freightlocation.org
   
Overview

The following case studies were examined in the report for local and regional transportation, economic, and quality of life impacts, benefits and costs. Each of these cases was then highlighted and discussed briefly in the guidebook.

The case studies were selected using the following criteria:

  • In general, an attempt was made to make sure that there was a balance in the geographic representation of the case studies across the U.S.
  • We selected facilities and projects that showed a range of project development, from projects that have been in operation for many years to facilities that are in the final stages of development.
  • The Team selected facilities that included multi-modal transportation issues.
  • The Team selected facilities where there was sufficient publicly available information available and project participants who were willing to share information as part of a publicly available research project.
  • All of the case studies that were chosen are generally considered to be successful freight facilities. By selecting successful projects, the information described pertaining to site selection criteria and transportation/economic impacts provides greater value than if projects were selected that were not developed or had not been successful with their implementation.

For more information on the process used to examine these case studies as well as information on the case studies themselves, please see chapter 8 of the full report on the Documents page.

The text in the following pages are excerpts from the guidebook and report.

Facility Type Case Study

Inland Port

Virginia Inland Port
(Front Royal, VA)
Intermodal Terminal Rickenbacker Intermodal Terminal
(Columbus, OH)
Bulk or Transload Terminal Savage Safe Handling
(Auburn, ME)
Distribution Center Family Dollar
(Numerous Facilities)
Warehouse Murphy Warehouses
(Numerous Facilities)
Integrated Logistics Center AllianceTexas
(Fort Worth, TX)
Hub Terminal Old Dominion
(Morristown, TN) Full Summary Only

Please click HERE for the detailed case study overview excerpt from the report.

 

Findings

Facility Type

Case Study

Direct & Indirect Jobs

Freight Volume

Transportation Impacts

Inland Port

Virginia Inland Port (Front Royal, VA)

17 direct jobs, catalyst to another 8,000 jobs

33,600 containers (2008)

5.4 million VMT reduction, $105,000 greenhouse gas emission savings

Intermodal Terminal

Rickenbacker Intermodal Terminal (Columbus, OH)

Approximately 150 direct jobs at Intermodal facility, projection of 20,000 jobs at freight industrial park

250,000 annual “lifts”

49 million fewer truck miles in Ohio in 10 years -  $2 M in pavement maintenance savings, $2,45 M in accident reductions

Bulk or Transload Terminal

Savage Safe Handling (Auburn, ME)

100 direct jobs with other businesses attracted nearby

500,000 tons per year – 5,000 railcars per year

$619,500 accident reduction, $506,000 pavement maintenance from using rail over truck

Distribution Center

Family Dollar (Marianna, FL)

515 direct jobs; catalyst to another 155 jobs

90 trucks/day – 32,000 trucks per year

 16.2 million in truck VMT per year

Warehouse

Murphy Warehouses

20 direct jobs per warehouse facility
(9 facilities in region)

10,000+ carloads per year

1.3 million VMT reduced annually. 6,730 fewer greenhouse gas tons emitted

Integrated Logistics Center

AllianceTexas (Fort Worth, TX)

28,000 direct jobs ; catalyst to another 63,388 jobs

600,000 intermodal rail lifts per year

 N/A

Hub Terminal

Old Dominion Morristown

750 direct jobs

75 to 90 trucks per day

21.5 million to 25.9 million truck VMT per year

Please click HERE for the detailed case study findings excerpt from the report.

 
  Copyright CWS Consulting Group, LLC 2011.  All rights reserved.