0% found this document useful (0 votes)
6 views17 pagesPat Cashman Tioga Group Draft Proves Oakland Planned Coal For Bulk Terminal in 2009
The report discusses the implications of CEDA's Gateway Development Area on railroad access to the Port of Oakland's Piers 20-26, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of rail rights of way. It highlights the evolution of 'on-dock' rail options and the current state of rail services at the Port, including the historical context and potential future developments. The report recommends that CEDA assess its preferences for rail access and engage with relevant stakeholders to determine the best course of action regarding the rail infrastructure.
Uploaded by
oaklandnewserCopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
6 views17 pagesPat Cashman Tioga Group Draft Proves Oakland Planned Coal For Bulk Terminal in 2009
The report discusses the implications of CEDA's Gateway Development Area on railroad access to the Port of Oakland's Piers 20-26, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of rail rights of way. It highlights the evolution of 'on-dock' rail options and the current state of rail services at the Port, including the historical context and potential future developments. The report recommends that CEDA assess its preferences for rail access and engage with relevant stakeholders to determine the best course of action regarding the rail infrastructure.
Uploaded by
oaklandnewserCopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
/ 17
Tok 200%
On-cleck Rail Options at the Port of Oakland Terminals 20 - 26
“2s of April 18, 2009 for discussion with CEDA)
Executive Summary
‘The design of CEDA’s planned Gateway Development Area might preserve of might probibit
railroad access to the Port of Oakland's Piers 20-26. The Port has just entered into a long tem
Tease of Piers 20-24 with Ports America, Either the Port or Ports America may or may not want
such rail access, Also, CEDA may want to use the right of way to access its planned GDA
development. Asa public planning practice, usually it is not wise to permanently convert @
railroad right of way to another use that prohibits future use and/or restoration of the right of
way, This report recommends that CEDA determine its preference for such rail access to Piers
30-24 and its development atea, Then, if appropriate, it should determine the interests and
preferences of the Port, Ports America, and others (as mentioned herein) and the possibility that
blockage of a rail right of way may be prohibited by State of California law.
Introduction
The City of Oakland's Community Economic Development Agency (CEDA) is interested in
“on-dock rail” options at the Port of Oakland (the Port). It asked The Tioga Group, Inc. (Tioga)
to prepare this report on the current situation and possible options. Tioga recommends that it
provide this report so that CEDA can be properly informed about the options and the impacts of
the options on CEDA’s expected Gateway Development Area (GDA) project and the Port. In
that way, CEDA can make a determination if it would be in its interest to further pursue the
options. ‘To conirol this investigation, Tioga also recommends that it provide only whet it
knows, or believes to be true. as of this date. As highlighted herein, there are many facts and
issues that would have to be further investigated. However, that need be done only if CEDA is,
further interested. Hence, for this report, Tioga has not yet reached out to the many parties and
agents, as detailed herein, involved to confirm the data included herein or to ask for their
opinions on the on-dock rail options. Such would be the logical nest steps if CEDA cares to
pursue this fopie further,
Definitions of “on-dock” rail ate as different as there are ports and marine terminals on ports and
as there are parties 1o champion various on-dock rail processes and projects. Originally, 10 ~ 40
years ago, most marine terminals at deep water ports had rail directly along side the ship right at
the edge of the wharf or dock. In that case, the idea was to load the commodity, either in bulk or
na container, directly between the rail car and the ship. However, that has evolved to having a
‘marshalling/holding area on the marine terminal at which the goods to be moved can be staged
for subsequent on-carriage by ship, rail or barge. Hence, today, there are many “on-dock” rail
lines that terminate at the marine terminal but not directly alongside the ship, Most of them
handle bulk materials, not containers. Grain, coal and petroleum coke are the commodities that
move most frequently thorough such bulk terminals at ports on the West Coast of Noth America
(USWC). At the Port of Oakland, there are only two such operations still in existence today
‘The firs is privately owned and operated by Schnitzer Steel o load serap metal, jn bulk, on bulk
vessels for export. It is not part of the Port of Oakland but is sandwiched between the Port's
‘APL Terminal (Piers 60-63) and Charles P. Howard Terminal (Piers 67 & 68 leased to Matson
— Page!
Tioga Group Drafi Report - Aprit 15.2009 jm
PC 022880 Navigation) at what would be Piers 64-66 if they were part of the Port It faces on she Inner
Harbor Channel, The other is at Piers 25 and 26. The Port has this site, which is on the Outer
Harbor Channel, eased to Hansen Aggregates, and itis curently being modified to
accommodate a renewed long term lease with Hansen,
Most specifically, the term “on-dock rail” hes come to refer specifically to raiiroad lines being
Jocated within a given marine terminal at a port. which marine terminal is dedicated 10 loading
‘and unloading international containers (ISO) to/from deep-sea container ships for beyond
carriage, See Exhibits 1 and 2. Usually the location of the rail lines and the lift equipment is at
tite perimeter of the marine terminal as distant as possible from shipside along the edge of the
wharf, As pictured in Ewhibit 2, which is the TICTF (Lerminal Island Container Transfer
Facility serving Berths 212-225) at the Port of Los Angeles, this rail intermodal yard is relatively
close to the wharf, confined by the parallel roadway. and has short track lengths. For the over
water movements, which usually, but not always, are intercontinental movements, the marine
terminal performs the functions of 1) loading ships with export containers that heve been lifted
‘off of domestic intermodal rail trains that terminate at the on-dock facility and 2) unloading,
import containers off of the ships and onto the rail ears positioned at the on-dock rail facility for
the purpose of building a train to take the containers to Various points inland in the U.S... Canada
‘or Mexico,
“Almost always each marine terminal, if it has an on-dock rail intermodal loading facility. has its
‘own captive facility. This is for competitive reasons. That is, so-called “common user" facilities
tre very rare. Asa result of this, and other considerations, its rare when a given marine
terminal ean originate (or terminate) a full train of containers for/from a given inland
destination/origin in a competitive time frame. Depending on the route used by the railroad, this
is 240 — 360 containers for a given destination within 8 ~ 12 hours of vessel arrival and 24 hours
“of vessel departure. Hence. itis mandatory that the on-dock facility be in geographical
proximity to other intermodal facilities. either other on-dock facilities or a major railroad’s
Jntermodal terminal, Also, it means that the on-dock options must bear the incremental cost to
switch cars between the on-dock facility and the neighboring railroad terminal
‘There is the “near-dock” option that is present at Oakland today. See Exhbit 3, (Please note that
Exhibits 3 — 9 are not precise in boundaries and shapes: they are graphic representations for the
purposes of this report only: ultimately more precise drawings will be required). There are (wo
tail facilities contiguous to the marine terminals, Technically, both are across a city strect from
the marine terminals. The Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP) facility. labeled as RailPort-Oakland, is
‘on land owned by the UP. The BNSF Railway's (BNSF) facility, labeled as Oakland
International Gateway (OIG). is on Port owned land. These locations are for historical reasons
and have the advantage of not having to use longshore labor. Clearly, they are “near dock” as it
‘would be difficult to be even closer.
Despite the proximity, “near dock” rail intermodal terminals require biring a commercial motor
camer. known as a drayman, to move containers on chassis between the marine terminals and
the rail terminals. Also, it requires a physical inspection of both the container and the chassis
upon entering the ral yard or the marine terminal to ascertain the responsiblity for any physical
damage to the equipment, particularly that which might have cecurred when the equipment was
in the possession of the drayman, When the operation of loading/unloading the container
tovitom the railear occurs in the marine terminal, or “on-dock” the movement between the two is
Tioga Group Draft Report - sprit 15 2009,m
Poge 2
Pc_022601 by the marine terminal's stevedore and hosting tractor and the physical inspection !$ by
exception when a railroad representative is present to “walk the trai
Ibis common for off-dock rail intermodal terminals to handle both domestic and international
in are pis the case today at both UP RailPort Oakland and BNSF O1G Oak 1t
possible to also handle domestic containers at she val facts that a consdock. However, this
ao se awe reasons, First, the two types of containers require diferent lifting wechan isms
daar sifferm sizes of railears, ate diferent shapes. are made of different metals: anal hays
veitotat tae and gross weight carrying characteristics. Rail intermodal terials have made the
aecary investments in soch complesities, Secondly, most domestic rll tenminals do not want
aasceert use labor supplied by the Intemational Longshore Workers Union (ILWU)
Chongshore labor") which is required onthe marine terminals. Amongst other nes. rail
coor yertuinals usually ae open 7 days, 24 hours per day without paying labor rates that
reflect the differentials inherent in an ILWU facility
Situe
17 - historical
For many years some of the marine terminals atthe Port of Oakland had rail service 101
Fotdual piers and/or immediately adjacent thereto, Traditionally these services exis citer
indivienePiaher than containers. For instance, at Oskland’s Pier 20, BNSF provided linchow!
‘eansporation of individual railcars loaded with wheeled or skid-mounted vehicles. These were
wa pived at Pet 200 vessels that accommodated either roll-on roll-oiT (Ro-Ro) vehicles oF
canara the pallets or skids into the hold of @ cargo ship. In the case of Oakland, often hese were
aeiree vehicles. Hence, they moved nto or off of Pier 20 by individual railcars suitable for
ich cargo, whieh, in turn, moved as individual railcars in a mixed carload freight Tah These
Suipos were not containerized. They mighs have been “containerizable. bur the military and
cares torners elected not to move them in a container. Most ofthis ype of heavy equipment
siaey aahiele business has ether converted to container operations cr moves via other, more
specialized ports, paricularly Por Hueneme, Port of Benecia, and Por of Tacoma,
Similarly, adjacent to Pier 63 in what is now the Eagle Marine Terminal (APE), here 60S 8 rail
yard devoted to automobiles and small trucks. Primarily these were imported, set-up, new
are ceils that tien moved inland by tail in special railcars with dedicated decks and ramps
sae ibe for loading by driving the vehicles on and off both the ship and the rail car. This Was
sneer Ro-Ro operation. The vehicles may have been “containerizable” but the suo companies
preferred the multi-level rail cars. Today, that business has relocated 19 either the Port of
ated or the Part of Benecia. In par, both departures from the Port were encouraged PY the
Ricaepakland as t believed it needed the land occupied by these operations to be converted 1o
handling containers.
“Additionally, there were, and still are, in some eases, rail tracks leading into other Pets.
particularly those along Seventh Steet, Piers 30 through 38, Like ier ‘20, there were occasions
Pan ehicles andlor heavy equipment to be boisted onto the deck of the vessel. As
Ao ani don became more prominent, tis cargo wis transferred at the piers to of from ine
sland ento an cpen flatbed “containes” suitable Yor been lifted and slowed into a cellular slot in
the hold on a container ship.
‘Tioga Group Draft Report ~April 15 2009,jm
Pc_o22692 ‘Re Key thing for this report
TD LIKE TO RESEAI
DOCUMENTS THAT SUPPORT THIS STATEMENT. STEVE - CAN YOU PROVIDE
DOCUMENTATION OR OTHER MATERIAL REGARDING THE RAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY?
‘As applicable to this repor, there are two sections of ral right of way that are important. The
first is where 7” Street and Middle Harbor Road intersect and on Maritime just south of 7*
Street, See Exhbit 4. Similarly, see Exhibit 5, there is a second complex of rail right of way,
‘much of it without track, starting atthe junction with the UP and BNSF at Desert Yard (UP) and
Wood Street (BNSF) and running to various locations in the Post, including Piers 20-22, along
Engineer/Purma Road and I-80, south parallel to Maritime Sect (crossing Burma, Alaska,
Bataan, Attu, and Chung King streets, across Maritime Street at Alaska, and throughout the OAB
in particular, parallel to Maritime and the UP Desert Yard. Of note is thatthe Burma Road
section of ral is abandoned and was not used to support the replacement of the Oakland Bay
Bridge which is currently under construction, However, the land at the end of the Burma Road
right of way is the contractor's staging area for the new bridge. One reason this track is not
being used is that it lacks a physical connection to the UP at the north end of Desert Yard
adjacent to the sewer treatment plant
These two sections of ral right of way, and other rail imbedded in pavement in the Port in the
OAB, and in West Oakland, are remnants of the defunct Oakland Terminal Railroad (OTR).
‘This corporate shell and the right of way are controlled by the Port of Oakland, 1D LIKE TO.
RESEARCH THIS FURTHER, MY RESEARCH INDICATES THIS STATEMENT 1S NOT
ACCURATE. STEVE ~ CAN YOU PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION OR OTHER
MATERIAL(S) TO SUPPORT THIS STATEMENT? The section of the OTR west of the UP
‘mainline is inside the GDA now being developed by CEDA.
Situation — current
‘A major question facing CEDA is what to do with these railroad rights of way._ In particular,
‘given that they exist to serve port interests but now bisect a parcel ready to be developed for
other purposes. is there any reason for CEDA to recommend that some or all of the rights of way
be preserved 1) to continue access to the Port of Oakland, and‘or 2) to support whatever CEDA
elects to develop in the GDA.
‘Major changes have occured, and many more are planned, to the rai srack layout at the Port
See Exhibit 6 and the discussion in this section of this report, Many of the changes could have
‘an impact on the availability of rail rights of way in the GDA and the Port. Jn turn, such would
impact the possibilities for on-
