallace, and Warsaw, and the other would connect via Fayetteville, with potential intermediate stops in Selma, Fayetteville, Pembroke and Lumberton.z 3.4.2 Proposed Infrastructure Needs � Necessary infrastructure improvements for the service via Goldsboro include upgrading the track between Selma, Goldsboi�o and Wallace, constructing a series of tracks connecting the NCRR (Corridor 17) to CSXT (Corridor 18) in City Goldsboro, and restoring the track between Wallace and Castle Hayne. Track from Castle Hayne to downtown Wilmington would also need to be upgraded. New stations will need to be constructed in Wilmington and Warsaw. Historic Since 2001 NCDOT has been evaluating expanding passenger rail services to Wilmington, as Wilmington is one of the larger metropolitan areas in North Carolina currently without passenger rail service. Also, Wilmington and the Southeastern North Carolina Beaches are major tourist destinations. 3.4.1 Proposed Operations Based upon the 2001 and 2005 feasibility studies, this new service will consist of one daily round trip train leaving Wilmington in the morning and arriving in Raleigh mid-morning, allowing passengers to connect with either the current stations in Wallace and Goldsboro will need to be upgraded. Positive Train Control (PTC) will also be required along the entire corridor. If this alignment is selected, these improvements would be completed in conjunction with restoring freight service in the Wallace to Castle Hayne corridor and other access improvements to the Port of Wilmington as described in Chapter 4. Alternatively, if the preferred route is via Fayetteville, the line between Wilmington and Pembroke would need to be upgraded since the corridor currently has a maximum speed of 40 mph due to track and signal conditions. Some of the improvements needed along this route include the currently programmed track connection at Pembroke to allow trains to move from the east-west line onto the CSXT A Line that i-uns through Fayetteville, Selma, and Rocky Mount and on to the Northeast. A second track connection would be z North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. Southeastern North Carolina Passenger Rail Feasibility Study Summary Report, May 2001. Southeastern North Carolina Passenger Rail Summary Report, July 2005. August 2015 3-18 �C��B'��G�'�€-s�bA�VVa ':ti�,➢'a- Pr�,V�_ f'? N:f',9 needed at Selma to permit trains to leave the A Line and proceed west over the NCRR to Raleigh. The crossings between Wilmington and Raleigh would need to be upgraded to include flashing lights, crossing gates and modern warning devices3. As described in Chapter 2, the restored Raleigh-Goldsboro-Wilmington service is projected to have annual ridership of approximately 29,000 in the first year of operation. There are no current ridership projections for the route via Fayetteville. Currently Amtrak operates Thruway Service buses connecting Goldsboro and Wilmington to Wilson. As described in Section 3.3, NCDOT is evaluating implementing new Thruway Service connecting Raleigh-Goldsboro- Wilmington as a first phase. A i�evised study should be undertaken to calculate potential ►�idership, revenue and costs since the most recent study was completed nearly 10 years ago. This updated study must also consider the feasibility and capital needs to ensure that the existing and projected freight rail traFfic is not negatively impacted with the introduction of new passenger rail service. Figure 3-12 shows the possible routes for this new service. 33 North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. 3outheastern North Caroli�la Passenger Rail Summary Report, July 2005. August 2015 3-19 Sow'ce: NCDOT Figure 3-12 to Wit.cf�rli;�torr, 1�C a��cd NeGv }iirk, NY Winston- Salem B�arfirtg#on a, QurMam - Greensboro C�JM��I-I€N�N� STAT� RAIL PLAN t�i iM1'irsltii��tc��r, UC ctiid NrGv Yi.�rk, N}' . — — �::y0 � , r�,:� � e�ti �I� ;; M � , _ ,,� c Rocky Mount � � U'`�� High Poont Raleigh �<<� � ; Salisbury Kanr�apolis Gastonia �hardotte to Atfwarfr�, G,� caa��rl �� Nc: �a� Orl ec�i rs, LA �� ..., Lxi5t9n,� passengEr tra�in rout�s �ci �'lorida ••�•• Winston-Salem Connector (van seivice) �� Proposed Southeastern NC Servlce E?xtensioe� Potential Southeastern NC (Raleigh-Goldsboro-Wilmington) Service Cary i� Wilsom s Se4ma ' � ,� Galdsboro � � o , � e Souther� �'� j ��'�,, � Pines � � `-t,�\� c Fayetteville 1 Hamlet � � � � �, Pe�mbrake � cL,� � ��'; �� ,» � ` _, i�♦ ► A,.,;,-,- .�` � , to Fluri�l�� t� Wi�m�ngton „ �:�; I;: �,; �` , -� ti_� �; i„ �.�'Fj August 2015 3-20 3.5 WESTERN NC SERVICE EXTENSION r � , f� „sP� . '� f �rI`a.�"�g<7. � _ - .. � - /`.i.A'-_ _ . . s• y �r € / =; :.ra �. /" 1 ��r �_ �-'';�- �, . � s , "�� . .� �� , ti � 1 , A_ ,.) a� ��) i � _ � r� •� --�- --, - � t ��-- l�ll'inston-Salem \� ,� � ,, E f ~ti �Conover High Pount -- � � i � rille�� _ � � �'� __ � � , � ��-� �� `-. ��1 ; Gastonia � 4-fConcord ,� � i � ,.� � -°�'� � � � Cliarlatte� _ �,��' � � — �� . � , ,_ Monroe ` ."- ❑ � ,.i I �� _� . Figure 3-13 Western NC Service Extension In 2001 NCDOT began evaluating the extension of passenger rail service to Asheville, which is one of North Carolina's top tourist destinations and one of the larger metropolitan regions without passenger rail service. The Salisbury- Asheville corridor (Corridor 03, see Figure 3-13) was noted for potential passenger rail expansion in the prioritization analysis completed in Chapter 2. 3.5.1 Proposed Operations Based upon previous studies, the proposed Western North Carolina service would include two daily round trips between Salisbury and Asheville, with additional stops in Statesville, Conover, Valdese, Morganton, Marion, Old Fort and Black Mountain. The first eastbound train would leave Asheville in the ea►-ly morning, arriving in Salisbury mid-morning. The second eastbound train would leave Asheville mid-afternoon and arrive in Salisbury late afternoon. ��+� 8'�i � G� � 9-9 C P�9 S V4J �� !�; ➢� P�� ; V� P L�: 0'� Westbound services from Salisbui-y to Asheville would depart mid-morning and evening. The schedules would allow for connections with the Piedmont and Carolinian trains, both northbound and southbound.4 3.5.2 Proposed Infrastructure Needs Necessary infrastructure improvements to complement the service include upgrading the track between Salisbury and Asheville to accommodate the passenger trains. NS will install Positive Train Control (PTC) along the corridor by late 2015 to meet FRA requirements, and NCDOT will need to equip their locomotives with PTC technology for the service extension. Several historic stations along the line have been renovated but would require upgrades when service resumes. A new multimodal station and a maintenance facility are needed in Asheville. Construction of a station is Valdese was recommended in previous studies. As described in Chapter 2, the Salisbury-Asheville service is projected to have annual ridership of approximately 24,000 in the first year of operation. As described in Section 3.3, NCDOT is evaluating implementing new Thruway Service connecting Asheville and other communities along the route with Salisbury or Winston-Salem and Greensboro as a first phase. A revised study should be undertaken to calculate potential ridership, revenue and costs since it is nearly 15 years since the most recent study was completed. This updated study must consider the feasibility and capital needs to ensure that the existing and projected freight rail traffic is not negatively impacted with the introduction of new passenger rail service. Figure 3-14 shows the proposed route for this new service. 4 North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division. Report on Western North Carolina Rail Operations and Station Right-of-Way Acquisition. April 2002. August 2015 3-21 Sow�ce: NCDOT Figure 3-14 Winst4n- Salem � a��he �e{ yJ�\e '• �ai`o�Qt�a`ae o�o ��a�� . J G ��D��v�� to YVrt.slzi��gto�z, 1)( aru� PJc x�� }�rk, NY' Burlington D�arham Greensboro High Painx Fialeigh Cary ,� � Sa�isb�ry Q��\a�°� Kannapolis P5`� �o � Gastonia \�,� Charlotte � tc� Atkarrtt�, GA ar�ei �[ 14L' �l'li'(f!].5� �Fi � Existiilg passenger train routes ••••••••• �nsto��-S��lem Conne-�ctor (van service) �� ProI�sed Westem NC Service Fxtensic�n Potential Western NC (Asheville-Salisbury) Service tu F'I�riclGt Sauthern Pines , Hamlet ru FluriGla cr�s�Pr?��—;�aa�.o��ra �.ti�.u�a=��.uo_r+�:o,� to Wiashiir�gtorr, 1)C �zt�ef New Yurk, NY ,,� ` � ` 4r ��_�� : �� Rocky Mount � �'� � �� Wilsan - �-J Selma �� a c: ille � - ,j n�� Y r, . .,.,�_I. `� August 2015 3-22 3.6 EASTERN NORTH CAROLINA SERVICE - ��Norlina ,� � I � � � G�eensboro ' � ❑ J � ❑ Durham� �J Burling�on �, �oint � ��R8121gh I Ca,ry ❑ ;; ��- ; '�`� lounh � �armele�` Plyn `�. J J I� Gulf J � Selma � J. d ' � ❑ - `� ` ' , Kirust 1 � Goldsboro � �_._ ,� Fayettevill � ' om,. � IV � - , ' �Hamlet � � � Wailace � � � J,� k � Pemb�oke /-0 . � � Ile C�J6�IGR�E-9Eh9�lU� Slf.l C �-t�.IL RLP.CJ not stop in North Carolina, Amtral� s Virginia to Florida Auto Train also uses the CSXT A Line. On the CSXT A Line, proposed improvements to meet this demand include station enhancements at Fayetteville and Wilson, which have the highest ridership outside of the Charlotte-Raleigh corridor, as well as canopy and platform extensions in Selma to accommodate longer trains. Wilson also serves as the hub connecting rail passengers with the current Amtrak Thruway bus services to Wilmington and Morehead City. Moreovei; the on-time performance (OTP) analysis of the Carolinian indicates congestion along the CSXT A Line and the need for improvements to reduce scheduling conflicts between freight and passenger rail. ARRA-funded double crossovers are being constructed in Nash and Halifax Counties to address current congestion along the corridor and � should improve on-time pe�•formance for the Carolinian, as well as for freight City traffic. Finally, NCDOT is investigating adding a station in Weldon, which would serve the northeastern area of the state with potential stops for the Carolinian and the Palmetto. These specific projects are listed in Section 3.9 below. Figure 3-15 Improveinents to Address Passenger / Freight Interoperability on the A Line and S Line In addition to the improvements to the Southeast Corridor and extending service in new corridors, there are improvements needed to help serve the growing ridership in other North Carolina corridors served by Amtrak, particularly on the CSXT A Line. The CSXT A Line (Corridor 15, shown in Figure 3-15) was rated within the Investment Tier and serves an important passenger rail link for the eastern areas of the state. Four of the six Aintrak trains serving North Carolina (Carolinian, Palmetto, Silver Meteor and Silver Star) use the CSXT A Line for at least a portion of their route in North Carolina. Although it does Cor►•idor 13 (shown in Figure 3-15) is ranked within the Stewardship Program Tier and is currently served by the Silver Star with stops in Raleigh, Cary, Southern Pines and Hamlet. The Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization (TARPO) has requested that Sanford be considered for an additional stop for the Silver Star. The Silver Star is an Amtrak-funded long distance train. Thus, Amtrak would need to evaluate the feasibility and schedule impacts of the proposed Sanford stop before it could be added to the Silver Star route. However, Sanford could be a stop along a future Triangle regional commuter rail corridor paralleling US 1 and sei-ving Lee, Chatham, and Wake Counties. August 2015 3-23 3.7 POTENTIAL INTERCITY CORRIDORS ! � - _ _Winston-Salem �, �� - Conover ��9M Poini � i �� `�Gastonia Concori� -��`�� Charlotte �� . � Monroe Figure 3-16 � L Guff'� ' G �� -= Norlina I� � `�� - Dueham : ,�pcky Mount � �� !Ra121 h J I I �..Parmele : , � 1' . . � Wilson �..J � Gr�vFlle �ASelma� � �1 . ,_ - � � p�� 7 __ _ Goldsharo �a.� � � Kinston � �NewE J � � , � � Wallace �'� J ;� . ,. . _ Potential Intercity Passenger Rail Corridors c �ry Based upon the corridor prioritization and needs assessment completed in Chapter 2, there are other corridors that should be evaluated for future passenger rail connections. 3.7.1 Charlotte to the Northeast via Lynchburg, VA A new service connecting Charlotte to the Northeast Corridor via Lynchburg, VA is undergoing preliminary evaluation. . The new service would be provided by extending an additional Amtrak Northeast Regional passenger train from Lynchburg south to serve Greensboro and Charlotte. This service would use Corridor 06 for its entirety before entering Virginia near Danville. The service extension would serve two needs. First, it would provide an additional route for the underserved Northeast Corridor-North Carolina travel market, complimenting Southeast Corridor service that would utilize the reactivated CSXT S Line between Raleigh and Richmond. . Second it would provide an additional service between Charlotte and Greensboro, two of the state's largest metropolitan areas. �:,�J6�I�V��Q-9�G�9�VV� Stit"-�.l C 6-t�.V� RLG.CJ It should be noted that under the state's current agreement with NS, NCDOT may operate up to six daily round trip passenger trains in the Charlotte to Greensboro corridor once the PIP is completed in 2017. This service would likely be introduced after the sixth frequency is added along the Piedmont Corridor, possibly i-equiring additional infrastructure improvements along this section of the NCRR. Also, additional track capacity upgrades will be needed between Greensboro and Lynchburg, VA to support the additional passenger train. 3.7.2 Charlotte to Wilmington This potential service would connect the state's largest metropolitan area with the growing Wilmington region, which is a key tourist destination. Depending on the schedule, this new service could also allow passengers from Wilmington and Charlotte connect in Hamlet with the Silver Star heading to points south. Long-term, this service could also provide connections to Southeast Corridor trains traveling between Charlotte and Atlanta, thereby connecting the communities in this corridor to additional points south. (Those connecting to the Northeast Corridor would likely use the future Wilmington-Raleigh service, described in Section 3.4 above). 3.7.3 Raleigh to Greenville This potential corridor would likely be served by extending one of the Charlotte- Raleigh trains east to Greenville, or via a regional commuter rail. Passengers could connect with Southeast Corridor trains in Raleigh, and Silver Star, Silver Meteor and Palmetto trains in Wilson. 3.7.4 Raleigh to Morehead City The potential Raleigh to Morehead City service would connect Selma, Goldsboro, Kinston and New Bern. Passengers could connect with future Southeast Corridor trains in Raleigh as well as to the Carolinian and Palmetto in Selma. Passengers might also connect in Goldsboro with the future Southeastern NC services to Wilmington, depending on the preferred route for the service to Wilmington. August 2015 3-24 C+�E�1FR�E-9Eh9SIU� ST�.I � ��.IL PLp.CJ 3.7.5 Raleigh to Hampton Roads An additional service that should be studied is the potential connection of the Triangle region to the Hampton Roads region of Virginia (Virginia Beach, Portsmouth, and Norfolk). The Hampton Roads area is Virginia's second largest metropolitan area, with a population of over 1.7 million people and could be a lucrative travel market for interciry passenger service to and from North Carolina. The study would investigate the market for rail se►vice from the Triangle region to Hampton Roads, as well as this new service's ridership, revenue and cost implications to the entire Southeast Corridor passenger rail service network. The sei�vice would run from Raleigh via a reconstructed CSXT S Line (Corridor 12) and the out of service CSXT SA Line (Corridor 12p) between Norlina the Roanoke Rapids/Weldon area. From there it would run up Corridor 38 into Virginia. Reinstituting service on the CSXT SA Line between Norlina and Roanoke Rapids/Weldon would provide a number of benefits. It would enable the passenger service between Raleigh and the Hampton Roads region without having to add additional passenger trains the CSXT A Line. It would also add network redundancy for passenger trains operating along the East Coast between Florida and the Northeast by providing a connection between the parallel CSXT A and S Lines. Figure 3-17 shows these study cori-idors. August 2015 3-25 Winston- Salem Kannapolis Gastonia Charlotte �~ I,:: � tn :1 tluirt�a, Q;,1 �+�ieJ Nr+v Orle�urry, Lr� � [?xistinb passengcr train rouccs ��••�• Winstcsn-Salei�a Connrctor {van service) � ['c�t�iatia] Study Cc�reidors Source: NCDOT Pigure 3-17 Potential Passenger Rail Study Corridors +�+�h1Pf?[!-9ENSN� 5Tf^.T� f��-^.IL PLA.CJ fu ti'l'usllri+y�uir, I)(; �, � �nirV �'�'ri�� }`in�k�, ,1�}' �\ Q Lynch'burg O Harmpton Rnads �, r=�� :;'. " � �. . - �;, Burling4on " ' ` Durham Greensbora Rocky Mount _��a � �3��'�,1 High Point �aleig� : I �. Cacy Wilson 's� r� Selma � Greenville U Galdsboro ,;1 e O New Bern Southeet� �in�s �ayettevilie !��] �r "�v� � � HamQet � v I� � � _ �,,, ;.� Rll�D7DN1� ��-i `., _ - . `;��r.� ` NEorehead -� ,� � Ci#y `� •-' �� r� to flord�la 11UIImingtot� August 2015 3-26 3.8 POTENTIAL COMMUTER RAIL While commuter rail primarily serves a local transportation need, commuter rail corridors often overlap with intercity passenger rail services. The corridor prioritization process described in Chapter 2 noted several corridors that were rated in the Investment and Stewardship Tiers for passenger rail. These corridors would also be candidates for commuter rail. The NCDOT has identified these corridors in the State Rail Plan as the corridors most likely to receive support from NCDOT for analysis and possible coordination and cooperation of infrastructure and services. Evaluating and developing these potential cominuter rail corridors correspond with the Governor's Z5-Year Vision for improving transit options within high growth areas. As of 2014, only two of these corridors are under active planning for commuter rail: Corridor 04 in the Charlotte region, and Corridor 09 in the Triangle. In Charlotte, CATS is studying a commuter rail service that shares the Norfolk Southern 0 Line connecting downtown Charlotte to Mooresville. (The Red Line would use a portion of Corridor 04.) CATS is exploring alternative funding sources such as freight oriented development and Tax Increment Financing since the project is not competitive for FTA New Starts funding. The project is currently delayed because Norfolk Southern has a new shared use policy that would limit CATS' ability to use the corridor without constructing a parallel track. CATS has stated double tracking the 0 line and purchasing right-of-way would triple project costs, malcing the project considerably less feasible. Several other corridors in the Charlotte region present opportunities for commuter rail and have been studied for high capacity transit at different levels (Figure 3-18). Corridor 26 (Mt. Holly to Terrell), which parallels Corridor 04, has potential as commuter rail corridor, but would need to connect with a main CSXT line (Corridor 02) to serve Charlotte. The Piedmont and Northern Railroad connects Gaston Counry to downtown Charlotte. NCDOT owns most of this abandoned i-ail corridor. The Gaston-Cleveland-Lincoln MPO studied this corridor for commuter rail potential. The study considered all high capacity transit technologies and ruled out commuter rail using the Piedmont and C+JB�'IFR�E-9Eh9SIU� ST�.I � ��.IL PLp.CJ Northern Railroad.s The Norfolk Southern line runs parallel to I-85 between Gastonia and downtown Charlotte (Corridor 06) offei•ing another potential commuter rail corridor to consider between Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties. The rail line parallels I-85 serving Gastonia, Lowell, Crainerton, Belmont, Charlotte-Douglas International Airport and downtown Charlotte. Several other congested highway corridors have pai-allel rail lines that offer commuter rail potential in the Charlotte region. US 74 parallels the CSXT SF Line (Corridoi- 07) between downtown Charlotte and Monroe. Commuter rail could relieve congestion on a road with numerous traffic lights that is the primary connection between Charlotte and Monroe. The CATS 2030 Transit Plan recommends bus rapid transit for this corridor in Mecklenburg County. CATS recently noted their intention to reexamine the transit technology for this corridor and would include rail as an option. The Norfolk Southern R line (Corridor 08) is another potential corridor, running parallel to I-77 from downtown Charlotte south to Rock Hill. This potential corridor could relieve congestion on I-77 by connecting the York Count}; South Carolina suburbs of Fort Mill and Rock Hill to downtown Charlotte. A potential commuter rail line would share an alignment with CAT's LYNX Blue Line in south Charlotte. The North Carolina Railroad corridor running parallel to I-85 from Charlotte to Cabarrus and Rowan Counties (Corridor 06) is another potential commuter rail corridor. The corridor currently includes the Piedmont and Carolinian Amtrak i-outes which serve the Charlotte, Kannapolis and Salisbuty stations. The route would also share a small portion of the corridor with the CATS Blue Line extension northeast of downtown Charlotte. Commuter rail in this corridor would relieve congestion on I-85 while serving Hai•risburg, Concord, Kannapolis and Salisbury. 5 Gaston-Cleveland-Lincoln MPO. 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan. March 27, 2014. http://www.gclmpo.org/documents/MTP204000MPLETEPLAN.pdf August 2015 3-27 Figure 3-18 Potential Commuter Rail Corridors, Charlotte Region The planning effort for the environmental document for the Durham-Wake Commuter Rail is currently on hold. The commuter rail would connect Duke University, Downtown Durham, Research Triangle Park, Cary, Raleigh and Garner. (The Durham-Wake Commuter Rail project would use a portion of Corridor 09.) Triangle Transit completed the Altei-natives Analysis for the project in July of 2012. The Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) adopted the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). The Capital Area MPO has not formally taken any action on the alternative. Once the LPA is adopted, Triangle Transit can go to the federal government under NEPA to get a notice to develop the environmental document. The project cannot proceed until both MPOs formally adopt the project since it is located in both MPO planning boundaries. However, Triangle Transit and NCRR are conducting a capacity study for future commuter rail between Mebane and Selma in the corridor in conjunction with NS. Congested highway corridors in the Raleigh area with parallel railroads present potential opportunities for commuter rail (Figure 3-19). These projects are conceptual in nature given Triangle Transit is currently focused on moving forward light rail projects in the region. A potential future commuter rail project might utilize the CSXT S line which runs parallel to US 1(Corridors 12 and 13). Highway 1 is a congested liinited access freeway in southwest Wake County that becomes a boulevard north of I-440 in Raleigh. A potential project CCiMPR[!-9EN�IU� ST�.^T� ��^.IL PL�.CJ might utilize the entire corridor or just run north from downtown Raleigh to Wake Forest or south from downtown Raleigh towards Sanford in Lee County. Segments of this corridor would overlap with the Durham-Wake Commuter Rail and the Raleigh-Cary Light Rail. Corridor 42 (Durham to Apex) also parallels a portion of the planned Durham-Wake commuter rail line, and perhaps should be explored as a second commuter rail line oi� other high capacity transit service. A second potential commuter rail corridor or corridor offshoot would be the Norfolk Southern VF line (Corridor 14) which travels parallel to US 401 from downtown Raleigh to Fuquay-Varina in southern Wake County. This i-oute might be considered as a standalone route or in combination with the CSXT S line. Pigure 3-19 Potential Commuter Rail Corridors, Triangle Region The Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART) completed the Alternatives Analysis for a commuter rail connecting North Carolina Agricultural and Technical University in Greensboro to Hanes Mall in Winston Salem, paralleling [-40 (Corridors 04 and O5). The analysis showed the existing transit ridership was not sufficient in 2009 to pursue the project. PART has not ruled out commuter rail in the corridor at a later date. Figure 3-20 shows the approximate alignment of the commuter rail line studied for the Ti-iad. August 2015 3-28 �u Figw•e 3-20 Potential Commuter Rail, Triad Region � [t should be noted that the NCRR, in partnership with NS and Triangle Transit, has recently evaluated commuter rail from Mebane to Selma, and NCRR has studied commuter rail from Greensboro to Goldsboro. Future evaluations for commuter services on this corridor (Corridor 09) should thoroughly assess these recently completed studies and coordinate with NCRR, NS, and regional transit agencies (Triangle Transit, PART), with NCDOT as an advisor. Local funding is a key component for implementing commuter rail plans. Mecklenburg County voters passed a dedicated half cent sales tax for transit that helps CATS fund major transit projects such as their LYNX Blue Line Light Rail Transit (LRT) and its extension. Any future commuter rail projects from Charlotte into neighboring counties would likely require a funding agreement with CATS and ongoing financial support from the neighboring jurisdiction(s). Durham and Orange County voters passed an additional half-ceizt sales tax levy for transit which will help fund their proposed Durham-Orange LRT project. Triangle Transit is currently preparing environmental documents for this project. To-date Wake County Board of Commissioners have not chosen to put the transit half cent sales tax increase on the ballot. Local funding from Wake County will be necessary to build the Durham-Wake Commuter Rail and the Wake Counry LRT project connecting Cary and Raleigh. Similar to the Charlotte region, any future commuter rail projects extending outside of the Triangle Transit service area would lilcely require a funding agreement with Triangle Transit and ongoing financial support from the neighboring jurisdiction(s). To C+�6�1PR[!-9Eh9SIU� S G�;1 � ��:IL PLA.CJ receive state transportation funds, these projects will have to compete for state matching funds under the Strategic Transportation Initiative. NCDOT will also be ii�volved in these local projects through the Rail Division's cooi-dination with FTA to ensure existing and proposed rail projects meet safety standards as part of the State Safety Oversight Program for Fixed Guideway and Rail Systems.� As noted in Chapter 2, noi-theastern North Carolina has an increasing number of residents who commute to the Hampton Roads region in Virginia. The Hampton Roads Transit Vision Plan recommends the study of express bus and eventual commutei- rail service from the Town of Edenton in Chowan County to Hainpton Roads as demand warranted, perhaps after 2026. The Chesapeake and Albemarle Railroad could serve as a future commuter rail corridor, connecting Edenton and Elizabeth City to Chesapeake and Norfolk, in Virginia. Any future interstate transit services (including commuter rail) will require coordination and an agreement between NCDOT and VDRPT. Figure 3-21 shows the possible alignments for this cori-idor. ✓�'. n�ud Hlus Figure 3-21 �N Potential Commuter Rail, Northeastern NC to Hampton Roads, VA 3.9 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Table 3-4 summarizes the passenger rail programs described above, and includes the capital costs. �North Carolina Deparrinent of Transportation. North Carolina Rail Plan 2009 Executive Summary. August 2015 3-29 C+�6�'IPR[!-9Eh9SIU� ST�^.T� ��^.IL PLA.CJ The findings from this chapter are developed further in the project prioritization and capital finance plans in Chapter 5. Generally, the corridor priorities identified in Chapter 2 are used to determine the level of potential benefit to the State, which begins to outline priorities. But, additional criteria are used in Chapter 5 to determine the timing of projects in the plan. Those criteria include idernification of whether or not projects leverage existing infrastructure, whether or not they leverage existing passenger or intermodal services, and whether or not planning studies have been conducted and railroad partnerships have been identified in principle. August 2015 3-30 ��o��,—��u�5ov� s��;�� ;oa_ P�r� Table 3-4 Projected Passen er Rail Pro ram Capital Costs Program Funding Needs Southeast Corridor - Fourth and Fifth Frequencies WiFi on Piedmont $630,000 Hillsborough Station $8.4M 5t�� Frequency - New equipment, Capital Yard Mechanical Facility expansion $35.4M Positive Train Control [PTC) equipment $2.125M Southeast Corridor - New Stops and Improved Stations New Stations at, Lexington and Harrisb�irg, associated track improvements , station expansions $237.4M Charlotte Gateway Station (and associated track improvements) $210M Southeast Corridor - Full lmplementation Full Southeast Corridor [mplementation (Raleigh-Richmond) $3.8B Carolinian Improvements New equipment to replace existing Carolinian trainsets that are nearing their end of their service life $76.6M Statewide Thruway Service Connector bus services (Amtrak) N/A Potential Connecting Services Western NC Passenger Service (Salisbury to Asheville, potential connection to Andrews to Murphy) * $405.3M Southeastern NC Passenger Service (Raleigh to Wilinington) * $262.5M Charlotte to the Northeast via Lynchburg, VA** $35.6M Eastern North Carolina Service Station impi�ovements (e.g., Fayetteville, Wilson, Selma) to accommodate growing ridership $2.5M Planning Studies New Thruway Bus services Alternatives analysis for new stops (Weldon) and other service and revenue enhancements Evaluation of additional intercity corridors (Charlotte-Wilmington, Raleigh-Greenville, Raleigh-Morehead City, Weldon to Hampton $4.4M (estimate) Roads, VA) Updated feasibility and costs analyses for Western NC and Southeastern NC connecting passenger services Analysis of capacity and economic potential of existing stations to accommodate uses for next 25 years NOTE: Costs are in 2014 dollars. *Costs from previously completed studies and will be updated under proposed planning studies. **Preliminary costs subject to further coordination with Amtral<, NCRR, and NS. August 2015 3-31 4 Chapter Four - Proposed Freight Rail Improvements and Investments This chapter presents the proposed freight rail improvements identified as part of this Comprehensive State Rail Plan (State Rail Plan). It also describes the process for selecting these proposed improvements and the benefits associated with them. In North Carolina, the freight and passenger systems largely share the same track and Rights-of-Way (ROW). As a result, many projects with a freight or passenger focus may have complementary benefits for the alternative service. The freight projects described in this chapter include those identified by freight stakeholders and those where benefits, costs, and impacts are largely centered on freight carriers and industrial clients. North Carolina's economic growth, competitiveness, and employment are shaped by reliable freight rail transportation connections within the state, as well as with the North American freight rail network. Freight rail projects help the state meet current and future freight demand, ensure safety, improve mobiliry, expand connectivity, and reduce highway congestion. Because of the importance of the freight railroad network, it is in the public interest to preserve rail capacity and ROW for future transportation needs. The Governor's 25-Year Vision identified region-specific economic solutions directly related to the freight rail component of the State Rail Plan. For the Western Region, emphasis should be placed on providing industrial access to freight lines to accommodate expanding agribusiness and economic development needs. The Central Region is home to two privately-developed megasites. The Governor's 25-Year Vision recommends ensuring that the plan supports the megasites' ability to attract targeted businesses and industry clusters by identifying the infrastructure needs and planning for them. For the Eastern Region, the Governor's 25-Year Vision advocates supporting economically competitive rail access to the Global TransPark (GTP) and the Port of Morehead City, improving rail connections between the state's military bases and the ports, and improving connections to the Interstate 95 corridor from the �.iiNIPRLI—OEV�dSIVL 3I�;T� R�1IL RB�".I�➢ state ports to serve markets throughout the eastern United States. Finally, for the Coastal Region, the Governor's 25-Year Vision calls for the development of intermodal train service to the Port of Wilmington and the development of an intermodal facility to serve the eastern part of the state. Chapter 3 identified a number of passenger rail projects and issues managed in the passenger rail program in North Carolina. The state has a long history of balancing the passenger and freight traffic for existing conditions and movement towards the respective growth opportunities. The privately-held freight railroads plan and implement long-term capacity improvements in a manner different from the public sector. Investments are often centered in the near term, focusing on existing clients and known operating needs that are consistent with a long-term vision. Improvements to the fi-eight rail system are being planned jointly by the railroads and the passenger rail service providers due to the shared infrastructure. 4.1 PURPOSE AND NEED Chapter 2 of this plan provided detailed information on demographic, economic, freight, and transportation trends influencing the existing and projected movement of freight to, from, and within North Carolina. As population and employment increase in North Carolina, as is projected to occur through the current planning horizon of 2040, so will the volume and value of freight movements. This will place increased demand on existing rail infrastructure and services, also resulting in increased highway congestion that will adversely affect the movement of goods and highway access to intermodal yards, and lead to potential safety conflicts. Based on these trends, and discussions with the Class I and short line railroads, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), Regional Planning Organizations (RPOs), North Carolina State Ports Authority, and other stakeholders, needs in railroad infrastructure and operations were identified. These needs include, but are not limited to, the need for increased capacity, upgraded short line tracks to support a higher maximum allowable gross weight, and the removal of highway/rail at-grade crossings. August 2015 4-1 The purpose of the proposed freight rail projects is to address these identified needs in the freight rail system. The projects selected for inclusion in this State Rail Plan were identified because of their potential to support North Carolina's mission and objectives for a successful multimodal transportation system. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Rail Division's mission is the "...safe and efficient movement of people and goods on North Carolina's railroads through freight, passenger and safety programs, supporting job creation and economic growth."1 Many of the projects, particularly those that strengthen connections to North Carolina's ports, also support the Governor's 25-Year Vision to transform the state's ports and strengthen infrastructure that provides access to military installations. In addition to being consistent with the NCDOT Rail Division's mission, the proposed freight rail improvements meet one or more of the following NCDOT goals: • Make our transportation network safer • Make our transportation network move people and goods ef�ciently • Make our infrastructure last longer 4.2 LEVERAGING MODAL TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS Projects involving rehabilitation of railroad tracks may result in faster delivery times, improved capacity, and more efficient train operations. Improvements to the freight rail system may also provide benefits such as helping with job creation, reducing long-haul truck movements, and reducing congestion on the highways. Freight rail improvement projects can also involve and benefit multiple modes of transportation. Coordinating improvements to the freight rail system with improvements to the highway, transit, maritime and inland ports, CSXT- and NS-operated intermodal terminals, and airport facilities can have a larger impact than completing non-complementary projects. For example, the removal of a highway/rail at-grade crossing results in the elimination of a ' North Carolina Depart�nent of Transportation Rail Division. http: //www.ncbytrain. o rg/about/default.html �aNi�R�ia�r�siv� s i�T� R�'3IL F"B�^,u� conflict point for highway vehicles and trains and can improve the flow of traffic on the roadway and rail facilities, as well as the safety performance of each mode. In turn, these improvements to the efficiency of the transportation network benefit the freight facilities they are serving, be it an intermodal facility, marine port, or airport. These facilities may be able to use the freight rail improvements as a springboard for complementary improvements, such as capacity expansion projects or supporting new business opportunities. Improvements at these facilities can also be leveraged to justify the need for improvements to rail infrastructure to respond to increased demand (e.g. additional track construction to provide increased capaciry). 4.3 PROGRAM STRATEGIES This section provides an overview of new program and policy needs to support North Carolina ports and industries. Where project requirements necessitate additional considerations, reviews of national best practices are identified and may serve to augment the state's efforts. In certain instances, the freight rail system's needs are consolidated into general improvements and/or recommended studies where specific projects have not been identified yet. Federal transportation policy places a greater systematic emphasis on freight traffic, and with the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRI[A) -authorized congestion relief efforts, has raised the profile of freight rail investment in infrastructure and operations. The linkage of freight rail access to economic development has received greater attention, in part as a response to sustaining the economic recovery and as a basis for securing major manufacturing plants. The combined Federal and State legislative efforts have placed a greater emphasis on transportation's performance metrics and tracking over time. Traditional factors such as speed and delays are considered, as well as contributions to carbon footprint reductions and other public policy goals. The Class I railroads also manage their respective multi-state networks to sustain cost competitive, long-distance freight movements. Each of these elements has been a contributing factor in the project definition and inclusion in the plan. August 2015 4-2 4.3.1 Emerging Raii Freight Needs Trends affecting freight rail were discussed in detail ii� Chapter 2. Of particulai- note, nationwide shifts in coal volumes and the etnergence of natural gas development and other energy industries are two trends anticipated to change traffic volumes and shape railroad project needs. The trend in energy supply may also drive growth in certain types of manufacturing, including plastics and chemicals. The state's growing population, as a part of the Piedmont Atlantic Megaregion,2 will continue to increase demands on the existing infrastructure system. At a regional level, east coast ports are facing a dual competitive threat from increases in container vessel size and the improved Panama Canal at the same time that shifts in industrial capacity move to new areas of the globe. Specific to North Carolina, freight issues and opportunities include the following: • Congestion on lines that carry both passenger and freight traffic that lead to interoperability and performance issues for both passenger and freight service providers • Increased need for investment in transload facilities • Need for investment in the intermodal network to continue to efficiently serve industries and also provide consumable goods to the growing population • Improved access and service to North Carolina's ports is needed to better serve North Carolina industries and consumers Investments are needed on both the Class I and short line networks. As noted in Chapter 2, a corridor prioritization method was developed to help identify the levels of importance of Class I corridors to the state's economy. Short line railroads often provide last mile connectivity to the Class I network and also provide public benefits. 4.3.2 Investment Programs The proposed projects indicate the nature and scope for rail freight infrastructure investments. These investments will support short- and long- � Piedmont Atlantic Megaregion, America 2050, http: //www.ameri ca2 0 5 O.org/p iedmo nt_atla nti c.html (viy��iPRLI—BEV�dSI`rIL 3lrr`,T� R�SIL �LF',N range goals that will guide freight rail planning as discussed in Chapter 5. The broad investment program categories include: • Maintenance & Preservation: Maintaining the existing system capacity, as well as preserving future service options • Safety & Impact Mitigation: Improving safety while reducing conflicts and incidents, and minimizing community and environmental impacts, particularly for sensitive receptors such as schools, and reducing emissions of criteria pollutants PM2.5 and NOx, as well as greenhouse gases (GHGs) • Railroad Capacity & Operations: Adding capacity to existing lines and enhancing operations that result in increased freight volume, velocity, and performance • Yards & Terminals: Investing in railroad-centered operations in the yards supporting rail car movement, as well as the mix of origins and destinations for rail freight traffic • Modal Transfer Facilities: Investing in intermodal yards and transload facilities • Ports: Maintaining and growing the role and competitive position of North Carolina's ports • Industry: Maintaining viable rail service for industries in North Carolina, as well as access to competitive supply chains and consumers Several of the identified projects may add to more than one investment program. Grade crossings have been listed as safety related projects. In some instances the grade separations and the corresponding infrastructure and operational improvement benefit Railroad Capacity & Operations, as well as Yards & Terminals. Table 4-1 presents the freight related projects. Additionally, the corridor prioritization process should be used as a tool, but projects, such as Rail Industrial Access Projects funded by FRRCSI, should be assessed using existing methods that identify the number and value of carloads August 2015 4-3 that are introduced to the system and the number of jobs supported by the investment. A project that helps build volumes on an otherwise low volume branch line that is rated in a lesser category should be evaluated based on its merits rather than being overridden by the corridor process. An economic development project on any corridor should be viewed favorably. In some instances, coordination of efforts with the Department of Commerce should be made to site projects along corridors where volumes are low and higher volumes could result in improvements to frequencies of service or potentially better available rates to all shippers on the corridor. 4.4 FREIGHT PROJECTS: PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SECTOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS 4.4.1 Process of Identifying Projects The proposed projects are based on iterative input from public and private sources, including NCDOT, MPOs/RPOs, Class I railroads, and short line railroads. The projects represented the railroads' internal and client discussions for service and infrastructure. Not every North Carolina freight rail corridor is captured. Infrequently used Class I branch lines, short line corridors, and military operated corridors may not be represented or have identified projects. The process also was informed by previous studies and reports, and existing state programs. As such, the benefits, costs, and impacts are largely centered on freight corridors and industrial clients. 4.4.2 Estimated Construction Costs For many projects, construction costs were obtained from previous studies or efforts conducted by either the NCDOT, MPOs, RPOs, or railroads. For projects which did not already have an estimated consti-uction cost, a high-level construction cost estimate was prepared. Costs and associated benefits of projects are included in Chapter 5. Because these projects are in the early stage of development assumptions, information is not available for formulating a detailed cost estimate. Pending additional detailed information on the projects, a mid-range potential cost for the improvement was used along with the assumption that the project is fi�ee of severe site constraints/conditions and free of mitigation costs. ��f�fPRLI-BEVVSI'VL 3I�;T� R�tIL �L�',N Projects may be funded through a variety of sources and a mix of public and private funds. The project cost estimates do not include information on potential funding or in-kind assets and services. 4.4.3 Class I Corridors and Projects Figure 4-1 presents the prioritization of freight corridors in the state, and Table 4-1 presents projects and studies categorized numerically by Class I corridor for corridors with identified projects.3 The projects that coincide with recommendations in the Governor's 25-Year Vision are bolded and italicized in Table 4-1. ; Specific projects have not been identified for Corridors O1, 03, 08, 16, 20, 23-26, 29-31, or 33-42. August 2015 4-4 � y � 1 `� % � ,�, .�f I :'", ,v r' !` � J�- �, ' - . n s �- � . `�� _��- � .�� . :-.`i',�J°�'� i.• l� '��'-',J � � :X �Ot]T Q02] C �03] S [04] C [05J G �06] S [07] C [08] Charlotte to Colurnbia �NS) t��_ Sr�'�� C�o_P�•E��➢��_ -I�.°:o F:=�'ti� �'4_��.�•% [09] Greensbaro to Salma (NS} [10] Greensboro 4o Guli (NS} [11] Monroe to Pembroke (CSXT) [12] �aieigh to Norlina (CSXT) [12fJ Norlina to UVeldon (CSXF) [13] Hamlet to Raieigih (CSX7) [�4] Raleigh io Fayettevrlle (NS} [15� VA state line to SC state line (CSXTy [t6] Ra9eigh to Greenville {C�NA) [17] Selma to Mprehead City (N5) [24J Newtott south (NS} [25] SC stake line to Gasionia {NS) [2&a Mount Holly ta �errell {CSXT) [27a Albemarie ta Salisbury (NS) [28jAsheboro to High Point (NS) [29] Eden ta VA state line (NS} [30] Raxboro Go VA state Ifne (NS) [31 ] Carrboro to Hillsbvrough (f�5} [32J Qxford ta Durham (NS) [33] Fuquay-Varina to Gulf (NS) [34j HamYet to SC state line (CSXT} Fi�ure 4-1 North Carolina Freigl�t Corridors Prioritized [35] Spring Lake to Fori Bragg (CSXT) [36] Siedrrnan fo Fayetteville (CSXT) [37] Saint Pauls to Lumbeoton (CSXTy [38] Weldon to VR state line {CSXT) [39] Clinton tio UUarsaw (CSXT} [40] Leland. NG to Sunny Paint (CSXTIDOD} [41J Chcrcowinity io New Bem {N5) [42] Du�ham toApex (CSX7) [43] Edenton to VA State Li�e [A4] Camp Lejeur�e to Morehead City {NS/DODy or ru sca�€ Freigrht Carridor Priaritization Tiers InvestPnent Pragram Stewardship Program -Actiwe Moc�itoring Prpgram August 2015 4-5 � d I�'a^:i-VVQ P'•V;�➢''� 0 _<''tjii. � _/'�,�.5 Tabde 4�-1 rreight R�il (:orriclor Tiers aricV Potedati7l Projects CORRIDOR CORRIDOR ROUTE RAILROAD PARALLEL FREIGHT TIER POTENTIAL FREIGHT RAIL PROJECTS HIGHWAYS • Phase ll/Expansion, Charlotte Intermodal Terminal and supporting rai► infi�astructure. /ncreases capacity from 122,000 lifts per year to 246,000 per 02 TN state line to Charlotte CSXT US 74/US 221 Investment year. • Evaluate operational improvements to the CSXT freight and intermodal network on Corridors 02, 07, and 11. • Evaluate separation of freight rail line from local streets in Mooresville and/or 04 Charlotte to Winston-Salem to �S 1-40/I-77 Stewardship planning for at-grade crossing separation along corridor in order to relocate traffic VA state line US 311 movement from existing substandard crossings. Greensboro to Winston-Salem to • Construct a rail spur at Piedmont Triad International Airport, Greensboro, 05 Rural Hall NS I-40 Stewardship f �, Guil ord Coun • Grade separate Old Dowd Rd in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County. • Grade separate MLK Blvd in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County. • Traffic Separation Study from Galyon Depot in Greensboro, Guilford County, north towards Rockingham County or VA. • Traffic Separation Study along Corridor 05 (K Line) from Corridor 06 (NS Mainline) west towards Forsyth County. • Extend Jamestown siding in Jamestown, Guilford CoLmty, to improve switching operations. • Establish a new Thoroughbred Bulk Transfer (TBT) facility in the NS Charlotte Yard for servicing non-ethanol traffic anticipated to move from Pineville to the new facility which will enable Che Pineville tacility to service 1,440 carloads of ethanol. • Extend NS tracks for operational efficiencies in Linwood Yard in Davidson Counry. • Convert the NS "Roundhouse" property adjacent to the Greensboro /ntermoda! Facility into a parking lot with 140 spaces for international containers to accommodategrowing container volumes. 06 SC state line to VA state line NS I-85/US 29 Investment • Extend Kimberly Clark lead in Lexington, Davidson County, to increase network fluidity for freight & passenger traffic. • Extend Pomona Yard auxiliary track and add power turnouts in Greensboro, Guilford County. • Grade separate Rogers Lake Road crossing (724408Y� in Kannapolis, Cabarrus County. • Construct grade separated crossing at or near 22nd Street, in coordination with two at-grade crossing closures (724399C and 724398VJ, to increase safery of rail and highway traffic in Kannapolis, Cabarrus County. • Extend Clanton Road with grade separated crossing of NS Mainline between West and Wilkinson Boulevards. Close NS Mainline crossing of Donald Ross Road. • Evaluate grade separations at Hilltop and Mackay Roads in Guilford County. • Provide access to the I-85 Corporate Center, a 1,000-acre megasite in Davidson County, which has the potential to be developed as an automotive manufacturing center. SC state line to VA state line, CSXT, US 74/I-277, • Grade separate Corridor 07 (CSXT SF Line) and Corridor 06 (NS Mainline) in 06, 07 Charlotte to Monroe NS 1-85/US 29 lnvestment Charlotte, Mecklenburg County. August 2015 4-6 Ci��VIR��B-0EV�9tiVVL 57�r!'LL ��1i� �T��^.V'•� CORRIDOR CORRIDOR ROUTE RAILROAD PARALLEL FREIGHT TIER POTENTIAL FREIGHT RAIL PROJECTS HIGHWAYS • Construct a si�iin� extension nt Stouts in Union County. Creates a passing sidinr� in the middle of a 30-mile segment of single track and improves network fluidity. Section serves carload and intermodal traffic. • Phase II/Expansion, Charlotte /ntermodal Terminal and supporting rail infrastructure. /ncreases capacity from 122,000 lifts per year to 246,000 per 07 Charlotte to Monroe CSXT US 74/I-277 Investment Year. • Replace Campus Ridge Road, at-grade crossing (631-931A, SF 317-30) with an overpass to improve safety. • Evaluate operational improvements to the CSXT freight and intermodal network on Corridors 02, 07, and 11. • /dentify access needs for the Project Legacy megasite in Union County. • Replace existing grade separation along the NCRR and Mainline at Aycock Street, in Greensboro, GuilFord County, to improve safety. • Grade separate Ellis Road (735236Y) in Durham, Durham County, to improve safety. • Grade separation at Ward Road crossing (722962H) in Greensboro, Guilford County and close Maxfield Road (722964W) to improve safety. • Grade separate Franklin Boulevard crossing (722959A) in Greensboro, Guilford County and close 0'Ferrell Street (722961B) to improve safery. • Grade separate Wagoner Bend Road crossing (722966K) in Greensboro, Guilford County and close Buchanan Church Road (722965D) to improve safety. 09 Greensboro to Selma NS 1-85/I-40 Investment • Grade separate Walker Street in Cary, Wake County, to improve safety. • Grade separate Harrison Avenue crossing (734755X) in Cary, Wake County, to improve safety and mobility. • Grade separate South West Street in Raleigh, Wake County and close West Cabarrus Street (735488A) to improve safety and mobiliry. • Extend East Durham siding in Durham, Durham County, to improve safety and mobility. [ncludes a combination of grade separations and closure at three crossings: Ellis Road - south end (734737A), Glover Road (734735L), and Wrenn Road (734736T). • Evaluate the development of an intermodal facility to serve the Triangle Region and eastern North Carolina either a►ong Corridor 09, 15, or 17. August 2015 4-7 iviv+l�flPlrlLi--0EV�9�8`�IL 5I'r``,�L(l�iILI�T��".�•e CORRIDOR CORRIDOR ROUTE RAILROAD PARALLEL FREIGHT TIER POTENTIAL FREIGHT RAIL PROJECTS HIGHWAYS • Monitor sliale gas exploration and potential infrastructure needs in the Piedmont region to support the cieveloping market and associated transportation needs. . Evaluate the installation of crossing signals and gates on West Dolphin Street, and West Elk Streets in Siler City. • Evaluate pedestrian crossings at W. Raleigh Street, W. Second 5treet and West Third Streets in Siler City. 10 Greensboro to Gulf (Sanford) NS US 421 Active Munitoring � Evaluate infrasti•ucture needs required to support industries targeted for the 1,800-acre Chatham-Siler CityAdvanced Manufacturing Site. This includes identifying improvements that would be required for a potential automotive manufacturing facility. • Evaivate infrastructure needs required to support industries targeted for the Randolph County (Liberty) Megasite. • Expansion of Carolinas ReLoad - Transload a CSXT-served facility in Anson County. New warehouse and expansion from 3.26 acres to 13.26 acres. 11 Monroe to Pembroke CSXT I-74/US 74 Investment � Study operational improvements to the CSXT freight and intermodal network on Corridors 02, 07, and 11. • Grade separate Rogers Road Extension crossing (6339051� in Wake Forest, Walce Cowity, to increase safety and use for future passenger rail service. 12 Raleigh to Norlina CSXT US 1 Stewardship � Grade separate Northside Loop (Harris Road) i� Walce Forest, Wake County, and close Brick St. crossing (6305821�. • Evaluate the feasibility of returning service to the SA Line between Norlina and Roanol<e Rapids. The corridor would provide a connection between Con�idors 12 12f Norlina to Roanoke Rapids / _ US 158 Stewardship and 15. Weldon . Acquire right of way to re-establish rail service. Would provide redundancy in the freight network and future passenger opportunities. • Construction of an approximately 40 acre automotive terminal facility in close proximity to the Piedmont area of North Carolina to handle 60 railcars and 2,000 vehicles. • Grade separate Apex Peakway at South Salem Street in Apex, Wake County, and 13 Hamlet to Raleigh CSXT US 1 Stewardship close Tingen Rd crossing (630696H) to provide connectivity and increase safety. • Grade separate Walker Street in Cary, Wake County, to improve safety. • Monitor shale gas exploration and potential infi�astructure needs in the Piedmont region to support the developing market and associated transportation needs. • Monitor shale gas exploration and potential project needs in the Piedmont region 14 Raleigh to Fayetteville NS US 401 Stewardship to support the developing market and associated transportation needs. August 2015 4-8 iviv+l�flPlrlLi--0EV�9�8`�IL 5I'r``,�L(l�iILI�T��".�•e CORRIDOR CORRIDOR ROUTE RAILROAD PARALLEL FREIGHT TIER POTENTIAL FREIGHT RAIL PROJECTS HIGHWAYS • Evnluate the development of nn interrnodal fncility to serve the Triangle Region and eastern North Carolina either along Corridor 09, 15, or 17. • /n partnership with CSXT, evaluate capacity improvements to Corridor 15 (A Line) that would increase freight capacity and efficiencies and help address 15 SC state line to VA state line CSXT 1-95 Investment interoperability issues with passenger services. • Evaluate the feasibility of returning service to SA Line (Corridor 12� between Norlina and Roanoke Rapids. Would peovide a connection between Corridors 12 and 15. • Evaluate the development of a Global TransPark (GTP) to Morehead City Mobility Corridor. Studied improvements are anticipated to allow higher speed and safer operation of the route as freight moves to and the Port of Morehead City. • As part of the GTP to Morehead City Mobility Corridor, as market conditions demand, relocate the NCRR along a new alignment between Morehead City and Havelock. This would allow trains to enter the port and access Radio Island from the east. 17 Selma to Morehead City NS US 70 Investment . Support implementation of frontage roads and/orsuper-street intersections to reduce highway-rail contlicts in Morehead City. . Develop a loop track at the Port of Morehead City to faci(itate the building and disassem6ly of larger trains, potentially unit trains. • As part of the GTP to Morehead City Mobility Corridor, study a rail bypass of New Bern. • Evaluate the deve►opment of an intermodal facility to serve the Triangle Region and eastern North Carolina either along Corridor 09, 15, or 17. • Monitor market conditions and seek Department of Defense funding for the I-40/I-795/US Wallace to Castle Hayne rail corridor from Wilmington, New Hanover County, to 18 Contentnea to Wallace CSXT 117 Stewardship Wallace, Duplin County, to provide corridor connectivity and multiple access points to the Port of Wilmington. • US 421 / CSXT crossing safety improvements south of I-140 / Dan Cameron Bridge. • Identify capacity and safety needs along CSXT and WTRY in Wilmington. • Evaluate the feasibility of a new rail crossing of the Cape Fear River to eliminate the need for trains to traverse through town to access the Port of Wilmington. 19 Pembroke to Wilmington CSXT 1-74/US 74 Investment . Evaluate the potential extension of rail service from its current terminus at US 421 in New Hanover County to the Pender Commerce Industrial Park (approximately 1.5 miles). • Provide rail access to the Mid-Atlantic /ndustrial Rail Park, a 1,025-acre CSXT- Select Site in Leland, Brunswick County, • Evaluate at-grade rail crossing improvements in Wilmington on CSXT. • Provide rail access to the Kingsboro Industrial Site, a CSXT-Select Site near 21 Rocky Mount to Plymouth CSXT US 64 Active Munitoring T�rboro, Edgecombe County. • Construct rai► line from Global TransPark in Kinston to CSXT line parallel with 22 Parmele to Greenville to Elmer CSXT NC 11 Active Monitnring NC 11, in Lenoir County to provide additional access to GTP. August 2015 4-9 iviv+l�flPlrlLi--0EV�9�8`�IL 5I'r``,�L(l�iILI�T��".�•e CORRIDOR CORRIDOR ROUTE RAILROAD PARALLEL FREIGHT TIER POTENTIAL FREIGHT RAIL PROJECTS HIGHWAYS • Upgrade the rail on Corridor 27 (NS N Line) along US 52 to allow for Freight. The 27 Albemarle to Salisbury NS US 52 Active Muuituring upgrade is anticipated to allow for 4.5 trucks diversimis to rail per day. 28 Ashebm�o to High Point NS I-74 Active Monitnring • Construct new siding at Sophia, Randolph County for mobility and system fluidity. • U�grade of the Oxford - Durham line to 286-1b rai] that can accommodate heavier 32 Oxford to Durham NS I-85 Active Monitnriug locomotives thereby improving customer service. • Preservation of threatened rail lines to preserve system connectivity and transportation options for local business. • Maintenance program for rail bridges and structures on NCDOT-owned rail corridors. mulriple Program Level . Maintenance program for bridges on low volume Class 1 branch lines. • IVCDOT-owned rail corridors funding mechanism to address maintenance and returning corridors to service. • Develop rail projects, as needed, to support the growing wood pellet market. Note: Projects bolded and italicized will help implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision Select corridors that have been identified as either Investment or Stewardship Tiers are discussed in additional detail below by numerical order. 4.4.4 Corridor 02- CSXT - Charlotte to TN state line AsE� 0 _� � Salem � ��._—� astonia` ' ;�( ,,� ~~. � ariotte�� Monroe � � � �: � � '. cord � Corridor 02 is the approximately 173-mile section of CSXT track connecting Erwin and ]ohnson City, Tennessee to Charlotte, North Carolina. It covers portions of the CSXT Blue Ridge Subdivision from the Tennessee border to Bostic and the Charlotte Subdivision from Bostic to Charlotte. Corridor 02 is i-anked as an investment corridor as a i-esult of the methodology using existing and projected freight volumes to rank the corridors. Historically, the corridor has been a major conduit for coal from Appalachia to southern power plants. However, as many older coal-fired plants have been retired or converted to gas, the volume of coal traffic has reduced significantly. The line is still expected to continue to serve through traffic and a number of wood chipping operations in Rutherford Counry, fiber glass and paper producers in Shelby, and a number of transload facilities in west Charlotte. The line also services unit grain train service supporting the agricultural and food processing industries in the state. Economic trends show that western North Carolina will experience growth in the plastics and chemical industries. Due to the i�eduction in coal volumes along the corridor, there should be sufficient capacity to support traffic growth for through and North Carolii7a freight. However, expansion of CSXT's Intermodal facility and growth in freight may necessitate a study to look at operational improvements along the eastern portion of this corridor (from Bostic to Charlotte). August 2015 4-10 4.4.5 Corridor 03- NS - Salisbury to Asheville ; - � �` " r - �,,. Er `��' ? �� ` � -� �� ❑ -^-,_r �_. _ :. � Winsto�Sale�m�<� � � a� � _ � '� � � � - Canover High Poi ,t _ � ` i �shevifle - � ,.x�.� n � n _` _ � � i �aston �� ;, �= �� arlotte��,,,�� m" ' A �._ Monroe �� ' ❑ ❑ �_ � / � Corridor 03 runs from Salisbury to Asheville, running concurrently with the NS S Line. The line also connects the Hickory/Conover area and Statesville to the state's rai] network. The primarily single track line is approximately 148 miles in length. The corridor carries a moderate volume of freight traffic with the majority of the freight originating in or destined for North Carolina industries. As such, the corridor connects industries in the western piedmont and mountain region of North Carolina to the rest of the national rail network via Corridor 06 at Salisbury and Corridor 01 which extends to Knoxville, Tennessee. These industries include a large polyester fibers manufacturer in Salisbury and a number of food producers and a large paper mill in Canton via connections to shoi•t line railroads. The corridor also acts as a conduit for coal destined for a number of North Carolina and southeastern power plants. The corridor ranked in the Stewardship Tier. (�t��f�iPFtLI-9E�dSl'�L � I�TL R�IL E��,^,V� Projections show that plastics, chemicals, and manufacturing facilities are expected to develop along this corridor. As volumes grow, it is suggested that the corridor be studied and monitored. No freight projects are cui-rently identified along Corridor 03. Interoperability and the mountainous topography are concerns for future track and facilities necessary to reinstate passenger service as a long-term goal. 4.4.6 Corridor 06- NS - SC state line to VA state line � `� r,.�-.;� '� ". ';e � �=j-�b�� , z ��; � ; ��< -- .� winstor� , �� C;onov,e� � � � � -- - -J�-� �. �--� ,i_ ' t G�eensbor� �alem � , �� Burlington High Point — _ i. � _ .0 'Gastonia'. � Conc 1 � ,. , . - i . arlott� ❑ � _,Mor C � _� � Fayetteville � � � ,, �l (��Hamlet �� Pembr`o r � � Corridor 06 is operated by NS from the Virginia state line northeast of Greensboro to the South Carolina state line southwest of Gastonia; it is approximately 188 miles long and parallels portions of I-85 and US 29. The August 2015 4-11 section between Greensboro and Charlotte is trackage owned by the NCRR Company. In North Carolina, the corridor is split between two NS operating districts; the Danville District which runs between Lynchburg, Virginia and the large classification yard in Linwood, and the Charlotte District that runs from the Linwood classification yard to Spartanburg, South Carolina. This important north-south route is NS' primary east coast corridor and is the busiest freight corridor in North Carolina. It connects the manufacturing and distribution centers of Charlotte and Greensboro to southeastern and northeastern rnarkets. Important points along the route include NS's Linwood Yard and an intermodal facility at the Charlotte Douglas International Airport. The I-85 Corporate Center, a 1,000-acre megasite in Davidson County, which has the potential to be developed as an automotive manufacturing center, is located along this corridor. Also, the 1,800-acre Chatham-Siler City Advanced Manufacturing Site and Randolph County (Liberty) Megasite are connected to Corridor 06 via a connection to Corridor 10 in Greensboro. By 2037, NS projects an additional 22 daily intermodal trains on the corridor. Due to its importance to the state and national rail network, Corridor 06 is ranked in the Investment Tier. ��'iNIPRLI—OEV�dSI'�TL STATL F��'+IL d�l�^-,P�9 restored to the corridor that was removed in the 1980s; the additional capacity will support future intercity passenger and freight growth. Under PIP and the Sealed Corridor Project, safety impi-ovements have been and continue to be made along Corridor 06. As such, capacity and safety improvement projects that support the proposed Charlotte Gateway Station will further improve freight and passenger operations for the corridor. Yard, siding, and track extensions increase capacity throughout the corridor for longer freight trains. For example, an additional 165 rail cars per day could be processed at Linwood Yard (near Salisbury) if the track extension projects are implemented. Due to the urban nature of a large portion of Corridor 06, the high volume of freight and passenger train volumes, and the varied types of freight carried, improving safety along this corridor is a priority. As such, nine grade separations or separation studies in and around Greensboro and Charlotte were identified. Traffic separation studies identify redundant and unnecessary at- grade crossings, future potential grade separation locations, and connections to industries. The PIP program of projects already includes 13 new grade separations and numerous grade crossing closures in addition to the Sealed Corridor crossing treatments and closures, some of which will be implemented on Corridor 06. In terms of freight flows, both intermodal and bulk commodities are hauled on Corridor 06. Both intermodal and bulk commodity flows have experienced Corridor 06 is part of the NS Crescent Corridor, a multi-state corridor program growth in recent years and as the economy continues to grow, expectations for extending from New Orleans and Memphis in the Southeast to Philadelphia and continued growth in these areas remain high. To support the expected Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and New York City and Mechanicville, New York, in intermodal traffic growth, NS is proposing to convert its former Roundhouse Pi-operty adjacent to its Greensboro intermodal facility, to storage space, thereby increasing capacity for international containers. This will enhance the existing internzodal service between the Triad and the Port of Norfolk. The project is included in the Transportation Improvement Pi�ogram (TIP) as TIP Project P-5700. In Charlotte, NS is proposing to convert its former intermodal yard property to a new Thoroughbred Bulk Transfer (TBT) facility (TIP Project 5702) with the expectation of growth in the ethanol market. The corridor serves both passenger (4 round trips per day) and freight flows, thus netwoi-k fluidiry and capaciry are of particulai� importance due to the widely varying train lengths, speeds, and operating characteristics. As pa►-t of the Piedmont Improvement Program (PIP) double track capacity is being the Northeast. The Crescent Corridor will target truck traffic, potentially lowering truck volumes along I-85. Corridor 06 is the spine for NS' east coast operations. Thus, it too connects the majority of NS' secondary and branch lines in North Carolina. It also connects to a major CSXT east-west line in Charlotte, and as a result, any investments in this corridor will have positive impacts on freight passing through, originating in, and destined for North Carolina. August 2015 4-12 4.4.7 Corridor 07- CSXT - Charlotte to Monroe l�v `��"� IJ�insto�-Sa�em � � � _ - __;� . `� Conover r ��, High Point ❑ � `� � �� G. � � 1 �'�� - _�� ❑ u — ��- _. _ �,t nia= �, ��C�nea�d � I � � Cfiarl�ot�e °�� ManrOe � � _ -- `� Corridor 07 is a 30-mile long CSXT line connecting Charlotte to Monroe. The corridor includes CSXT's Pinoca classification yard which serves Charlotte area freight traffic and the Charlotte Intermodal Terminal. The corridor connects Charlotte to the Port of Wilmington and the CSXT A Line via Corridor 11, which is CSXT's primary north-south corridor along the east coast. The corridor also connects Charlotte with CSXT lines in western North Carolina. As a result of the corridor's location in CSXT's North Carolina network, it carries a wide variety and substantial amount of freight traffic. The corridor is the only connection between CSXT's intermodal terminal in Charlotte and the remainder of its intermodal netwo►-k. Due to its position in CSXT's intermodal network, Corridor 07 has been included in CSXT's National Gateway Initiative. The corridor also serves a number of inedium-size manufacturers in Union County. CSXT has proposed two projects along Corridor 07. The 10,000 foot long passing siding at Stouts will improve capacity along the corridor by enabling trains to pass each other. This project is funded in STI and identified as TIP CCaNIPRLI-BENSIVL STAT� R�tIL RL�',N Project P-5704. CSXT is also proposing to construct Phase III of the Charlotte Intermodal Terminal (CIT) which will more than doubles the terminal's container handling capability. The improvements at the CIT are a component of the National Gateway Initiative. A grade separation between Corridors 07 and 06 was proposed to improve the flow of freight traffic at the at-grade crossing of the two corridors near Uptown Charlotte; however, that project is currently on hold. Improving safety by reducing vehicular conflicts will be addressed with the grade separation of Campus Ridge Road and Corridor 07. From an econoinic development perspective, long-term investments in Corridor 07 should be considered because of the expected growth in the plastics and chemical-related industries in Charlotte and western North Carolina. Enhanced access to the Port of Wilmington and CSXT's intermodal network via Corridor 07 should benefit these industries as they experience growth. August 2015 4-13 4.4.8 Corridor OS- NS - Charlotte to Columbia � ��..J ' _-_U _ W�nston-Sa , �c.,ona�ue� � � � � �-� `, � � �� , � t 4 ` I4 t . - _- �I�r�� ❑� � � �' `Ga � = I�� I a� Monroe -�__ � d ❑i' Corridor 08 consists of the NS R line and it connects Charlotte to Rock Hill and Columbia, South Carolina. The corridor parallels I-77 from Charlotte to South Carolina. Relative to other freight corridors in North Carolina, Corridor 08 carries a moderate volume of traffic, yet the rype of freight it carries varies tremendously. The corridor serves a large industrial park in south Charlotte which includes a number of transload facilities. The corridor also serves a large quarry adjacent to the south Charlotte industrial park. With the opening of the new NS intermodal facility at Charlotte-Douglas Intei•national Airport, intermodal flows to Charlotte ]lave grown. As such, Corridor 08 funnels container traffic between the intermodal facility at the airport and the ports at Charleston, South Carolina and Savannah, Georgia. Corridor 08 ranlced in the caNiPR�ia��siv� s i�r� ��iL ��,n� Investment Tier due to its role in providing connections to intermodal facilities, ports, and major transloads, and the current and future volume of truck traffic that can be potentially diverted from [-77. No projects have currently been identified along Corridor 08. 4.4.9 Corridor 09- NS - Greensboro to Selma Greens Burli �urh �,I� , ��❑ ; � .� �a� � . - �'� - c�ut�f�� " i � .-: � ; �_. va; � �Concord � `t, , � harlotte,.: ', �,� .: �"' _ �� Mo�n'roe� ,_ FayeQtev�lle ;� 1—1 �Norlina � ' `' I� � � � _. - � `i �-. - __� T__ -�" �. �Racky Mo� , Ralei h �� , , ❑ ,.: �`� � j wus��' � -, ::)c ■.�� Goldsbaro -, �,�: ��0 � �\ � � Kinstoh _ n '� Corridor 09 is concurrent with the 115 mile long, NS H Line. The corridor parallels 1-40, I-85 and US 70, running from Greensboro to Selma in Johnston County, connecting the Triangle to the NS Mainline (Crescent Corridor) at Greensboro. Through a connection with Corridor 17 at Selma and Corridor 06 in Greensboro, the corridor connects the state's primary economic centers ultimately to the Port of Morehead City. Though the corridor carries a moderate amount of freight traffic, its importance in connecting North Carolina's economic growth regions places it in the Investment Tier. Due to the urbanized nature of the corridor, at-grade crossing safety is a major concern. As such, ten grade separation projects between Greensboro and Raleigh were identified. In addition to the grade separations, a number of crossing closures were identified to further reduce vehicle/train conflicts along the corridor. The reduction in crossings will also increase average speeds on the corridor, benefiting freight movement and passenger service as the corridor carries three daily Amtrak round trips. With future passenger frequencies and August 2015 4-14 commuter service proposed along the corridor, a number of passing sidings are also proposed to provide increased capacity. Additionally, as the Triangle Region's population continues to grow, and highway congestion increases, access to intermodal services will be impacted. Thus, a study to identify the need for a future intermodal faciliry either along the eastern end of Corridor 09, or along Corridors 15 and/or 17 will be conducted. This is consistent with the Governor's 25-Year Vision to develop an intermodal facility along the I-95 corridor. 4.4.10 Corridor 11- CSXT - Monroe to Pembroke �Ga�tania°'= ��° ti�Con oc �d '' < / � p Charlotte. - . � _ Mon'r��' , Har�let � �� u CaNIPRLI-BENSIV� SiAT� R�IL ��a4� Atlanta. The corridor is included as a component of CSXT's National Gateway Initiative, which seeks to improve intermodal connections between the Mid- Atlantic ports and markets and the Upper Midwest. The corridor ranks in the Investment Tier due to its role as a strategic link between the Port of Wilmington, the CSXT A Line (Corridor 15), the Charlotte area, and other Southeast markets. Economic growth in the region has resulted in a project request to expand a transload faciliry in Wadesboro, in Anson County. Also, CSXT is proposing a number of improvements to enhance freight operations along the corridor. They include a tracic extension at the Monroe Yard to support more efficient yard operations and the track and signal improvements in Anson County. These proposed improvements will also be beneficial to the Port of Wilmington as -:� ' much of the rail freight destined to and originating from the port utilizes the i0��' �:",� corridor. Any improvements along Corridor 11 are in accord with the � Governor's 25-Year Vision to develop intermodal train service to the Port of Pern Corridor 11 is approximately 84 miles of east-west CSXT track running from Pembroke to South Carolina west of Monroe. This corridor is a major component of CSXT's North Carolina network, connecting the Charlotte area with the large classification yard in Hamlet, the north-south running A Line (Corridor 15), and the Port of Wilmington. [t also provides a direct connection to CSXT routes throughout the southeast via Atlanta. As such, Corridor 11 is among the top gross tonnage routes in North Carolina, carrying a wide variety of mixed freight. This includes grain destined for feed mills in Union County, the ADM flour mill in Charlotte, and chemicals destined for the Wilmington area. The corridor is a major component of the CSXT inter►nodal network, linking the Charlotte Intermodal Terminal to the remainder of the CSXT network via Wilmington. Also, as the North Carolina Ports Authority pursues initiatives to grow freight at Wilmington, continual investments in Corridor 11 will be ilecessary to support iilcreased freigllt volumes. August 2015 4-15 4.4.11 Corridor 12, 12f, and 13— CSXT - Hamlet to Raleigh, Norlina, and We►don . � •� � � �� ----- � - --Greensboro � lem ,-� � � �� ❑ �� ) Burlirugton� High Point � -� i � � � Gulf��" ❑_ �� :oncord �% " rlotte Monro� � � _� �ille Durham `� � � �l Hamlet � `J Pembroke r ,�� - -❑ -Norlima —� �� ❑ �__ �., / - k ,-1, Racky Moe�nt �leigh z� � 1_Rarmele ; ;(,� �� , ', Wilson , - � Gresnville "_� �, j .. Goldsbaro �` ' '" �1 ��- __�_. -- �' -�--� ' �'`` ' � Kinston 0 �� - -- i �. \I I i � Wal�'ce � `� _ `.� - J� � CCaNIPRLI-BENSI'VL S IATL R�tIL RL�',N Corridor 12 consists of the 65 mile long segment of the S Line running from Raleigh to Norlina. The corridor includes CSXT's Raleigh Yard and adjacent Trans-flo transload facility, both located in downtown Raleigh. Corridor 12 is a primarily single track route due to its relatively low train volumes. Despite the low volumes, the corridor serves a number of industries including a pharmaceutical plant in Raleigh, a number of inedium-sized manufacturers and a quarry in Henderson, and a wood chipping operation in Ridgeway. Improvements to Corridor 12 are proposed as part of the Southeast Corridor Raleigh to Richmond segment. This would include restoration and reactivation of service along the abandoned portion of the S Line fi-om Norlina to Petersburg, VA. Corridor 12f consists of the approximately 30 mile long abandoned CSXT SA �� !..J Line between Norlina and Roanoke Rapids and the approximately six mile long � New'E CSXT Roanoke Rapids Spur between Roanoke Rapids and the A Line in Weldon. A large paper mill and coal-fired power plant are served by the Roanoke Rapids , _ Spur. The CSXT S Line (Corridors 12 and 13) parallels the CSXT A Line (Corridor 15) to the west. The S Line is made up of the Norlina Subdivision which runs from Norlina to Raleigh and the Aberdeen Subdivision which runs from Raleigh to Hamlet. . Corridor 13 consists of the 102 mile long section of the S Line running from Raleigh through the major classification yard at Hamlet and on to the South Carolina border. The primary rail connections are located in Raleigh, Cary, and Hamlet. Corridor 13 carries a relatively low volume of freight. However, it does serve a number of inedium-sized manufacturers and a large quarry near Sanford. Corridor 13 is also CSXT's only direct connection to the Triangle Region, making it an invaluable resource as the freight needs of the region continue to grow. The combined Corridors 12, 12f, and 13 are ranked in the Stewardship Tier primarily for two reasons. First, there are two market-driven initiatives on the corridor. CSXT has proposed a new 40-acre automotive distribution terminal to serve the Piedmont region of North Carolina. The other initiative would add capacity and construct facilities to support shale gas exploration in this part of the state. Secondly, the combined Corridors 12, 12f, and 13 could provide significant congestion relief to the CSXT A Line (Corridor 15), by providing additional north-south freight (and passenger) capacity to supplement the A Line and provide network redundancy in case of an emergency. The combined corridor intersects rail lines connecting the Piedmont to North Carolina's two seapoi•ts. Also, the restored SA Line would provide a direct connection between central North Carolina and the ports at Hampton Roads. To support safety goals and improve roadway congestion in urban areas, three grade separation projects have been identified; one each in Apex, Cary, and Raleigh. The Amtrak Silver Star operates one daily round trip along Corridor 13 and any safety or capacity improvements will benefit existing and future passenger operations. August 2015 4-16 4.4.12 Corridor 15- CSXT - VA state line to SC state line � � ; n I -- , Norlina� � � � � y i., Gree�sboro I , _ � , �.� '`� � � D��har� i' ) Burli,ngtoni�� } � - --�_ ' � ❑ � �:� --�Ge�lf�� 1 l� ,, � ---- :� � Fayeti � s � rJ.H�mle Ra I �: �� Cary � �_ � Pembr,o"ke r-Q _ � Wilso sbou�o� CCaNIPRLI-BENSI'VL S IATL R�tIL �L�',N be diverted to the corridor, and its role in connecting North Carolina industries the national rail network. Corridor 15 is CSXT's primary east coast north-south route, thus it cari•ies a -�� significant amount of through intermodal and mixed freight. This includes `� J dedicated trains carrying fruit raised in Florida to Northeastern distribution � centers. Coi�ridor 15 intersects two Investment Corridors, 17 and 19, which ky Mount I� � ; Parmel� �;� ,� �; � .-_ Greenvi�le' _ ` -� � ,� — _ - ''�' , `' ` � � ,: � � � . � ,* � ,_ � - Kinston } c- � , � � � �� V1lsllace r'� �� ngton provide connections to the State Ports at Morehead City and Wilmington, respectively. As the global economy continues to shift and deepened navigational channels and port investments enable North Carolina's ports to accommodate a wider variety of vessels and types of cargoes, Corridor 15 will continue be a conduit for freight traffic, connecting North Carolina's ports to the national rail network. This corridor also provides connections to the ports at Hampton Roads, Charleston, and Savannah, giving North Carolina manufacturers and shippers additional import/export options. This fact is why Corridor 15 was selected as a major component of CSXT's National Gateway Initiative, as it would funnel intermodal traffic from Charlotte and the Poi•t of Wilmington to Midwestern markets. �' Its geographic location and connections to other rail corridors make Cori•idor III� 15 a major route for freight originating and terminating in eastern and central North Carolina. In particular, freight supports the agricultural industry with products such as feed grain, phosphate, and fertilizer. Also, the vast amount of forest resources in the eastern part of the state will continue to make this corridor a major route supporting the paper and wood pulp industry and the growing export wood chip industry. The corridor is also a component of the Strategic Rail Corridor Network (STRACNET), connecting Fort Bragg to the Corridor 15 parallels I-95, running from the South Carolina border to the Virginia border. It is part of the CSXT A Line, the primary north-south rail corridor between the Northeast and Florida. In North Carolina, it is split between two CSXT operating subdivisions, the North End Subdivision which runs between Richmond, Virginia and Rocky Mount, North Carolina and the South End Subdivision which runs between Rocky Mount, North Carolina and Florence, South Carolina. Corridor 15 ranked in the Investment Tier due to the volume of rail traffic it carries, the volume of truck traffic that could potentially national rail network. In compliance with the Governor's 25-Year Vision, a study to evaluate the need for a future intermodal facility either along this corridor or Corridors 09 and/or 17 will be conducted. A new intermodal rail terminal could also stimulate the need for intermodal train service to the Port of Wilmington, which was also identified in the Governor's 25-Year Vision as a means to growing the state's economy. August 2015 4-17 Although there were no specific projects identified in the State Rail Plan for this corridor, NCDOT will partner with CSXT to identify any additional operational improvements that inay be needed along the corridor to ensure freight movements to and f►-om the eastern part of the state are accommodated. The major Class I corridors in North Carolina are already cleared for double stack intermodal operations, but considering that Corridor 15 carries ten passenger train roundtrips per day, which is the highest number of any corridor in the state, any additional capacity or operational improvements will also have positive benefits on passenger service. Additionally, the potential restoration and reactivation of the SA Line from Norlina to Roanoke Rapids(Corridor 12� could provide some additional connectivity and redundancy in the rail network, having positive impacts along the entirety of Corridor 15. CCaNIPRLI-BENSIV� STAT� �AIL PLAN . :�:-_: 4.4.13 Corridor 17— NS - Selma to Morehead City I—�—� ,—Noclin � �� Corridor 17 is concurrent with the A& EC District of NS, running 113 miles between Selma and Morehead City. The corridor parallels US 70 for its entirety, connecting Goldsboro, Kinston, and New Bern to the rest of the state's rail network. Though the corridor currently carries a relatively low volume of freight ti-affic compared to other Class I lines in the state, it still plays a major role in supporting the economy of North Carolina due to its connection to the Port of Morehead City. With agriculture being an essential component of the region's economy, Corridor 17 serves two large grain elevators, Goldsboro August 2015 4-18 Milling and Sanderson Foods in Kinston. Via a connection to Corridor 41, Corridor 17 also connects to a large paper mill north of New Bern and acts as a conduit for chemicals and phosphate produced at the Potash Corporation mine in Aurora (Lee Creek). The corridor is also on the STRACNET, connecting Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station, Camp Lejeune (through connections to Corridor 44), and the Port of Morehead City. The corridor's connection to the Global TransPark in Kinston and the Port of Morehead City puts the corridor in a position to support current and future economic initiatives at both of these valuable state assets. Thus, Corridor 17 ranked in the Investment Tier. As in the case of Corridors 09 and 15, a study to loolc at the possibility of siting a new intermodal facility to serve eastern North Carolina and the Triangle Region will be conducted. This facility could help support the area's agricultural industry and provide valuable connections to the Port of Morehead City and the GTP. As previously stated, this aligns with the Governor's 25-Year Vision to seek opportunities to develop an intermodal facility along the I-95 corridor. Community impacts associated with the line running down the center of streets in the business districts of Goldsboro, New Bern, and Morehead City are a major concern along this corridor. As such, a Traffic Separation Study was ►-ecently completed, making crossing closure and improvement recommendations in Goldsboro. The need to study the relocation of railroad tracks through downtown New Bern along a new alignment south of the city was identified. Also, a study is underway evaluating how to reduce the number of vehicle/train conflicts and improve traffic flow in downtown Morehead City. Supporting freight traffic growth at the Port of Morehead City is also a concern. The Eastern Infrastructure Improvement Study (SB 402) recommended several potential improvements. In the short term, the study recommended developing a loop track at the Port of Morehead Ciry, and using frontage roads and super- street highway intersection improvements to help reduce highway-rail conflicts through Morehead City. The Eastern Infrastructure Improvement Study recommended establishing a GTP to Morehead City Mobiliry Corridor. This corridor would include the relocation of the NCRR between Havelock and Morehead Ciry. This relocation has been studied previously and is not fiscally feasible based on current port and rail volumes, but it is included as a long-term improvement that can be implemented when marlcet conditions change. Also, CCaNIPRLI-BENSIVL STATL R�'+IL RL�',N as previously noted, the feasibility of a rail bypass around New Bern should also Ue examined. . The improvements and studies described above will help to deliver on the Governor's 25-Year Vision to transform North Carolina's Ports. As this corridor is owned by the NCRR, any studies to analyze bypasses or track relocations will be conducted in partnership with the NCRR. 4.4.14 Corridor 19— CSXT - Pembroke to Wilmington � C Corridor 19 is the approximately 73 mile long CSXT SE Line connecting Wilmington to Pembroke. The corridor parallels I-74 and US 74 for its entirety. At its western terminus, it connects to the CSXT A Line (Corridor 15), the primary east coast north-south rail corridor. The corridor is the only rail access to the Port of Wilmington via the Wilmington Terminal Railway, underscoring its importance to North Carolina's economy, placing it in the Investinent Tier. Also noteworthy, CSXT has included the corridor as a component of its National Gateway Initiative and has provided double-stacic clearances along the corridor as a part of that initiative. Currently, no rail intermodal service exists to the port. The North Carolina State Ports Authority will continue to partner with CSXT to respond to growing market demands for intermodal service to the Port of Wilmington, which is consistent with the Governor's 25-Year Vision to August 2015 4-19 C�f�iPG1LB--0E d�9�8VL SIA�GL �t.�"�IB_ �01^,B�➢ transform North Carolina ports. A current project will construct a new connector track between Corridors 19 and 15, in the Town of Pembroke, improving connectioi�s between the two lines and significantly reducing the number of vehicle/train conflicts in the Town. Corridor 19 provides access to a number of large industries, including a paper mill in Riegelwood and chemical plants in the Wilmington area. The 1,025-acre Mid-Atlantic Industrial Park, which is a CSXT-Select Site, is adjacent to the corridor in the town of Leland. The corridor is also on the STRACNET providing access to the Sunny Point Military Ocean Terminal, the world's largest military ocean terminal, and connecting Fort Bragg to the Port of Wilmington. At its eastern end, Corridor 19 passes through a mix of industrial and urban land uses. The projects submitted for this corridor reflect this. In Pender County, north of Davis Yard, an economic development project was submitted to provide access to the Pender Commerce Park, which currently does not have rail access. To address the potential vehicle/train conflicts as the corridor passes through Wilmington, a Traffic Separation Study is underway and will make recommendations to improve crossing safety. Any proposed investments in the corridor will be beneficial to the Port of Wilmington, as much of the rail freight destined for and originating from the port utilizes the corridor. As the North Carolina Ports Authority pursues initiatives to grow freight at Wilmington, additional investments in Corridor 19 will be necessary to support increased freight volumes. These efforts range from studying upgrades of at-grade crossings through Wilmington, grade separations at the port gates, and a recommendation to evaluate the need for a new rail crossing of the Cape Fear River, south of downtown Wilmington. August 2015 4-20 4.4.15 Improvements to Short Line Railroads As noted in Section 4.4.1, potential improvements to short line railroads were identified through their input, and input from MPOs, RPOs, and NCDOT units. This section presents needs for the short line railroads across the state. Figure 4-2 shows the location of rail operators and owners in the state. It should be noted that short lines often provide "last mile" access between industries and the Class I railroad network. The Aberdeen Carolina and Western Railway (ACWR) was identified as a strategic i•ail corridor in the North Carolina Transportation Network (NCTN) due to its potential to support economic development in central North Carolina. In particular, the ACWR serves the Heart of North Carolina MegaPark in Moore and Montgomery Counties. As the plans for the mega park continue to develop, an evaluation of the rail infrastructure required to support the megapark should be conducted. Additionally, connections to North Carolina's ports are operated by short lines: Wilmington Terminal Railway (WTRY) at the Port of Wilmington and Carolina Coastal Railway (CLNA) at the Port of Morehead City. In some cases, specific projects have been enumerated. The City of Charlotte identified the need to relocate the Aberdeen Carolina and Western Railway, and the Wilmington MPO identified the need for grade separations at the Port of Wilmington gates and Front Street signalization. An ongoing study within NCDOT is looking at reestablishing rail service from Andrews to Murphy, in the western part of the state. However, the majoriry of the needs were developed through a short ]ine survey and are grouped into the major categories of bridges, i�ail, ties and surfacing, additional capacity, rail yards, and transloads. Not every short line CCaNIPRLI-BENSIVL STATL F��tIL RLL�N railroad provided specific project level input. The generalized needs were compiled from 11 responses received fi•om short lines following a request to identify aggregate needs. For all short lines, upgrading tracks and bridges to accommodate 286,000 lb. rail cars is essential to retaining industries in the state, particularly the rural and small urban areas where short lines predominantly operate. Historically, short line railroads have received funding from NCDOT either through the Rail Industrial Access Program or the Short Line Infrastructure Assistance Program. Both of these projects are now funded by the Freight Rail and Rail Crossing Improvement Program. Projects are awarded through a grant system that evaluates projects based on factors including, but not limited to, the number of carloads that would benefit from the pi-oposed improvements. Thus, the needs are presented in order to show the level of funding needed, but short line projects will still compete through those grant processes. Table 4-2, on the following page, presents the freight projects and needs on North Carolina's short line network. In addition to the projects and needs identified in Table 4-2, the Northwest Piedmont RPO requested an investigation of the feasibility of constructing a railroad line along the western side of I-77 from the Iredell-Yadkin County line to the Yadkin Valley Railroad in Surry County. August 2015 4-21 Railroad �wnershr'p c�ar�one area r�ansrt ,�. :,#.:, System � � �� CSX �ranspa�iatcan � pepariment of . Narfolk Southern Defense m �� CSX Transportatimn and NS " _ fE G Winskoru-Salem' J/\ North Carolina RR Company � �;� ` m m � m' Shon I�ne �� -- i� �' High P_oint� � ��'- _ Asheville � � m ,' m, _ i � m��~ Railroad C7perator ��_ [01j Graat Smoky Mountains RR [02] Blue Ridge Southern Railroad (10] High Point, 7homasville & Denion RR [03] The�mal Belt Railway [11j Carolina Coasial Railway [04] CaldweBl County RR [12] Laurinburg 8 Sovthem Company [05] Alexander RR [13] AbercJeen & Rockfisli RR [06J Yadkin Valley RR = [14] AtlantQc & Western Railway [07] Charlotte Area Transit System, [15] Clinton Terminal RR [18] Chesapeake & Albemarte [08J Aberdeen Carolina & Westem Railway [16j Wilmington Terminal RR [19] Carolina Sauthern RR [09] Winston-Salerrt Soutf�bound Raulway [17] North Carolina & Virginia RR [20] Cape Fear Railway Figure 4-2 Railroad Opecatocs �QNIPR�I-BEh95��➢�J� _-i.°: o �_-^�i'd �°�� ° V�.t [2't] PPedmont & Norlhern Railway CSX Tramsportation Norfolk Southem MOi FO SCALE August 2015 4-22 CONIPR�I-9EV�9S1'V� 5i'.�TL �IL �LL',1�9 i,�Gyb�z �.-2 :;''do�aP'- I�,�u��k� u� d� ._7�m�v�sV `'u�4a�e�t:; raa�211 6!, ��_Ueti�i; I�� =��1-; FUNDING NEEDS BY TIME PERIOD SHORT LINE PROJECTS AND NEEDS - ELIGIBLE FOR FUNDING BY FRRCSI NEAR TERM MID TERM LONG TERM 2015--2019 2020-2024 2025-2040 Bridges (Based on 11 short line survey responses) $3,524,000 $3,200,000 $21,692,000 Rail (Based on 11 short line survey responses) $4,837,500 $11,412,500 $27,600,000 Ties and Surfacing (Based on 11 short line survey responses) $13,834,000 $14,072,000 $29,544,000 Additional CapaciTy (Based on 11 short line survey responses) $15,500,000 $4,650,000 $1,300,000 Rail Yards (Based on 11 short line survey responses) $1,100,000 $1,600,000 Transloads (Based on 11 short line survey responses) $2,360,000 $500,000 Other (Based on 11 short line survey responsesJ $2,370,000 $1,135,000 $2,070,000 Relocate ACWR (Mecklenburg County) $16,500,000 Front Street Lead Track Signals and Gates (New Hanover Counry) $900,000 Andrews to Murphy Reactivation (Cherokee Counry) $16,400,000 Loop Track at the Port of Morehead City (Carteret Counry) $5,000,000 Grade Separations and Port of Wilmington Gates (New Hanover Co.)* $50,000,000 Total - Short line Project Needs $94,425,500 $74,469,500 $82,206,000 */f identified by a Traffic Separation Study, could potentially be funded by highway-rail grade separation funds August 2015 4-23 5 Chapter Five - State Rail Service and Investment Program This chapter describes the improvements and investments that address the passenger and freight rail needs identified in earlier chapters. The proposed improvements and investments described in Chapters 3 and 4 are evaluated using the objectives developed as part of the overall rail vision for the state, and analyzed for their public and private benefits and costs. This chapter also lists the proposed studies and other recommendations needed to improve rail services in the state. This Rail Service and Investment Program and State Rail Plan fulfills all of the requirements of the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) State Rail Plan guidance and complies with the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA). The State Rail Plan also supports the state's long-standing rail planning practice. 5.1 VISION An important step in development of the State Rail Plan recommendations was to develop a list of goals and objectives. The goals and objectives for the State Rail Plan must support the mission and goals of the Noi-th Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and the NCDOT Rail Division, The NCDOT Rail Division's mission is the "...safe and efficient movement of people and goods on North Carolina's railroads through freight, passenger and safery programs, supporting job creation and economic gi-owth." The North Carolina Governor's 25-Year Vision, the NCDOT mission and goals, the Rail Division mission, the goals and objectives from the 2009 State Rail Plan, and input from the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) were used to develop goals, vision, and objectives for this State Rail Plan. The State Rail Plan supports the state's long-standing rail planning practice and the Governor's 25-Year Vision for North Carolina, which includes the following rail-related goals: • Expand access to passenger rail options in all regions of the state • Expand mass transit options, including rail • Regular intermodal rail service to the Port of Wilmington ��! C�9 f��ZC 6'-Y � I�! � P' L�, i.,r� I� 6�.,r� I �L f�'V� ��i • Intermodal facilities along the I-95 corridor to support freight shipping • Improve rail and seaport connections to I-95 to serve eastern U.S. • Competitive rail access to Global TransPark and Port of Morehead City • Public-private partnerships to complete Radio Island • Improve rail connections between military bases and ports • Economically competitive rail service to inland ports around Charlotte • Expand rail capabilities to support Triad Logistics hub • Support access to privately developed megasites • Industrial access to freight rail lines for agribusiness and economic development in western NC The goals, vision, and objectives for the State Rail Plan were categorized as follows: State Rail Plan Goal Area: Goal areas are a way of organizing NCDOT's objectives for the state rail system. Goal areas are: Safety and Security, Stewardship, Preservation, System/Interoperability, Freight, Passenger, Commuter, Planning. Vision Statement: Vision statements capture a shared understanding for the direction of planning and policies in each goal area. All objectives should support the overall vision for the goal area. Objective: Objectives describe the desired outcomes or progress under each goal area. Table 5-1 shows how initiatives identified in the State Rail Plan will help implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision. Table 5-2 lists the Goal Areas, Vision Statements and Objectives of the State Rail Plan. Processes and strategies were also developed for each objective in the table to describe specific actions to be taken to achieve each objective, as well as possible success criteria to help NCDOT measure progress. These additional details are provided in Appendix E. Projects, studies, and initiatives needed to implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision and to meet the goals and objectives in Table 5-2 are provided in Figure 5-1 and Figure 5-2. August 2015 5-1 Table 5-1 The Governor's 25-Year Vision and the State Rail Plan Region Regional Solution Next Steps Coastal Develop Intermodal Train Service to . Identify capacity and safety needs along CSXT and WTRY railroad corridors in the Port of Wilmington Wilmington • In partnership with CSXT, study capacity improvements to the CSXT system in Eastern NC that would increase freight capacity • Construct bridges at the north gate and container terminal to separate railroad and truck traffic at the Port of Wilmington Seek opportunities to develop intermodal facilities . Evaluate the development of an intermodal facility to serve the Triangle Region and along the I-95 Corridor to support freight shipping Eastern NC . Consider the potential roles for North Carolina state ports and regional ports to support intermodal service Leverage public-private partnerships to complete the . Evaluate economic feasibility of relocating the NCRR along a new alignment between development of Radio Island and support enhanced Morehead City and Havelock, allowing trains to access Radio Island from the east rail access to the Port of Morehead City . Work with the North Carolina State Ports Authority and Carolina Coastal Railway to develop a loop track at the port . Support development of other frontage roads or superstreet intersections to help reduce highway-rail conflicts in Morehead City Eastern Support economically competitive rail access to the . Construct a rail line from GTP in Kinston to the CSXT line parallel to NC 11 in Lenoir Global TransPark (GTP) and Port of Morehead City County Improve connections to the I-95 corridor from rail and . Provide access to the Mid-Atlantic Industrial Rail Park, a 1,025-acre CSXT-Select Site in seaports to serve markets throughout the Eastern US Leland, Brunswick County • Evaluate feasibility of a new rail crossing of the Cape Fear River to eliminate the need for trains to traverse through Wilmington to access the Port of Wilmington Central Improve highway connections and seek economically . Construct siding extension at Stouts in Union County competitive rail service to inland ports in and around • Support the Phase III Expansion of CSXT's Charlotte Intermodal Terminal Charlotte and Greensboro . Study operational improvements along the CSXT rail line between Charlotte and Pembroke • Relocate the Aberdeen Carolina & Western Railroad in Mecklenburg County Improve highway connections and expand airfreight . Construct rail spur at Piedmont Triad International Airport and rail capabilities to support the Triad Logistics Hub • Convert NS "Roundhouse" property adjacent to Greensboro Intermodal facility into parking and container storage Ensure infrastructure plans recognize the development . Provide access to the 1,000-acre I-85 Corporate Center megasite in Davidson County August 2015 5-2 Region Regional Solution Next Steps of inegasites in the region and support their ability to . Conduct a study to identify infrastructure needs required to support industries targeted attract new businesses in targeted industry clusters. for the 1,800-acre Chatham-Siler City Advanced Manufacturing Site • Support access to the Project Legacy megasite in Union County • Identify infrastructure needs required to support industries targeted for the Heart of North Carolina MegaPark Support the expansion of mass transit options in high- . Plan to accommodate potential commuter and light rail in the Triangle, Triad and growth areas to address the needs of changing Metrolina regions. NCDOT will work with the regional agencies as they develop their demographics, congestion and land development plans. concerns Western Provide industrial access to freight rail lines to . Evaluate operational improvements to the CSXT freight and intermodal network from accommodate expanding agribusiness and economic TN to Charlotte development while fully utilizing our multimodal . Reactivate Andrews to Murphy line to accommodate potential freight movement transportation system Comprehensive Expand access to passenger rail options in all regions . Continued development of the Southeast Rail Corridor of the state to accommodate changing demographics, • Work with project sponsors to evaluate intrastate passenger rail for commuter and light address congestion issues and meet regional rail in existing and emerging urban/suburban corridors transportation needs . Statewide Thruway Bus service expansion . Analysis of capacity and potential of existing stations to accommodate needs, and potential positive economic impacts to surrounding land uses August 2015 5-3 Table 5-2 State Rail Plan Goals, Vision, Objectives Goal Area/ Vision Statement Objectives 1.1 Reduce the number of rail-related crashes, including pedestrian trespassers 1.2 Maintain safety and mobility during emergencies Goal Area 1. Safety & Security 1.3 Prevent harm from train crashes and incidents and, when incidents occur, Vision: A rail system that safely moves people and products address them safely and efficiently 1.4 Improve the security of North Carolina's rail system 1.5 Maintain equipment properly 2.1 Minimize the negative impacts of rail operations and new rail projects on the natural and human environment Goal Area 2. Stewardship 2.2 Maximize positive impacts of new rail projects on the natural and human Vision: A rail system that is operated and improved with the greatest benefit and environment the least impact feasible to the human and natural environment 2.3 Increase the understanding and support of rail among policy makers and the public as a mode of transportation that supports growth while limiting the impact of increased transportation demand on air quality, energy use, and safety 3.1 Maintain and improve the viability of short line railroads and associated Goal Area 3. Preservation industries Vision: A rail system that is preserved for current and future use 3.2 Preserve opportunities for future passenger or freight rail service to leverage existing corridor assets and capacity 3.3 Preserve railroad corridors for future use 4.1 Move people and goods more efficiently Goal Area 4. System/Interoperability 4.2 Maintain and improve connectivity of the rail system, supporting economic Vision: A rail system with connecting corridors and facilities that promotes the growth efficient movement of people and goods and supports economic growth and 4.3 Ensure intercity, commuter, and transit services act as a cohesive system and development are planned in a manner that accommodates existing and future freight movement Goal Area 5. Freight 5.1 Increase the efficient use of freight rail service Vision: A rail system that provides safe, reliable, efficient, and well-used rail 5.2 Increase the freight customer base frei ht service 5.3 Promote economic develo ment Goal Area 6. Passenger 6.1 Increase ridership and enhance the economic performance of the state's Vision: Provide a system of intercity passenger services connecting North passenger rail network Carolina's major metropolitan areas and other communities to destinations 6.2 Provide passenger service, or connections to intercity passenger service, from within the state and alon the East Coast lar e rowth areas to ma'or East Coast destinations and feeder sto s Goal Area 7. Commuter Vision: A rail system that connects suburbs and bedroom communities of major 7.1 Support local plans and policies to implement commuter rail service employment centers with commuter rail service Goal Area 8. Planning 8.1 Provide a comprehensive plan that incorporates the needs of today and Vision: State rail planning addresses the collective needs of the State, its citizens, addresses the demands of a growing State and region industries, travelin ublic, and trans ortation roviders August 2015 5-4 Fri�ari��a[i�n �rit�en� �opu�ati�wri wa�i�ain 1�,a�ad 3� mia� �f �araid�,� �3� p�ulation w�thir� �i� mi'�� f t�etida�r ��rr�nt an� �� u�um�s a,�a para�lel �ai�hw�� u�rr�nt �n�9 � �ongestiam� �n �a�r�lle� h�ighw� -��r�on�cti�;r�� t�a �rsaj+�r �etiwit� «rnters �',�ss�n��r �r��in� �r�lU�e� in ��rrido� -In�lu�io�� a�lar�� fed�efiaJlp�-d�ig�at��d 5auth�;��t �cm�n�r � w�-� A5W Wilk�v W'rms�- . - , .� L� ��_��,_� �� ;_ P ,�,,• � ��w i �;�, ,��,�, �� N�� Wr�t�t � �`b� ,�,�a' - a�``�"� ��c �-`�� =__ -�� ,s a " - �J `� � �'� ��-1`°°'_` s��' — - �� ,4�'' �r�'f�" �� P47JIIII��i �r � �� +, . s� �.ry��„�� '4Y e01 RIBWC M�„� -. - _ - a - �, �. l��f�� — _ - ��d � � � ',� l i�. � � � � . ��.� _ — �, � .•t r1�,. ��:� � � � ��f�ll�'df,'� �i A� �, � �1�� 1 � P r �i.w F1'i7�',� � � h: 'rl�ii5�l�t�€Y�4�1,. d�l- re!�:r h:� r'��ck:. ?�,l. � ��. �� . R � ii� k�I�YtS�l:t',g�.:lt�. �h:. �d i2F!fi� o'4'r'•,�� -��rk. �'y,.,I. P�i� � �ELi�b3'� �,3.s�L'I�.iPT �"•d7[L $�P1`S�E� � � �'s'�S'Q�YP'S�aE:T�S�CSL-�YjP�j �[1C6nnwti-irYff � ii.�FJi�i�d7 �y� _ e, � S�7'ifLC£� � �esEeral}}�-U�signate�d �utl�� C�e�ar �� Pe�na�l �au�h:ea��rn `�C :��'P,�re�en l�[ ,� Cd�fTh6ia,5C gas�enger Train �r.� � �� A�en�l pa�s�ctg�r Fa�l �'.,ttads,,r Ccrrridao� �■ �nti�l Thn�a�� gw �r�R� E.�par sicsn Pca�eniial �e�w� "at3�i.a�a,Y�taticm L]�eead�g Figure 5-1 COMF�REFIEN�IVE STATE RJ41L PL4N -- F4i�mc�rud,YA tcj ti+�sl�r{�t��a,, �°aca ;�ra� ,�� o-�r�, ,�•r� � �� Nmp� lbc��, YA : �a~ �r � ,*�� _ _ — ;•- � _ i �J, �� y �bee�� °; .. ,'.,�� a - ' I #��_ Y `-, � —�.?tl�ttilli0fl ' ' �Sii� , Roci�Iw�uat ; �„� � ,��'�� r�; # 4 � 1 5ti � �r� � 't Passenger Rail Corridor Priorities to Implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision ��..�� 4;.. ��}��s� „��jRn�l+ ��i . � ,�� '_�_� ��e }`; "� (} " _ ,�S�S' � f� e _ �� "� �r �. a: � Jy r�� Ila�od�� '<;"�� F.i, '•% #.y r� ,�� .. ��v , ,'� �"7� F_i'.', August 2015 5-5 COMF�REFIENSIVE �TATE RJ41L P�N ---_ - ' �� — ',� � � � Gre�nsbora � � �` .:, '� �----.� 'MN'ins#�n-�lern O �I�►:�J► � ,� ,� /` �� ,� &irlin�t�n� J Uurham �}acky�l�aunt _,�_� _- -- ;�. _ ` 1 C�on�r � Po ox �` Cary� ��j Raleigh �� Parmel�e lVmaukh �, �- �� t��, �► � �;,_►. � � 4�ilsan Gul �r�emille �Vldashingt�n hshewill� � z s C�onc�� ,� Selma pGa�ldsbaro �--% �� ndrer+rs _ -- — �Gastoni �s � �' � ' � ,�`i C� ` r � �- `�" `" � dutt �� Kinst�an � Le��C�k �_ ��lur - — - � � �*�►,� � �' .�l, �9�nr� _ -�� _ ��_ _ � � � � � Bern � �� Fay�ett�ewillr ,�� `��,` � Ailannoe � H�rnl�rt � ,�;` - Class I Fr�i�ht �C+�rridc�r �ri�riti�ation Ti�r� �m�� ,� ,� ��,��i��„�„_`�� _� �fl'��St'f11�11t ��'� jrd�Tl ��,<, �,� 9A�allace , �y �ih�d — �Y � �t�euvar�dship� P`ragram . �, �� ilmirngton �ctiv� �onitc�ring Progr�m YuimloalN�cthCir�liulY �. .�,..,,�, — Sh�rt Line Pr�gram '`��,� ,"�'�'��,1,�► . i .� i . ; Studies to irnplement GovernarFs ��-Year'Vision � Figure 5-2 Freight Corridor Priorities to Implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision August 2015 5-6 .� Freigh# Pragram - IUear-Terrn Improuerr7ents 1. N5 Thorough�r�d Bulk T�ac�sfer {TBT} Facili�y in Char��tte 2. CSX'I'-10,4➢�1Q ft. 5iding �xtez�sion at 5tou�s ii7 Union Count�rr 3, 1Upgra�le NS along U'S 52 it� Albemarle in Stai�y �County 4. Gontail�er �'arkil�gjStar�geAcljacent t� �1S Greenst�or� InTer€��oc1aY Facylity [C��verts �arrner raunc�hoTase]� 5. Grac�e sepat-at'ron �t Po�rt of'4�'i�r�iingtom Gates; Frofl�t S�reet Crassialg Ii��pro�enleil�ts 6. �x�ancl tr�ns�oad f�cility in Az�so�� Coutity �t�ad�ies t� Imp'��ement the �c�verna�r's �5-�'ear � Vis�Q� and Okher Or�'entiiied i�eeds 7_ �astern Intermaclal - IdeFitify location �a�oa�,� �CSX'T ar 1+JS C�rric9ors� far a g�fltent�al niew irateraljaclal facili�y that s�z�pcarts agrici.flltvr�, fnod m�r�uf�ctuzing ancl ir��lustry in East�ern I�C, �nd su��or�s Tria�gle �egit�n"s �cces� �o ir�tert��odal service as laig9�way coa�gestioa� iiihpacts �eri��iizaTs f a� �ha�rlc�[te aai�i Greernsboro B. CSXT Capacizy Studies ii1 �as�ern NC - Freight MovemQnt P�ssea�ger Interoperabili�y 9. Ec��ergiilg Markei �eeds - �.g. woa�i �eYlets �{�. �m�rgiti� Market I'�eeds - e.g. tay�lraa�lic fracturing �1. c�s part v�t71e �TP ta i�i�rehead Ci�y Mobility Cari•id:or, assess a i�il i�y�ass af Tietiv �ern, paraliel to �a-oposed US 70 P�evv Beni By�ass in ca�ijunctian ��ith NCRR �Z. :�s part of the �TP ta P�oreheacl GiYy Nlability �Carriciar, in coa��tmctio�a rwith �1�RR, relocate NCF�R fron7 Port �f Morehead City �o F�avelaci� [de�e�den� o�� stiii�sta.tatial increases in �art traffic) 7�3. drnplen�eil� short-ter�n �rojects identified in 5� 402 stu�lies ta ree��.ice highway railraa� caraf�ic�s in Mc�rehead Ciry an�i �dd laop trac� on partterniinal �4. At-grade erossing inlproveinents - Vl?T4�Y' anc� C��i"I' acc�ssing tlte Parzvfi+l,�'ili�t�ng�on �5. �dentify ca�acity ��eec�s �hrough Wilmeragtnn ta enhance co¢1a�e�tivi¢y tcr the �'csnt �F. P�e�,v raPl lii�e Eraan G'�'� i�1 ]{i�is�ai� ia the CS�'Y° liz�e paralleY to NC 1� in Lenair �ounty ��C��'��C6'-Y�C�f`;V1✓L'�, P.,r,� V � B�.,r,�I�L �'V�'�� 17. Prov-�ele access to the hiid-�itlantie I�dustrial R�iY Park, a 2,025 acre CSX'�` 5elect �i�e � Lelai�cl, Brur�swick County 18. E�ralu�te feasybidy�ty of a new Gape Fe�r River crossitgg. 19. Pliase III ex�ansioFi of CSXT°s Charlotte dnternloc��1 Terzi�ena� 2(1. S�iidy c�peratior�al Ta�i�roveme�tts �l��g GS�"I" �ie�veei� �Char�ot�te az3� Pem�roke 21. New r�il �fliYe to serve �he Triad Logis�ies Hub at Pied�icant Traac3 Ia�ternatian�l Air�ort 22. Pro�de �ccess to the 1,DQ� acre I-8� C+arporate Center I'�egasite lil �'?VI�SQ%1 CObIY3Ty 23. Iclerltify inf►-astructure nee�ls required to sup��ort ir�d�shies targete�l fc�r t1�e 1,8{D�0 acre Chaihan�-Siler Ci�y A�lvamced h�Ianufac�uril�g Sjee 24. Id�eiitify operatio��l iaai�rovea��e�ts to �he CSXT ir�eigl�t anc� i��te2-mQclal n�etwor� froiYt �'en��ssee to CYiarlqdte; Ga-ade se�arate CSX'I' SF d.ine and h!' S Nlainline an Charlotte 25. I�le.citify infrastruc�zre needs required ta support t9ae PrQjec� Legacy ATe�asit�e in Unian County 26. Impravememts to Linwoad Y�rcl, Pony�ana Y�rd, Jatnestawn ssding, Kii�i}�er�y Clark lea:el track, acad multigle gra�de separatia�s laeriveen Charlotte a��R Gr-eensbora 27. Mul�i�le grade separa�ian �raaects between Greensbora ai�d Raleig� 28. T�vo gr-�de se�ara�ian �ro�ee�s l�et�ween Raleigh and N�r1i��a 29 CSXT An�amorive I�is�a-ibu�ion Ternaina� in Lee County 30. MuIliig�le ga-acle s�para�ion projeets in Ape� ap��i Car� 31. Im�rove aV5 si�ing i�3 5o�hia 32. iJggra�le NS Corriclflr fi-o� D�zrtiam ta O�ord 33. Re�oc�te Aberde�e�1 +Carolin� &�+V'�stern Railr�ad in M�ck➢enUurg C�unty 34. Re�crivate �he Andrews tv �fiurphy line far freiglYt r�bc�*�e�aient and exc�irstons 35. Ki�rlgs&��rr•a�`Rose Megaslite, a�CS�C'�'-Select Site east oi R�aeky Maun� 36. Idea�tify infrastructure ne.e�ls ta sup��rr� Ft�ndaiph County [Li�erty) Megas¢te 37. Ide�itify infi-astnteture nee�ls to s2Yppot-� Heart of ddC MegaPark 3'S. S�d�aport R�ail Industrial A�ceess aitct Slaort Li��es Tlirough FRACSI Figure 5-3 Freight Corridor Prioi-ities to Implernent the Governor's 25-Year Vision (Map Key) August 2015 5-7 5.2 PROGRAM COORDINATION The 2015 State Rail Plan was coordinated with various planning efforts in the public and private sector, at the local, regional, statewide and multi-state and national levels. A review of the 2009 North Carolina Rail Plan was conducted to identify and update previously proposed projects and rail programs. The State Rail Plan was also coordinated with the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) as well as with the NCDOT's new Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) program, as described Section 2.1.5.3.1. The STIP and STI were reviewed to identify projects and possible funding sources. The Governor's 25-Year Vision for North Carolina was consulted to ensure that recommended short- and long- term transportation investments were consistent with the plan's regional and statewide visions. A review of Rail Division programs, including the crossing safety program, the industrial access program, and the passenger rail and station program was also undertaken to identify their benefits, funding sources, and future needs so that they could be incorporated into this State Rail Plan. Statewide plans that were consulted include: • Seven Portals Study (2011) • Governor's Logistics Task Force Final Report (2011) • NCDOT 2040 Transportation Plan (2012) • North Carolina Maritime Strategy Final Report (2012) • North Carolina Jobs Plan (2013) • North Carolina Regional Study Summary (2013) • North Carolina Transportation Network (2014) • Governor McCrory's 25-Year Vision (2014) • Eastern Infrastructure Improvement Study (2015) The State Rail Plan was also developed thi•ough coordination with a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) that included representatives from NCDOT, NC Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, NC Department of Commerce, NCRR Company, CSX Transportation, Norfolk Southern Railway, Amtrak, the NC Center for Global Logistics, and the Railway Association of North Carolina. The TAC met several times during the plan's development and was afforded the opportunity to review materials, data, methods, and recommendations presented in the plan. This coordination is discussed in more detail in Chapter 6. COMPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLl�N � The State Rail Plan efforts were also coordinated with the on-going planning efforts and studies associated with the Southeast Corridor and the work underway by the Virginia-North Carolina Interstate Rail Compact. This review of Southeast Corridor program efforts included a review of the Piedmont Improvement Program(PIP) and other improvements funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). The Plan also coordinated with the 2013 Virginia Statewide Rail Plan. The Georgia Department of Transportation was contacted to ensure that the planning efforts for the Atlanta to Charlotte segment of the Southeast Corridor were considered. A critical component of the stakeholder engagement efforts included outreach to the various Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and Rural Planning Organizations (RPOs) to ensure that regional and local needs were addressed in the Plan. This outreach was accomplished via surveys, telephone interviews, a Rail Planning Forum, and through a session at the 2014 North Carolina MPO conference. Interviews were also conducted with planning staff at the transit agencies in the Metrolina (Charlotte and surrounding metropolitan area communities), Triad and Triangle regions to gather input on their proposed and planned rail projects. Direct coordination was conducted with CSXT and NS to ensure that the State Rail Plan was consistent with their national planning efforts. Representatives from these two railroads also served on the TAC, which gave input and reviewed components of the State Rail Plan. In addition, the NCDOT Rail Division has strategic planning meetings with both railroads on a regular and on-going basis. These meetings can be used as a tool to ensure that projects that evolve out of the studies included in the State Rail Plan and additional initiatives that the railroads are interested in, can be coordinated and programmed as market conditions change and more information is available. Surveys and project requests were also distributed to the short line railroads. The President of the Railway Association of North Carolina, an advocacy group for the short line railroads, was included as a member of the TAC to ensure their participation in the development of the plan. The NCRR Company was also included as a member of the TAC and their recently completed economic impact study was ►-eviewed during the development of the State Rail Plan. Through a meeting with NCRR, the principles of their strategic plan were discussed, but the plan was not available for review. Their plan is anticipated to concentrate August 2015 5-8 on economic development, though it does not wholly exclude other initiatives. Finally, Amtrak's plans for improving Silver-service trains, routing, on-time performance, and customer satisfaction were considered during plan development. 5.3 RAIL AGENCIES ORGANIZATION AND POLICY CHANGES NCDOT recently completed a review of the Rail Division organization and staffing requirements, and a reorganization of the Division was completed in 2013 (see Figure 1-14). Therefore, the State Rail Plan does not recommend changes to the structure or organization of the NCDOT Rail Division. As the Rail Division's programs continue to grow, there may be the need for additional staff to oversee efforts such as expanded passenger operations, economic development, and safety oversight. The Rail Division can address these additional staffing needs through the Department's systematic organizational and staff reviews. Rail helps support North Carolina's economy. Freight rail operations offer a cost competitive mode for the state's shippers and reduce emissions, congestion, and highway maintenance. Passenger rail provides an alternative to using congested highway corridors and improves safety for travelers who divert from auto travel while increasing the accessibility for the state's populations to jobs, education, and recreational opportunities. These benefits are built on cumulative past investments in rail infrastructure projects and are realized through strategic partnerships with public and private entities. Recognizing the value of rail service to North Carolina's economy, a variety of local communities and stakeholders have identified candidate investments to maintain and foster future growth. Given this interest, an exploration of whether changes to existing rail funding programs could make them more flexible, as well as potential sources of new funding for rail investment, may be warranted. 5.3.1 Existing Federal Programs • Support reauthorization of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA), which includes grants for safety improvements along rail corridors, passenger rail corridor development, and addressing congestion bottlenecks. • Support long-term reauthorization of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 215t Century Act (MAP-21) and appropriations for associated funding programs such as the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality «H� �IVE STATE RAIL PLAN (CMAQ) program, Railway/Highway Crossing Hazard Elimination grants, and Rail Line Relocation and Improvement Capital Grants, which have provided North Carolina with funding for relocating freight lines that eliminate congestion and rail/street at-grade conflicts within downtowns and urban areas. • Support expansion of the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant program and annual appropriations. • Support reauthorization of the Rail Safety Improvement Act, which includes grants for rail safety technology. • Support action on the National Freight Network Trust Fund bill, proposed under the US House Bill 5101. • Support reauthorization of the federal tax credit for short line maintenance. 5.3.2 Existing State Programs • Continue to identify projects to be considered in future iterations of the Strategic Transportation Investments (STI), which is described in Section 2.1.5.3.1. • Continue the Freight Rail and Rail Crossing Improvement Fund (FRRCSI) funding of the Short Line Infrastructure Assistance Program and Rail Industrial Access Program. • Alter FRRCSI eligibility requirements to include short lines that do not carry freight. The Great Smoky Mountain Railroad is a tourist/excursion railroad providing economic benefits in Western North Carolina. However, since it does not have a freight customer it is not eligible for FRRCSI funds, the only source of state funding for short line railroads. • Create an ongoing and available funding mechanism for purchasing abandoned or inactive rail corridors or right of way required to preserve the option for future freight or passenger service. Rail corridors are difficult, if not impossible to reassemble if they are not August 2015 5-9 preserved. North Carolina needs a source of funding to secure inactive corridors such as the CSXT S line, which is needed for the Raleigh to Richmond portion of the Southeast Corridor Passenger Service, and others that provide transportation alternatives. • Allow greater funding flexibility for NCDOT to match federal grants. • Support the use of tax incentives for railroad intermodal facilities. • Explore potential to revise the state's public-private partnerships legislation to better allow for passenger rail projects. Private developers have expressed interest in partnerships for constructing new train stations in Charlotte and other cities. • Where appropriate, explore the use of just-in-time bond strategies and other mechanisms described in the Governor's 25-Year Vision. 5.3.3 Illustrative Funding Programs from Other States • Virginia has expanded its passenger rail program using a portion of the state's sales tax dedicated to passenger rail operations and maintenance ($44M annually in 2014) and a three percent vehicle rental tax to fund rail capital improvements ($27M annually). • Wisconsin operates a revolving loan fund for private rail infrastructure improvements. Georgia proposed the creation of a Goods Movement Investment Fund, to have three revenue sources: diesel fuel tax paid by the railroads, railroad property lease income, and a penny gas tax. 5.3.4 Other Potential Funding Sources • Parking and station use fees. • Local funding to support extensions to passenger rail services. • Local (municipal) funding to cover operating costs of new/extended passenger services. CfICIV. tiAILF • Tax increment funding based on increased property values resulting from the additional Raleigh to Charlotte train frequencies to fund operations and maintenance of these services. • Exemption of railroads from state gross earnings tax, or tax credits, if money saved is used for capital expenditures in North Carolina. 5.4 PROGRAM EFFECTS Existing freight and passenger rail networks and services contribute approximately $1.88 billion in direct economic impacts per year to North Carolina. For freight, this reflects savings in shipping costs (rail vs. truck), pavement costs (i.e. wear and tear on roads), and congestion costs (travel time impacts for other vehicles based on the number of trucks on the road). For passenger rail, this includes direct operator jobs, purchases of goods and services, and tourist spending, as well as pavement and congestion savings from trips that would otherwise be made by automobile. In addition to the direct economic impacts, broader social impacts generate approximately $311 million in emissions and safety impacts annually as a result of the truck and auto vehicle miles traveled (VMT) avoided due to the use of freight and passenger rail in the state. Further, rail supports approximately 2,800 direct jobs in the state. The statewide impacts of rail services in North Carolina are discussed in detail in Chapter 2(Section 2.1.7). Beyond the direct jobs associated with the rail industry, improvements to access and enhancements to the network support indirect jobs, increase volumes on the rail network, and can help support job creation, though there are other factors in the economy that also play a role. As an example, from 1994 to 2013, the Rail Industrial Access Program provided grants to 71 companies; these grants have helped support industries that employ 6,105 people. The Rail Industrial Access Program is now funded through FRRCSI. FRRCSI also funds the Short Line Infrastructure Assistance Program, and safety projects that help reduce train-car collisions, as shown in Figure 5-3. These positive safety benefits are also a result of additional safety funding through the Federal Highway Administration Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) and Section 130 Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Program. August 2015 5-10 �50 2Q0 150 ��f� 50 Source: NCDOT '86 '88 '90 '91 '92 '93 '9A '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '41 '42 '03 '04 'OS '06 '07 "08 'D9 '10 'll '12 '13 '14 Figu►•e 5-4 Train-Car Collisions and Fatalities, 1988-2014 This section presents the expected benefits of the program of rail projects presented in Chapters 3 and 4. Potential effects include benefits to the rail network and other transportation modes, increased rail capacity, reduced congestion, improved safety, improved environmental quality, modal diversion and regional economic development benefits. Program effects are described in detail for near-term (short range) projects encompassing the first five years of the program (2015-2019) and summarized for mid- to long-term (long range) projects (2020-2040). Tables 5-3 and 5-4 show the program effects for the short-range and long-range passenger rail programs. The effects from the short-range program and information presented previously on existing rail programs are used to approximate the expected effects of the long-range pi•ogram. Freight rail near- and long-term program effects are presented in Tables 5-5 and 5-6. More details on project costs are presented in subsequent sections in Tables 5-7 through 5-10. Where practicable, a quantitative analysis comparing the benefits of each near- term project to its capital and operating costs. In some cases, a qualitative analysis was done. A benefit-cost analysis (BCA) ratio is provided in Table 5-3 �=�� fi C� C�� B-B E h�! e G5;' C S �^, u� �z' ^, I�L. C�' �L�. ��l and Table 5-5 for near-term projects where necessary data was available. A BCA is a ratio that compares the sum of a project oi� program's benefits to its cost. Typically, a BCA ratio of 1.0 indicates the benefits and costs are equal over the analysis period, and a BCA ratio over 1.0 demonstrates that there are more quantifiable benefits than costs for the project or program. Alternately, a BCA ratio of less than 1.0 may indicate that there are not enough benefits to outweigh the costs, or that all of the benefits are not quantifiable at this time. As markets and conditions change, some projects may need to be reevaluated to capture all available benefits. Capital costs and BCAs are highlighted in this chapter, but more detailed information regarding the capital costs, operating costs, and estimated benefits used to calculate the BCAs are available in an associated technical memorandum included in Appendix F. Passenger Rail The NCDOT Rail Division anticipates implementing a number of projects on key passenger rail service corridors within the next five years including additional fi�equencies and amenities on the Piedmont, maintenance yard improvements, a new station, improvements at existing stations, and additional Amtrak Thruway Bus service. The remaining passengei• rail program elements, which include full implementation of the Southeast Corridor in North Carolina and Virginia, Western and Southeastern North Carolina service extensions, are projected for implementation over the mid- to long-term (2020-2040). Program effects and timeframes for near-term projects are shown in Table 5-3. Similar information for mid- to long-term projects is shown in Table 5-4. In addition to the projects identified in the tables, NCDOT is in the final stages of implementing the Piedmont Improvement Program (PIP), which will add capacity, improve safety, and reduce travel time between Raleigh and Charlotte on the NCRR corridor. These improvements have been fully funded under the ARRA and will be completed by 2017, at which time the fourth fi-equency (which is included in Table 5-3) can be implemented. Benefit-cost ratios were calculated for adding the fourth and fifth frequencies on the Piedmont corridor, adding Wi-Fi to the Piedmont equipment, and construction of a new station and platform in Hillsborough. Operating the fourth frequency of the Piedmont and Carolinian services in North Carolina would result in additional ridership and revenues. The capital investment required for the fourth frequency is in place and was excluded from the analysis. The additional frequency would allow more riders to access passenger rail and reduce vehicle trips in the state. August 2015 5-11 The service is expected to attract ridership of 144,000 additional Piedmont and Carolinian riders per year compared to the third frequency. Ridership is conservatively assumed to be constant throughout the analysis period. The new riders would avoid trips by auto, resulting in reduced VMT and the associated benefits including safety, emissions, congestion, and pavement costs avoided. The average trip length for fourth frequency riders is estimated to be 239 miles,l and it is assumed each rider would have driven alone if not for the additional Amtrak service. Annual operation and maintenance (0&M) costs were estimated to be $7.3 million per year and offset by the annual ticket revenue estimated at $4.6 million per year;z 0&M and revenues were held constant throughout the analysis period. The annual0&M was estimated by taking the difference between the operating costs for the fourth frequency compared to the current 0&M of the 3rd frequency, and the revenues consider only the Piedmont and Carolinian services. While ticket revenues are not a benefit, they help recover some of the 0&M costs for the project, and therefore, are included as a cost offset. In total, the 30-year benefit stream of the fourth frequency at 7 percent and 3 percent discount rates total $129 million and $234 million, respectively, and when compared to the additional 0&M costs, the project provides over five times more benefits than costs. The fifth frequency would attract additional ridership and revenues beyond those of the fourth. Operating the fifth frequency depends on two projects: extending the lead track in Capital Yard and acquiring new equipment (a locomotive, communications control unit, baggage/luggage cars, and coach cars). The fifth frequency is expected to attract ridership of 237,400 additional Piedmont and Carolinian riders per year compared to the fourth frequency. Ridership is conservatively assumed to be constant throughout the analysis period. The new riders would avoid trips by auto, resulting in reduced VMT and the associated benefits including safety, emissions, congestion, and pavement costs avoided. The average trip length for fifth frequency riders is estimated to 'All trips are one-way trips. See Table 3-2 for projected daily ridership and revenues of the fourth and fifth frequencies. Average trip length is found from Piedmont and Carolinian Passenger Miles divided by Piedmont and Carolinian Ridership. z See Table 3-2 for projected daily ridership and revenues of the fourth and fifth frequencies. The difference of ticket revenues for Piedmont and Carolinian trains from 3 to 4 frequencies totals $4.636 million. {_ {�i- n�NSIVE STE; i � nr;VL PLAiv be 200 miles,3 and it is assumed each rider would have driven alone if not for the Amtrak service. Annual 0&M costs were estimated to be $7.3 million per year4 and offset by the annual ticket revenue estimated at $7 million per year; 5 0&M and revenues were held constant throughout the analysis period. Because the annual0&M cost for the fifth frequency has not yet been determined, it was assumed to be equal to the 0&M cost for the fourth frequency, and the revenues consider only the Piedmont and Carolinian services. While ticket revenues are not a benefit, they help recover some of the 0&M costs for the project, and therefore, are included as a cost offset. Finally, the additional frequencies would yield greater utilization of physical plant and rolling stock and the potential for greater labor efficiency, depending on scheduling and regulations concerning crew changes. Some of these savings would be offset by incremental increases in operating costs associated with the additional service. In total, the 30-year benefit stream of the project at a 7 percent and 3 percent discount rates total approximately $140 million and $289 million, respectively, and when comparing to the incremental costs from the fourth to fifth frequencies, the project provides over six times more benefits than costs. The Hillsborough Station project would include constructing a platform, passenger rail station building, site access, utilities, and parking on the Town of Hillsborough-owned site. The station will synergize with the adjacent planned transit-oriented development (TOD). The station would allow more riders to access passenger rail and reduce vehicle trips in the state. The facility is expected to attract 12 riders per day and ridership was assumed to conservatively grow by 1 percent per year as a result of the increased connectivity and reliability of the service. The new riders would avoid trips by auto, resulting in reduced VMT and the associated benefits including safety, emissions, congestion, and pavement costs avoided. Annual0&M costs were estimated to be 5percent of the capital costs, or $400,000 per year, and because the facility would have a useful life longer than 30 years, the project has a residual value benefit. 3 See Table 3-2 for projected daily ridership and revenues of the fourth and fifth frequencies. Average trip length is found from Piedmont and Carolinian Passenger Miles divided by Piedmont and Carolinian Ridership. ' Operating costs estimated as part of the State Rail Plan 5 See Table 3-2 for projected daily ridership and revenues of the fourth and fifth frequencies. The difference of ticket revenues for Piedmont and Carolinian trains from 4 to 5 frequencies totals $7.045 million. August 2015 5-12 In total, the BCA ratios of the project at 7 percent and 3 percent discount rates are 0.52 and 0.69, respectively, which means that the project is anticipated to have more costs than benefits that can currently be quantified in the analysis period. However, as station planning progresses, the impact of the proposed station on surrounding land values will be able to be better-estimated which may lead to a more favorable BCA. While benefits have been presented for individual projects, the near-term projects, including PIP projects, will collectively create additional passenger benefits for the Piedmont corridor. The station, capacity, operating speed and amenity improvements will increase the efficiency, convenience and quality of passenger rail service in North Carolina. When implemented as a coordinated program, they will result in statewide system capacity improvements, congestion relief, environmental and economic benefits. Substantial benefits will accrue from implementing the Southeast Corridor. Major travel time savings will foster economic development opportunities near stations. Modal diversion from trucking and vehicle trips to passenger and freight rail will also contribute to environmental benefits in the Southeast Corridor. Implementing passenger service to Western North Carolina and Southeastern North Carolina will create an interconnected passenger rail network across the state improving mobility options. Another potential service could connect Charlotte to the Northeast Corridor via Lynchburg, Virginia. These services will also create new economic development and tourism opportunities in these regions. Freight Rail Similar to the passenger rail projects, the near-term freight rail projects will produce collective benefits beyond those individual project benefits identified. The grade separation projects will enhance overall corridor safety and capacity, resulting in congestion relief, economic and air quality benefits. The Port of Wilmington and intermodal facility projects will leverage private investment and enhance rail's attractiveness for intermodal shipping, creating environmental and economic benefits to shippers and the public. The NCDOT Rail Division has coordinated with the freight railroads and local planning organizations to identify projects to enhance the state's freight rail network and anticipates implementing several freight rail oriented projects within the next five years. These are projects that primarily have funding identified under current available programs. Some projects, such as grade C�MAK �.��VE � �NTE R, _�;�v separations, will benefit passenger rail travel as well as freight and highway traffic. The projects include intermodal facility improvement projects, track upgrades and siding extensions, one signalization project, bridge improvement projects for both Class I and short line railroads, industry-specific economic development projects and numerous grade separation projects, including two at the Port of Wilmington. Over 30 freight rail capital projects are identified for implementation over the mid- to long-term (2020-2040). The program effects of the near-term projects are shown in Table 5-5. Similar information for mid- to long-term projects is shown in Table 5-6. There are three general types of freight rail projects included in the mid- to long-term. The associated benefits for each category of project are described below: Track Improvements/New Access: projects that provide new or upgraded rail lines may result in higher train speeds and/or more reliable schedules, thereby reducing transit time for shipments, increasing capacity of the line, and saving shipping costs. In addition, because new tracks can provide new access to industries or populations, resulting in increased accessibility between shippers and consumers. This access can divert truck traffic from highways to rail, resulting in enhanced safety, reduced emissions and congestion, and pavement savings. In addition, the new track will require lower maintenance costs as it is brought up to a state of good repair. Track improvements can be prioritized in part by the volumes and types of commodities carried on corridors and connectivity to major freight activity centers and networks, as noted in the corridor prioritization process in Chapter 2. Because they affect higher volumes of freight, these types of projects are anticipated to have good benefit-cost ratios. Intermodal Terminal and/or Rail Yard Improvements: projects that create or improve rail yards and intermodal/transload facilities aid in diverting shipments from the state's highways, resulting in safety, emissions, congestion, and pavement savings. Shippers also save by using a more cost-efficient mode. These types of projects are consistent with the Governor's 25-Year Vision and benefit North Carolina's economy by linking industry to the overall rail network. As a result, these types of projects are anticipated to score well within STI and have good benefit to cost ratios. August 2015 5-13 • Safety, Crossing Safety Improvements, and/or Grade Separations: projects that reduce train-car conflicts result in improved safety at crossings. Train-car conflicts increase the likelihood of collisions that result in injuries and the loss of lives. In addition, autos idle at crossings, incurring travel time delays, increased emissions, and vehicle operating costs. Grade separations also allow for faster train speeds, resulting in increased capacity and reliability for rail shipments. Fourteen (14) of the 42 corridors shown in Figure 4-1 have proposed freight projects between 2020 and 2040. These corridors are geographically diverse and located throughout the state. Projects on several of these corridors will also benefit existing or future passenger rail service. The corridors with the most substantial proposed investments are corridors 06, 07, 09, 13 and 18. The investments in these corridors will improve freight rail capacity in the Piedmont region (06, 07, and 09), promote economic development and enhance safety between Raleigh and Hamlet (13), and support intermodal movement of freight and economic development through track reconstruction to Wilmington (18). The Statewide Freight Investments program includes projects across the state that will serve corridors not included in the fourteen numbered corridors in Table 5-5 and Table 5-6. Benefit-cost ratios were calculated for near-term projects where required data was available or could be easily estimated. These projects include construction of the NS Thoroughbred Bulk Terminal in Charlotte, conversion of the former NS Roundhouse property into container parking/storage for the NS Greensboro Intermodal Facility, construction of a 10,000-foot siding on CSXT's corridor in Stouts, Union County, upgrading the NS rail corridor along US 52 in Albemarle, adding signals and gates to the Front Street lead track in Wilmington, and construction of grade separations at the Port of Wilmington gates. The BCA ratios are presented in Tables 5-5 and 5-6 and are discussed in detail in Appendix F. All of the freight projects included in STI have BCA ratios greater �-9RR�H�NSIVE � �N fE RAIL H�AN than 1.0 indicating benefits exceed costs. Some of the projects have ratios as high as 10.22. Construction of a grade separation at the North Gate to the Port of Wilmington also had a BCA greater than 1.0. The grade separation would eliminate numerous conflicts between the freight car switching operations at the port on the Wilmington Terminal Railroad and the highway entrance to the bulk goods facilities at the port. When trains are in operation, a flagger must stop truck traffic entering the port at the gate. This project is an excellent candidate for FRRCSI and/or a federal TIGER grant application. Two freight projects - gates and signals at the Front Street crossing and a grade separation at the Container Gate to the Port of Wilmington had BCA ratios less than 1.0 based on current information and train volumes. However, as volumes at the Port of Wilmington continue to increase, these projects should be considered to enhance highway, intermodal, and carload access to the port. FRRCSI and potential federal grants are the most likely source of funding for these projects, though partnerships with the Wilmington MPO and port will be explored. Projects that coincide with recommendations in the Governor's 25-Year Vision are denoted by an asterisk in Tables 5-3 through 5-8. In addition to the passenger and freight projects identified in Tables 5-3 through 5-6, the NCDOT Rail Division completes approximately 15 to 25 safety projects per year through their nationally-recognized safety program. The number of projects varies depending on the level of funding received. Funding ranges for the Federal Highway Administration Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) vary from $0 to $500,000 per year. The Section 130 Highway- Rail Grade Crossing Program is typically funded at $6.5 million per year. Other additional associated safety funds range from $0 to $1,000,000 per year. August 2015 5-14 COMPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN Table 5-3 Near-Term (Short Range) Passenger Rail Program Effects Costs Timing and Corridor Project* Program Effects Benefit Cost (2014 dollars) Ratio Southeast Corridor/Piedmont Service 06, 09 *WiFi on Total: $630,000 The State's Transportation System: Provides an amenity to riders to encourage 2015-2016 Piedmont Piedmont service NCDOT:$630,000 the use of passenger rail instead of single occupancy vehicles - Add Wi-Fi to 20 Partners:$0 Public and Private Benefits: 2.44 @ 7% cars Annual0&M: Public: Provides an amenity for passengers to increase satisfaction with service discount $30,000 and attract new riders 3.15 @ 3% Rail Capacity and Congestion: NA discount Transportation System Capaciry, Congestion, Safery, and Resiliency: NA Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: Having WiFi on trains can attract riders to rail and away from cars, reducing auto emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment. It enhances the rider's experience Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users on the Piedmont service which operates in central North Carolina 06, 09, 15 *Positive Train Total: $2,125,000 The State's Transportation System: Provides safety devices on trains that will 2016 Piedmont Control (PTC) - NCDOT: $2,125,000 improve the network within the state installed on 8 Partners: $0 Public and Private Benefits: NA @ 7% discount locomotives, 5 cab Annual0&M: TBD Public: Improves safety by allowing trains to be centrally controlled and NA @ 3% discount control units monitored, enhances line capacity by allowing for reduced headways, reduces (CCUs), and 4 delays as communications are enhanced and incidents can be avoided, supports spares, plus additional frequencies infrastructure to Private: Supports FRA requirement for railroads to implement PTC support PTC Rail Capacity and Congestion: To the degree that it prevents incidents, PTC can increase capacity and reduces congestion by allowing for reduced headways Transportation System Capacity, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: PTC provides monitoring and control of train movements that will improve safety for passenger and freight rail users and reduce the likelihood of conflicts at highway grade crossings across the state Environmental, Economic, Livabiliry and Employment Conditions: Increased safety results in better livability for the state's residents; reduction in safety incidents means greater economic viability through improved train reliability, and increased economic activity in the state can result in more jobs Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users statewide August 2015 5-15 C�MPREHEN511, Costs Timing and Corridor Project* Program Effects Benefit Cost (2014 dollars) Ratio 06, 09 *Fourth and Total: $35,400,000 The State's Transportation System: Provides additional services on the Piedmont 2017-2018 (4th) Piedmont Fifth frequencies NCDOT: route, which serves more of the state's residents on the passenger network and 2019 (5th) - New equipment $35,400,000 potentially removes single occupancy vehicles from the roads (locomotive, CCU, Partners: $0 Public and Private Benefits: 4th: baggage/lounge Annual 0&M: Public: Accommodates ridership growth and enhances mobility options with 5.44 @ 7% cars, and coach $7,316,000 additional arrival and departure times for travelers. The 4th and 5th discount cars) to add a 5t" frequencies are anticipated to attract 144,000 and 237,400 additional riders, 5.16 @ 3% frequency and respectively which would reduce vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) in the state. discount expand Capital Rail Capacity and Congestion: NA Yard, including Transportation System Capaciry, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The 5th: extending north additional frequencies attract riders to rail, reducing the number of vehicles on 6.63 @ 7% and south lead the road and thereby decreasing highway demand; attracting passengers to rail discount tracks improves safety because rail is a safer mode than single occupancy vehicles 9.25 @ 3% Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: The additional discount frequencies attract riders to rail and away from cars, reducing auto emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users on the Piedmont service which operates in central North Carolina 9 *Hillsborough Total: $8,400,000 The State's Transportation System: Provides a new station that offers riders the 2018 Piedmont Station, track NCDOT:$7,680,000 option of using passenger rail instead of single occupancy vehicles and crossings - Partners: $720,000 Public and Private Benefits: 0.52 @ 7% Construct station Annual0&M: Public: Expands access to passenger service. Adjacent to planned 20-acre transit discount and platform $400,000 oriented development. 0.69 @ 3% Rail Capacity and Congestion: NA discount Transportation System Capacity, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The new passenger station can attract riders to rail, reducing the number of vehicles on the road and thereby decreasing highway demand; attracting passengers to rail improves safety because rail is a safer mode than single occupancy vehicles Environmental, Economic, Livabiliry and Employment Conditions: The new station can attract riders to rail and away from cars, reducing auto emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment; the new station provides greater accessibility for Hillsborough residents to the rest of the state, possibly resulting in increased educational or employment opportunities Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users accessing the Piedmont service at the station August 2015 5-16 C�MPREHEN511, Costs Timing and Corridor Project* Program Effects Benefit Cost (2014 dollars) Ratio Western NC Service 3 *Western NC N/A The State's Transportation System: Provides an a connecting service to riders to 2018 NS Thruway Bus encourage the use of passenger rail instead of single occupancy vehicles Service- Partner Public and Private Benefits: NA @ 7% discount with Amtrak to Public: Amtrak Thruway bus service will build ridership in the future rail NA @ 3% discount implement corridor and provide connecting service along the Piedmont rail corridor. Near- Thruway bus term benefits include improved travel accessibility and tourism opportunities. service between Rail Capaciry and Congestion: NA the Piedmont area Transportation System Capaciry, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The of NC, Asheville, connecting service to passenger trains attracts riders to rail, reducing the and western NC number of vehicles on the road and thereby decreasing highway demand; attracting passengers to rail improves safety because rail is a safer mode than single occupancy vehicles Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: The service can attract riders to rail and away from cars, reducing auto emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users in western North Carolina Eastern / Southeastern NC Service 13, 15 *Station Total: $2,500,000 The State's Transportation System: New stations provide amenities to riders to 2018-2025 Carolinian Improvements NCDOT: $2,500,000 encourage the use of passenger rail instead of single occupancy vehicles and (Fayetteville, Partners: $0 expands service areas in the state NA @ 7% discount Wilson, Selma) Annual0&M: Public and Private Benefits: NA @ 3% discount $250,000 Public: Station improvements will enhance passenger experiences through improved amenities and add capacity for growing ridership at these stations Rail Capacity and Congestion: NA Transportation System Capacity, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The station improvements attract riders to rail, reducing the number of vehicles on the road and thereby decreasing highway demand; attracting passengers to rail improves safety because rail is a safer mode than single occupancy vehicles Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: Expanded and improved stations can attract riders to rail and away from cars, reducing auto emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment; provides greater accessibility for residents to the rest of the state, possibly resulting in increased educational or employment opportunities Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users on the Carolinian service which operates in central North Carolina August 2015 5-17 C�MPREHEN511, Costs Timing and Corridor Project* Program Effects Benefit Cost (2014 dollars) Ratio 9,18 *Southeastern N/A The State's Transportation System: Provides an a connecting service to riders to 2018 NS, CSXT NC Thruway Bus encourage the use of passenger rail instead of single occupancy vehicles Service- Partner Public and Private Benefits: NA @ 7% discount with Amtrak to Public: Amtrak Thruway bus service will build ridership in the future rail NA @ 3% discount expand Thruway corridor and provide connecting service along the Piedmont rail corridor. Near- bus service to term benefits include improved travel accessibility and tourism opportunities. Wilmington and Rail Capacity and Congestion: NA other markets Transportation System Capacity, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The connecting service to passenger trains attracts riders to rail, reducing the number of vehicles on the road and thereby decreasing highway demand; attracting passengers to rail improves safety because rail is a safer mode than single occupancy vehicles Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: The service can attract riders to rail and away from cars, reducing auto emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users in southeastern North Carolina * Projects that will help implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision Note: Annual operating and maintenance (0&M) costs for near-term projects are noted in the costs category and contribute to the projects maintaining a state of good repair. They are assumed to be 5 to 10 percent of total capital costs except for the 4th and 5th Frequencies where specific data was available. Please see Appendix F for more detailed information. Table 5-4 Long-Term (Long Range) Passenger Rail Program Effects Costs Locaton Project* � Program Effects Timing 2014 dollars) Southeast Corridor - Service Improvements 6 *Charlotte Gateway Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Congestion: Environmental, Economic, 2020-2035 Station - $210,000,000 Transportation ✓ Livability and Employment new/relocated station System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ and associated track Transportation System improvements Public and Private Capaciry, Congestion, Safety, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ and Resiliency: ✓ Regions: Mostly attributable to Charlotte region August 2015 5-18 C�MPREHEN5IVE STATE RAIL PLAN Costs Corridor/ Location Project* (2014 Program Effects Timing dollars) 06, 09, 15 *Harrisburg and Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Congestion: Environmental, Economic, 2020-2035 Piedmont Lexington Stations - $237,400,000 Transportation NA Livability and Employment new stations and System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ associated track Transportation System improvements Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Safety, Distribution of Benefits to Bene�ts: ✓ and Resiliency: ✓ Regions: Mostly attributable to Harrisburg and Lexington 06, 09, 15 *Carolinian Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Congestion: Environmental, Economic, 2020-2035 Equipment - New $76,600,000 Transportation NA Livabiliry and Employment equipment to replace System: NA Conditions: ✓ existing Carolinian Transportation System trainsets Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Safety, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ and Resiliency: ✓ Regions: Mostly attributable to central North Carolina Southeast Corridor - Full implementation 06, 09, 12 *Southeast Corridor - Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Congestion: Environmental, Economic, 2035 Full Implementation of $3,800,000,000 Transportation ✓ Livability and Employment service (Raleigh- System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Richmond) Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Safety, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ and Resiliency: ✓ Regions: Mostly attributable to areas between Raleigh and Richmond, but extend as far as the Northeast Corridor Western NC Passenger Service 3 *Western NC Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Congestion: Environmental, Economic, 2020-2035 Passenger Service - $405,300,000 Transportation NA Livability and Employment Add new connecting System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ rail service between Transportation System Salisbury and Asheville Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Safery, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ and Resiliency: ✓ Regions: Mostly attributable to western North Carolina August 2015 5-19 C�MPREHEN5IVE STATE RAIL PLAN Costs Corridor/ Location Project* (2014 Program Effects Timing dollars) Eastern/Southeastern NC Service 09, 18 *Southeastern NC Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Congestion: Environmental, Economic, 2020-2035 Passenger Service - $262,500,000 Transportation NA Livability and Employment Add new rail service System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ between Raleigh and Transportation System Wilmington Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Safety, Distribution of Benefits to Bene�ts: ✓ and Resiliency: ✓ Regions: Mostly attributable to areas between Raleigh and Wilmington Charlotte to the Northeast via Lynchburg, Virginia 06 *Charlotte to Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Congestion: Environmental, Economic, 2020-2035 Lynchburg Passenger $35,600,000 Transportation NA Livability and Employment Service - System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ New service to connect Transportation System Charlotte to the Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Safery, Distribution of Benefits to Northeast via Benefits: ✓ and Resiliency: ✓ Regions: Mostly attributable Lynchburg, VA to Charlotte and Greensboro Notes: ✓ indicates that long-term projects are expected to have program effects similar to those experienced in the near-term projects list; Costs for Southeastern and Western NC services are from previous studies and will be updated under proposed planning studies; Costs for Charlotte to the Northeast via Lynchburg costs are preliminary and subject to additional study by Amtrak and coordination with the host railroads August 2015 5-20 COMPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN Table 5-5 Near-Term (Short Range) Freight Rail Progra�n Effects Costs Timing and Corridor Project* (2014 Program Effects Benefit Cost dollars) Ratio 06 *Convert NS Total: The State's Transportation System: Will provide additional parking and storage 2019 "Roundhouse" $1,695,000 of containers, allowing for increased intermodal freight property adjacent to NCDOT: Public and Private Benefits: 10.22 @ 7% intermodal facility into $847,500 Private: Increase capacity at the intermodal facility thus reducing the number discount parking / storage for Partner: of long-haul trucking events, reducing congestion, improving air quality and 13.11 @ 3% containers $847,500 supporting economic growth and development discount (Greensboro) - 4 acres, Rail Capacity and Congestion: Will provide additional storage, thereby 150 spaces, security enhancing operation of the intermodal facility fencing, lighting, new Transportation System Capaciry, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The paved entrance. 50% property would attract long-haul truck freight to rail, reducing the number of capacity increase. vehicles on the road and thereby decreasing highway demand; attracting freight to rail improves safety because rail is a safer mode than truck Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: Better and larger storage space can attract shipments from truck to rail, reducing emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment; if shippers can save money by switching to rail, they may expand operations and thereby provide additional jobs in the state Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users in central North Carolina and the reater re ion served b the facilit 06 New NS Thoroughbred Total: The State's Transportation System: Provides a new bulk terminal in Charlotte 2020 Bulk Terminal Facility $2,125,000 Public and Private Benefits: (Charlotte) NCDOT: Private: Converts the former intermodal facility to accommodate bulk transfer. 1.7 @ 7% $2,125,000 NS will transfer all non-ethanol bulk traffic from their Pineville facility, which discount Partners: $0 will enable the Pineville facility to handle 1,440 ethanol carloads. The 1.97 @ 3% expansion of the terminal allows for the movement of additional carloads that discount might otherwise use the trucks for transport Rail Capacity and Congestion: NA Transportation System Capacity, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The property would attract truck freight to rail, reducing the number of vehicles on the road and thereby decreasing highway demand; attracting freight to rail improves safety because rail is a safer mode than truck Environmental, Economic, Livabiliry and Employment Conditions: Better and larger storage space can attract shipments from truck to rail, reducing emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment; if shippers can save money by switching to rail, they may expand operations and thereby provide additional jobs in the state Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users in central North Carolina and South Carolina August 2015 5-21 C�MPREHEN511, Costs Timing and Corridor Project* (2014 Program Effects Benefit Cost dollars) Ratio 07 *Stouts Siding Total: The State's Transportation System: Provides a siding that relieves congestion 2018 Extension (Union $10,600,000 and increases freight capacity County) - 10,000 foot NCDOT: Public and Private Benefits: 9.87 @ 7% siding extension at $5,300,000 Public/Private: Improve flow of rail and intermodal traffic, reducing discount Stouts. Partner: congestion, improving air quality and supporting economic growth and 14.77 @ 3% $5,300,000 development discount Rail Capacity and Congestion: The siding will add capacity and relieve congestion, allowing freight to move faster through the region Transportation System Capacity, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The siding would increase train speeds and potentially attract truck freight to rail, reducing the number of vehicles on the road and thereby decreasing highway demand; attracting freight to rail improves safety because rail is a safer mode than truck Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: Faster shipments and better capacity can attract shipments from truck to rail, reducing emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment; if shippers can save money by switching to rail, they may expand operations and thereby provide additional jobs in the state Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users of the CSXT intermodal networks in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee Connects to 19 *Front Street Lead Total: The State's Transportation System: Provides better signalization and safety at a 2016-2020 railroad signalization $900,000 grade crossing in Wilmington and gates (Wilmington) NCDOT: Public and Private Benefits: Improves vehicle and pedestrian safety by 0.76 @ 7% $900,000 providing signals and gates at the railroad crossing discount Partner: TBD Rail Capacity and Congestion: NA NA @ 3% Transportation System Capacity, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The discount improved crossing will help reduce the number of rail/auto/pedestrian incidents Environmental, Economic, Livabiliry and Employment Conditions: A safer crossing improves livability for pedestrians using the intersection Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users in southeastern North Carolina August 2015 5-22 C�MPREHEN511, Costs Timing and Corridor Project* (2014 Program Effects Benefit Cost dollars) Ratio Connects to 19 *Grade Separation at Total: The State's Transportation System: Provides a grade separation that will 2016-2020 Port of Wilmington - $25,000,000** increase safety at a grade crossing at the Port of Wilmington Container Yard Construct grade NCDOT: Public and Private Benefits: 0.15 @ 7% separation at container $25,000,000 Public: Improve safety by eliminating a conflict point between trains and discount yard gate Partner: TBD vehicle and trucks at the container yard. Improve flow of goods, alleviating NA @ 3% congestion, improving air quality and supporting economic development and discount growth Private: Improve roadway and rail traffic flow and safety. Enhanced capacity at the Port of Wilmington Rail Capacity and Congestion: Trucks will no longer have to wait for trains to clear the intersection, reducing congestion on port Transportation System Capaciry, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The improved crossing will help reduce the number of rail/auto/pedestrian incidents Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: A safer crossing improves livability for pedestrians using the intersection Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users in southeastern North Carolina Connects to 19 *Grade Separation at Total: The State's Transportation System: Provides a grade separation that will 2016-2020 Port of Wilmington - $25,000,000** increase safety at a grade crossing at the Port of Wilmington North Gate Construct grade NCDOT: Public and Private Benefits: 3.37 @ 7% separation at port's $25,000,000 Public: Improve safety by eliminating a conflict point between trains and discount north gate Partner: TBD vehicle and trucks at the port. Crossing is immediately adjacent to yard. Traffic NA @ 3% must be frequently flagged due to numerous switching moves. Improve flow of discount goods, alleviating congestion, improving air quality and supporting economic development and growth Private: Improve roadway and rail traffic flow and safety. Enhanced capacity at the Port of Wilmington Rail Capacity and Congestion: Trucks will no longer have to wait for trains to clear the intersection, reducing congestion on port Transportation System Capacity, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The improved crossing will help reduce the number of rail/auto/pedestrian incidents Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: A safer crossing eliminates the bottleneck and will enhance the port's ability to accommodate new clients and may help spur economic growth Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users in southeastern North Carolina August 2015 5-23 C�MPREHEN511, Costs Timing and Corridor Project* (2014 Program Effects Benefit Cost dollars) Ratio 27 Albemarle Rail Line Total: The State's Transportation System: Upgrading the rail line to accommodate 2020 Upgrades - Upgrade $2,126,000 freight will allow for greater rail utilization rail parallel to US 52 in NCDOT: Public and Private Benefits: 1.1 @ 7% Albemarle (Stanly $1,913,000 Public/Private: Improved economic development opportunities from discount County) to allow for Partner: upgrading rail line. 1.39 @ 3% freight. $213,000 Rail Capacity and Congestion: The upgraded rail provides rail capacity, which discount could alleviate some congestion from other competing highway or rail routes Transportation System Capacity, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The upgraded facility could attract shipments from truck to rail, reducing the number of vehicles on the road and thereby decreasing highway demand; attracting shipments to rail improves safety because rail is a safer mode than truck Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: The upgraded rail can attract shipments from truck to rail, reducing emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment; if shippers can save money by switching to rail, they may expand operations and thereby provide additional jobs in the state Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users in central North Carolina multiple Bridges on Class I TBD The State's Transportation System: Upgrading bridges to accommodate freight 2016-2020 Branch Lines allows for more efficient freight movements in the state and keeps the bridges in a state of good repair NA @ 7% Public/Private Benefits: Supports safety and economic competitiveness discount through maintaining bridges in a state of good repair along Class I branch lines NA @ 3% Rail Capacity and Congestion: To the degree that the bridges do not allow for discount freight traffic today, the improvements could relieve bottlenecks in the system and open up more destinations to rail freight Transportation System Capacity, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: The upgraded bridges could attract shipments from truck to rail, reducing the number of vehicles on the road, decreasing highway demand; attracting shipments to rail improves safety because rail is a safer mode than truck Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: The upgraded rail can attract shipments from truck to rail, reducing emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment; if shippers can save money by switching to rail, they may expand operations and thereby provide additional jobs in the state Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users across the state August 2015 5-24 C�MPREHEN511, Costs Timing and Corridor Project* (2014 Program Effects Benefit Cost dollars) Ratio multiple Short Line bridge and Total: The State's Transportation System: Upgrades to accommodate freight allows 2016-2020 infrastructure needs• $43,526,000 for more efficient freight movements in the state and keeps the bridges in a (Bridges, rail, ties and NCDOT: state of good repair NA @ 7% surfacing, capacity, yard $21,763,000 Public and Private Benefits: discount improvements, Partner: Public/Private: Support safety and economic competitiveness through NA @ 3% transloads based on 11 $21,763,000 maintaining bridges in a state of good repair along short line railroads and discount short line railroads providing opportunities for truck to rail transloads responding to survey) Rail Capacity and Congestion: To the degree that the bridges do not allow for freight traffic today, the improvements could relieve bottlenecks in the system and open up more destinations to rail freight. Transportation System Capaciry, Congestion, Safety, and Resiliency: New transload facilities and upgraded system could attract shipments from truck to rail, reducing the number of vehicles on the road and thereby reducing highway demand; attracting shipments to rail improves safety because rail is a safer mode than truck Environmental, Economic, Livability and Employment Conditions: The upgraded rail can attract shipments from truck to rail, reducing emissions in the state and creating a healthier environment; if shippers can save money by switching to rail, they may expand operations and thereby provide additional jobs in the state Distribution of Benefits to Regions: Benefits of the improvement will be felt by users across the state August 2015 5-25 COMPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN Table 5-6 Long-Term (Long Range) Freight Rail Progra�n Effects Corridor/ Project* Costs (2014 Program Effects Timing Location dollars) 02 *Charlotte to TN state line Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2024 (CSXT) $49,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment • Phase III Expansion, Charlotte System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Intermodal Terminal Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safery, and Resiliency: Regions: North Carolina, ✓ South Carolina, and Tennessee 05 *Greensboro to Winston Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2024 Salem to Rural Hall (NS) $1,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment • PTI rail spur System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safery, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to Greensboro region 06 SC state line to VA state line Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2035 (NS) $77,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment • Extend Jamestown siding System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ • Linwood yard improvements Transportation System • Extend Kimberly Clark lead Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to track. Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable • Extend Pomona yard ✓ to central North Carolina auxiliary track and add turnouts • Grade separations at Old Dowd Road, MLK Blvd. in Charlotte • Clanton Road Extension / Grade Separation to facilitate closing Donald Ross Rd crossing in Charlotte • Grade separation near 22nd St. in Kannapolis to facilitate closing two crossings • Grade separation at Rogers Lake Road in Kanna olis August 2015 5-26 C�MPREHEN5IVE STR Corridor/ Project* Costs (2014 Program Effects Timing Location dollars) 06, 07 *SC state line to VA state line Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2024 (NS) $257,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment Charlotte to Monroe (CSXT) System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ • Grade separate Corridor 7 Transportation System (CSXT SF Line) and Corridor 6 Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to (NS Mainline) in Charlotte Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to central North Carolina, but potential for statewide benefits 07 *Charlotte to Monroe (CSXT) Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2024 • Phase III Expansion, Charlotte $5,501,988 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment Intermodal Terminal (These are System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ • Grade separate Campus Ridge only the costs Transportation System Road for the grade Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to separation. Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: North Carolina, The costs for ✓ South Carolina, and the intermodal Tennessee expansion are included under Corridor 2 09 Greensboro to Selma (NS) Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2035 • Replace existing grade $210,478,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment separation at Aycock Street in System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Greensboro Transportation System • Grade separations at Ward Public and Private Capaciry, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Road, Franklin Blvd., and Benefits: ✓ Safery, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable Wagoner Bend Road in ✓ to central North Carolina Greensboro • Grade separate Ellis Road (735236Y) and a combination of grade separations and closings at Ellis Road (734737A), Glover Road, and Wrenn Road • Grade separate Walker Street and Harrison Ave. in Cary • Grade separate South West Street in Ralei h August 2015 5-27 C�MPREHEN5IVE STR Corridor/ Project* Costs (2014 Program Effects Timing Location dollars) 11 Monroe to Pembroke (CSXT) Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2035 • Expansion of Carolinas $3,600,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment ReLoad/Transload warehouse System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ and expand site from 3 to 13 Transportation System acres. Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to central North Carolina 12 Raleigh to Norlina (CSXT) Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2035 • Grade separate Rogers Road $21,780,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment Extension and Northside Loop System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ (Harris Road) in Wake Forest Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safery, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to central North Carolina 13 *Hamlet to Raleigh (CSXT) Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2035 •*Construct 40-acre $25,100,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment automotive terminal facility (Does not System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ • Grade separation at Apex include costs Transportation System Peakway at South Salem Street for Walker Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to and close Tingen Road Street. Those Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable • Grade separation at Walker costs are ✓ to central North Carolina Street included in Corridor 9) 17 *Selma to Morehead City (NS) Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Environmental, Economic, 2025-2040 • As part of GTP to Morehead $200,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment City Mobility Corridor, relocate System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ the NCRR from Havelock to Transportation System Morehead City Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safery, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to eastern North Carolina August 2015 5-28 C�MPREHEN5IVE STR Corridor/ Project* Costs (2014 Program Effects Timing Location dollars) 18 *Contentnea to Wallace Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2025-2035 (N/A) $160,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment • Restore Wallace to Castle System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Hayne Corridor Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to southeastern North Carolina 19 *Pembroke to Wilmington Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2024 (CSXT) $400,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment • US 421 / CSXT Improvements System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ at the I 140 Dan Cameron Transportation System Bridge Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safery, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to southeastern North Carolina 22 *Parmele to Greenville to Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2025-2035 Elmer (N/A) $27,400,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment • GTP - CSXT Connector System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Transportation System Public and Private Capaciry, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safery, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to eastern North Carolina 28 Asheboro to High Point (NS) Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2024 • Sophia siding $3,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Givability and Employment System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to central North Carolina 32 Oxford to Durham (NS) Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2024 • Upgrade Oxford-Durham line $7,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safery, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to central North Carolina August 2015 5-29 C�MPREHEN5IVE STR Corridor/ Project* Costs (2014 Program Effects Timing Location dollars) Multiple Wood Pellet & Hydraulic Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2024 Fracturing Projects - support $36,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment developing market System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safery, and Resiliency: Regions: Various locations ✓ across the state Short Line *Aberdeen Carolina & Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2024 Western Railway $16,500,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment • Relocation in Mecklenburg System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ County Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to Charlotte region Short Line *Andrews to Murphy Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2024 Reactivation $16,400,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to western North Carolina Short Line *Port of Morehead City Loop Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2020-2024 Track $5,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Transportation System Public and Private Capaciry, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: Mostly attributable ✓ to eastern North Carolina Multiple Short Short line bridge and Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Environmental, Economic, 2025-2035 Lines infrastructure needs $118,776,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment • Bridges, rail, ties and System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ surfacing, capacity, yard Transportation System improvements, transloads Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to based on 11 short line Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: Various locations railroads responding to survey ✓ across the state August 2015 5-30 C�MPREHEN5IVE STR Corridor/ Project* Costs (2014 Program Effects Timing Location dollars) Multiple Preservation of threatened Total: The State's Rail Capacity and Environmental, Economic, 2025-2035 rail lines $12,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safery, and Resiliency: Regions: Various locations ✓ across the state Multiple Bridge and structure repairs Total: The State's Rail Capaciry and Environmental, Economic, 2025-2035 on NCDOT-owned corridors $12,000,000 Transportation Congestion: ✓ Livability and Employment System: ✓ Conditions: ✓ Transportation System Public and Private Capacity, Congestion, Distribution of Benefits to Benefits: ✓ Safety, and Resiliency: Regions: Various locations ✓ across the state 5.5 PASSENGER ELEMENT This section describes assumptions, outlines the capital and operating financing plans, and summarizes key benefits for the passenger rail program. More detailed information on project costs, funding sources and potential partners is provided for near-term (short range) projects and information is summarized for long range projects. 5.5.1 Description of Analysis Approach The passenger rail projects and programs listed in Chapter 3 were evaluated for their potential ridership, revenue, expenses and how well they meet the NCDOT goals and vision. The projects included are consistent with the Governor's 25- Year Vision's goals to improve the passenger rail network, expand mass transit options and relieve congestion. All of the passenger rail projects included in the State Rail Plan have been evaluated by the NCDOT Rail Division staff to determine their eligibility for funding under STI and other state and federal funding programs. The following model and forecasting methods were employed to develop project information for near-term projects: • Fourth & Fifth Frequencies - The operating, ridership and revenue modeling for these additional frequencies were completed as part of the modeling to incrementally implement the Southeast Corridor and were refined under the agreement developed by FRA, NCDOT, NCRR, Amtrak, and NS under the ARRA in 2009. • Western NC Thruway Bus Service - Since 1995 NCDOT has been working with the local communities along the Salisbury-Asheville line (Corridor 03) and NS to implement passenger service. Amtrak and NCDOT are evaluating the costs and benefits of adding Thruway Bus service, to build ridership for eventual rail passenger service in this corridor. • Hillsborough Station Ridership - NCDOT has studied adding Hillsborough and other stations to meet the growing demand in the Piedmont Corridor. Ridership and revenue studies and coordination and planning with the Town of Hillsborough have been undertaken. This station was selected for funding under the NCDOT's new STI program. • Station Renovations (Selma, Fayetteville, Wilson) - These stations were renovated approximately 20 years ago. The Rail Division has been August 2015 5-31 actively monitoring the increasing ridership at these stations, which have some of the highest ridership outside of the Piedmont Corridor. Since these stations primarily serve longer trains, platform and canopy extensions are required. The remaining short term project costs are based on 2014 capital cost quotes or preliminary design estimates for facilities and improvements. For several years the Rail Division has been studying plans to incrementally implement the long range plans for the Southeast Corridor, as well as how best to implement new services to metropolitan areas currently without services. This primarily has been through regular updates to ridership and revenue studies based upon new demographic and travel demand data, as well as new ridership and revenue data from existing services. Through these studies and other information NCDOT has identified the long range passenger rail projects, as well as additional studies needed to assess environmental impacts, and refine the costs and benefits of these new services. The Record of Decision for the Raleigh to Richmond portion of the corridor is anticipated in 2015. North Carolina's current system for funding transportation projects, Strategic Transportation Investments (STI), was described in Section 2.1.5.3. Passenger rail capital projects were identified in Chapter 3 based on needs previously identified by NCDOT, MPO and RPO project submissions for the State Rail Plan and from NCDOT Division and MPO/RPO projects submitted for STI funding analysis. The STI funding analysis is a quantitative approach to evaluating project benefits and local and Division project priorities to determine what future projects will be considered for funding. Passenger projects presented in the near-term have funding identified. The funds appropriated by STI are anticipated to leverage other federal funding sources, such as USDOT grants. Under the STI program, scoring for statewide mobility projects has been completed and the new scoring formula is scheduled to be fully implemented after July 1, 2015. Based on the established criteria, $7,680,000 of funding has been programmed over the next five years for passenger rail capital projects through STI. Those dollars are being used to leverage additional local investment. A minimum floor for funding of non-highway modes was established. The floor for all non-highway modes is 4 percent of State Highway Trust Fund revenues. In 2013-2014, the $1.105 billion in the Highway Trust Fund was distributed by allocating $937 million to the Strategic Mobility Formula (SMF], $73 million for debt service, and $46 million to administration. The floor for non-highway modes is calculated as $37,480,000. It should also be {: r9AR�r �IVE STATE RAIL PLAN noted that the SMF associated with STI is being reviewed and could be modified for future funding cycles. Future projects and services are anticipated to be funded by a combination of federal, local, and state funds appropriated either through specific legislation or future iterations of STI. State funds needed to match federal grants will either compete through STI or require specific legislative actions. It is anticipated that a mix of local and private partnerships will be sought to supplement funding that can be secured through STI and federal grants. Project sponsors should strategically partner with local public and private entities in order to secure matching funds and thereby be eligible for greater matching federal funding. Effects on livability were identified qualitatively. Projects that have positive effects on livability are often projects that enhance or encourage walkability in communities. As such, many of the projects identified with livability effects include new stations, station improvements, and projects that add frequencies to services that enhance access to alternative modes of transportation. 5.5.2 Capital Financing Plan Passenger rail capital projects were identified in Chapter 3 based on needs previously identified by NCDOT, MPO and RPO project submissions for the State Rail Plan and from NCDOT Division and MPO/RPO projects submitted for STI funding analysis. The STI funding analysis is a quantitative approach to evaluating project benefits and local and Division project priorities to determine what future projects will be considered for funding. The STI quantitative scoring is considered alongside the completion of environmental and engineering plans and corridor spending caps to create the STIP. The STIP programs federal and state transportation funds on projects over the next 10 years. Passenger rail in North Carolina also leverages other federal funding sources, such as USDOT grants. Future projects and services are anticipated to be funded by a combination of federal, local, and state funds appropriated either through specific legislation or future iterations of STI. State funds needed to match federal grants will either compete through STI or require specific legislative actions. It is anticipated that a mix of local and private partnerships will be sought to supplement funding that can be secured through STI and federal grants. Project sponsors should strategically partner with local public and private entities in order to secure matching funds and thereby be eligible for greater matching federal funding. August 2015 5-32 Table 5-7 identifies near-term projects by key passenger service corridors and presents information on costs, annual operating and maintenance costs to maintain a state of good repair, potential funding sources, and timeframes. Projects included in the STI are identified. Capital needs and potential funding sources for passenger rail projects scheduled for implementation in the mid-term (2020-2024) or long-term (2025-2040) are presented in Table 5-8. As shown in the table and noted in Section 5.4, substantial investments are planned in the mid and long-term planning horizons for the Southeast Corridor, along with investments in passenger rail service extension to eastern and western North Carolina. August 2015 5-33 COMPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN Table 5-7 Near-Term (Short Range) Passenger Rail Projects and Benefits Funding genefits Benefit Cost Ratio Timing In Costs Source STI? Corridor Project* (2014 dollars) 7% 3% Discount Discount Southeast Corridor Piedmont Service 06, 09 *WiFi on Piedmont service - Total: $630,000 State Rail Public: Provides an amenity 2.44 3.15 2015-2016 N Piedmont Add Wi-Fi to 20 cars NCDOT:$630,000 Program for passengers to increase Partners:$0 satisfaction with service and Annual 0&M: $30,000 attract new riders. 06, 09, 15 *Positive Train Control (PTC) Total: $2,125,000 State Rail Public: Improves safety by N/A N/A 2016 N Piedmont - installed on 8locomotives, 5 NCDOT: $2,125,000 Program allowing trains to be centrally cab control units (CCUs), and 4 Partners: $0 controlled and monitored, spares, plus infrastructure to Annual 0&M: TBD enhances line capacity by support PTC allowing for reduced headways, reduces delays as communications are enhanced and incidents can be avoided, supports additional frequencies. Private: Supports FRA requirement for railroads to implement PTC 06, 09 *Fourth and Fifth frequencies Total: $35,400,000 Federal, Public: Accommodates 4th: 5.44 4th: 5.16 2017-2018 N Piedmont - New equipment (locomotive, NCDOT: $35,400,000 CMAQ, ridership growth and (4tn) CCU, baggage/lounge cars, and Partners: $0 State Rail enhances mobility options 5th: 6.63 5th: 9.25 2019 (5tn) coach cars) to add a 5th Annual 0&M: Program with additional arrival and 2019 (5tn frequency and expand Capital $7,316,000 departure times for travelers. frequency) Yard, including extending north The 4th and 5th frequencies and south lead tracks are anticipated to attract 144,000 and 237,400 additional riders, respectively which would reduce vehicle- miles traveled (VMT) in the state. 09 *Hillsborough Station, track Total: $8,400,000 STI, Public: Expands access to 0.52 0.69 2018 Y Piedmont and crossings - Construct NCDOT:$7,680,000 State Rail passenger service. Adjacent to station and platform Partners: $720,000 Program, planned 20-acre transit Annual 0&M: $400,000 Local oriented development. August 2015 5-34 �IVESIHi� r:All Funding genefits Benefit Cost Ratio Timing In Costs Source STI? Corridor Project* (2014 dollars) 7% 3% Discount Discount Western NC Service 03 *Western NC Thruway Bus N/A Amtrak Public: Amtrak Thruway bus N/A N/A 2018 N NS Service- Partner with Amtrak service will build ridership in to implement Thruway bus the future rail corridor and service between the Piedmont provide connecting service area of NC, Asheville, and along the Piedmont rail western NC corridor. Near-term benefits include improved travel accessibility and tourism 0 ortunities. Eastern / Southeastern NC Service 13, 15 *Station Improvements Total: $2,500,000 Federal, Public: Station improvements N/A N/A 2018-2025 N Carolinian (Fayetteville, Wilson, Selma) NCDOT: $2,500,000 State will enhance passenger Partners: $0 experiences through Annual 0&M: $250,000 improved amenities and add capacity for growing ridership at these stations. 9,18 *Southeastern NC Thruway N/A Amtrak Public: Amtrak Thruway bus N/A N/A 2018 N NS, CSXT Bus Service- Partner with service will build ridership in Amtrak to expand Thruway bus the future rail corridor and service to Wilmington and other provide connecting service markets along the Piedmont rail corridor. Near-term benefits include improved travel accessibility and tourism 0 ortunities. Total: $49,055,000 State funding assigned to passenger projects through STI for the next five years is NCDOT: $48,335,000 $7,680,000 for the Hillsborough Station. The local government will also contribute to that Partners: $720,000 project. Projects identified with funding as State may compete in future iterations of STI. Projects whose funding is identified as State Rail Program include projects and services subject to annual budget appropriation by the legislature. Federal CMAQ funding is used to fund operation of passenger rail services. Additional funding sources will be sought throu h federal PRIIA and TIGER rant a lications. * Projects that will help implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision Note: Annual operating and maintenance (0&M) costs for near-term projects are noted in the costs category and contribute to the projects maintaining a state of good repair. They are assumed to be 5 to 10 percent of total capital costs except for the 4th and 5th Frequencies where specific data was available. Please see Appendix F. August 2015 5-35 COMPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN Table 5-8 Mid- to Long-ter�n (Long Range) Passenger Rail Projects and Benefits Corridor/ Costs Location Project* (2014 dollars) Funding Source Benefits Timing Southeast Corridor - Service Im rovements 06 *Charlotte Gateway Station - Total: FTA grant, Public: Supports increased passenger service 2020-2035 new/relocated station and $210,000,000 STI, frequencies and allows for longer passenger trains in associated track improvements Local support of increasing ridership. Will attract additional riders due to improved location and station condition as well as connectivity to other transit modes. Current station is adjacent to the freight yard. Proposed CATS commuter rail service, planned streetcar service, intercity bus service and 90+ local buses will serve the new location that is close to center city Charlotte and passenger destinations. Upon completion of station, 5 city blocks of state owned property will be available adjacent to the station for transit oriented development. Private: Reduces passenger/freight train conflicts by improving capacity. A relocated station eliminates passenger tracks and facilities in the middle of NS freight yard. 06 *Harrisburg and Lexington Total: Federal, Public: Increase access to stations within the 2020-2035 Stations - new stations and $237,400,000 STI, urbanized Piedmont corridor. Resulting increased associated track improvements Local ridership will create air quality, accessibility and economic development benefits. 06, 09, 15 *Carolinian Equipment - New Total: Federal (Amtrak), Public: Replacing the Carolinian train cars and 2020-2035 equipment to replace existing $76,600,000 State (payments equipment will improve the passenger experience and Carolinian trainsets funded through reduce long-term maintenance costs. capital agreement with Amtrak) Southeast Corridor - Full implementation 06, 09, 12 *Southeast Corridor - Full Total: Federal Public/Private: Full implementation of the Southeast 2035 Implementation of service $3,800,000,000 State Corridor will create substantial benefits to travel time (Raleigh-Richmond) savings. Full implementation will result in sizable benefits to air quality, congestion reduction and economic development. August 2015 5-36 C�MPREHEN5IVE STATE RAIL P� �v Corridor/ Costs Location Project* (2014 dollars) Funding Source Benefits Timing Western NC Passenger Service 03 *Western NC Passenger Service Total: Federal Public/Private: The Western NC passenger rail service 2020-2035 - Add new connecting rail service $405,300,000 STI, State, will create accessibility, tourism and economic between Salisbury and Asheville Local development benefits for communities between - Reactivate Andrews to Mur h Salisbur and Asheville. Eastern/Southeastern NC Service 09, 18 *Southeastern NC Passenger Total: Federal Public/Private: The Eastern NC passenger rail service 2020-2035 Service - Add new rail service $262,500,000 STI, State, will create accessibility, tourism and economic between Raleigh and Wilmington Local development benefits for communities between Ralei h and Wilmin ton. Charlotte to Northeast via Lynchburg, Virginia 06 *Charlotte to Lynchburg Total: Federal Public/Private: This new service would provide an 2020-2035 Passenger Service - New service $35,600,000 STI, State, additional route / connection for the North Carolina to to connect Charlotte to the Local Northeast travel market. It would also provide an Northeast via Lynchburg, VA additional frequency between Charlotte and Greensboro. The service will create accessibility, tourism and economic development benefits for communities with stations alon the corridor. Total: $5.03 Future projects and services are anticipated to be funded by a combination of federal, local, billion and state funds appropriated either through specific legislation or future iterations of STI. State funds needed to match federal grants will either compete through STI or require specific legislative actions. It is anticipated that local partnerships will be sought to su lement fundin that can be sou ht throu h STI and federal rants. * Projects that will help implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision Notes: Updated studies, Service Development Plans, and/or NEPA documentation is needed to select the Southeastern Corridor route. Costs for Charlotte to Lynchburg are preliminary and subject to additional study by Amtrak and coordination with host railroads. August 2015 5-37 The near-term and long-term investments are consistent with the Governor's 25-Year Vision and range from the addition of amenities and convenience to enhance riders' experiences, and adding frequencies to existing services that can help connect people to jobs to full implementation of the Southeast Corridor, establishing Amtrak Thruway Bus service to build ridership, and future expansion of service into southeastern and western North Carolina. Additional capital projects may be identified from the anticipated planning studies listed in Section 5.7. The implementation costs of those projects are not included in Tables 5-13 and 5-14. 5.5.3 Operating Financing Plan NCDOT fully funds the operations of the Piedmont service and the Carolinian service between Washington, DC and Charlotte via a state operating funds subsidy, CMAQ funds and passenger revenues. These sources also will be used to fund the additional fourth frequency when it is implemented (SFY 2018). The projected annual ridership, revenues by source and costs for operating the Carolinian and the Piedmont services over the near-term are presented in Table 5-9. CMAQ funds will only be available to fund the first three years of the fourth frequency and an additional funding source will need to be identified to support mid- to long-term operations. Amtrak has fiscal responsibility for the other long-distance routes that serve North Carolina (Crescent, Palmetto, Silver Meteor and Silver Star). Therefore, the operating costs for these trains are not included. Table 5-9 Finance Projections, Piedmont and Carolinian Sei SFY 2015 SFY 2016 Pro ram Costs** $37,556,032 Passen er Revenue $19,943,000 CMAQ Revenue $3,700,000 State Revenue $13,913,032 [=�Mrr�EHEN51� � STAI ;AIL PLAti Table 5-10 shows the projected ridership and revenue for the fully operational NC/VA segment of the Southeast Corridor, as well as for the proposed Western and Southeastern North Carolina service extensions. According to NCDOT estimates, the passenger revenues from the fully operational Southeast Corridor are projected to cover the annual operation costs. Thus, the Southeast Corridor may provide a private-partnership concession opportunity. A new service connecting Charlotte and Greensboro to the Northeast via Lynchburg is not within the near term, thus operating costs of that service are not reflected in Table 5-9. However, based on preliminary information prepared by Amtrak, North Carolina expects its share of Section 209 payments supporting the service to be approximately $5.2 million per year. More detailed operation costs for this service and additional operating needs may be identified from the anticipated planning studies listed in Section 5.7. State Fiscal Years 2015-2019 (2014 dollars) SFY 2017 SFY 2018* $38,682,414 $39,842,586 $47,239,717 $20,541,290 $21,157,529 $23,392,000 $3,700,000 $3,700,000 $7,640,000 $14,441,124 $14,985,058 $16,207,717 Passengers 517,700 534,000 550,020 630,020 Train Miles 600,790 600,790 600,790 726,350 CMAQ: Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality funds *State Fiscal Year 2018: Begin Fourth Raleigh to Charlotte round trip **Costs include items such as Amtrak contract payments, station and facility rent, marketing and administration, train fuel and insurance. Source: NCDOT/PB, Apri12014 SFY 2019 $48,656,606 $24,093,760 $7,657,000 $16,905,846 648,921 726,350 August 2015 5-38 COMPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN � I'able 5-10 Projected Ridership and Revenue, all NC Passenger Train Services, 2025 (2014 dollars) Full Build* Full Build* Full Build* with Southeastern NC and with Southeastern NC and Western NC Services Western NC Services 2025 2025 2040 TICKET REVENUES Piedmont/Carolinian Trains $126,215,000 $129,038,000 $169,148,000 Amtrak Long Distance Trains** $28,303,000 $28,228,000 $35,172,000 SENC Raleigh-Wilmington Trains -- $665,000 $927,000 WNC Salisbury-Asheville Trains -- $508,000 $712,000 RIDERSHIP Piedmont/Carolinian Trains 1,866,700 1,911,200 2,586,300 Amtrak Long Distance Trains** 224,000 222,300 2800,100 SENC Raleigh-Wilmington Trains -- 37,000 50,100 WNC Salisbury-Asheville Trains -- 29,700 41,700 PASSENGER MILES Piedmont/Carolinian Trains 495,310,000 507,820,000 670,490,000 Amtrak Long Distance Trains** 99,940,000 100,270,000 125,280,000 SENC Raleigh-Wilmington Trains -- 3,230,000 4,580,000 WNC Salisbury-Asheville Trains -- 2,610,000 3,660,000 *Full Build = Federally-Designated Southeast Corridor service for 8 round trips Charlotte to Raleigh, with 3 continuing to New York via S Line between Raleigh and Petersburg (and a 4th round trip that operates only Raleigh to New York via S Line between Petersburg & Raleigh) and 1(the Carolinian) continuing to New York via the A Line. Full Build assumes 90 to 110 MPH MAS operations along the Federally-Designated Southeast Corridor and premium fares. Capacity studies in partnership with NS and CSXT may be needed to verify speeds and capacities on the impacted routes. **Amtrak Long Distance Trains: Crescent, Palmetto, Silver Meteor, and SilverStar Sources: NCDOT and AECOM, September 2013 August 2015 39 5.5.4 Passenger Rail Public and Private Benefits Projects in the near-term, 5-year, passenger rail program focus on enhancements and increased access to existing passenger rail service corridors. These improvements are anticipated to result in further mobility, transportation capacity, congestion relief, environmental and economic benefits along these corridors. In the long term, major investments in these corridors will contribute to even greater benefits in the state's core population areas, while new services introduced will provide multimodal access, mobility and economic development opportunities to western and eastern North Carolina. Individual project and corridor level benefits in the short range and long range are further described in Section 5.4. 5.6 FREIGHT ELEMENT This section includes information on investments needed, funding and key benefits for the freight rail projects identified in Chapter 4 and Section 5.4. As with the passenger rail program, more detailed information on project costs, funding sources and potential partners is provided for near-term (short range) projects (see Table 5-11) and information is summarized for long range projects (see Table 5-12). 5.6.1 Finance Plan The list of near-term freight projects shown in Table 5-11 was generated using projects submitted for STI by the railroads and needs identified by Metropolitan and Rural Planning Organizations (MPO/RPO's). Funding for capital costs of these projects is identified. The projects included are consistent with the Governor's 25-Year Vision's goals to expand industrial access to freight rail, enhance access to inland and coastal ports, relieve congestion, and maintain existing infrastructure. The majority of near-term projects are track improvement projects that will either enhance movement on the intermodal network or provide transload opportunities. The list of mid- and long-term projects predominantly consist of projects submitted for STI that did not receive funding in the initial round of evaluations and projects identified as needs by MPO's and RPO's. Many of the mid- and long- term projects are grade separations, but there are additional intermodal terminal, yard improvements, track improvements, and access projects. Track improvements, new access, transloads, and intermodal terminal improvements are anticipated to score well in future iterations of STI. c_ i7MRREHENSIVE STATE RAIL RLAN Table 5-12 summarizes the long range freight rail projects and potential funding sources by the rail corridor identifications presented in Chapter 4 (Figure 4.1). Proposed mid and long-term projects have been totaled for each corridor. Fourteen (14) of the 42 corridors shown in Figure 4.1 have proposed projects between 2020 and 2035. These corridors are spread throughout the state and may also benefit highway and passenger projects. Additional freight needs may be identified from the anticipated planning studies listed in Section 5.7. It is anticipated that studies including, but not limited to, the Eastern Intermodal Study and the capacity / interoperability study on CSX Transportation's A-Line (Corridor 15) could identify high investment needs that would have positive benefits on the state's economy. In addition, continued coordination with railroads on their capital programs in North Carolina will be conducted to ensure projects that are mutually beneficial to the railroad companies and the State are included in future iterations of this plan. Future projects and services are anticipated to be funded by a combination of federal, local, and state funds appropriated either through specific legislation or future iterations of STI. State funds needed to match federal grants will either compete through STI or require specific legislative actions. Project sponsors should strategically partner with local public and private entities to align priorities for future STI scoring. State funding assigned to freight rail projects through STI for the next five years totals $8,549,000. Assuming similar funding levels are maintained in the following 20 years, approximately $34 million will be available from STI to secure matching private, local, or federal funds. Assuming FRRCSI is funded at $4 million per year, $80 million will be available over the mid- and long-term period of this plan to leverage matching private investments or serve as matching funds for federal grants and loans. Federal programs such as TIGER and the currently unfunded Rail Line Relocation and Improvement Program provide 80% funding and require a 20% state or local match. Project sponsors should aim to leveraging local public and private matches to secure the largest Federal match possible. In the competitive transportation marketplace, it is important to be cognizant that private capital investments can only be justified when there is sufficient demand to earn a return on the investment, no matter whether projects are funded entirely by private enterprise or partially through public private partnerships. Alternately, public funds are considered justified for an investment when there are private and public benefits that exceed the investment. August 2015 5-40 COMPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN Table 5-11 Near Term (Short Range) Freight Rail Projects and Benefits Potential In Funding Benefits Benefit Cost Ratio Timing Costs � � STI? Corridor/Location Project* Source s (2014 dollars) 7% 3% Discount Discount 06 *Convert NS "Roundhouse" Total: $1,695,000 STI, Private: Increase capacity at 10.22 13.11 2019 Y property adjacent to intermodal NCDOT: $847,500 Partnership the intermodal facility thus facility into parking / storage for Partner: $847,500 with the reducing the number of containers (Greensboro) - 4 acres, railroad long-haul trucking events, 150 spaces, security fencing, reducing congestion, lighting, new paved entrance. 50% improving air quality and capacity increase. supporting economic rowth and development. 06 New NS Thoroughbred Bulk Total: $976,000 STI, Private: Converts the 1.70 1.97 2020 Y Terminal Facility (Charlotte) NCDOT: $488,000 Partnership former intermodal facility Partner: $488,000 with the to accommodate bulk railroad transfer. NS will transfer all non-ethanol bulk traffic from their Pineville facility, which will enable the Pineville facility to handle 1,440 ethanol carloads. The expansion of the terminal allows for the movement of additional carloads that might otherwise use the trucks for transport. 07 *Stouts Siding Extension (Union Total: $10,600,000 STI, Public/Private: Improve 9.87 14.77 2018 Y County) - 10,000 foot siding NCDOT: $5,300,000 Partnership flow of rail and intermodal extension at Stouts. Partner: $5,300,000 with the traffic, reducing congestion, railroad improving air quality and supporting economic growth and development. connects to 19 *Front Street Lead railroad Total: $900,000 FRRCSI, Public/Private: Improve 0.76 N/A 2016- N signalization and gates NCDOT: $900,000 Rail- vehicle and pedestrian 2020 (Wilmington) Partner: TBD highway safety by providing signals safety and gates at the railroad crossin . August 2015 5-41 C�MPREHEN5IVE STATE RAIL PLAN Potential In Funding Benefits Benefit Cost Ratio Timing Costs � � STI? Corridor/Location Project* Source s (2014 dollars) 7% 3% Discount Discount connects to 19 *Grade Separation at Port of Total: FRRCSI Public: Improve safety by 0.15 N/A 2016- N Wilmington - Construct grade $25,000,000** and/or eliminating a conflict point 2020 separation at container yard gate NCDOT: Federal, between trains and vehicle $25,000,000 Rail- and trucks at the container Partner: TBD highway yard. Improve flow of safety goods, alleviating congestion, improving air quality and supporting economic development and growth. Private: Improve roadway and rail traffic flow and safety. Enhanced capacity at the Port of Wilmington. connects to 19 *Grade Separation at Port of Total: FRRCSI Public: Improve safety by 3.37 N/A 2016- N Wilmington - Construct grade $25,000,000** and/or eliminating a conflict point 2020 separation at port's north gate NCDOT: Federal, between trains and vehicle $25,000,000 Rail- and trucks at the port. Partner: TBD highway Crossing is immediately safety adjacent to yard. Traffic must be frequently flagged due to numerous switching moves. Improve flow of goods, alleviating congestion, improving air quality and supporting economic development and growth. Private: Improve roadway and rail traffic flow and safety. Enhanced capacity at the Port of Wilmington. August 2015 5-42 C�MPREHEN5IVE STATE RAIL PLAN Potential In Funding Benefits Benefit Cost Ratio Timing Costs � � STI? Corridor/Location Project* Source s (2014 dollars) 7% 3% Discount Discount 27 Albemarle Rail Line Upgrades - Total: $2,126,000 STI, Public/Private: Improved 1.10 1.39 2020 Y Upgrade rail parallel to US 52 in NCDOT: $1,913,000 Partnership economic development Albemarle (Stanly County) to allow Partner: $213,000 with the opportunities from for frei ht. railroad u radin rail line. multiple Bridges on Class I Branch Lines TBD FRRCSI Public/Private: Support N/A N/A 2016- N safety and economic 2020 competitiveness through maintaining bridges in a state of good repair along Class 1 branch lines. multiple Short Line bridge and Total: $43,526,000 FRRCSI Public/Private: Support N/A N/A 2016- N infrastructure needs NCDOT: safety and economic 2020 $21,763,000 competitiveness through Partner: maintaining bridges in a $21,763,000 state of good repair along short line railroads. Total: $109,823,000 State funding assigned to freight projects through STI for the next five years is NCDOT: $8,549,000. For this State Rail Plan, it is assumed that FRRCSI will be funded through $81,211,500 the NCRR dividend to the state at approximately $4 million per year over the next Partners: five years. The NCDOT share of near-term project costs ($81,211,500) exceeds the $28,611,500 funds identified through STI and estimated for FRRCSI (a total of $28,549,000). Typically, both STI and FRRCSI are used to leverage equal private investments. Alternatively, the funds could be used to leverage federal grants and loans that can provide 80% matching funds. Rail-highway safety funds may also be used for grade separations that have been identified in traffic separation studies. In order to deliver more of the projects identified in the near-term, NCDOT Rail Division will work with the NCSPA to re-apply for a federal TIGER grant for one or more of the port gate projects, work with the Wilmington MPO to identify potential funding for the Front Street crossing upgrade, and work to identify additional funding sources for projects that support hydraulic fracturing and wood pellet projects as needs are more fully identified. * Projects that will help implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision ** The project is estimated to cost between $15 and $25 million. The BCA ratio is based on $15 million, but $25 million is a more conservative capital cost estimate. August 2015 5-43 COMPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN Table 5-12 Mid- and Long-Term (Long Range) Freight Rail Projects and Benefits Corridor Costs Potential /Location Project* (2014 dollars) Funding Benefits Timing Source(s) 02 *Charlotte to TN state line (CSXT) Total: STI, Public/Private: Phase III Expansion of the 2020-2024 • Phase III Expansion, Charlotte $49,000,000 Partnership Charlotte Intermodal Terminal and supporting Intermodal Terminal with the rail infrastructure will increase capacity at the railroad, intermodal facility thus reducing the number of Federal long-haul trucking events, reducing congestion, improving air quality and supporting economic rowth and develo ment. 05 *Greensboro to Winston Salem to Rural Total: FRRCSI, STI, Public/Private: The PTI Rail Spur project will 2020-2024 Hall (NS) $1,000,000 Partnership connect the PTI Airport to Corridor 05 providing • PTI rail spur with the additional economic development opportunities railroad at the airport. 06 SC state line to VA state line (NS) Total: FRRCSI, STI, Public/Private: Multiple grade separation 2020-2035 • Extend Jamestown siding $77,000,000 Partnership projects are planned for Corridor 06. Additional • Linwood yard improvements with the projects include track extensions and • Extend Kimberly Clark lead track. railroad, Rail- improvements to train clearance capabilities. • Extend Pomona yard auxiliary highway safety These improvements will benefit freight and track and add turnouts passenger trains traveling between the Charlotte • Grade separations at Old Dowd region and the VA state line. Collectively the Road, MLK Blvd. in Charlotte projects will reduce congestion, improve air • Clanton Road Extension / Grade quality and reduce rail freight transport times. Separation to facilitate closing Donald Ross Rd crossing in Charlotte • Grade separation near 22nd St. in Kannapolis to facilitate closing two crossings • Grade separation at Rogers Lake Road in Kanna olis 06,07 *SC state line to VA state line (NS) Total: STI, Public/Private: Grade separating the two 2020-2024 Charlotte to Monroe (CSXT) $257,000,000 Partnership railroads will enhance safety and reduce conflicts • Grade separate Corridor 7(CSXT with railroads, / delays that affect freight movements on two SF Line) and Corridor 6(NS Federal, Rail- high volume corridors and passenger train Mainline) in Charlotte highway safety, movements on the NS Mainline. The corridors local are also part of both railroads' intermodal networks. . August 2015 5-44 C�MPREHEN5IVE STATE RAIL PLAN Corridor Costs Potential /Location Project* (2014 dollars) Funding Benefits Timing Source(s) 07 *Charlotte to Monroe (CSXT) Total: STI, Public/Private: Phase III Expansion of the 2020-2024 • Phase III Expansion, Charlotte $5,501,988 Partnership Charlotte Intermodal Terminal and supporting Intermodal Terminal (These are only with the rail infrastructure will increase capacity at the • Grade separate Campus Ridge the costs for the railroad, intermodal facility thus reducing the number of Road grade separation. Federal, Rail long-haul trucking events, reducing congestion, The costs for the Highway safety improving air quality and supporting economic intermodal growth and development. expansion are Public: The grade separation will improve safety included under by eliminating a conflict point between trains and Corridor 2 vehicles and/or pedestrians. 09 Greensboro to Selma (NS) Total: FRRCSI or Public/Private: Multiple grade separation 2020-2035 • Replace existing grade separation $210,478,000 Federal, Rail projects between Greensboro and Raleigh will at Aycock Street in Greensboro Highway safety improve safety by eliminating conflict points • Grade separations at Ward Road, between trains and vehicles and/or pedestrians. Franklin Blvd., and Wagoner Bend Improve highway and rail traffic flow, alleviating Road in Greensboro congestion and improving air quality. • Grade separate Ellis Road (735236Y) and a combination of grade separations and closings at Ellis Road (734737A), Glover Road, and Wrenn Road • Grade separate Walker Street and Harrison Ave. in Cary • Grade separate South West Street in Ralei h 11 Monroe to Pembroke (CSXT) Total: FRRCSI Public/Private: Increase capacity at the transload 2020-2035 • Expansion of Carolinas $3,600,000 facility thus reducing the number of long-haul ReLoad/Transload warehouse and trucking events, reducing congestion, improving expand site from 3 to 13 acres. air quality and supporting economic growth and development. 12 Raleigh to Norlina (CSXT) Total: FRRCSI or Grade separation projects will improve safety by 2020-2035 • Grade separate Rogers Road $21,780,000 Federal, Rail- eliminating conflict points between trains and Extension and Northside Loop highway safety vehicles and/or pedestrians. Improve highway (Harris Road) in Wake Forest and rail traffic flow, alleviating congestion and im rovin air ualit . 13 *Hamlet to Raleigh (CSXT) Total: FRRCSI, STI, Public/Private: Two grade separation projects in 2020-2035 • *Construct 40-acre automotive $25,100,000 Partnership Wake County will improve safety by eliminating terminal facili (Does not with the conflict points between trains and vehicles August 2015 5-45 C�MPREHEN5IVE STATE RAIL PLAN Corridor Costs Potential /Location Project* (2014 dollars) Funding Benefits Timing Source(s) • Grade separation at Apex Peakway include costs for railroad, and/or pedestrians. Improve roadway and at South Salem Street and close Walker Street. Federal, Rail- railroad traffic flow. A new automotive terminal Tingen Road Those costs are highway safety facility in Moncure will reduce the lengths of • Grade separation at Walker Street included in truck trips used to bring new automobiles to the Corridor 9) central and eastern NC market and will enhance economic develo ment in Lee Count . 17 *Selma to Morehead City [NS) Total: Federal, Public/Private: The relocation of the railroad 2025-2040 • As part of GTP to Morehead City $200,000,000 Partnership would eliminate the highway-rail conflicts in Mobility Corridor, relocate the with the Morehead City and provide enhances access to NCRR from Havelock to Morehead railroad the Port of Morehead City. Cit 18* *Contentnea to Wallace (N/A) Total: STI, State, Public/Private: Restoration of the Wallace to 2025-2035 • Restore Wallace to Castle Hayne $160,000,000 Federal Castle Hayne Rail Corridor from north of Corridor Wilmington to Wallace will provide potential economic development benefits and allow for future air quality and travel accessibility benefits if the corridor is used for passenger rail service between Raleigh and Wilmington. 19 *Pembroke to Wilmington (CSXT) Total: $400,000 FRRCSI or Public/Private: Crossing safety improvements 2020-2024 • US 421 / CSXT Improvements at Federal, Rail- will increase pedestrian and vehicle safety in the the I-140 Dan Cameron Bridge highway safety Wilmington area. Also, in conjunction with other at-grade and grade separation improvements, enhances access to the Port of Wilmin ton. 22* *Parmele to Greenville to Elmer (N/A) Total: STI, State, Private: Constructing a rail line connecting the 2025-2035 • GTP - CSXT Connector $27,400,000 Federal Global TransPark into the CSXT line will provide access to a second Class I rail line. The connection could provide economic development opportunities and provide additional shipping o tions. 28 Asheboro to High Point (NS) Total: FRRCSI, STI, Private: This siding extension project will 2020-2024 • Sophia siding $3,000,000 Partnership increase freight capacity and alleviate congestion with the at the High Point Yard. railroad 32 Oxford to Durham (NS) Total: FRRCSI, STI, Private: Upgrading the Oxford-Durham Line to 2020-2024 • Upgrade Oxford-Durham line $7,000,000 Partnership 286,000-1b rail that will preserve and potentially with the enhance economic development through railroad increasin the corridor's abili to accommodate August 2015 5-46 C�MPREHEN5IVE STATE RAIL PLAN Corridor Costs Potential /Location Project* (2014 dollars) Funding Benefits Timing Source(s) 6 axle locomotive trains that existing on the corridor industr needs. Multiple Wood Pellet & Hydraulic Fracturing Total: FRRCSI Public/Private: Advance economic development 2020-2024 Projects - support developing market $36,000,000 and growth through projects supporting emerging energy industries in North Carolina. Short line *Aberdeen Carolina & Western Railway Total: FRRCSI, Public/Private: Increase capacity and reduce train 2020-2024 • Relocation in Mecklenburg County $16,500,000 Partnership and vehicle conflicts by relocating the ACWR in with the Mecklenburg County. railroad, Federal Short line *Andrews to Murphy Reactivation Total: FRRCSI, Private: Reactivating the railroad line will create 2020-2024 $16,400,000 Federal economic development opportunities in this rural area in the mountains. Short line *Port of Morehead City Loop Track Total: FRRCSI, Public/Private: The loop track enables longer 2020-2024 $5,000,000 Partnership trains and potential unit trains to be built and with the disassembled at the port facility. Supports NC railroad, industries shipping through the port. Federal Multiple Short line bridge and infrastructure Total: FRRCSI Public/Private: Support safety and economic 2025-2035 short lines needs $118,776,000 competitiveness through maintaining bridges in a • Bridges, rail, ties and surfacing, state of good repair along short line railroads. capacity, yard improvements, transloads based on 11 short line railroads res ondin to surve Multiple Preservation of threatened rail lines Total: State Public/Private: Preserve railroad corridors that 2025-2035 $12,000,000 would otherwise be abandoned for future market 0 ortunities. Multiple Bridge and structure repairs on NCDOT- Total: State Public/Private: Statewide investment projects 2025-2035 owned corridors $12,000,000 focus on bridge and structure repairs to NCDOT owned corridors that may provide access to potential future rail markets. Expected benefits are broad and primarily center on system maintenance and reservation. Total: $1,266,000,000 State funding assigned to freight projects through STI for the next Total on Class I network: five years is $8,549,000. For this State Rail Plan, it is assumed that $1,109,000,000 FRRCSI will be funded through the NCRR dividend to the state at Total on Short line network: approximately $4 million per year. These funds will be used to $157,000,000 match and leverage private investments from the railroads and August 2015 5-47 C�MPREHEN5IVE STATE RAIL PLAN Corridor Costs Potential /Location Project* (2014 dollars) Funding Benefits Timing Source(s) potential federal grants to deliver projects. Typically, FRRCSI and STI require a 50% match by the railroads. Federal programs such as TIGER and the currently unfunded Rail Line Relocation and Improvement Program provide 80% funding and require a 20% state or local match. Additional programs that should be considered include intermodal tax credits and Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Loans. Rail-highway safety funds may also be used for grade separations that are recommended in traffic separation studies. As these mid- and long-range projects are further developed, more detailed economic analyses will be conducted to identify the projects with better returns on investment. * Projects that will help implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision are denoted by an asterisk in the Project column. August 2015 5-48 5.6.2 Freight Rail Public and Private Economic Benefits Detailed information on the projects and expected benefits of freight projects identified in Section 5.6 are described in detail in Section 5.4. Projects in the near-term, 5-year, freight rail program focus on continuing to improve safety and rail and highway traffic flow through grade separation projects, supporting connections at intermodal facilities and the Port of Wilmington, and continuing to expand. These improvements ai-e anticipated to result in further safety improvements, transportation capacity, congestion relief, economic and environmental benefits. lndividual project and corridor level benefits from freight projects in the shoi•t range and long range are further described in Section 5.4. ��_��,��llt��,��\�1��!] During the course of developing the State Rail Plan various projects were recommended by stakeholders that require additional study to determine costs and whether or not they will provide positive benefits and help meet the state's overall rail vision. Considering the timeline of a typical transportation project's development process, executing planning studies in the near term will ensure that projects begin construction and operations in the earliest possible time frame. As shown in Figure 5-5, it can take a typical project ten years to begin construction due to the required planning and environmental work, followed by design and right of way engineering. In addition, other planning studies or updates to existing studies are necessary to further i•efine passenger and freight rail projects that have been included in the long range. Table 5-13 lists the planned and recommended passenger rail studies during and extending beyond the next five years, while Table 5-14 identifies short range and long range freight rail studies. Studies that coincide with recommendations in the Governor's 25-Year Vision are bolded and italicized in �_��'��''�Q-��G'`��iG�,�� `r Gi�', 9 � �2'i�,��. ��;�.�'� Tables 5-13 and 5-14. Again, it should be noted that some of the studies identified could result in additional funding needs, but also positive economic benefits to North Carolina. Appr�.xirnste Tirn�elir�e (in years) �� Detern�ine Existing Conditions T�affur forecasts Analysis Needs ConcepFual Solutiarvs Preliminary Cost Estimates Cast Estimation Validatian PRocess iCEVP) Purpose and Need Traffic Analysis Preliminary Alternatiwes Puk�lic Outreach Technlcail Studi�s n�� a��ioz� Noise Analysis Traffic Analysis Socio/ Economic Cultural Resources Biological Resources Wazardous Materials Water Quality Source: NVDOT Fluadplain� Hydrologic Energy Land Use Economic Wetlands Visual Effec[s Environmental Justice CumuVative &Secondary Impac[s Cosi-Benefit Analysis Refine Aliematives Alternativ�e Selection Sectiori 4(fl Evaluation Record ef Decisia�n Geomeir4c Desiyn pypicaV Sectiw�s Grading Drainage Structural TraifidlTS Signing/Stefp�ing Lighting UtiliYles 30 % Pians 6D'�o Flens " 90°% Plans ' Final Plans Specifications kighi-of-Way ieM�ng and Eskimates Right-of-Way Engineenng Appeaisals Purchase 04fers Counter Offerz Relocation Asbestos Clearing Demadition Condemnation rf ��«5�� Federal Aegulations Figure 5-5 Typical Transportation Project Development Process (Source: NVDOT) August 2015 5-49 COMPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN ._ � a�ue �-i3 rc�e:ega�i�i �rassea��er Ka�► �tida�es Estimated Cost / Study Description Funding Source(s) Projected Completion (2014 dollars) Charlotte Gateway Station Phase 1 of a multi-phased study on the multi-modal Charlotte Gateway $250,000 (TIGER and Early 2016 Technical & Feasibilit Stud Station and TOD com onent match PassengerRail Service Evaluate intrastate passenger rail for commuter and light rail in the existing $1.5 million (State Rail Fall 2020 Extension Studies and emerging urban/suburban corridors Planning funds) Passenger Rail /Airport Analyze improved connections between passenger rail and commercial TBD TBD Connectivity Study airports, including, but not limited to, Raleigh Durham International and Charlotte Dou lass International Service Development Plans for Prepare SDPs to incrementally implement the full Southeast Corridor TBD TBD SoutheastCorridorse ments Commuter and Light Rail Evaluate potential for commuter and light rail in the Triangle, Triad, and $400,000 TBD Studies Metrolina Re ions Wilmington Multi-Modal Environmental document for future Wilmington multi-modal terminal $200,000 2017 Terminal Station Analysis Analyze capacity and economic potential of existing stations to accommodate $250,000 2020 pro'ected uses Southeastern and Western NC Update previous studies for Southeastern and Western, NC passenger service $400,000 2020 Service extension. Use capacity information obtained through CSXT Eastei•n NC Capaci Studies listed in Table 5-14. Note: Projects bolded and italicized will help implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision T�ble S-�4 Poteutial Freight Rai� Studies Study Description Estimated Cost projected Completion 2014 dollars Short Range Studies Best Practice for Land Uses Memorandum or short report with links to federal or other industry To be completed by Mid-2016 Adjacent to Freight Rail guidelines on local zoning and land use planning around freight rail lines Rail Division staff Corridors N. Guilford County Traffic Evaluate and develop recommendations for rail-highway crossings along the $250,000 2016-2020 Se aration Stud main line from Gal on De ot towards Rockin ham Count or Vir inia Guilford County K-Line Traffic Evaluate and develop recommendations for rail-highway crossings along the $75,000 2016-2020 Se aration Stud K Line from the NS Mainline west towards Fors th Coun Wilmington CSXT, WTRYLine Study and identify capaciry and safety needs along CSXT and WTRY in $400,000 2016-2020 Traffic Separation Study and Wilmington and eastern North Carolina Sa ety Hilltop Rd. and Mackey Rd. Study Determine potential safety improvements for these crossin s in Greensboro $300,000 2016-2020 August 2015 5-50 Study Description Estimated Cost projected Completion 2014 dollars New Hanover County/Pender Evaluate extending existing short line 1.5 miles from US 421 in New Hanover $250,000 2016-2020 Count Short Line Extension Count to the Pender Commerce Industrial Park on the Pender Coun Line CSXT Freight and Intermodal Study operational improvements along the CSXT rail line between Charlotte $400,000 2016-2020 Operational /mprovements and Pembroke Morehead City Highway-Rail Support development of other frontage roads or superstreet intersections to $250,000 2016-2020 Operationallmprovements help reduce highway-rail conflicts in Morehead City Wilmington Beltline CSXT Study capacity needs along the CSXT corridor through Wilmington to provide $400,000 2016-2020 Capacity Study enhanced access to the port and customers CSXT Capacity Studies - Studies of freight movement and passenger interoperability $400,000 2016-2020 Eastern NC Eastern NC Intermodal Study the development of an intermodal facility to serve eastern North $400,000 2016-2020 Connections Carolina and the Triangle region Operationallmprovements to Identify operational improvements from Tennessee to Charlotte $400,000 2015-2019 CSXT from Tennessee to Charlotte Shale Gas Monitor shale as ex loration discussion and identif otential needs $250,000 2015-2019 Wood Pellets Study and develop projects as needed to support the growing wood pellet $250,000 2015-2019 industry Access to l-85 Corporate Center Provide access to the 1,000-acre I-85 Corporate Center Megasite in Davidson $250,000 2015-2019 Coun Access to Chatham-Siler City Conduct a study to identify infrastructure needs required to support $250,000 2015-2019 Advanced Manufacturing Site industries targeted for the 1,800 acre Chatham-Siler City Advanced Manufacturing Site Access to Randolph County Conduct a study to identify infrastructure needs required to support $250,000 2015-2019 Liber Me asite industries tar eted for the Randol h Count Libert Me asite Access to Mid-Atlantic Provide access to the Mid-Atlantic Industrial Park, a 1,025 acre CSXT-Select $250,000 2015-2019 Industrial Rail Park Site in Leland, Brunswick County Access to Kingsboro/Rose Identify needs for potential development of the CSXT-Select Site near $250,000 2015-2019 Industrial Site Tarboro, NC Access to ProjectLegacy Identify needs for access to the Project Legacy Megasite in Union County $250,000 2015-2019 Megasite Freight Oriented Land Use Study Prepare memorandum of best practices / guidelines on local zoning and land $75,000 Mid-2016 use planning around freight rail lines to protect potential sites for future rail- served industries and maintain compatible adjacent land uses Low Volume Class I Corridors Identify infrastructure health needs along lower volume Class I corridors $250,000 2016-2018 Infrastructure Needs Class I August 2015 5-51 Study Description Estimated Cost projected Completion 2014 dollars Frei ht Investment Plan Corridor Preservation Needs Assess corridor preservation needs across the state $75,000 On- oin Lon Ran e Studies SA Line Service Restoration Study SA Line from Norlina to Roanoke Rapids / Weldon for potential freight $1,050,000 2021-2025 and passenger connections to the Norfolk area. Also, would enable the S Line to provide additional capacity to supplement the A Line. Investigate previous Yadkin Co Evaluate feasibility of construction of a railroad line running parallel to I-77 $250,000 2026-2030 Rail Feasibility Study from the Iredell County line to the Yadkin Valley Railroad in Surry County Siler Ciry Crossing Study potential for installation of crossing signals and gates on W. Elk and W. $50,000 2021-2025 Improvements Study Dolphin Streets and pedestrian crossing improvements along W. Raleigh, W. Second and W. Third Streets. Cape Fear River Crossing Study feasibility of a new crossing of the Cape Fear River to eliminate the $1,530,000 2021-2025 need for trains to traverse through Wilmington to access the Port of Wilmington NCRR Relocation Studies Study economic feasibility of relocating the NCRR to bypass New Bern $500,000 2021-2025 Mooresville Traffic Separation Study crossings for closing, grade separation and safety enhancements along $250,000 2021-2025 Stud frei ht rail corridor in Mooresville Note: Projects bolded and italicized will help implement the Governor's 25-Year Vision 5.8 PASSENGER AND FREIGHT RAIL CAPITAL PROGRAM All near-term passenger rail and freight rail capital projects presented in Sections 5.4 through 5.6 are shown in Table 5-7 and 5-11, respectively, along with information on costs, potential funding sources, impact on operating subsidy requirements, if applicable, and timeframes. The passenger projects in the near-term will help increase ridership and revenue with the existing and proposed Piedmont and Carolinian services, as shown in Table 5-10. Table 5- 15summarizes the capital needs for the freight and passenger projects identified in Tables 5-7 through 5-12. Table 5-16 summarizes operational, maintenance, and associated overhead and program costs for the Rail Division over the next five years. The table is inclusive of the Piedmont and Carolinian operating costs, and CMAQ and passenger revenues presented in Table 5-10. For the passenger projects, the costs sharing arrangement between NCDOT and its partners will depend upon the funding programs that are in place when these projects are underway, and the funding available in those programs. The passenger, freight, and safety projects described within the plan all provide benefits to North Carolina. In order to realize the benefits, state, private and local funds must be used to leverage federal grant and loan programs. i-15 5 ' Freigl�t, Passen� 5 J� [ ) Program Near-Term Mid- and Total Lon -Term Freight (Class I system) $15M $1,109M $1,124 Freight (Short line system) $94M $157M $251 Frei ht Subtotal $109M $1,266M $1,375M Passen er $49M $5,027M $5,076M Safet $40M $160M $200M Total $198M $6,453M $6,651M August 2015 5-52 COMPREHENSNE STATE RAIL PLAN "' , , � 16 " . , "" - . " '., 'iE '�erm (2015-2019) Unit 0 eration and Maintenance Costs b State Fiscal Year 2014 dollars 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Desi n and Construction $1.6M $1.8M $2.1M $2.2M $2.3M $10.OM Engineering Coordination $0.7M $0.7M $0.7M $0.7M $0.7M $3.5M and Safel Finance and Contracts $1.7M $1.7M $1.7M $1.8M $1.8M $8.7M Plannin and Develo ment $2.5M $2.5M $2.6M $2.6M $3.2M $13.4M Rail Facilities and $2.4M $0.5M $7.2M - - $10.1M Properties Rail Operations $13.7M $14.2M $14.7M $16.2M $17.4M $76.2M Total $22.6M $21.4M $29.OM $23.5M $25.4M $121.8M Source: NCDOT Rail OM Summary SFY2014-2020 (April 23, 2014) August 2015 5-53 6 Chapter Six - Coordination and Review The public participation approach for the Comprehensive State Rail Plan (State Rail Plan) engaged a broad cross-section of railroads, rail user and agency stakeholders and the general public throughout the plan development process. The outreach activities, feedback from stakeholders obtained through the process, and issues and projects identified for development of the State Rail Plan are summarized in the following sections. 6.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION APPROACH A Stakeholder Involvement Plan (SIP) was developed at the outset of State Rail Plan development outlining the goals and approach to stakeholder and public outreach. Outreach activities conducted to help develop the draft State Rail Plan are described in the following sections and included technical advisory and oversight committees, targeted stakeholder group meetings and interviews, surveys, briefings, and a project web page. Following compilation of an administrative draft, additional stakeholders, interest groups, and the public were notified of the availability of the draft plan on NCDOT's website for comment. 6.1.1 Stakeholder Involvement Plan The SIP was created early on to identify stakeholders and outline how stakeholders and the public would be engaged throughout the development of the State Rail Plan. The SIP outlined the stakeholder groups, outreach methods, project schedule and milestones for the project. The SIP established goals and objectives for outreach including: engaging a broad range of stakeholders; educating public and private stakeholders; developing support for the State Rail Plan; collecting feedback and recommendations to address in the plan; reviewing assumptions and evaluation results with industry/expert stakeholders; integrating stakeholder feedback into the State Rail Plan; and facilitating broad public input into the State Rail Plan. 6.1.2 Stakeholder Groups and Participation Opportunities Various stakeholder groups were identified within the SIP along with targeted outreach approaches for each group based on their information and input C�MPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN needs. A Rail Planning Forum held on November 12, 2013 provided the first opportunity for stakeholder engagement during the State Rail Plan process. Invitees included participants from the business community, the railroads, local government planners and state officials. The forum provided participants an opportunity to learn about the State Rail Plan process and to share their interests and needs with NCDOT. Several committees were formed to involve key stakeholders in providing input and reviewing recommendations. Their membership and overall objectives were as follows: Executive Board - The Executive Board was composed of high level NCDOT staff tasked with promoting State Rail Plan agency awareness, providing policy direction and feedback on the plan, coordinating with the full NCDOT Board of Transportation, and approving the final State Rail Plan. NC Delegation of the UA-NC Interstate High Speed Rail Compact - The NC Delegation of the VA-NC Interstate High Speed Rail Compact included legislators from the North Carolina General Assembly were tasked with examining and discussing strategies to advance multi-state high speed rail initiatives. Members of the group were engaged during the vision-development process as described further in Section 6.3.1. Technical Advisory Committee - The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was comprised of representatives from NCDOT, North Carolina Department of Commerce, North Carolina Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services, FRA, Norfolk Southern Railway (NS), CSX Transportation (CSXT), the Railway Association of North Carolina, the North Carolina Railroad Company (NCRR), Amtrak, and the North Carolina Center for Global Logistics. A specific list of members is included in Appendix H. These stakeholders were tasked with providing critical input into the State Rail Plan process, sharing specific data and assumptions, and reviewing drafts of technical evaluations and the plan. Information on TAC meetings held during development of the State Rail Plan is provided in Section 6.3.2. The TAC was also given the opportunity to review the State Rail Plan prior to its release for public review. August 2015 6-1 In addition to the committees described above, the SIP also identified rail- related industry groups for targeted outreach through small group meetings, interviews and/or surveys. These industries are shown in Table 6-1. The project team reached out to industry representatives to provide a more detailed assessment of rail needs and user groups in North Carolina, gathering input on their experience with rail in North Carolina, needs that can be served by rail, and barriers to use of rail. More information on outreach to the industry groups in Table 6-1 are provided in Section 6.3.6. Table 6-1 Industry Groups INDUSTRY GROUPS Agriculture/Forestry/Food Processing Metropolitan and Rural Planning Organizations Class 1 Railroads, Short lines, Mining and Aggregates Intermodal and Transload Operators Coal and Energy Trucking and Logistics Department of Defense Regional and Local Transit Authorities Economic Development Regions Other Transportation Advocacy/Interest Groups Manufacturing & Chemical Producers 6.1.3 Communication and Feedback Tools The following communication and feedback tools were employed to engage the public and stakeholders: State Rail Plan Website - NCDOT hosts a website for the State Rail Plan (http://www.ncbytrain.org/projects/rail-plan.html). The website includes background on the plan and explains outreach opportunities for the public and stakeholders. Links are provided to surveys for short line railroads, Metropolitan and Regional Planning Organizations (MPOs, and RPOs) and to a form for interested parties to submit a rail project request. The website also includes the project timeline, links to social media and web tools (MindMixer) for providing feedback on rail programs and NCDOT Rail Division contact C�MPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN information. The Draft State Rail Plan was made available for public review via the website on February 21, 2015 and advertised through email, social media, and outreach to governmental organizations, advocacy groups, and railroad publications on February 25. Web tools (MindMixer) and project contact email addresses were used to receive comments. The web tool included some leading survey questions, but allowed for free-form comments as well. The public comment process is described in Section 6.3.6.8. MPO/RPO and short line surveys - The project team developed surveys to solicit input on passenger and freight rail needs from MPOs and RPOs and needs of short line railroads. Survey feedback has been incorporated by the project team in development of the State Rail Plan and is reflected in Sections 6.4 and 6.5 summarizing those issues and recommendations identified by stakeholders. Project submission form - The project team developed a project submission form to solicit freight and passenger rail, intermodal, transload and other rail- related infrastructure projects that stakeholders wanted to see considered in the State Rail Plan. A discussion of stakeholder feedback via project submission forms and how submitted projects were considered in the plan is provided in Section 6.5. Legislative briefing and summary - The project team developed a briefing packet and summary for NCDOT leadership and the North Carolina General Assembly. 6.2 COORDINATION WITH NEIGHBORING STATES NCDOT works with neighboring states on an ongoing basis regarding rail issues including existing and planned passenger services and corridor development. The US Congress and the state legislatures of Virginia and North Carolina authorized the Virginia-North Carolina Interstate High Speed Rail Compact to advance the Southeast Corridor rail project. North Carolina Compact members were briefed and provided the opportunity for input on the State Rail Plan during development of the plan. The project team reached out to the neighboring states of Virginia, Tennessee, and South Carolina, as well as Georgia, to inform them of the State Rail Plan and to solicit input on the draft plan. August 2015 6-2 6.3 STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE STATE RAIL PLAN The stakeholder groups identified in Section 6.1.2 provided important input throughout the planning process. Involvement of each group is described further in this section. 6.3.1 NC Delegation of the VA-NC Interstate High Speed Rail Compact North Carolina members of the VA-NC Interstate High Speed Rail Compact were provided a briefing on March 12, 2014. The briefing summarized key findings of the planning process and described the efforts required to complete the State Rail Plan by June 2015. It contained information about the goals of the State Rail Plan, trends in passenger rail travel and freight rail, detailed expansion and preservation plans and described key partnerships in delivering programs and services. Importantly, it provided recommendations on policy and funding actions. 6.3.2 Technical Advisory Committee As noted in Section 6.1.2, the Technical Advisory Committee includes representatives from NCDOT, other state agencies, FRA, and freight and passenger railroads, and the NC Center for Global Logistics. These agency representatives had an important role of providing expert input on assumptions and recommendations at key points throughout the planning process. Table 6-2 outlines the TAC input provided on plan elements at each meeting. Table 6-2 TAC Meeting Schedule and Tasks TAC MEETING MEETING OBJECTIVES Meeting #1 - April 17, State Rail Plan planning process orientation 2014, NCDOT Provide input on the plan's vision Transportation Building, 1 Identify emerging markets and issues S. Wilmington St., Raleigh Identify potential performance measures Meeting #2 - September Discuss draft findings for freight and passenger 19, 2014, NCDOT rail trends Transportation Building, 1 Review and provide input on prioritization S. Wilmington St., Raleigh methods, corridors and potential projects TAC MEETING MEETING OBJECTIVES Electronic distribution - TAC members review draft State Rail Plan and January 6, 2015 provide comments Meeting #3 - Spring 2015 Review and consider public comments on draft State Rail Plan 6.3.3 Coordination with Railroads, Ports and Intermodal Terminals Coordination with the freight and passenger rail interests was achieved through TAC meetings, individual stakeholder meetings, and a survey to short line railroads in North Carolina. The TAC includes representatives from the state's Class 1 railroads including NS CSXT and Amtrak. A representative of the NCRR was also a member of the TAC. Individual meetings were also held with NS, CSXT, and NCRR representatives. The short line railroads were directly engaged via participation in the Railway Association of North Carolina (RANC) annual conference. The short line railroads were sent a survey soliciting input on their freight volume and trends, track agreements, infrastructure conditions, economic development opportunities and transloading trends. Short line railroads were also sent the project submission form. Meetings were held with leadership and staff from both the Port of Wilmington and the Port of Morehead City. Additionally, the railroads were afforded the opportunity to provide comments on the draft statewide rail plan prior to its release for public review, as were all TAC members. 6.3.4 Coordination with Transit Authorities Transit agencies that have formally considered commuter rail plans were interviewed to gauge where the transit authorities were in terms of commuter rail planning. Detailed information on commuter rail plans for Triangle Transit, Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) and the Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART) have been included in Section 2.3.1. 6.3.5 Coordination with Metropolitan and Rural Planning Organizations (MPOs/RPOs) Nineteen MPOs and nineteen RPOs conduct multi-modal transportation planning in North Carolina. All MPOs and RPOs were sent the MPO/RPO survey and project submission form. The survey asked MPOs and RPOs questions about their region's key rail corridors, rail-dependent industries and major rail August 2015 6-3 generators, rail infrastructure needs, freight and passenger rail plans, and rail- related economic development plans. The project submission form allowed MPOs and RPOs to submit rail projects including freight and passenger rail projects, intermodal facilities, transload projects and other associated rail infrastructure projects. The form solicited information on each project's description, project type, purpose and need, expected benefits, and previous planning done for the project. The MPO/RPO surveys informed the existing conditions and recommendations sections of the State Rail Plan as reflected in Section 6.4 and 6.5. The submitted projects were included in the State Rail Plan's long term project inventory and funding analysis. The MPOs and RPOs across the state were also briefed on the State Rail Plan in separate business meetings held at the annual North Carolina Association of MPOs Conference on May 14, 2014 in Wilmington. The project team provided a presentation on the State Rail Plan and emphasized the input needed from the MPOs and RPOs, including the survey and the project submission form. 6.3.6 Industry Group Outreach Interviews and small group meetings were conducted with industries that utilize rail in North Carolina. The purpose of these meetings and contacts was to involve stakeholders and solicit their input on the State Rail Plan. Industries were asked how they utilize rail and to share their existing and anticipated rail infrastructure needs. Industry groups were also asked to confirm State Rail Plan data and assumptions where appropriate. An overview of the industry working group discussions follow. 6.3.6.1 Mining Two national aggregate companies and one local aggregate company were interviewed regarding how they utilize rail in North Carolina. The National Stone, Sand and Gravel Association and the North Carolina Aggregates Association were also interviewed. In general, the aggregates industry does not utilize rail much due to the high shipping cost for aggregates and because dump trucks are typically needed to transfer aggregates to the needed site. Estimates of 10 to 20 percent of aggregate materials in North Carolina were provided for the amount of aggregate moved by rail. The percentage share has increased over the past few years. Rail is most often used in eastern North Carolina where C�MPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN geology does not allow for quarries and therefore aggregate must be shipped in by rail or barge. 6.3.6.2 Trucking Over a dozen trucking and transportation logistics firms were contacted to inquire whether they utilize rail or intermodal facilities, gather input on needs associated with rail and intermodal facilities, and gather input on any barriers to using rail or intermodal facilities. Most of the trucking firms contacted indicated that they do not use rail because their business model is built on utilizing long haul trucking. Several firms noted they have used rail and associated intermodal facilities when clients requested. The North Carolina Trucking Association was contacted and confirmed that there is little use of rail by trucking and logistics companies in North Carolina. 63.6.3 Manufacturing Fifty manufacturing firms were contacted through email and through information distributed by the Manufacturers and Chemical Industry Council of North Carolina. Manufacturing firms attended a meeting on June 3, 2014 where they provided information on what commodities they ship by rail, barriers for rail shipment and potential opportunities for rail shipment. The North Carolina Department of Commerce conducted additional follow up to manufacturing firms that could not participate in the meeting. 63.6.4 Agriculture/Forestry/Food Process Industry Staff from the NC Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services was interviewed regarding rail-related agricultural needs in May, 2014. This interview was also informed by ongoing stakeholder outreach conducted as part of the Eastern Infrastructure Study looking at markets and infrastructure needs associated with GTP, the Port of Morehead City, and the restoration of the Wallace to Castle Hayne corridor, which could enhance access to the Port of Wilmington. A primary concern is the ability to receive grain at competitive prices to support North Carolina's hog and poultry industries. It was also indicated that there is an opportunity to ship agricultural products in refrigerated containers. In particular, opportunity to ship North Carolina's pork and poultry, sweet potatoes, cucumbers, blueberries, and other products. There is a need to August 2015 6-4 develop a concentration of refrigerated containers in North Carolina that a service would be interested in moving. In addition, it was noted that increasing the amount of food manufacturing / processing facilities in North Carolina could lead to increased volumes or margins on products. It was also noted that the wood pellet industry will likely expand to locations west of I-95, which may increase the need to ship wood pellets via rail to future terminals at the Ports of Morehead City and Wilmington. It was indicated that the agricultural industry could be supported by the restoration of the Wallace to Castle Hayne corridor, the GTP to CSXT connection, and the Pembroke turn. 6.3.6.5 Department of Commerce A listening session was held with the Department of Commerce on March 19, 2014. In addition to representatives of the NC Department of Commerce, representatives of the Lenoir County Economic Development Council and of the Carteret County Economic Development Council participated. Topics ranged from economic opportunities and challenges at GTP, wood pellet projects coming online in eastern North Carolina, opportunities at the Ports of Morehead City and Wilmington, and the re-shoring of industry. It was noted that industries returning to North Carolina may gravitate to areas that have interstate access nearby and established populations. The 2013 Jobs Plan was also discussed. 63.6.6 Department of Defense Input from the Department of Defense was incorporated into the State Rail Plan through coordination with the project team that was working concurrently on the Eastern Infrastructure Study, published in January 2015. That study investigated the demands and infrastructure needs at the Port of Morehead City, GTP, and restoration of the Wallace to Castle Hayne corridor that would provide redundant access to the Port of Wilmington and Military Ocean Terminal - Sunny Point (MOTSU). The Eastern Infrastructure Study included outreach to the Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command, MOTSU, Fort Bragg, and several military associations, such as, but not limited to, the North Carolina Military Business Center. It was indicated as a part of the Eastern Infrastructure Study outreach that the Department of Defense is supportive of C�MPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN the restoration of the Wallace to Castle Hayne corridor as it would enhance deployment capabilities from Camp Lejeune and Fort Bragg. In addition, the corridor provides redundant access to MOTSU. This support was voiced previously in a February 21, 2012 letter to the NCDOT Rail Division. The Pembroke turn project was also cited as a need. However, at this time, no funding is available from the Department of Defense for the projects. 63.6.7 Other Transportation Advocacy/Interest Groups The Western NC Passenger Rail Organization advocates for extending intercity passenger rail service to Western North Carolina. The organization was interviewed to obtain input on the organization and how communities in Western North Carolina view potential intercity rail. Many municipalities with proposed stations already have buildings or land acquired that would host future train stations. The Western NC Passenger Rail Organization has been advocating for rail service for the past fifteen years. Many of the local communities have expressed interest in seeing this service implemented because it may boost tourism while also offering alternative transportation options. In addition, rail plan team representatives attended meetings held by the Triangle Mainline Forum and Carteret County Technical Advisory Committee. 6.3.6.8 Public Involvement In addition to the stakeholder outreach described previously, the Draft State Rail Plan was published on the NCDOT website at (http://www.ncbytrain.org/projects/rail-plan.html) for review by the general public. The plan was posted on February 21 and an email notification and social media update was circulated on February 25 informing people of the plan's availability. Social media was circulated to all that follow NCDOT. A direct email was sent to approximately 245 people, including state and regional governmental and transit agencies, representatives of adjacent states, parties that had expressed interest in the rail plan through the publicly advertised Rail Planning Forum (described in Section 6.1.2), shippers with manufacturing, aggregate / mining, and agricultural interests identified through the Rail Planning Forum and other ongoing freight related studies, rail advocacy and industry groups, including, but not limited to the Association of American August 2015 6-5 Railroads and American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association, and publications such as Trains and Progressive Railroading. Comment topics are incorporated and generally described in Section 6.4. 6.4 ISSUES IDENTIFIED DURING THE RAIL PLAN PROCESS Stakeholder input received through the meetings, interviews, surveys, and other mechanisms as described identified a host of broad issues, as well as specific considerations, for the State Rail Plan. The issues raised by stakeholders during development of the State Rail Plan have been organized into freight, passenger, and other issues and include: Freight Rail • From a review of the global logistics issues, the trucking industry is facing several constraints - thousands of trucking jobs were lost during the last recession, and today, finding drivers to enter or re-enter the trucking workforce is becoming difficult. This will have a large impact on freight for all modes. • Coal shipments are projected to decrease as North Carolina power plants convert from coal to other energy sources, possibly natural gas. Much of the state's coal is shipped by rail, and natural gas extraction is expected to increase in North Carolina. There is opportunity for rail service providers in North Carolina to serve the emerging wood pellets and hydraulic fracturing industries. • Recent trends have shown increases in the shipment of livestock feed to NC and increases of the production of chemicals and plastics in North Carolina. • Highway-rail grade crossings at the Port of Wilmington and along the Wilmington Terminal Railway and CSXT through Wilmington create a bottleneck and challenge for freight movements navigating the "last mile" to and from the port. • Improved rail access is needed to Radio Island at the Port of Morehead City. • The Port of Wilmington is predicting bulk growth, which will likely result in more rail traffic. • New intermodal and transload facilities are needed to meet the growing needs. These facilities should be multi-use, multi-mode and serve C�MPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN multiple companies. Future markets include the resurgence in furniture and textiles and other local manufacturing and the agricultural market (grain to farms, and produce and animals shipped from farms). • The air quality benefits of rail should be considered when building new intermodal sites. • State of good repair should be considered especially for near-term improvements. • Short line railroads have considerable bridge, track and modernization needs. • Global economic trends, energy trends and emerging markets in North Carolina will shape North Carolina's future freight rail needs. • Projected population growth will create potential land use challenges for freight rail. There needs to be an awareness campaign for local officials on best-practices for land uses and zoning around active freight railroads. Land use planning often conflicts with freight railroads' safety and economic development goals when development is located adjacent to freight corridors. Some land uses, such as residential, should not be encouraged adjacent to active freight rail lines. • Agricultural needs include competitive rail prices for grain / feed, opportunities to ship goods in refrigerated containers, and identified infrastructure needs in eastern North Carolina. • Through the public review process, the priority of several freight corridors in central North Carolina was questioned. Due to the potential development of the natural gas industry and several megasites being marketed, it was suggested that importance of the ACWR, CSXT S-Line, and NS' Greensboro to Gulf Corridor be elevated. • Through the public review process, it was noted that transportation improvements that enhance connections to intermodal facilities in other states should be highlighted. Specifically, the new inland port in Greer, South Carolina was identified with the potential to support western NC. • The public noted the importance of investing in industrial access, transload and intermodal facilities, track capacity, and infrastructure maintenance. August 2015 6-6 • The public identified the greatest freight needs as access to industrial clients, facilitate diversion of truck trips to rail, intermodal, capacity, grade crossing improvements and separations, access to ports, and minimizing passenger service interference with freight movement. Passenger Rail • Intercity passenger rail has doubled in the past twelve years and continues to increase. Riders are taking advantage of new and existing services and renovated stations. • Expanding to additional markets/cities should be evaluated along with reducing travel time along existing corridors. • There is uncertainty from stakeholders and the public over the timeline and plans for extending passenger rail to Western North Carolina or Eastern North Carolina. • Improved multimodal connections (bus, light rail) at stations and air/rail connections should be evaluated. Parking needs at existing stations needs to be evaluated. • Evaluate the changing demographics in the state and how they might impact travel markets. • Projected population growth will grow the intercity passenger rail market, especially in the Piedmont. • Evaluate commuting patterns and labor markets, where new intrastate and commuter corridors might emerge. • Determine how passenger services can be added without unduly impacting freight services. • Funding and institutional barriers have made it difficult to advance commuter rail projects in the Triangle and Charlotte regions. • The air quality benefits of rail should be considered when looking to invest in bus relocation/expansion. • The public expressed support for the proposed Southeast Corridor service. • The public advocated for additional Piedmont and / or Carolinian frequencies and for additional services to Birmingham, Alabama and Fort Worth, Texas. C�MPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN • Support for the Western NC and Southeastern, NC services was expressed by public respondents. Additional frequencies for the Piedmont service and additional stops were requested. Service to Lynchburg, Virginia was also noted. • A request to consider a route that passes through Fayetteville be considered for the Southeastern service. • It was noted that the studies for service expansions need to be updated. • Several public respondents advocated to accelerate plans to construct a new station and associated track improvements to serve Lexington, NC. • A new station in Sanford, NC along the Silver Star long distance service was requested. Otherlssues • The Military Surface Deployment and Engineering Command is supportive of the restoration of the Wallace to Castle Hayne corridor. • Positive Train Control (PTC) and signalization should be addressed. PTC will be required in the future including along new passenger rail corridors. • Reviving abandoned corridors and preserving at-risk corridors remains a key concern. • There is a need for continued state funding to acquire abandoned or unused corridors. • Rail is a key component for achieving statewide multi-modal, environmental, economic development and tourism goals. • The environmental benefits of rail transportation should be emphasized and marketed. • Improving existing infrastructure and quality of service is a top priority of railroads and agencies • Respondents during the public comment period supported several potential funding sources, including parking fees at stations and local funding to help support capital, operating, and maintenance of passenger service extensions, property taxes on locations benefited by additional Raleigh to Charlotte frequencies, exemption of railroads from gross state taxes if money is used for infrastructure maintenance, and a 3% vehicle tax. August 2015 6-7 6.5 CONSIDERATION AND INCORPORATION OF STAKEHOLDER INPUT The outreach process was designed to incorporate input along with data considerations in assessing existing conditions, evaluating passenger and freight rail corridors and services, and developing plan recommendations. Input from the interviews, surveys, and early meetings was used to verify data and inform the assumptions for the plan, as well as to identify issues for consideration in the plan. The TAC served as a key mechanism for industry experts to review the specific technical analyses and sections of the plan through activities during the meetings and review assignments leading up to and following meetings. The project submissions were used in development of the draft list of proposed projects for consideration by the project team and TAC. Public comment provided on the draft State Rail Plan was used to revise the plan prior to approval by FRA and adoption by the North Carolina Board of Transportation. r:�r:��re��:�ai��_�nnn�ez.�•z•�:�•�in_��•�►i The mission and goals of the NCDOT and the Rail Division guided the development of the State Rail Plan. Coordination of rail planning activities within NCDOT and with metropolitan areas is described in Section 1.3 of the plan. The NCDOT Rail Division is authorized to carry out a number of activities associated with rail planning, construction, equipment inspection, and ongoing safety programs. The NCDOT Rail Division is housed in the Division of Transit and planning activities are undertaken by the Rail Division Planning & Development Branch. The Rail Division participates along with other multimodal divisions in the NCDOT Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) project prioritization process and projects are programmed into the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) once funding is identified. Representatives from other Divisions within NCDOT have been involved in the State Rail Plan process through TAC meetings and individual and small group meetings, and the project team has conducted briefings to the Board of Transportation Multi-modal Committee. The NCDOT Rail Division coordinates with CSXT, NS and NCRR on projects and planning efforts along their respective rail corridors. As noted in Section 6.3.3, representatives of these railroads were members of the TAC and conversations were held with NCRR, NS and CSXT to discuss the State Rail Plan. The NCDOT coordinates with MPOs through board and committee meetings and direct coordination as needed to support C�MPREHENSIVE STATE RAIL PLAN identification and inclusion of rail-related projects in MPO regional planning and local project prioritization. August 2015 6-8