North American intermodal rail hubs – update

Freight railroads throughout Canada and the United States have been investing billions of dollars over the past couple of decades to upgrade their intermodal infrastructure. Unlike most other forms of transportation, nearly all rail infrastructure is privately financed and maintained versus publicly financed.

As intense competition with the trucking industry for long distance freight shipping shows not signs of abating, the intermodal terminals have grown in size, technical complexity, and scope. However, regardless of the competition, trucks remain critical for completing the “last mile” of the delivery process.

In some cases, this boom has meant the construction of entirely new intermodal terminals on green fields along with a plethora of excess acreage destined for warehousing, distribution centers, and ancillary facilities. The massive new 440 acre BNSF (Burlington Northern Santa Fe) intermodal facility under construction at Edgerton, Kansas  and adjacent 560 acre Logistics Park is an example (see below).

In other instances, existing intermodal terminals have received major upgrades. CSX’s Mont Clare facility in Baltimore, Maryland is an example of this, as the railroad chose its existing inner city location over suburban sites.

For urban planners, intermodal rail facilities, whether they are existing or new have huge implications. From a transportation perspective, they impact not only rail traffic patterns, but those for trucks and automobiles. In the instances of those tied to seaports or airports, the intermodal facility can influence waterborne  and air traffic.

The ancillary uses such as warehousing, distribution, manufacturing, maintenance, and operations  can contribute to the intermodal facility becoming a significant 24/7 employment center. Furthermore, since the intermodal complexes operate around the clock, noise, glare, and odors can all be a concern to surrounding and nearby properties.

Below is a listing of those cities with at least two intermodal terminals and which railroad(s) operate the facilities. Some may be joint (or duplicate) facilities. Updates shown in bold.

  • BNSF (Burlington Northern Santa Fe)
  • CN (Canadian National – includes KC Southern)
  • CP (Canadian Pacific)
  • CSX (CSX)
  • KCS (Kansas City Southern)
  • NS (Norfolk Southern)
  • UP (Union Pacific)
  • Chicago (21): BNSF(4), CN (2), CP (2), CSX (3), NS (5) and UP (5)
  • New York City (8): CSX (4) and NS (4)
  • Los Angeles (6): BNSF (2) and UP (4)
  • Memphis (6): BNSF, CSX, CN, NS (2) and UP
  • Seattle-Tacoma (6): BNSF (4) and UP (2)
  • Detroit (5): CSX, CN, CP and NS (2)
  • Houston (5): UP (3) and BNSF (2)
  • Montreal (5): CSX, CN, CP (2) and NS
  • Toronto (5): CN (2), CP (2) and NS
  • Atlanta (4): CSX (2) and NS (2)
  • Dallas-Fort Worth (4): BNSF, KCS and UP (2)
  • Hampton Roads (4): NS (3) and CSX
  • Kansas City(4): BNSF, CSX, NS and UP
  • New Orleans  (4): BNSF, CN, CSX and UP
  • St. Louis (4): BNSF, CSX, NS and UP
  • Cincinnati (3): CSX and NS (2)
  • Columbus, OH (3) CSX (2) and NS
  • Louisville (3): CSX and NS (2)
  • Twin Cities (3): BNSF, CN, and CP
  • Worcester (3): CSX (2) and CN
  • Baltimore (2): CSX and NS
  • Birmingham (2) CSX and NS
  • Buffalo (2) CSX and NS
  • Calgary (2): CN and CP
  • Charleston, SC (2) CSX and NS
  • Charlotte (2) CSX and NS
  • Cleveland (2): CSX and NS
  • Denver (2): BNSF and UP
  • Edmonton (2): CN and CP
  • El Paso (2): BNSF and UP
  • Hagerstown-Chambersburg (2): CSX and NS
  • Jacksonville (2) CSX and NS
  • Oakland (2): BNSF and UP
  • Omaha (2): BNSF and UP
  • Philadelphia (2): NS (2)
  • Portland, OR (2): BNSF and UP
  • Saskatoon (2): CN and CP
  • Savannah (2) CSX and NS
  • Stockton, CA (2): BNSF and UP
  • Toledo (2) CSX and NS
  • Vancouver (2): CN and CP
  • Winnipeg (2): CN and CP

Here is an amazing map depicting the geography of intermodal rail hubs throughout North America.

This entry was posted in Canada, cities, economic development, economics, energy, geography, infrastructure, land use, North America, planning, rail, spatial design, Statistics, transportation and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to North American intermodal rail hubs – update

  1. basil berchekas jr says:

    Wish to see more on INTERMODAL!


  2. Terry Nobbe says:

    Rick: If you’ve ever considered riding on a trail, consider this statistic: Of the seven collisions I’ve experienced as an adult cyclist, five have been on trails. I prefer streets and roads because most users on those thoroughfares behave in a predictable fashion.


  3. Cassy says:

    You completed several nice points there. I did a search on the matter and found a good number of folks will have the same opinion with your blog.


  4. Pinterest says:

    Howdy very cool web site!! Guy .. Excellent .. Wonderful .. I will bookmark your web site and take the feeds additionally…I’m satisfied to search out so many useful information right here within the put up, we need work out extra strategies in this regard, thanks for sharing.


  5. Pingback: North America’s newest intermodal railroad facilities | Panethos

  6. Natalia says:

    Do you have the rail map picture on a larger format? I would like to print it on a large poster but the link doesn’t work. Let me know, Thanks !

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.