(The following story by Allyson Bird appeared on The Post and Courier website on July 10, 2010.)
CHARLESTON, S.C. — Proponents of a controversial rail plan that would shape North Charleston’s future say its detractors are missing the big picture — that the project has less to do with one company’s competitive disadvantage than Charleston’s ability to reclaim its standing as a major player in the shipping world.
Representatives from CSX Corp. and development firm Shipyard Creek Associates spoke to The Post and Courier on Friday about details of the plan, which includes three key changes: closing a little more than three miles of current CSX track through neighborhoods, creating a half-mile of new track and rebuilding another half-mile of mostly dormant track.
An agreement between the city, CSX and Shipyard Creek also calls for redevelopment of CSX’s Cooper Yard and Shipyard Creek’s Macalloy property into an intermodal rail facility and warehousing space. The operation would serve a new port terminal under construction at the former Charleston Naval Base, loading shipping containers onto trains two miles long for transportation to major cities such as Atlanta, Nashville and Chicago.
Robert Clement, one of Shipyard Creek Associates’ owners, lists the virtues of the plan: It keeps with North Charleston Mayor Keith Summey’s revitalization plan for the city by taking trains out of the neighborhoods and reconnecting those areas now separated by tracks. It removes at least 20 rail crossings that stall traffic. It leaves Clemson University’s property, another proposed train site, free for wind turbine research. It takes 833,000 miles of truck driving off interstates and local roads each year.
“It’s the first step in the ultimate rail for Charleston,” Clement said.
But there’s one problem, something with which the State Ports Authority, the state Commerce Department’s S.C. Public Railways and the other major railroad company in the area can’t reconcile. The intermodal yard leaves Norfolk Southern Corp. at a competitive disadvantage for business at the new port terminal.
The whole plan hinges on federal funding and support from South Carolina’s delegation in Washington. A spokeswoman for U.S. House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn previously said and reiterated this week that the congressman would not support a plan that excludes one railroad company for another.
Clement likened the situation to a Piggly Wiggly grocery store owning land and being expected to let Publix build a store on that land without charge.
“This is still America. We are not 501(c)(3)s,” Clement said. “We are private enterprise.”
He pointed out that Norfolk Southern could use CSX lines for a switching fee — which insiders estimate at nearly $500 per rail car currently — or could bring containers by truck to its existing train facility farther from the Navy base terminal.
The intermodal yard at his Macalloy property would overhaul the way Charleston handles rail cargo. In addition to building two-mile-long trains, some stacked two containers high, the facility would rely on natural gas-run “yard dogs” to carry the goods from the shipping terminal to the intermodal terminal, eliminating the need for trucks entirely.
Shipyard Creek Associates offered to develop an intermodal yard at its Laurel Island property, a former landfill off Morrison Drive, for Norfolk Southern. Neither the company nor Public Railways views Laurel Island as a feasible site.
Clement pointed out that Savannah and Norfolk, Va., two Southeastern ports that wrested business from Charleston, both grew in volume while one competing railroad held a superior position over another.
“My competition is not Norfolk Southern in Charleston,” Clement said. “My competition is Norfolk Southern in Norfolk.”
Mike O’Malley, vice president of state government and community affairs for CSX, pointed out that larger ships will call East Coast ports after the widened Panama Canal reopens in 2014 — and that this project could make Charleston more attractive.
The deal came not without short-term sacrifices from CSX, too.
“You’re asking a company that’s designed to serve customers to take up (rail) lines,” O’Malley said. In fact, the plan calls for shedding some 32 acres of track.
The project needs funding to work, including future U.S. Transportation Department grants and Surface Transportation Authorization bills, according to O’Malley. Ideally, the intermodal facility would launch a year before the Navy base terminal opening slated for around 2017.