Rails-with-Trails: Lessons Learned

2y ago
18 Views
2 Downloads
7.80 MB
181 Pages
Last View : 16d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Milo Davies
Transcription

U.S. Departmentof TransportationFederal HighwayAdministrationFederal RailroadAdministrationNational HighwayTraffic SafetyAdministrationFederal TransitAdministrationRails-with-Trails:Lessons LearnedLiterature Review, Current Practices, ConclusionsAugust 2002FTA-MA-26-0052-04-1

ForewordThis report has been prepared at the direction of the U.S. Department of Transportationfor the purpose of examining safety, design, and liability issues associated with the de velopment of shared use paths and other trails within or adjacent to active railroad andtransit rights-of-way. This document is intended to explore lessons learned from the ex perience of rails-with-trails (RWTs), and suggest practices to enhance safety and secu rity for railroads, transit, and trail users.The U.S. Department of Transportation does not actively promote RWT projects, butrecognizes that RWTs already exist and that more are being planned and implemented.This report provides information for public agencies, railroads, legal interests, and trailorganizations to make informed decisions.NOTEThis document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department ofTransportation in the interest of information exchange. The United StatesGovernment assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof.The contents of this report reflect the view of the contractor, who is responsiblefor the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarilyreflect the official policy of the Department of Transportation.This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers.Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein only because they are consideredessential to the object of this document.

Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGEPublic reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searchingexisting data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding thisburden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services,Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Managementand Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank)2. REPORT DATEAugust 20023. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVEREDFinal Report July 1999 - August 20024. TITLE AND SUBTITLERails-with-Trails: Lessons LearnedLiterature Review, Current Practices, Conclusions5. FUNDING NUMBERSTMC3/BB2526. AUTHOR(S)Mia L. Birk, Andrea Ferster, Esq., Michael G. Jones, Philip K. Miller, George M. Hudson, Joshua Abrams, Daniel Lerch*7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)U.S. DOTResearch and Special Programs AdministrationVolpe National Transportation Systems Center55 Broadway, Kendall SquareCambridge, MA 02142-10939. SPONSORING/MONITORINGAGENCYNAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Transit AdministrationOffice of Program ManagementOffice of Safety and SecurityWashington, DC 20590U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationOffice of Human and NaturalEnvironmental ManagementWashington, DC 205908. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBERDOT-VNTSC-FTA-04-05U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Railroad AdministrationOffice of SafetyCrossing Safety and TresspassPrevention ProgramsWashington, DC 2059010. SPONSORING/MONITORINGAGENCY REPORT NUMBERFTA-MA-26-0052-04-111. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES*Alta Planning Design144 NE 28th AvenuePortland, Oregon 9723212a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT12b. DISTRIBUTION CODEThis document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)This report, prepared at the direction of the U.S. Department of Transportation, examines safety, design, and liability issues associated with the development ofshared use paths and other trails within or adjacent to active railroad and transit rights-of-way. This document is intended to explore lessons learned from theexperience of rails-with-trails (RWTs), and suggest practices to enhance safety and security for railroads, transit, and trail users. This report provides informa tion for public agencies, railroads, legal interests, and trail organizations to make informed decisions.14. SUBJECT TERMSrails-with-trails (RWT), shared use paths, trails, crossings, liability, legislation15. NUMBER OF PAGES19016. PRICE CODE17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATIONOF REPORTUnclassifiedNSN 7540-01-280-550018. SECURITY CLASSIFICATIONOF THIS PAGEUnclassified19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATIONOF ABSTRACTUnclassified20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACTUnlimitedStandard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18298-102

METRIC/ENGLISH CONVERSION FACTORSENGLISH TO METRICMETRIC TO ENGLISHLENGTH (APPROXIMATE)1 inch (in)1 foot (ft)1 yard (yd)1 mile (mi) LENGTH (APPROXIMATE)2.5 centimeters (cm)30 centimeters (cm)0.9 meter (m)1.6 kilometers (km)1 millimeter (mm)1 centimeter (cm)1 meter (m)1 meter (m)1 kilometer (km)AREA (APPROXIMATE)1 square inch (sq in, in2)1 square foot (sq ft, ft2)1 square yard (sq yd, yd2)1 square mile (sq mi, mi2)1 acre 0.4 hectare (he) 1 square centimeter (cm2)1 square meter (m2)1 square kilometer (km2)10,000 square meters (m2) 1 gram (gm)1 kilogram (kg)1 tonne (t) 0.16 square inch (sq in, in2)1.2 square yards (sq yd, yd2)0.4 square mile (sq mi, mi2)1 hectare (ha) 2.5 acres 0.036 ounce (oz)2.2 pounds (lb)1,000 kilograms (kg)1.1 short tonsVOLUME (APPROXIMATE)5 milliliters (ml)15 milliliters (ml)30 milliliters (ml)0.24 liter (l)0.47 liter (l)0.96 liter (l)3.8 liters (l)0.03 cubic meter (m3)0.76 cubic meter (m3)1 milliliter (ml)1 liter (l)1 liter (l)1 liter (l) 0.03 fluid ounce (fl oz)2.1 pints (pt)1.06 quarts (qt)0.26 gallon (gal)1 cubic meter (m3)1 cubic meter (m3) 36 cubic feet (cu ft, ft3)1.3 cubic yards (cu yd, yd3)TEMPERATURE (EXACT)[(x-32)(5/9)] ºF MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE)28 grams (gm)0.45 kilogram (kg)0.9 tonne (t)VOLUME (APPROXIMATE)1 teaspoon (tsp)1 tablespoon (tbsp)1 fluid ounce (fl oz)1 cup (c)1 pint (pt)1 quart (qt)1 gallon (gal)1 cubic foot (cu ft, ft3)1 cubic yard (cu yd, yd3)0.04 inch (in)0.4 inch (in)3.3 feet (ft)1.1 yards (yd)0.6 mile (mi)AREA (APPROXIMATE)6.5 square centimeters (cm2)0.09 square meter (m2)0.8 square meter (m2)2.6 square kilometers (km2)4,000 square meters (m2)MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE)1 ounce (oz)1 pound (lb)1 short ton 2,000 pounds (lb) TEMPERATURE (EXACT)y ºC[(9/5)y 32] ºC x ºFQUICK INCH – CENTIMETER LENGTH CONVERSIONInches 01Centimeters 0122343567489510111213QUICK FAHRENHEIT – CELSIUS TEMPERATURE or more exact and or other conversion factors, see NIST Miscellaneous Publication 286, Units of Weights and Measures. Price 2.50 SD Catalog No. C13 10286Updated 6/17/98

Rails-with-Trails:Lessons LearnedLiterature Review, Current Practices, ConclusionsP R E PA R E D B Y:PROJECT MANAGERS:Alta Planning DesignMia L. Birk (Project Manager)Michael G. JonesPhilip K. MillerGeorge M. Hudson, RLAJoshua AbramsDaniel LerchChristopher Douwes, Federal HighwayAdministrationPamela Caldwell-Foggin, Federal RailroadAdministrationI N A S S O C I AT I O N W I T H :Andrea Ferster, Esq.Sprinkle ConsultingJennifer Toole, AICPCharles Denney, AICPTexas Transportation InstituteMichele BrownJessica FranklinENSCO, Inc.Eric Keller, PERick Tannahill, PEKarl Morell, Ball Janik LLPCASE STUDY SUPPORT:Peggy Gentry, Chapin Land Management, Inc.Craig della Penna, Railroad Services Inc., Rails-toTrails ConservancySuzan PinsofPRODUCTION SUPPORT:Architecture 21Grapheon DesignTerri Musser, Bicycles Etc.

AcknowledgmentsThe authors would like to thank the following people for their contributions to this report:Doug Andrews, Operation Lifesaver DelawareJohn Balicki, Maine Department ofTransportationSgt. Belden, City of San Fernando, CaliforniaRobert Bernard, Portland (OR) Office ofTransportationThomas Brooks, Alaska Railroad CorporationRon Campbell, Wildcat Mountain State Park,WisconsinLionel Carver, City of Augusta, MaineOfficer Joe Cepeda, Seattle Police DepartmentGeorge Church, Westmoreland Cty. (PA)Industrial Development AuthorityAndy Clarke, Association of Pedestrian andBicycle ProfessionalsByron Cole, Ballard Terminal RailroadMark Conley, City of Kirkland, WashingtonSeth M. Corwin, Operation Lifesaver New YorkMichael Coty, City of Gardner, MaineJ.M. (Mike) Cowles, Burlington Northern andSanta Fe Railway CompanyJohn Dinning, Canadian National/Illinois CentralRailwayStephen Dockter, Columbus (GA) ConsolidatedGovernmentsSylvanus Doughty, Citizens in Defense ofCommon SenseLt. John Drum, City of Portland, OregonKevin Fazzini, Hickory Run State Park,PennsylvaniaG. Thomas Foggin III, Department of Geography,The George Washington UniversityMarianne Fowler, Rails-to-Trails ConservancyEdwin Galvez, City of San Fernando, CaliforniaBill Gentilman, Buffalo & Pittsburgh RailroadBruce F. George, Federal RailroadAdministration, retiredMary Jean Gilman, Missoula (MT) Parks &Recreation DepartmentGerri Hall, Operation Lifesaver, Inc.Joshua Hart, Rails-to-Trails ConservancyW. Stephen Head, North Carolina Department ofTransportationLt. Dewayne Herbert, Norristown (PA) PoliceDepartmentLarry Hodes, Coalition for the MetropolitanBranch Trail, Washington BicyclistAssociation (WABA)Steve Jantz, City of Carlsbad, CaliforniaKenyon KarlRichard Kotan, Omaha Public Power DistrictRoy Lapota, City of Newark, DelawareConstable William Law, Canadian Pacific RailwayPoliceEarl Leach, Rummel, Klepper & Kahl, LLPJosh Lehman, Massachusetts Highway PlanningSergeant Curtis Lockette, Columbus (GA)Consolidated Governments PoliceDepartmentCpl. Christopher Lynch, Burlington (VT) PoliceDepartmentMichael Maher, Transplan PTY Ltd.Richard Mather, R.A. Mather & Associates, Ltd.Ron Mathieu, Southern California Regional RailAuthority/MetrolinkSil Mazzella, City of Gaylord, MichiganSheriff James McBride, Otsego County,MichiganRobert D. McCarthey, CIC, McCarthy RailInsurance ManagersMike McGinley, Southern California Regional RailAuthority/MetrolinkSgt. Phillip McMillion, City of Gaylord, MichiganPaul Meijer, Coalition of the Metropolitan BranchTrailZigisha Mhaskar, North County (CA) TransitDistrictJoe Moore, Grapevine (TX) Parks & RecreationDepartmentJim Moorehead, Wildcat Mountain State Park,WisconsinHugh Morris, Rails-to-Trails ConservancyAssistant Chief Wesley Mott, Columbus (GA)Consolidated Governments PoliceDepartmentDetective Bob Murphy, City of Grapevine (TX)Police DepartmentCapt. William Nufoski, City of Newark, DelawareDaniel O’Brien, Massachusetts Dep’t ofEnvironmental ManagementLuisa Paiewonsky, MassHighway Bureau ofTransportation PlanningDave Papworth, North County (CA) TransitDistrictNaresh Patel, Southern California Regional RailAuthority/MetrolinkJack Paulik, Five Star TrailJohn Perlic, Parametrix, IncJim Raffa, Reading & Northern RailroadJennifer Rice, Redwood Community ActionAgencyLt. Denis Riel, Lincoln (RI) Police DepartmentMalcome Ritchie, Ohio Central RailroadPaula RougnyDick Samuels, Oregon Pacific RailroadMike Scime, Indiana DOT, Railroad SectionManagerDeborah Sedares, Providence & WorcesterRailroadJan Seidner, Dallas Area Rapid TransitJoe Simon, Kirkland (WA) Police DeptBruce Sleeper, JBG&HP. Conrad Smith, Mesa Design GroupPhil Smith, City of Missoula, MontanaRussell Spinney, Maine Department ofTransportationJohn Stevens, Friends of the RiverfrontLes Town, AmtrakSkip Tracy, City of Irvine, CaliforniaDr. Jürg Tschopp, VCS Verkehrs-Club derSchweizRichard van Buskirk, Lake State RailroadStephen Vance, San Diego Association ofGovernmentsFrançoise Vermette, Vélo QuébecOfficer Mark Warrington, City of Portland,OregonRobert Whalen, Burlington (VT) Parks &RecreationChip Willett, Willett CompanyPhillip Williams, Maryland Mass TransitAdministrationJohn Wood, Montgomery County (PA) PlanningCommissionTom Zeinz, Canadian National RailwayLambri Zerva P.E., Rhode Island Department ofTransportationThe authors also thank U.S. Department of Transportation staff who assisted in this project, as well as those who provided substantivecomments and insights throughout this process, but chose to remain anonymous.

Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IData Collection and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IIProcess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IIILiability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VDesign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIOperations/Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .XConclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .XII N T R O D U C T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iTrail Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iiiRailroad Trespassing and Safety Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iiiBackground of the Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ivData Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vProcess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .viIntent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .viContents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .viS E C T I O N I : Literature Review Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Rail-with-Trail Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Individual Studies and Master Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Liability of Rails-with-Trails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Innovative Technological and Operational Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5International RWT Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6S E C T I O N I I : Case Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9Overview of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9Case Study Summaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11S E C T I O N I I I : RWT Development Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27Overview of Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27Current Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Assessing Potential Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29Corridor Acquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32Process Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32RWT Feasibility: Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33Involving the Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35Keeping Written Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Legislation, Liability, and Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39Overview of Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39Overview of Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40Definitions and Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41Available Legal Protections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44Crash Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47Property Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50Review and Strengthen State Statutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53Crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53Indemnification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54S E C T I O N V : Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57Overview of Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58Rail Characteristics and Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58Setback: Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62Setback: Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64Separation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66Railroad Track Crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69Trail-Roadway Crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81Utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .84Accommodating Future Tracks and Sidings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .84Trestles and Bridges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85Tunnels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87Environmental Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88Support Facilities and Amenities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88Trailheads and Parking Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88Landscaping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .89Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90Lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90Signing and Markings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90Equestrian Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91Considerations for Steam Locomotives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91S E C T I O N V I : RWT Operational Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .93Overview of Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .93Rail Operations Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94Maintenance Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94Construction Management Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .96Trail Safety Education and Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .96Railroad Safety Education and Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .96Security and Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .97Developing Trail Use Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100R E F E R E N C E S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .101A P P E N D I X A : Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109A P P E N D I X B : State-by-State Matrix of Applicable Laws and Statutes . . . . . . . . .113A P P E N D I X C : Sample Legal Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .123A P P E N D I X D : Photo Credits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .155SECTION IV:

List of Figures & TablesFIGURE 1.1Map of existing rails-with-trails. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iFIGURE 1.2Number and kilometers of U.S. rail-trails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iiiFIGURE 1.3Number and kilometers of existing U.S. rails-with-trails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iiiFIGURE 1.4Railroad trespassing casualties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iiiFIGURE 2.1RWT case studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9FIGURE 2.2Type of trespassing by percentage of incidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10FIGURE 2.3“Would observed activity be accommodated by planned RWT?” . . . . . . . .10FIGURE 2.4Age of observed trespassers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10FIGURE 2.5Observed gender of trespassers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11FIGURE 2.6Observed type of trespassers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11FIGURE 3.1Agency ownership of rail corridor, by percentage of trails . . . . . . . . . . .31FIGURE 3.2Steps in feasibility study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32FIGURE 3.3Involving railroad companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36FIGURE 4.1Liability definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42T able 4.1Liability exposure reduction options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45FIGURE 4.2Highway-rail grade crossing collisions and casualtiesat public crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47FIGURE 4.3Highway-rail incident breakdown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47FIGURE 4.4Preferred easement agreement contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51FIGURE 4.5Preferred license agreement contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51FIGURE 4.6Requirement for indemnity, by percentage of RWTs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55FIGURE 4.7Source of liability insurance, by percentage of RWTs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55T ableExamples of RWTs by corridor type and ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .595.1FIGURE 5.1Type of railroad adjacent to existing RWTs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61FIGURE 5.2Frequency of trains, by percentage of existing RWTs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61FIGURE 5.3Type of terrain through which trails pass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61FIGURE 5.4Width of full corridor, by percentage of trails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61FIGURE 5.5Width of RWT, by percentage of trails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62FIGURE 5.6Setback and separation definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62

FIGURE 5.7Distance between edge of trail and track centerline,by percentage of trails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62FIGURE 5.8RWT setback/train speed correlation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63FIGURE 5.9Setback/frequency correlation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63FIGURE 5.10Minimum RWT setback depends on specific situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64FIGURE 5.11Dynamic envelope delineation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64FIGURE 5.12Minimum RWT setback – fill sections (depending on situation) . . . . . . . . .65FIGURE 5.13Minimum RWT setback – constrained sections (depending on situation) . .65FIGURE 5.14Percentage of existing RWTs with barrier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66FIGURE 5.15Barrier type, by percentage of existing RWTs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66FIGURE 5.17Trail separation example – using vegetation as a separation technique . .66FIGURE 5.16Fencing styles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67FIGURE 5.18Sample maintenance access transitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69FIGURE 5.19Approach grade at at-grade crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72FIGURE 5.2045 Trail-rail crossing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73FIGURE 5.2190 Trail-rail crossing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73FIGURE 5.22Crossing equipped with passive warning devicesFIGURE 5.23Crossing equipped with active warning devices and fencing . . . . . . . . . .74FIGURE 5.24Highway-rail crossing (Crossbuck) sign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75FIGURE 5.25MUTCD #2 approved railroad warning signs that may beappropriate for RWTs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75FIGURE 5.26Sample trespassing and other signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76FIGURE 5.27Composite drawing showing clearances for active traffic controldevices at highway-rail grade crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78FIGURE 5.28Typical light rail transit flashing light signal assembly forpedestrian crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78FIGURE 5.29Typical pedestrian gate placement behind the sidewalk . . . . . . . . . . . . .78FIGURE 5.30Typical pedestrian gate placement with pedestrian gate arm . . . . . . . . .78FIGURE 5.31RWT culvert under tracks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79FIGURE 5.32RWT track undercrossing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79FIGURE 5.33RWT track overcrossing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79FIGURE 5.34RWT track overcrossing (meets Amtrak required clearance heightfor non-electrified track) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79FIGURE 5.35Roadway crossing type 1 (reroute to nearest intersection) . . . . . . . . . . .82FIGURE 5.36Roadway crossing type 2 (new signal) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82FIGURE 5.37Roadway crossing type 3 (unprotected crossing) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82FIGURE 5.38Roadway and track crossingFIGURE 5.39Summary of potential trail user movements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83FIGURE 5.40Angled intersection with roadway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83FIGURE 5.41Trestle options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86FIGURE 5.42Trailhead and parking design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .89FIGURE 6.1“Does railway help trail agency maintain corridor?”by percentage of trails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94FIGURE 6.2Operation Lifesaver “Tips for Bicyclists” brochure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .98. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82

Executive SummaryThis report offers conclusions about the lessons learned in the development, construc tion, and operation of “rails-with-trails” so that railroad companies, trail developers, andothers can benefit from the history of trails in existence today. “Rail-with-trail” (RWT) de scribes any shared use path or trail located on or directly adjacent to an active railroadcorridor. About 65 RWTs encompass 385 km (239 mi) in 30 States today. These trails arelocated adjacent to active rail lines ranging from a few slow-moving short-haul freighttrains weekly, to high-frequency Amtrak trains traveling as fast as 225 km/h (140 mi/h).Dozens of RWTs are proposed or planned. While most are located on public lands leasedto private railroads, many are on privately owned railroad property. Hundreds of kilo meters of RWTs traverse Western Australia, Canada, and Europe.RWT advocates and r

Jun 17, 1998 · Lt. Denis Riel, Lincoln (RI) Police Department Malcome Ritchie, Ohio Central Railroad Paula Rougny Dick Samuels, Oregon Pacific Railroad Mike Scime, Indiana DOT, Railroad Section Manager Deborah Sedares, Providence & Worcester Railroad Jan Seidner, Dallas Area Rapid Transit Joe

Related Documents:

Note from the Publisher The Ruby on Rails 3 Tutorial and Reference Collectionconsists of two bestselling Rails eBooks: Ruby on Rails 3 Tutorial:Learn Rails by Example by Michael Hartl The Rails 3 Wayby Obie Fernandez Ruby on Rails 3 Tutorial:Learn Rails by Exampleis a hands-on guide to the Rails 3 envi- ronment.Through detailed instruction,you develop your own complete sample

rails dbconsole rails db # starts up the Rails db console Command Shortcut Description Help: All commands can be run with -h for more information rails g scaffold zombie name:string bio:text age:integer rails g migration RemoveEmailFromUser email:string rails g mailer Zombi

Contributing to Ruby on Rails Rails is not 'somebody else's framework.' This guide covers a variety of ways that you can get involved in the ongoing development of Rails. API Documentation Guidelines This guide documents the Ruby on Rails API documentation guidelines. Ruby on Rails Guides Guidelines This guide documents the Ruby on Rails guides .

RESTful Rails controllers, the Rails controller methods will also support the traditional HTML views. Rails provides a standard three-tier architecture (presentation tier, model tier, persistence tier) as well as a Model-View-Controller (MVC) architecture. As shown in Figure 1, Rails takes care of everything between the web server and the database.

to purpose built mountain bike trails. ¾ Less than 20% of the South West's sanctioned mountain bike trails are purpose built singletrack and only 15% of these singletrack trails are in good condition. ¾ Fewer than 10% of all trails are well-signed purpose built singletrack. ¾ Existing purpose built singletrack trails are largely

were Grails, previously known as Groovy on Rails, Trails, and RIFE. Both Grails and Trails are heavily influenced by Ruby on Rails. All of these frameworks where developed because a web application written in Java has been harder than they should be. According to the lead developer of Trails, once you

folders for the Open Rails software to read them into the game engine. Installation of Open Rails software does not modify any MSTS files. Nor does Open Rails software modify any MSTS files during game play. The Open Rails software is not responsible for your inability to access any MSTS train sets, activities, consists, services or routes.

Canopy Assembly and Installation Instructions 1. Assemble Lower Frame Locate (4) Side rails, (2) Front/rear rails and (1) Ridgepole. Connect the two side rails using the splice as shown. Finish Lower frame assembly by attaching the Front/Rear rails to the Side Rails using the Corner Castings.