TRAFFIC SEPARATION STUDY NORFOLK SOUTHERN ‘O’ LINE CHARLOTTE TO MOORESVILLE FINAL REPORT Prepared for ORTH F N CA O RO TE L A IN T A S D N E O P I A T R A T T M R E O N SP T OF TRAN Charlotte Area Transit System North Carolina Metropolitan Transit Commission Department of Transportation Rail Division Prepared by April 2004 Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES ___________________________________________________________ V LIST OF FIGURES _________________________________________________________ VI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY _____________________________________________________1 I. FINDINGS ______________________________________________________________ 1 II. RECOMMENDATIONS ___________________________________________________ 2 A. Public Crossing Recommendations WITH Rail Passenger Service ________________________________2 B. Public Crossing Recommendations WITHOUT Rail Passenger Service____________________________3 C. Private Crossing Recommendations WITH Rail Passenger Service _______________________________4 III. ESTIMATED COSTS_____________________________________________________ 4 A. Charlotte - $2,757,650.00. _______________________________________________________________5 B. Huntersville - $2,783,500.00._____________________________________________________________5 C. Cornelius - $1,841,500.00. _______________________________________________________________5 D. Davidson - $310,000.00. ________________________________________________________________5 E. Iredell County - $1,168,000.00. ___________________________________________________________5 F. Mooresville - $523,000.00. ______________________________________________________________5 G. Estimated Costs WITHOUT Passenger Service_______________________________________________5 TRAFFIC SEPARATION STUDY_______________________________________________6 I. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY ________________________________________________ 6 II. PREAMBLE _____________________________________________________________ 7 III. AGENCY PARTICIPATION AND ASSISTANCE ______________________________ 8 IV. THE ‘O’ LINE CORRIDOR ________________________________________________ 9 V. EVALUATION CRITERIA________________________________________________ 12 A. Accident History _____________________________________________________________________13 B. Truck Traffic ________________________________________________________________________13 C. Sight Obstructions ____________________________________________________________________14 D. Summary of Crossing Protection Devices __________________________________________________15 E. Crossings With The Highest Traffic Volume________________________________________________16 F. Humped Crossings ____________________________________________________________________17 G. Queue Distance ______________________________________________________________________18 VI. RATING CRITERIA_____________________________________________________ 20 A. Safety Devices _______________________________________________________________________20 ii B. Traffic Volume_______________________________________________________________________20 C. Accident History _____________________________________________________________________20 D. School Route ________________________________________________________________________21 E. Emergency Response Route_____________________________________________________________21 F. Humped Crossing_____________________________________________________________________21 G. Sight Obstruction _____________________________________________________________________21 H. Queue Distance ______________________________________________________________________22 VII. MENU OF AVAILABLE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ENHANCEMENTS ______ 22 A. Grade Separation Structures_____________________________________________________________22 B. Crossing Protection Devices Upgrade _____________________________________________________23 C. Enhanced Crossing Protection Devices ____________________________________________________24 D. Crossing Closure/Crossing Consolidation __________________________________________________25 E. Street Improvements __________________________________________________________________25 F. Traffic Signals _______________________________________________________________________25 VIII. SAFETY AND MOBILITY ISSUES_________________________________________ 27 A. Vehicles Queuing Across Railroad Tracks__________________________________________________27 B. Traffic Signal Preemption ______________________________________________________________27 C. Humped Crossings ____________________________________________________________________27 D. Grade Crossing Condition ______________________________________________________________27 E. Vehicles Driving Around Automatic Gates _________________________________________________28 F. Improved Signs and Markings ___________________________________________________________28 G. Roadway Improvements________________________________________________________________28 H. Roadway Grade Separation _____________________________________________________________29 I. Other Mobility Factors_________________________________________________________________29 J. Thoroughfare Plan Considerations________________________________________________________30 K. Transportation Improvement Program/Capital Improvement Program Considerations________________31 IX. RECOMMENDATIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS ___________________________ 32 A. Crossings Recommended for Closure _____________________________________________________33 B. New Public Crossings Recommended _____________________________________________________38 C. Crossings Recommended for New or Improved Automatic Warning Devices ______________________41 D. Other Recommended Street Improvements _________________________________________________43 E. Other Long -Term Recommendations _____________________________________________________48 X. RECOMMENDATIONS WITHOUT PASSENGER SERVICE____________________ 49 PRIVATE CROSSINGS ______________________________________________________52 XI. CROSSING SUMMARY__________________________________________________ 52 XII. PRIVATE CROSSING RECOMMENDATIONS _______________________________ 52 XIII. COSTS SUMMARY _____________________________________________________ 60 A. Charlotte-All Crossings - $2,757,650.00.___________________________________________________60 B. Huntersville-All Crossings - $2,783,500.00. ________________________________________________61 C. Cornelius-All Crossings - $1,841,500.00. __________________________________________________61 D. Davidson-All Crossings - $310,000.00. ____________________________________________________61 E. Iredell County-All Crossings - $1,168,000.00. ______________________________________________61 iii F. Mooresville-All Crossings - $523,000.00. __________________________________________________61 XIV. COSTS SUMMARY BY IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE _________________ 62 XV. SUMMARY ____________________________________________________________ 62 iv List of Tables TABLE 1___________________________________________________________________ 10 TABLE 2___________________________________________________________________ 15 TABLE 3___________________________________________________________________ 17 TABLE 4___________________________________________________________________ 18 TABLE 5___________________________________________________________________ 19 TABLE 6___________________________________________________________________ 42 TABLE 7___________________________________________________________________ 44 TABLE 8___________________________________________________________________ 66 TABLE 9___________________________________________________________________ 68 TABLE 10__________________________________________________________________ 69 v List of Figures FIGURE 1 – SPRATT STREET, CHARLOTTE (BEGIN STUDY)............................................. 9 FIGURE 2 – PRIVATE CROSSING ........................................................................................... 10 FIGURE 3 – RURAL PUBLIC CROSSING................................................................................ 10 FIGURE 4 – END OF THE LINE, STATESVILLE AVENUE CROSSING, MOORESVILLE 11 FIGURE 5 – TRUCK ROUTE ..................................................................................................... 14 FIGURE 6 – SIGHT OBSTRUCTION – PRIVATE CROSSING............................................... 15 FIGURE 7 – SIGHT OBSTRUCTION –PUBLIC CROSSING .................................................. 15 FIGURE 8 – RURAL CROSSING WITH GATES, FLASHING SIGNALS & BELL............... 16 FIGURE 9 – GATED PRIVATE CROSSING - IREDELL CO. ................................................. 16 FIGURE 10 – HUMPED PUBLIC CROSSING - CHARLOTTE. .............................................. 17 FIGURE 11 – HUMPED PRIVATE CROSSING........................................................................ 18 FIGURE 12 – VEHICLES QUEUED OVER THE CROSSING – NC 73 .................................. 19 FIGURE 13 – INADEQUATE QUEUE DISTANCE - MOORESVILLE .................................. 19 FIGURE 14 – SCHOOL ROUTE................................................................................................. 21 FIGURE 15 – LONG GATE ARM .............................................................................................. 24 FIGURE 16 – MT. MOURNE VFD (NOW LOCATED AT LANGTREE ROAD & 115)........ 30 FIGURE 17 – PROPOSED HAMBRIGHT ROAD EXTENSION.............................................. 38 FIGURE 18 – CALDWELL STATION –