DOCSLIB.ORG

US Depaflment Oftransportation Admlnlwr

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
US Depaflment Oftransportation Admlnlwr f>w RABLROADmMIIGHWAlf U S Depaflment ofTransportation GRikDE CROSSING F&era! ~Ighway AdmlnlWr*!on HAIMDBOOK –SEC4DND EDITION FHWA-TS-86”275 SEPTEMBER1986 FOREWORO This handbook provides general infer.nationon railroad-highway crossings, including Cilaracteristicsof the crossing environl~~nta~~ US~rs, and the physical and operational improveinentsfor safe and efficient use by both highway and rail traffic. The handbook wil1 be of interest to Federal, State and local ilighwayagency personnel, railroad officials, consulting engineers and educators involved witilrailroad–highway grade crossi:lgsafety and oper3ti9n. The late William J. Hedley contributed generously of his 5ackground and experience tu,wardthe colnpletionof this handbook. This is the second printing of the second edition of the handbook. The only change from the first pri,ltingis a revision of Figure 24, page 103, to reflect the guidance for placement of the railroad crossing pavements marking synbol in relation tu the location ,ofthe advance wa,-rringsign. A standard distribution of the handbook was made to the FHdA Region and Division offices, the State highway agencies and the T~ Centers in ?986. Copies of the handbook were also pr>vided to the Federal Railroad Ad~:)inistrationand the Association of A;nericanRailroads for “their ~se. A limited n(~mberof copies are available from the Railroads, IJtilitiesand Programs Branch, HNG-?2, Federal liigl~wayAdministration, Washington, D.C. 205% and the RD&T Report Center, HRD-11, Federal Highway Administration, 6300 Georgetown Pike, ~~cLean,Virginia 22101-23Y6. Copies may be pur~tlasedfroin the N~tional Technical Infer.lationService, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161. .&&f s~~ Stanley R. 3y(ngton Director, Office of Implementation Federd? IiighwayAdministration NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Trans})ortationin the interest [jfinformation exchange. The United States Govern!nentassumes no 1iai)i1ity for its contents or use thereof. The contents of this report reflect the views of the author, who is responsible for the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Departinentof Transportation]. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. “TheUnited States Govern;nentdoes not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein only because they are considered essential to the object of tilisdoc(~ment. T(@chnicolkepotiDocumentationpeg, 1. R.P.t, No. FHWA TS-86-215 4.1;,1.andS.b+itl. ~2G0”*’”m*”’Ace*’s’O”M” ~= Se?tember 1986 Railroad-Highway Grade Crossing Handbook-2nd Edition ~,~.,,Q,m,n*~,gen,,o,,on~odo — — 8 P.r{o,m,.s O,g.n,,.,i.nR.p.,, N.. 7.A.?ho,,,) 2- B.H. Tustin, H. Richards, H. i!cG(:e,and R. Patterson — 9. P.,l.,mi.o0,9m,,.,;onNom. md Add,.,, /10.W..ku.,tN..(TRAISI Tustin Enterprises FCP Category 12 (A) — 2903 Maple Lane 11.Con,,..,o,G,..,N.. Fairfax; Virginia 22031 13.Typ..1R.per,andP.r,.dCev.r.d 12,S9..,.,;.$A9...YNom. o.dAdd,.,, Office of Implementation Federal Highway Administration c 6300 Georg;to~ Pike 14.Sp..,.,,.g Ag..cyCod. McLean, Virginia 22101-2296 r— - , — 15.$.ppl.m.n,o,yN.,., FHWA Contract Manager (COTR): Eric ltinley(HRT-20) FHWA Office of Engineering Cont:~ct: Jim Overton (KNG-12] FRA Office of Safety Analysis: Tom P. Well [RRS-Z:[) Rail-Highway grade crossing safety and operational problems involve two component$-- the highway and the railroad. The!highway component involves drivers, pedestrians, vehicles and roadway segments in the vicinity of the crossing. The railroad component involves the trains and the tracks at the crossing. The element of risk present at a given location is a function of the ch~lracteristicsof the two components and their corresponding;elements. Sever:llformulas are described which seek to quantify the degree of risk, identify the locations most urgently in need of improvement, and prioritize the!hazardous locations which have been isolated. Various types of at-grade crossin~;improvements described include active warning devices, passive warning devices, sight distance improvements, operational improve- ments, and crossing surface improvements. Grade sel)arations,or crossing closures are suggested as improvement solutions where either extremely high or low demmd for the crossing exists. The ultimate choice for a crossing improvement is determined by balancing the benefits in accident reduction and reduced user costs against costs for the improvement. Procedures, models and computer programs whick~ will assist making these selectior~sare described. — 17.K,YWo,d, 18.Distrtb.?oon$?.~.m.nl No restriction. This document is Grade Crossing, Railroad, availablt!to the public through the Traffic Control, Crossing Surfaces National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161. 19,$.e.rityClo.sil.(.Ithisr.p.rt) m. S,,.vr; ty Clo,,, t. (ef,h,,pag.) ~classified Unclassified I ‘~z’ ““* - 1 t i — :ormDOT F 17N.7 (6-72] R.p,od..?ionof..mpl.?edpg. ..lho,i=ed I GZ 22 12 IOZ 61 81 ,1 ,1 S1 bl El Z1 11 0T68L, s , s, ,~, 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111I 11111111I 11111111I 111111111111111111111lll’1!!11111111111111111111’1111111111I 11111111I 11!1II11111111111111111111I ,,,!,O!s!!,,!,,!,$!,!,,!,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill 1]1 Ill Ill Ill Ill 1]1 Ill Ill Ill 1[1 9 8 17 16 Is 14 3 2 1 ‘..,., RAILROAD-llIG~AY GRADE CROSSING WNDBOOK Chapter Pa{;e List of Figures ............................. .......................... v List of Tables .......................................................... <LX A. Backgromd .......................................................... 1 1. Introduction to Railro/id-HighwayGrade Crossings ................. 2. Safety and Operations :itRailroad-Highw%y Grade Crossings ........ : B. Railroad-Highway Grade Cr~>ssingPrograms ........................... 8 C. Responsibilities at Railroad-Highway Grade Crossings ................ “1& D. Some General Lagal Considerations - Railroad-Highway Grade Crossings .......................................).................. ;23 E. References ............................................................ 27 II. COWONENTS OF A RAILROAD-HIG~AY GRADE CROSSING A. The Highway Component ................................................ :29 1. Driver ............................................................. :29 2. Vehicle ........................................................... 33 3. Roadway .....................................................<...... 36 4. Pedestrian ..................................................t..... Lo B. Railroad Components ................................................. Lo 1. Train ........................................................... 41 2. Track ............................................................. 45 C. References ............................................................ 49 III. ASSESS~NT OF CROSSING SAFETY AND OPERATION A. Collection and Maintenance of Data ................................... 51 B. Identification of CrOssinigsfor Further Analysis .................... ’63 1. Peabody Dimmick Formula .......................................... 63 2. New Hampshire Index ............................................... 56 3. NCHRP 50 .......................................................... 66 4. U.S. DOT Accident Pred,ction~uations ........................... 70 5. Florida DOT Accident Prediction Model ............................ 76 C. Engineering Study .................................................... ’79 1. Diagnostic Study Team Method ...................................... 79 2. Other Engineering Studies ........................................ 84 D. The Systems Approach ................................................ 85 E. References .......................................................... 87 iii -. tihapter Fage IV. IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATI~S A. Elimination .......................................................... 1. Grade Separation .................................................. ;: 2. Highway and Railroad Relocation ................................... 91 3. Closure ........................................................... 92 4. Abandoned Crossings ............................................... 94 B. Passive Traffic Control Devices ..................................... 96 1. Signs ................o............................................ 96 2. Pavement Markings ................................................. 102 C. Active Traffic Control Devices ....................................... 103 1. Flashing Light Signals ............................................ 104 2. Automatic Gates ................................................... 108 3. Warning Bell ...................................................... 110 4. Active Advance Warning Sign ....................................... 114 5. Traffic Si~als ................................................... 115 6. Train Detection ................................................... 125 D. Site and Operational Improvements .................................... 131 1. Sight Distance .................................................... 131 2. Geometries ........................................................ 135 3. Illumination ...................................................... 140 4. Shielding Supports for Traffic Control Devices .................... 141 5. Flagging .........................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Certain Railroad Employee Fatalities Investigated by the Federal
    Certain Railroad Employee U.S. D epartm ent of Transportation Fatalities Investigated by Federal Railroad Administration the Federal Railroad Administration Calendar Year 1985 Office of Safety DOT/FRA/RRS February 1987 ACCIDENTS REPORTS ACT - 45 USC 41 Section 41 "Neither the report required by Section 38 of this title nor any report of the investi­ gation provided for in Section 40 of this title nor any part thereof.shall be admitted as evidence or used for any purpose in any suit or action for damages growing out of any matter mentioned in said report or in­ vestigation." INTRODUCTION This report presents the Federal Railroad Administration's findings in its investigation of 36 railroad employee fatalities suffered during 1985. Not included are the employee fatalities that occurred as a result of train derailments, collisions, or rail-highway crossing accidents; these are reported in the 1985 Summary of Accidents Investigated by the Federal Railroad Administration. The purpose of this report is to direct public attention to hazards that exist in the day-to-day operation of railroads, to guide the overall Federal program to promote the safety of railroad employees, and to supply rail management, rail labor, and all other interested parties with information and analysis for use in training and other action to prevent similar accidents. J. W. Walsh Associate Administrator for Safety * * 1 CAUSE DIGEST REPORT NUMBER PAGE 1. Accidents related to switching and train operations a. Crossing track in front of or going between trains and/or equipment 13 29 b. Falling off a moving train or switching equipment consist 1 1 11 24 c.
    [Show full text]
  • Rail Highw Y Cro Sing Ace Dent/I Cident and Tory Ulletin
    --flt7 (., '(_\ ,( t~ Rail Highw y Cro sing• U.S.Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Ace dent/I cident and Administration Office of Safety tory ulletin t No. 8 ,.. • June 1986 Cale·n ar Year 1985 - • is document is disse nated under the sponsoring J the Department of Tr nsportation in e interest ,,l information exchange The United St es Government sumes no liability fo its contents o use. • Federal Railro d Administratio Office of fety, RRS-22 400 Sevent Street, S.W. Washington D.C. 20590 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page INTRODUCTION. 1 1. RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSING ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS; HISTORICAL DATA LAST SIX YEARS . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 3 2. RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSING ACCIDENTS /INCIDENTS (1985). • 5 State and Railroad Data. • • • • • • • • • • • • • 5 . Highway User and Vehicle Data. • • • • • • • • • • 12 Train and Track Data • • • • • • • • • • • • 20 ._ Warning Device Data. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 26 ·tt Time, Day, and Weather Data. • • • • • • • • • 30 Motorist Action Data • • • • • • • • • • • 33 3. RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSING ACCIDENT RATES ••• 34 4. CURRENT YEAR RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSING INVENTORY. • • • • 45 Physical Characteristics • • • • • • • • • • • 45 Track Data . • • • • • . • • • • . • • • • • • • 50 Highway System Data. • • • • • • • • • • • 53 Warning Device Data. • • • • • • • • 59 Operational Characteristics. • • • • • • • • • • • 66 Train Traffic Data • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 66 Train Speed Data • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 71 Highway Traffic Data • • • • • • • • • • 72 APPENDIX A: REPORTING REQUIREMENTS AND DEFINITIONS. • • • • A-1 APPENDIX B: REPORTING FORMS ••••• . B-1 APPENDIX C: MISCELLANEOUS DATA. C-1 APPENDIX D: ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS AT PRIVATE CROSSINGS. 0-1 KEYWORD INDEX -. 0 LI ST OF TABLES Tab le S SUMMARY OF RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSING ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS, 1985. 2 1 SUMMARY OF ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS AND CASUALTIES AT RAIL- HIGHWAY CROSSINGS, LAST SIX YEARS .•••.••••• 3 2 SUMMARY OF ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS AND ACCIDENT RATES AT RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSINGS INVOLVING MOTOR VEHICLES, .
    [Show full text]
  • METHOD of TRAIN OPERATION JANUARY 1. 1982 .. Akron. Camton & Youngstown 162 162
    --- METHOD OF TRAIN OPERATION JANUARY 1. 1982 Nonautoaatic Total Block Tiaetable :I Traffic Control Automatic Block Block Signala Train Orders Track Hilea u Road Track Road Track Road Track Road Track Road Track Operated 1: Railroad Hiles Hiles Hiles Hiles Miles Hiles Miles Miles Hlles, Miles Total 162 162 162 1: .. Akron. Camton & Youngstown 33 .· 'Alton Southern 1 1 22 32 23 33 \'. & 12 12 12 Angel;na & Noches River t 15 15 4 8 19 23 278 278 301 Ann Arbor 96 96 96 Apalochicola Northern 3 6 3 6 6 Arkansas &Memphis Ry Bridge & Terminal 9 9 Aroostook Valley Railroad 3368 4290 2047 2747 5415 7037 6191 6191 13228 Atchison. Topeka and Santa Fe 88 88 88 Atlanta & Saint Andrews Bay 92 Atlanta & West Point 81 92 81 92 1443 1325 1850 538 549 2979 3842 2091 2192 6034 Baltimore and Oh;o 1116 42 118 Baltimore and Ohio Chicago Terminal 1 ·1 37 75 38 76 31 19 21 22 22 41 43 457 461 504 Bangor & Aroostook 33 33 33 Belfast & Moosehead Lake Railroad - I 53 Belt Ry. Co. of Chicago 16 28 11 25 27 53 177 133 177 54 54 231 Bessemer & Lake Erie 133 48 Birmingham Southern 42 48 42 48 476 213 358 611 834 554 552 1386 Boston &Maine 398 27052 Burl;ngton Northern 6516 7195 3864 4899 10380 12094 14874 14958 9 9 9 9 25 25 34 Butte, Anaconda & Pacific 256 312 312 Camas Prairie 2 Canadian National 1 2 1 2 2 256 256 56 56 314 314 312 312 626 Canadian Pacific 2 324 Central of Vermont 21 21 21 21 303 ·303 j 425 537 777 777 2964 3575 884 872 4447 Chesapeake and Ohio 1762 2261 96 Chicago & Illinois Midland 96 96 Chicago.
    [Show full text]
  • 150 Years of Railroading in Starke County, Indiana
    150 YEARS OF RAILROADING IN STARKE COUNTY, INDIANA Compiled by Marvin Allen, Starke County Historical Society 2005 Contents Chapter 1: New Albany and Salem Railroad (Monon) 1852-1853 Radioville-San Pierre-Kankakee-LaCrosse Chapter 2: Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne and Chicago Railroad (Penn) 1856 Donaldson-Grovertown-Hamlet-Davis-Hanna Chapter 3: Cincinnati and Chicago Railroad (Penn) 1858-1861Denham-North Judson-English Lake-LaCrosse Chapter 4: Chicago and Atlantic Railroad (Erie) 1883 Monterey-Ora-Bass Station-Aldine-North Judson-Lomax-Wilders Chapter 5: New York, Chicago and St. Louis Railroad (Nickel Plate) 1882 Burr Oak-Ober-Knox-Brems-South Wanatah Chapter 6: Iowa, Illinois and Indiana Railroad (NYC) 1881 & 1894 Walkerton-Hamlet-Knox-Toto-North Judson-San Pierre-Teft Chapter 7: Cincinnati, Richmond and Muncie Railroad (C&O) 1902 Lawton-Lena Park-North Judson-English Lake-LaCrosse Chapter 8: Bass Lake Railroad (Erie) 1898 Bass Station-Lake Station Chapter 9: Lake Michigan, Logansport and Ohio River Railroad 1852 & 1855 The line that was never built Foreword The year 2002 marks the 150 th year of railroad history in Starke County. It all started with the New Albany and Salem Railroad that ran north and south through the western portion of the county. At its peak, seven railroads traversed Starke County. Today, although much has changed, the Norfolk Southern runs many trains through Knox between Chicago and Buffalo on the former Nickel Plate line. Norfolk Southern also uses the former Pennsylvania line across the northern half of Starke County for additional freight traffic. While it may seem to the casual observer that railroads are in a decline, statistics from the Association of American Railroads show that freight revenue is at an all time high of 33.5 billion for the year 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal, We Will Publish Part 2 of Register to Vote - You Can’T Vote If Es out to Our Parents, Sisters, Broth- Detailed Information of Every Candi- This Article
    BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES DIVISION Of The International Brotherhood Of Teamsters Volume 115 ■ Number 4 www.bmwe.org August 2006 BMWED STRIKES CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY Message to Carrier is Clear - We Will Not Be Ignored! n the morning of July 19, at The Railway Labor Act, a law in O06:00, BMWED members and effect since 1926, requires that CN IBT volunteers from area Teamster exert every reasonable effort to make Locals (Joint Council 42) established an agreement, to settle the dispute, picket lines at no fewer than twelve and to bargain with the BMWED in work-site locations of the Canadian good faith. The RLA also requires that National Railway (CN) in Ohio, CN meet and confer with the Michigan, and Indiana. The strike tar- BMWED, as the representative of geted CN properties of the former CN’s maintenance of way employees. Grand Trunk Western (GTW), Detroit The CN refused our repeated request Toledo & Ironton (DT&I), and Detroit for meetings. Toledo & Shore Line (DT&SL) After the National Mediation Board Railroads. This action followed a law- (NMB) declined to schedule meetings suit filed against the CN in the U.S. between the parties, the BMWED District Court for the Northern District sought to meet directly with CN. of Ohio (Toledo) two days earlier. Again, the CN refused to respond to Both of the actions directed against any of our written requests to them to the CN were in strong protest to CN’s hold direct negotiations. On July 17, Strike Hits CN Rail Yard Operations - Pontiac, Michigan.
    [Show full text]
  • South Suburban Commuter Rail Feasibility Study
    South Suburban Commuter Rail Feasibility Study FINAL REPORT and April 1999 South Suburban Commuter Rail Feasibility Study TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE FOREWORD ........................................................ iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................ ES-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................... 1 1.1 Study Area .................................................... 1 1.2 Historical Background ............................................ 3 1.3 Candidate Alignments ............................................ 4 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................. 7 2.1 Alignment Options .............................................. 7 2.2 Descriptions of Alignment Segments ................................. 10 2.3 Freight Railroad Operating Characteristics ............................ 12 2.4 Existing Transportation Services .................................... 15 2.5 Potential Station Locations ........................................ 17 3.0 FUTURE PLANS ........................................... 27 3.1 Study-Area Demographics ......................................... 27 3.2 Rail Corridor Community Analysis .................................. 30 3.3 Railroads and Other Agencies ...................................... 36 4.0 POTENTIAL OPERATIONS ............................... 39 4.1 Service Concept ................................................ 40 4.2 Utilization of Existing Facilities ..................................... 40 4.3 Potential Transfers with Existing Lines ..............................
    [Show full text]
  • National Transportation Safety Board
    DEPARTMENT OF PB84-916302 ' TRANSPORTAT'ON SEP 25 1984 LIBRARY NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 20594 RAILROAD ACCIDENT REPORT REAR END COLLISION OF SEABOARD SYSTEM RAILROAD FREIGHT TRAINS EXTRA 8051 NORTH AND EXTRA 1751 NORTH SULLIVAN, INDIANA SEPTEMBER 14, 1983 NTSB/RAR-84/02, UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE . Report No. 2.Government Accession No 3.Recipient's Catalog No. NTSB/RAR-84/02 PB84-916302 k. Title and Subtitle Kaiiroaa Accident Keport— 5.Report Date Rear-End Collision of Seaboard System Railroad May 15, 1984 Freight Trains Extra 8051 North and Extra 1751 North, 6.Perform!ng Organization Sullivan, Indiana, September 14, 1983 Code 7. Author(s) 8.Performing Organization Report No 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10.Work Unit No. 3815A National Transportation Safety Board 11.Contract or Grant No. Bureau of Accident Investigation Washington, D.C. 20594 13-Type of Report and Period Covered 2.Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Railroad Accident Report September 14, 1983 EPA NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY B0ARDT£ HTMEN7 Of Washington, D. C. 20594 j iHANspORTA7/ON MH-Sponsoring Agency Code SEP 25 ?984 15.Supplementary Notes UBBAHY Ib.Abstract At 5:32 a>m>> c.d.t., on September 14, 1983, Seaboard System Railroad train Extra 1751 North moved onto the main track from the north end of the siding at Sullivan, Indiana, and proceeded northward. About 5:37 a.m., after Extra 1751 North had attained a speed of approximately 18 mph and had traveled 1,939 feet beyond the siding switch, Seaboard train Extra 8051 North, moving about 35 mph, overtook and struck the rear caboose of Extra 1751 North.
    [Show full text]
  • Loss of Rail Competition As an Issue in the Proposed Sale of Conrail to Norfolk Southern: Valid Concern Or Political Bogeyman
    Cleveland State Law Review Volume 34 Issue 3 Article 6 1986 Loss of Rail Competition as an Issue in the Proposed Sale of Conrail to Norfolk Southern: Valid Concern or Political Bogeyman Mark D. Perreault Nancy S. Fleischman Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev Part of the Business Organizations Law Commons, and the Transportation Law Commons How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! Recommended Citation Mark D. Perreault & Nancy S. Fleischman, Loss of Rail Competition as an Issue in the Proposed Sale of Conrail to Norfolk Southern: Valid Concern or Political Bogeyman, 34 Clev. St. L. Rev. 413 (1985-1986) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cleveland State Law Review by an authorized editor of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LOSS OF RAIL COMPETITION AS AN ISSUE IN THE PROPOSED SALE OF CONRAIL TO NORFOLK SOUTHERN: VALID CONCERN OR POLITICAL BOGEYMAN? MARK D. PERREAULT* NANCY S. FLEISCHMAN** 1. INTRODUCTION ......... ..................................... 414 II. PRESERVATION OF RAIL-RAIL COMPETITION AS A CONSIDERATION IN RAIL CONSOLIDATIONS ............................... 414 A . Prior to 1920 ................................. 414 B . 1920 - 1940 .................................. 418 C. 1940 - 1980 .................................. 421 D . 1980 - Present ................................ 425 Ill. PRESERVATION OF RAIL-RAIL COMPETITION AS A CONSIDERATION IN THE FORMATION OF CONRAIL AND SUBSEQUENT DETERMINATION TO SELL CONRAIL ........ ........................................ 428 A. 1970's Congressional Response to the Penn Central and Other Railroad Bankruptcies ..................... 428 B. Foundation of Initial CongressionalPolicy ........... 429 C. Implementing the Policy ......................... 432 D.
    [Show full text]
  • A Context of the Railroad Industry in Clark County and Statewide Kentucky
    MAY 4, 2016 A CONTEXT OF THE RAILROAD INDUSTRY IN CLARK COUNTY AND STATEWIDE KENTUCKY CLARK COUNTY, KENTUCKY TECHNICAL REPORT 15028 15011 SUBMITTED TO: City of Winchester 32 Wall Street PO Box 40 Winchester, Kentucky 40392 10320 Watterson Trail Louisville KY 40299 502-614-8828 A CONTEXT OF THE RAILROAD INDUSTRY IN CLARK COUNTY AND STATEWIDE KENTUCKY OSA Project No. FY15-8453 KHC Project No. FY16-2211 Submitted to: Mr. Matt Belcher City Manager 32 Wall Street PO Box 40 Winchester, Kentucky 40392 859-744-6292 LEAD AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Prepared By: Mathia N. Scherer, MA, Tim W. Sullivan, PhD, RPA, Kathryn N. McGrath, MA RPA, Anne Tobbe Bader, MA RPA, Sara Deurell, BA, and Michelle Massey, BA Corn Island Archaeology, LLC P.O. Box 991259 Louisville, Kentucky 40269 Phone (502) 614-8828 FAX (502) 614-8940 [email protected] Project No. PR15012 Cultural Resources Report No. TR15028 (Signature) Anne Bader Principal Investigator May 4, 2016 A Context of the Railroad Industry in Clark County and Statewide Kentucky ABSTRACT From April 2015 through April 2016 Corn Island Archaeology LLC researched and prepared a historic context for railroad and rail-related buildings, structures, objects, and archaeological resources in Kentucky with a particular focus on the City of Winchester and Clark County. Specifically, Corn Island prepared an inventory of known (recorded) railroad-related cultural resources within the proposed undertaking; assessed the potential for unrecorded railroad- related resources to be present in Clark County; and developed a historical context to allow informed interpretation of these resources as well as those that may be recorded in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Alabama Railroads
    Alabama Department of Transportation Year 2001 Alabama Rail Plan Update Alabama Department of Transportation Bureau of Multimodal Transportation Rail Section Year 2001 Alabama Rail Update Produced by BURK-KLEINPETER, INC. Engineers, Architects, Planners, and Environmental Scientists 600 Lurleen Wallace Boulevard, Suite 180 Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35401-1734 In Association with Parsons Transportation Group 1133 15th Street, NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20005-2701 January 2002 Alabama Department of Transportation Year 2001 Alabama Rail Plan Update Table of Contents page Title Page Table of Contents........................................................................................................... i List of Figures.............................................................................................................. iv List of Tables .................................................................................................................v Executive Summary............................................................................................ES.1 1. Introduction Purpose and Authority ................................................................................................1.1 General Trends in the Rail Industry............................................................................1.3 Mergers and Acquisitions ...........................................................................................1.3 Abandonments ............................................................................................................1.4
    [Show full text]
  • Abandoned Railroad Inventory and Policy Plan Abandoned Railroad Inventory and Policy Plan
    ABANDONED RAILROAD INVENTORY AND POLICY PLAN ABANDONED RAILROAD INVENTORY AND POLICY PLAN prepared by: Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission The Bourse Building 111 S. Independence Mall East Philadelphia, PA 19106-2515 September 1997 This report was printed on recycled paper The preparation of this report was funded through federal grants from the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) , as well as by DVRPC's member governments. The authors, however, are solely responsible for its findings and conclusions, which may not represent the official views or policies of the funding agencies. Created in 1965, the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) is an interstate, intercounty and intercity agency which provides continuing, comprehensive and coordinated planning for the orderly growth and development of the Delaware Valley region. The region includes Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery counties as well as the City of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania and Burlington, Camden, Gloucester, and Mercer counties in New Jersey. The Commission is an advisory agency which divides its planning and service functions between the Office of the Executive Director, the Office of Public Affairs, and three line Divisions: Transportation Planning, Regional Planning, and Administration. DVRPC's mission for the 1990s is to emphasize technical assistance and services and to conduct high priority studies for member state and local governments, while determining and meeting the needs of the private sector. The DVRPC logo is adapted from the official seal of the Commission and is designed as a stylized image of the Delaware Valley. The outer ring symbolizes the region as a whole while the diagonal bar signifies the Delaware River flowing through it.
    [Show full text]
  • SMART Transportation Division News
    SHEET METAL | A I R | R A I L | T R A N S P O R T A T I O N Transportation Division News International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers Volume 49 • Number 7/8 • July/August 2017 National negotiations update: Unions say contract negotiations take a step backward As part of our ongoing effort to conclude dations that could come from a Presidential https://static.smart-union.org/worksite/Contract - national contract negotiations, the Coordinat - Emergency Board appointed by President Neg/NCCC_2017-06-29_Synopsis_and_Pro - ed Bargaining Group (CBG) met with the Trump, and ultimately be imposed on the posal.pdf or by visiting www.smart-union.org/td. nation’s freight rail Carriers (NCCC) for three employees by a Congress that already has More information will be forthcoming after the days during the week of June 26. These enacted or is pushing for changes in longstand - next mediation sessions in July and August. efforts were part of our ongoing mediation ing labor laws that protect employee rights. We appreciate your continuing support. process, mandated by the Railway Labor Act We of course are frustrated by the Carriers’ when the parties have been unable to reach hard-line attitude. But we will not let this FEMA appoints SMART TD’s a voluntary agreement, and managed by the stand in our way. In spite of this latest turn of National Mediation Board. events, the CBG will not give up its efforts to Hayes as rail labor rep. Despite the CBG’s best efforts to achieve a voluntary settlement reach a fair agreement with the that is fair and protects our NCCC, the mediation process members’ best interests.
    [Show full text]