center for transportation research - the university of texas at austin protecting and preserving...

CENTER FOR TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH - THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN

Protecting and Preserving Rail Corridors

from Encroachment of Incompatible Use

2008 Mid-States Highway Rail Grade Crossing Safety Conference

Grapevine, TxMay 20, 2008


Research Project Purpose

Purpose of the research was to improve TxDOT rail planning by

developing strategies to protect rail corridors – existing and planned –

from encroachment of incompatible land use activities

TxDOT Research Project 0-5546Research Team: Lisa Loftus-Otway, Lynn Blais,

Nathan Hutson, Michael WaltonTxDOT Project Management: Wilda Won and Jennifer Moczygemba


Encroachment: What’s the Problem?• Safety

–at-grade crossings–trespass–accidents and spills

• Noise & vibration–wheels, locomotives and carriages

–freight yard activity

• Clearance–vertical encroachment, from overpasses that are not cleared for double stack


What do we mean by incompatible use?


Encroachment of incompatible useHeights Boulevard, Houston, TxFence is 3.5 feet from near rail and foundation is 8.5 feet from rail

Source: Carolyn Cook - FRA

8.5 feet


Encroachment of incompatible useBeing built to ‘usual’ standards No soundproofing/vibration mitigation

Source: Dale Hill – Union Pacific


Encroachment of incompatible use

Source: Carolyn Cook - FRA

Unit facing us is listed at $350kUnit behind is closer to rail listed at $380k

Source: Dale Hill – Union Pacific


Current Texas Practices• Comprehensive plans outline future rail

corridors (freight/transit)

• State/local/Class I cooperation and coordination

• Rail relocation – needs funding

• Zoning around rail corridors, especially transit corridors and use of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) is occurring


Regulation in Texas• Legal powers – 2 categories

– Land use acquisition– Land use regulation

• TxDOT Powers – none to adopt land use regulations

• RTAs, RMA Powers – none to engage in land use regulation

• Municipal Powers – power to regulate use of land via zoning authority

• County Powers – more constrained in ability to regulate land use


Regulation/Tools Used in U.S.• Official maps

– Prevent future encroachment by reducing uncertainty

• Development permitting

• Protective condemnation – Nebraska DOT has authority to preserve 300 feet

either side of transportation alignment

• Setbacks, cluster and overlay zoning

• Joint-development – with private sector– TOD– Developers may also pay for quiet zone

implementation


4 Items for success1. Plan

• Inventory that also reviews current land use activity• Permitting controls (e.g. where DOT has some oversight

over plat’s and sub-division plans) for development should become a practice used by more jurisdictions

2. Preserve• Cheaper to do it now than wait• Rails-to-trails/Banking is an option• Put land use controls in early

3. Collaborate• Work with partners esp. Class I’s• Understand that compromise will be required• Education and outreach with multiple constituents

4. Mitigate• May be required and will be expensive


Planning• Regularly updated inventories should be undertaken• Work with the Class I’s – to be notified as lines come

up for abandonment/divesture• Comprehensive Plans

– CA Noise Control Act 1972– Required to undertake a noise analysis when city/county

comprehensive plans are updated• Rationale “to develop strategies for abating excessive noise

exposure through cost-effective mitigating measures in combination with zoning, as appropriate, to avoid incompatible land uses”

• Create Corridor Planning/Preservation Boards– 2002 Indiana Legislature created Corridor Planning Board to

identify needs & develop plan to prioritize use of abandoned ROW

– Utah – Wasatch Front MPO created a corridor preservation committee to take responsibility for regional corridor preservation & revolving corridor fund


Planning: Blueprint Denver• Developed in 2002 as planning guide for

multiple transit routes– Areas of change

• Would absorb most new growth till 2030• Mostly around transit hubs

– Areas of Stability

• Zoning is being revisited • Created a typology for station areas land uses

– Denver Regional Transit District developed a Strategic Plan for TOD development

– September 2007 released a TOD status report– Ties into Blueprint Denver’s planning goals


Planning: Denver station typology


Zoning: Cluster Zoning• Cluster Zoning: allowing denser development

without encroaching into future ROW

Source: Williams, K. Managing Corridor Development: A Municipal Handbook, October 1996


Zoning: Setbacks• Setbacks: required distances from the

development within which development is not permitted without a variance

Source: Williams, K. Managing Corridor Development: A Municipal Handbook, October 1996


Preserve: multiple ways• Advance purchase/holding

– Heartland Corridor • Corridor was preserved for 20 years prior to construction of

Maersk container terminal

• Preservation Programs– North Carolina DOT

• 13 corridor acquisitions totaling 102 miles• No specific funding source uses general revenues

• Purchase – Utah Transit Authority– New Mexico Rail Runner

• Rail Banking• Rails to Trails

– Washington Eastside Rail Corridor• Statutory Authority to create program


Preserve: Heartland Corridor• Double stack capable freight corridor

running from Virginia to the mid-West that is far more direct than the existing route.

• Is possible only due to a preserved grade separated corridor leading out of the Port of Norfolk.– Corridor was preserved as unused land for 20 years

• The central part of the project is creating double-stack clearance through West Virginia– 28 tunnels are being cleared– 24 overhead obstructions are being removed– Projected cost $151 million


Heartland Corridor Case Study


Purchase: Rail Runner NM• New Mexico DOT acquired Albuquerque to

Santa Fe Corridor from BNSF– BNSF still run freight trains on corridor to serve

local customers on a fee basis– Phase I - $135m– Phase II – estimated $240-255m

• Notable for fast time line from proposal to acquisition to implementation: 2½ years

• Communities have placed moratorium on new development ½ mile around stations


Collaborate• Collaboration is one way to achieve

success when a corridor crosses multiple jurisdictions– Compromise will be required

– UTA interlocal agreement (62 jurisdictions)- everyone gave up a little land-use control but in the long-run this is leading to greater certainty, has streamlined permitting and it is easier to work with developers

• Need public outreach/education program on the importance of planning around corridors to ensure ‘quality of life’


Mitigation• All new system activity requires

sound/vibration analysis to be undertaken• Noise & vibration is a subjective issue• Freight RR’s are beginning to be involved • Mitigation does occur on an ad-hoc basis for

existing corridors– This is often expensive and there is no single best

practice on materials that has been identified

• Some communities (after many years of petitioning) find the implemented mitigation options aren’t as good as they thought


Mitigation: other examples• Zoning activities

– Anaheim – 120 foot minimum lot depth beside rail corridor

– Portland – rezoning around MAX Yellow Line to make uses more compatible

– Buffer zones

• Rail Relocation– Alameda

• Most expensive relocation to-date• Considered a best practice in multi-jurisdictional, multi-

entity partnering

– Reno Re-Track• Rezoning entire downtown now that the rail is trenched• Looking to incorporate mixed-use type zoning


Mitigation for new residential development

Source: Railway Proximity Website: Research Report: Proximity Guidelines and Best Practices. November 2006. Available at: http://www.proximityissues.ca/english/MaterialsContent/2006_Guidelines_eng.pdf


Mitigate: Sound Barriers• Sound Barriers have limited efficacy in

blocking low frequency noise and vibration• Anaheim CA – BNSF Route

– Close to SR 90/91– 12 years of lobbying– 100 trains a day– 3.44 miles of sound wall $13m cost– Completed 2006

• Issues– Yorba Linda has increased sound and vibration– Building berm to offset “bounce effect” from wall– Cost $2.8m– Completion expected in 2008


LA Gold Line - sound barrier

Source: Phil Hooser – Industrial Acoustics Group


Recommendations to remedy legal barriers• Give DOT greater authority to acquire

property by purchase/eminent domain for purposes of protecting the rail corridor from incompatible land uses

• Give DOT authority to require political subdivisions to take particular actions, to aid the planning and protecting of rail corridors

• Allow DOT to engage in corridor planning and protection through the use of overlay maps and zoning powers

• Counties and Regional transportation authorities could be empowered to undertake rail corridor planning and protection using traditional zoning powers


Next Steps• Outreach/education is needed

– Quality of life– Costs of planning ahead using land use

controls versus wait-and-see

• CTR Proposal– Encroachment Clearinghouse Website– Working Committee

• With multiple stakeholder involvement


Questions????


Lisa Loftus-Otway

Center for Transportation Research

University of Texas at Austin

[email protected]

512 232 3072

center for transportation research - the university of texas at austin protecting and preserving...

Documents

transportation research

university of texas

land use slide

use of land

research team

rail source

texas legal powers

austin regulationtools