NYSDOT Consideration of Potential Intermodal Sites for Long Island

Details

• Alternative Title:
  New York State Department of Transportation consideration of potential intermodal sites for Long Island ; Potential LI intermodal sites
• Creators:
  Paaswell, Robert E. ; Eickemeyer, Penny
• Corporate Creators:
  University Transportation Research Center
• Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Intermodal facilities
  • Intermodal terminals
  • Containerization
  • Intermodal services
  • Terminals (Transportation)--New York (State)--Long Island
  • Containerization--New York (State)--Long Island
• Resource Type:
  Tech Report
• Geographical Coverage:
  New York
• Corporate Publisher:
  University Transportation Research Center
• Abstract:
  This Study was prepared in response to the Governor's directive to conduct an extensive analysis of the feasibility of a truck/rail ; facility on Long Island. It was designed to answer three questions: ; • Is an intermodal truck/rail transfer facility needed to respond to the current and anticipated volume of goods movement in ; Nassau and Suffolk County? ; • Where should such a facility be located? ; • What are the economic, social, and environmental effects of such a facility and can any adverse effects be mitigated? ; The research showed that there is a demand for increased freight delivery on Long Island as a result of population and employment ; gains and such increased delivery could reduce the number of trucks currently required to deliver freight to area businesses and ; industrial parks. Increased rail-freight deliveries would, in all likelihood, reduce the costs of these local freight deliveries. Industry ; experts consulted for this study agree that there is a likely market for delivery of freight by rail to Nassau and Suffolk Counties, but ; that the demand for bulk freight yards may be more immediate than is the demand for container yards and that the demand for ; containerized rail freight would be significantly increased if a cross-harbor tunnel were built. Experts generally agree that a ; significant demand for containerized freight will also depend upon the availability of conveniently accessible warehouse facilities. ; The study team identified potential sites for the facility and assessed the “pros” and “cons” of each and reviewed the previous work on ; the LITRIM project. Some recommendations for future action included: ; The Pilgrim FEIS site evaluation should rigorously address a number of significant environmental, legal, public-health, and ; environmental justice issues that were identified in the Study Team’s interviews with project stakeholders such as mitigating the ; potential adverse impacts of light and noise on the patients of Pilgrim State Hospital, some of whom live as close as 350 feet from the ; proposed site; the impact of the transfer facility site on the adjacent Edgewood State Preserve; and the site’s location within the Oak ; Brush Plains Special Groundwater Protection Area. ; The Study Team distinguished between the two major types of truck-rail transfer facilities, bulk and containerized, and found that: ; while there might be some short-term advantages to combining bulk and container operations, as rail-freight markets develop in the ; near-term, there is neither any compelling long-term need to combine these operations nor any significant near-term demand for ; container operations. There is a need for multiple yards on Long Island both for bulk traffic and (with the development of a doublestack ; cross-harbor rail-freight tunnel) for containers and that there is an immediate demand for at least one major bulk transfer yard on ; Long Island. In addition, if a double-stack rail-freight tunnel is built across New York harbor, at least two major containers (or bulkand- ; container) yards will be required.
  More +
• Format:
  PDF
• Funding:
  55505-08-01
• Download URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/23254/dot_23254_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 934.15 KB]
• Collection(s):
  University Transportation Centers ; US Transportation Collection
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha-512:d51a12749e60324fe395d2d916b86282f75876a13225f8d081f90bf6615817e77e2d3de5d58be377ab57df670b6e56c3c95cbb236c2077e519b75e8f343f2a70