National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: References
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Literature Review by Category." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Prioritization Procedure for Proposed Road–Rail Grade Separation Projects Along Specific Rail Corridors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25460.
×
Page 46
Page 47
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Literature Review by Category." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Prioritization Procedure for Proposed Road–Rail Grade Separation Projects Along Specific Rail Corridors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25460.
×
Page 47
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Literature Review by Category." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Prioritization Procedure for Proposed Road–Rail Grade Separation Projects Along Specific Rail Corridors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25460.
×
Page 48
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Literature Review by Category." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Prioritization Procedure for Proposed Road–Rail Grade Separation Projects Along Specific Rail Corridors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25460.
×
Page 49
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Literature Review by Category." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Prioritization Procedure for Proposed Road–Rail Grade Separation Projects Along Specific Rail Corridors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25460.
×
Page 50
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Literature Review by Category." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Prioritization Procedure for Proposed Road–Rail Grade Separation Projects Along Specific Rail Corridors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25460.
×
Page 51
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Literature Review by Category." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Prioritization Procedure for Proposed Road–Rail Grade Separation Projects Along Specific Rail Corridors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25460.
×
Page 52

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

46 Literature Review by Category A P P E N D I X A

1 Railroad–Highway Grade Crossing Handbook (FHWA, 2007) X 3 Development of Evaluation Tools for Road–Rail Grade Separation (Hakkert and Gitelman, 1998) (not used in the equation) (not used in the equation) 5 Prioritizing Level Crossings in Melbourne for Grade Separation (Crawford, 2010) x x 7 Grade Separation Program (California Public Utilities Commission, 2013) x 9 A Methodology for Evaluating Highway–Rail Grade Separations (Schrader and Hoffpauer, 2001) X x 11 Highway–Rail Crossing Project Selection (Qureshi, et al., 2003) X (output of the model) 13 Criteria for Grade Separation for RR Crossing (Right of Way) – Minnesota (AASHTO, 2008) X 15 Criteria for Grade Separation for RR Crossing (Right of Way) – New Hampshire(AASHTO, 2008) x 17 Benefit–Cost Analysis and the Construction and Financing of Rail/Highway Grade Separations (Dodgson, 1984) X x Literature Accident Prediction Value FRA Safety Record (Accident History) Near Misses 2 Grade Separation Prioritization Report(Kern Council of Governments, 2011) X 4 Grade Separation Priority Update Study for Alameda Corridor East (Riverside County Transportation Commission, 2012) X 6 Improvement to Highway–Rail Grade Crossing and Rail Safety (Minnesota DOT, 2014) X x x 8 Grade Separations: When Do We Separate? (Nichelson and Reed, 1999) X x 10 Integrated Prioritization Method for Active and Passive Highway–Rail Crossings (Weissmann, et al., 2013) x 12 Criteria for Grade Separation for RR Crossing (Right of Way) – Arizona (AASHTO, 2008) X 14 Criteria for Grade Separation for RR Crossing (Right of Way) – Arkansas (AASHTO, 2008) x 16 User Benefits of Railroad Grade Separation in a Small Community (Roper and Keltner, 1999) X 18 Quantifying the Public Impact of Highway Rail Grade Crossing on Surface Mobility (Protopapas, et. al., 2010) x Safety-Related Literature

Literature Current Road Delay Future Road Delay Rail Delay Posted H ighway Speed Speed Reduction AADT AATT Train Distrib Passenger Train Count Train Speed Train Length Exposure Traffic Growth Duration of Crossing C losure LOS Queue Length Binary Var: Through Train 1 x x x x X x x x x 2 Grade Separation Prioritization Report (Kern Council of Governments, 2011) x x x x X x x x 3 x x x x x (not used in the equation) x 4 Grade Separation Priority Update Study for Alameda Corridor East (Riverside County Transportation Commission, 2012) x x x x x x x x x 5 X X HCADT X X x x 6 Prioritizing Level Crossings in Melbourne for Grade Separation (Crawford, 2010) x X x x 7 x X HCADT X 8 Grade Separation Program (California Public Utilities Commission, 2013) X x x 9 x X x x x 10 Criteria for Grade Separation for RR Crossing (Right of Way) – Arkansas (AASHTO, 2008) X x 11 X x x 12 Grade Separations: When Do We Separate? (Nichelson and Reed, 1999) x X x x x 13 x x x HCADT x x x x x 14 Motorist Delay at Public Highway Rail Grade Crossings in Northeastern Illinois (Illinois Commerce Commission, 2002) x x x x x 15 Benefit – Cost Analysis and the Construction and Financing of Rail/Highway Grade Separations (Dodgson, 1984) x x 16 Quantifying the Public Impact of Highway–Rail Grade Crossings on Surface Mobility (Protopapas, et. al., 2010) x x x x x x x x 17 Methodology for Evaluating Highway–Rail Grade Separations (Schrader and Hoffpauer, 2001) x x x X (peak trains per day) x x Note: Distrib = distribution; LOS = level of service; HCADT = heavy commercial average daily traffic. Railroad–Highway Grade Crossing Handbook (FHWA, 2007) Development of Evaluation Tools for Road–Rail Grade Separation (Hakkert and Gitelman, 1998) Improvements to At-Grade Rail Crossings: Prioritizing Crossings for Grade Separation (Peel Regional Council, 2014) Improvement to Highway–Rail Grade Crossing and Rail Safety (Minnesota DOT, 2014) Highway – Rail Crossing Project Selection (Qureshi, et al., 2003) Criteria for Grade Separation for RR Crossing (Right of Way) – Michigan (AASHTO, 2008) User Benefits of Railroad Grade Separation in a Small Community (Roper and Keltner, 1999) Literature on Traffic- and Delay-Related Factors

Literature Land Use Spread of Region Geometry of Crossing/sight distance/clearance time for road vehicles Number of Highway Lanes/Highway Paved Number of Rail Tracks Adjacent Grade Separation Warning Device Construct -ability 1 Grade Separation Prioritization Report (Kern Council of Governments, 2011) x x 2 Grade Separation Priority Update Study for Alameda Corridor East (Riverside County Transportation Commission, 2012) x x x 3 Grade Separation Program (California Public Utilities Commission, 2013) X (under special conditions factors) 4 Improvements to At-Grade Rail Crossings: Prioritizing Crossings for Grade Separation (Peel Regional Council, 2014) x x x x 5 Integrated Prioritization Method for Active and Passive Highway–Rail Crossings (Weissmann, et al., 2013) x x 6 Highway–Rail Crossing Project Selection (Qureshi, et al., 2003) x 7 Criteria for Grade Separation for RR Crossing (Right of Way)–Michigan (AASHTO, 2008) x 8 User Benefits of Railroad Grade Separation in a Small Community (Roper and Keltner, 1999) x 9 Motorist Delay at Public Highway–Rail Grade Crossings in Northeastern Illinois (Illinois Commerce Commission, 2002) x x 10 A Methodology for Evaluating Highway–Rail Grade Separations (Schrader and Hoffpauer, 2001) x x x x 11 Grade Separations: When Do We Separate? (Nichelson and Reed, 1999) x Crossings in Literature on Location and Crossing Geometry

Literature Noise Air Quality/Emissions and Fuel Savings Sites of Environmental Significance 1 Grade Separation Prioritization Report (Kern Council of Governments, 2011) x 2 Grade Separation Priority Update Study for Alameda Corridor East (Riverside County Transportation Commission, 2012) x x 3 Prioritizing Level Crossings in Melbourne for Grade Separation (Crawford, 2010) x x x 4 A Methodology for Evaluating Highway– Rail Grade Separations (Schrader and Hoffpauer, 2001) x 5 Criteria for Grade Separation for RR Crossing (Right of Way) – New Hampshire (AASHTO, 2008) 6 Benefit–Cost Analysis and the Construction and Financing of Rail/Highway Grade Separations (Dodgson, 1984) x Literature on Environmental Factors Related to Grade Crossings

Literature Population Vulnerable Population Transit/Emergency /School Bus Vehicle Routes Social Significance (local development) Community Cohesion/ Accessibility/ Connectivity Quiet Zone Strategic Fit Local Agent Priority/ Isolated Location Visual Amenity 1 Grade Separation Prioritization Report (Kern Council of Governments, 2011) X x 2 Improvements to At-Grade Rail Crossings: Prioritizing Crossings for Grade Separation (Peel Regional Council, 2014) x x 3 Grade Separation Priority Update Study for Alameda Corridor East (Riverside County Transportation Commission, 2012) X x x X 4 Prioritizing Level Crossings in Melbourne for Grade Separation (Crawford, 2010) X x x x x x x 5 Improvement to Highway– Rail Grade Crossing and Rail Safety (Minnesota DOT, 2014) X x x X (nearby traffic generator) 6 A Methodology for Evaluating Highway Rail– Grade Separations (Schrader and Hoffpauer, 2001) X x 7 Criteria for Grade Separation for RR Crossing (Right of Way)— Michigan (AASHTO, 2008) x 8 Grade Separations: When Do We Separate? (Nichelson and Reed, 1999) x x Literature on Community Livability Factors Related to Grade Crossings

52 Literature Vehicle Operating Cost/Delay and Accident Cost Crossing Operating Cost/Life- Cycle Cost Construction Cost Economic Losses 1 Development of Evaluation Tools for Road–Rail Grade Separation (Hakkert and Gitelman, 1998) X 2 Grade Separation Prioritization Report (Kern Council of Governments, 2011) x 3 Prioritizing Level Crossings in Melbourne for Grade Separation (Crawford, 2010) x 4 Grade Separations: When Do We Separate? (Nichelson and Reed, 1999) x x x 5 User Benefits of Railroad Grade Separation in a Small Community (Roper and Keltner, 1999) x 6 Motorist Delay at Public Highway–Rail Grade Crossings in Northeastern Illinois (Illinois Commerce Commission, 2002) x 7 Benefit–Cost Analysis and the Construction and Financing of Rail/Highway Grade Separations (Dodgson, 1984) X Literature on Economic Considerations Related to Grade Crossings

Next: Appendix B - Methodology for Adjusting the USDOT Accident Prediction Value »
Prioritization Procedure for Proposed Road–Rail Grade Separation Projects Along Specific Rail Corridors Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Research Report 901: Prioritization Procedure for Proposed Road–Rail Grade Separation Projects Along Specific Rail Corridors is designed to assist state and local planners in making prioritization and investment decisions for road–rail at-grade crossing separations.

The report provides a comprehensive means of comparing similar project alternatives within a specific rail corridor. Planning factors include economic, environmental, and community livability factors to support a robust decision process for making grade separation decisions.

NCHRP Report 901 also includes railroad crossing assessment tool (RCAT), a multicriteria evaluation tool that considers safety, economic, environmental, and community livability factors in a set of linked Microsoft Excel spreadsheets.

The report also includes a communications toolkit to help inform and convey to stakeholders and decision makers the relative objective merits of individual road–rail separation projects within corridors.

The assessment tool, communications toolkit, and user guide are published in electric only format as Appendix C - The RCAT User Guide, and Appendix D - The RCAT Toolkit and Templates.

During the past decade, railroad traffic has fluctuated in a number of key markets; coal traffic has declined, while other markets such as petroleum and intermodal have grown. Changing markets can impact the amount of rail traffic on rail mainlines, presenting challenges to state and local planners faced with making investment decisions about at-grade rail crossing improvements. This situation is particularly acute along urban rail corridors experiencing significant increases in train traffic or where the operating speed or train length has increased.

The traditional approach for making grade-crossing investment decisions has been guided primarily by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Railroad–Highway Grade Crossing Handbook, which focuses heavily on traffic and safety factors. While safety continues to be a high priority in the development of road–rail grade separation projects, state and local decision makers need more robust criteria when competing against other projects for funding and construction.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!