HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 02, 2016
Declaration of Property - February 2016
Case #Item(s)BrandModelColor
15016593SkateboardVentureReturn of BlackoutMultiple
15017388Coin CollationLincoln HeadN/AN/A
15017388BraceletMichael KorsBedazzledN/A
15017388Nintendo DSXLN/ABlue
12011395CameraKodak10.3 pixelSilver
12011395Digital Cam CorderDXG2.4 LCDRed
12011395Digital CameraVivicamN/APurple
12011395Ear BudsN/AN/ABlue
15013888Dress CoatBlackN/ABlack
15016978BackpackTargusN/AGrey
15013385Brown purse & blue bagN/AN/AN/A
15013417StrollerKapsCity StrollerBlack/White
2000-6517Woman's Diamond ringN/AWedding ring w/bandGold
12016221Currency CounterN/AN/ABlack
12012186BinocularsBushnellN/ABlack
BagAdidasN/AN/A
Digital CameraCanonN/ASilver
Knife setMaxamN/AN/A
Baseball capBlue/BlackN/AN/A
Cords/accessoriesN/AN/AN/A
SunglassesGabbanaN/ABlack
Power InverterN/AN/AN/A
Jig SawBlack & DeckerN/ARed
Ipad/w caseApple2Black
PurseCherokeeN/AN/A
Laptop PCWindowsNSUSBlack
Portable DVD PlayerRCADRC6309Black
Multi-toolLeathermanN/AN/A
Multi-toolLeathermanN/AN/A
Multi-toolLeathermanN/AN/A
Pocket toolEdgeN/AN/A
FlashlightN/AN/ABlack
Men's watchSwiss CardinN/AGold
Woman's necklaceLarge PendantN/ABlack
IpodApple2GBBlack
IpodApple8GBBlue
Digital CameraCanonN/ASilver
IpodApplesA1303 White
PaintballsN/AN/AN/A
Paintball gunSpyderN/ABlack
Paintball equipmentN/AN/AN/A
Maxam Knife setN/AN/AN/A
BagSwiss ArmyN/ABlack
SunglassesRay Banwith caseBlack
Skill sawBlack and Decker6-1/2 " bladeOrange
Socket set HuskyN/AN/A
Declaration of Bikes - February 2016
Case #TypeBrandModelColorSer#
15012718MountainGiantBoulderPurpleC75A1286
15012937MountainMagnaGreat DivideGreen/greyDJHAT18736
15013060MountainNextPX4BlackLWMA012067
15013259MountainPacificSynchroBlackN/A
15013311StreetMirracoRetromagBlackWTU311P0041B
15013654MountainSchwinnRanger 2.6Blue/WhiteN/A
15013781MountainMagnaGreat DivideRed00T797241
15014265StreetHuffyRockitRed/greySNHBZ08m05121
15014298StreetNextSlumber PartyPink5214243
15014346StreetChaosFS20Green/Black140307759
15014383StreetX GamesBig AirBlackB00E015488
15014773MountainMongooseTormentWhiteSNFSD14AC1976
15015141MountainNextTiara ProPurpleLWHC032927
15015623MountainShimanoHavocBlackDMG12D041976
15015717MountainSchwinnHigh TimberGreenSNTDC08E0400
15015717StreetKentAmbushWhite/Blk.G1411064745
15015717StreetMongooseN/ASilverM5EE2373
15016232StreetDynocraft8567-52Blue20030316
15016303StreetNextLil GemPink/PurpleLWLK025004
15016303StreetUnknownUnknownSpidermanSC12B39015
15016334MountainMagnaGlacier PointRed03TD5332601
15016337MountainSchwinnOR2Black/RedSNMNG-11C76495
15016356MountainRoadmasterGranite PeakBlue/PurleSNFSD12MV8069
15016356MountainMagnaGlacier PointRed6252
15016492MountainMagnaExcitorBlue02TD8051869
15016541StreetMongooseRebelWhite/tanUnknown
15016593MountainMagnaSlick Rock TrailBlack8531-51, 95td53319
15016626MountainSpecializedHardrockBlk/RedC20J6614
15016650MountainTrek7100White123C0102E
15016994MountainSchwinnMesa RunnerBrownG09855255933
15017041MountainMurrayEagle RiverBlackUnknown
15017088MountainMongooseRebelWhiteSNACB08D12265
15017147MountainRoadmasterMt. FuryPurpleSNFSD05PA6980
15017140StreetNextPower ClimberOrangeN/A
15017515MountainMagnaGreat DivideGreyDJFF009093
RESOLUTION NO. 7678
RESOLUTION APPROVING STATE OF MINNESOTA JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTSWITH THE CITY OF
SHAKOPEEON BEHALF OF ITS PROSECUTING ATTORNEYAND POLICE DEPARTMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee,on behalf of its ProsecutingAttorney and Police Department,
desires to enter into Joint Powers Agreementswith the State of Minnesota, Department of Public
Safety, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension to use systems and tools available over the State’s
criminal justice data communications network for which the City is eligible. The Joint Powers
Agreements further providethe City with the ability to add, modify and delete connectivity,
systems and tools over the fiveyear life of the agreement and obligates the City to pay the costs
for the network connection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Shakopee, Minnesota,as follows:
1. That the State of Minnesota Joint Powers Agreementsby and between the State of
Minnesota,acting through its Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension and
the City of Shakopee, on behalf of its ProsecutingAttorney and Police Department, arehereby
approved. Copiesof the two Joint Powers Agreementsareattached to this Resolution and
made a part of it.
2. That the, or his successor,is
Chief of Police/Emergency Management Director, Jeff Tate
designated the Authorized Representativefor the Police Department. The Authorized
Representative is also authorized to sign any subsequent amendment or agreement that may
be required by the State of Minnesota to maintain the City’s connection to the systems and tools
offered by the State.
To assist the Authorized Representative with the administration of the agreement, the Captain of
Services is appointed as the Authorized Representative’s designee.
3. That the , or his successor, is designated the Authorized
CountyAttorney, Ron Hocevar
Representative for the Prosecuting Attorney. The Authorized Representative is also authorized to
sign any subsequent amendment or agreement that may be required by the State of Minnesota
to maintain the City’s connection to the systems and tools offered by the State.
To assist the Authorized Representative with the administration of the agreement, Todd Zettler,
Attorney, is appointed as the Authorized Representative’s designee.
4. That , are
Bill Mars, the Mayor for the City ofShakopee, and Lori Hensen, the City Clerk
authorized to signthe State of Minnesota Joint Powers Agreements.
Passed and Adopted by the Council on this 2day ofFebruary, 2016.
nd
CITY OF Shakopee
_____________________________________
By: Bill Mars
Its Mayor
ATTEST: ______________________________
By: Lori Hensen
Its City Clerk
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone
Study
Final Report
City of Shakopee
January 2016
SRF No. 8834
Executive Summary
SRF Consulting Group, Inc. (SRF) was retained by the City of Shakopee to conduct a Train
Safety/Quiet Zone Study for the Union Pacific Railway (UPRR) mainline corridor through
the city. Since 1999, the City has imposed a speed limit of 10 mph on the railroad through
the downtown portion of the corridor. However, the City and UPRR recently began
discussing the potential for allowing increased train speeds if additional safety measures
along the corridor were implemented. Related to this effort was the evaluation of the
potential for implementing a quiet zone in Shakopee to eliminate the routine sounding of
horns at highway-rail crossings and improve the quality of life throughout the City. Many of
the potential crossing improvements used to increase safety may also be used to assist with
quiet zone implementation. The goals of this study were twofold:
Evaluate the effects on safety for an increase in train speed from 10 mph to 25 mph
(Train Safety Analysis)
Evaluate the potential for quiet zone implementation in Shakopee (Quiet Zone
Analysis)
The findings from the train safety analysis show that while the proposed speed increase from
10 mph to 25 mph would slightly increase the severity of a train derailment, the probability
of a derailment occurring is very low due to the high classification track installed by UPRR.
The findings also show that the increases in collision risk resulting from the higher train
speed can be largely mitigated by upgrading the crossing warning devices to gates, flashing
lights, and constant warning time detectors.
The quiet zone analysis evaluated the potential for the implementation of a quiet zone
through the City based on the requirements of the Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA)
Train Horn Rule. With guidance from the Shakopee City Council Railroad Safety
Committee, a number of crossing improvement scenarios were developed based on the goals
and needs of the City. The estimated construction costs for the scenarios ranged from
$2,077,500 to $4,877,500. Many of the construction costs were related to necessary gate and
signal system upgrades.
Due to high costs, a recent decline in UPRR train volumes, and a lack of financial
commitments from other partners (UPRR, MnDOT, Hennepin County, etc.) the Committee
is not recommending the implementation of a quiet zone at this time. The Committee
recommends that the train speed limit in the downtown portion of the corridor remain at 10
mph. If the City wishes to proceed with quiet zone implementation at some point in the
future, the information in this report will form the basis of that undertaking, but will need to
be updated to reflect any significant changes in train/traffic volumes, existing crossing
warning devices, and other site conditions.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study i SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Table of Contents
I.INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1
II.EXISTING CROSSING CONDITIONS ..................................................................... 3
Current Warning Devices .................................................................................................................... 3
Passive Warning Devices ....................................................................................................... 3
Active Warning Devices ........................................................................................................ 5
Crash History ........................................................................................................................................ 6
III.TRAIN SAFETY ANALYSIS ..................................................................................... 7
Risk of Derailment ............................................................................................................................... 8
Types of Derailments ............................................................................................................. 8
Predicting Derailment............................................................................................................ 9
Risk of Collisions ................................................................................................................................ 12
Crossing Improvement Options ........................................................................................ 15
IV.QUIET ZONE ANALYSIS .......................................................................................18
Overview............................................................................................................................................. 18
Minimum Requirements...................................................................................................... 18
Risk Calculations ................................................................................................................... 18
Approved Crossing Improvements................................................................................... 19
Quiet Zone Review and Implementation Process ........................................................... 20
Crossing Improvement Scenarios .................................................................................................... 22
Scenario 1: Minimal Improvements ................................................................................... 24
Scenario 2: Closures Used ................................................................................................... 25
Scenario 3: One-Ways Used................................................................................................ 27
Scenario 4: No Closures or One-Ways.............................................................................. 28
V.CONCLUSIONS .....................................................................................................30
H:\\Projects\\8834\\TP\\Report\\Train_Safety_and_Quiet_Zone_Report_2016-01-25.docx
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study ii SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
I.INTRODUCTION
SRF Consulting Group, Inc. (SRF) was retained by the City of Shakopee to conduct a Train
Safety/Quiet Zone Study for the Union Pacific Railway (UPRR) mainline corridor through
the city. This rail corridor has a unique configuration wherein the tracks are located in the
middle of Second Avenue with one lane of traffic on each side of the tracks. This
configuration is maintained through downtown Shakopee from Apgar Street to Minnesota
Street. The railway continues through the eastern portions of the city parallel to Highway
101.
This track has existed in the city since 1858 when the city passed an ordinance granting
permission to UPRR’s predecessor—the Southern Minnesota Railroad Company—to run an
east-west mainline track through the city. For many years, UPRR operated at a speed of 10
mph through downtown Shakopee and 30 mph in other areas of the city. In 1998, UPRR
upgraded this corridor to class 4 track with a maximum operating speed of 60 mph. UPRR
notified the City that they intended to increase the speed of trains through downtown from
10 mph to 30 mph.
In 1999, before this speed increase was implemented, the City petitioned the Commissioner
of the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) to impose a 10 mph speed limit
in downtown Shakopee. UPRR filed an opposition to this petition and a contested case
hearing was held before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The ALJ issued
recommendations in favor of a 10 mph speed limit imposed by MnDOT “until Union
Pacific and Shakopee can improve the safety and warning mechanisms at the crossings and
reduce visual clutter in the area.” UPRR appealed this decision to the Minnesota Court of
Appeals, but the decision of the ALJ was affirmed and UPRR’s motion was denied, citing
that “The speed limit is necessary to reduce or eliminate an essentially local safety hazard and
does not conflict with existing federal law or pose an undue burden on interstate
1
commerce.”
In recent years, an increase in train volumes has led to more train horn noise and has
increased delay to motor vehicles at crossings. The City has held discussions with the
railroad about potential options for increasing railroad speed through downtown while
maintaining roadway user safety. To this end, the City requested the services of SRF to
conduct this Train Safety/Quiet Zone study.
The goals for the following study were twofold:
Evaluate the effects on safety for trains increasing from 10 mph to 25 mph
Evaluate the potential for a quiet zone implementation in Downtown Shakopee
http://mn.gov/web/prod/static/lawlib/live/archive/ctappub/0005/c1991722.htm
1
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 1 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
While the likelihood and severity of train derailments and collisions at highway-rail grade
crossings are—by their nature—difficult to predict, there are certain infrastructure
conditions that can be used to identify relative risks for these incidents. This report provides
a review of the primary causes of derailments and collisions and assesses the potential
increase in risk to the public resulting from an increase in train speed from 10 mph to 25
mph.
This study also evaluates the potential for the implementation of a quiet zone through the
City. Under the Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) Train Horn Rule, railroads are
required to sound the train horn at all public crossings. Exceptions to this requirement can
be made through the implementation of a railroad quiet zone. In order to qualify for quiet
zone implementation, certain minimum warning device requirements must be present at all
relevant crossings and additional safety improvements must be installed to reduce the overall
risk of a collision. Quiet zones can be a powerful tool for improving traveler safety through a
rail corridor and the quality of life for neighboring residents and businesses by eliminating
the routine sounding of the train horns.
This study was completed with the review and guidance from the City of Shakopee City
Council’s Railroad Safety Committee. A summary of the outreach with this committee and
other stakeholders is also documented in this report.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 2 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
II.EXISTING CROSSING CONDITIONS
The section of track reviewed in this study runs from mile marker 25.17 to 29.13 on the
UPRR’s Merriam Subdivision. A total of 20 highway-rail at-grade crossings from Canterbury
Roadto the east to a Private Entrance to the west were reviewed as part of this study. This
includes 15 public crossings and five private crossings. The locations of these crossings are
shown in Figure 1. It should be noted that two crossings are located on Apgar Street. The
southern Apgar Street crossing is part of the mainline Merriam Subdivision while the
northern Apgar Street crossing is part of a spur track providing service to the Rahr
Corporation facility immediately to the west of the crossing. The 10 mph portion of track in
downtown extends approximately one mile from Apgar Street to Minnesota Street.
Current Warning Devices
Highway-rail crossings can be equipped with a variety of warning devices, ranging from a
simple crossbuck sign to a full four-quadrant system with pedestrian gates. The crossings
within Shakopee are equipped with a range of various devices. A description of these
existing warning devices is provided below and is divided into two categories: passive
warning devices and active warning devices.
Passive Warning Devices
Passive warning devices consist of static warning signs and pavement markings and do not
change their condition based on the presence of a train at or near the crossing. Crossings
equipped with only passive warning devices typically have lower train and/or traffic volumes
and do not provide any additional safety improvements.
Of the 20 crossings evaluated in this study, six are equipped with only passive warning
devices. As is typical for most private crossings, all five of the private crossings included in
this study are equipped with only passive warning devices. Of the remaining public
crossings, the Apgar Street spur crossing is the only one with only passive warning devices.
The warning devices at these crossings consist of crossbucks, pavement markings, and/or
stop signs.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 3 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
Figure 1.Shakopee Highway-Rail Crossings
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 4 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
Active Warning Devices
Active warning devices provide advance notice of an approaching train. They are activated
by the passage of a train over a detection circuitry in the track. They are also typically
supplemented with passive warning devices as described above. Common active warning
devices include gates, flashing lights, and bells.
Flashing Lights
Flashing lights are most commonly mounted on a mast on each approach to a crossing, but
may also be mounted on a cantilever in order to increase visibility. Cantilever-mounted
flashing lights are required when the approaching roadway consists of multiple travel lanes
or if mast-mounted lights would not be visible due to parking or other physical barriers. At
crossings with high volumes of pedestrian activity, individual lights may be aimed at the
pedestrian approach. With the exception of the Apgar Street spur crossing, all of the public
crossings are equipped with flashing lights.
Gates
Standard two-quadrant gates provide additional warning to roadway users by placing a
physical barrier across the road. The gates may still be circumvented, but only through an
illegal maneuver. Four-quadrant gates prevent this by placing two additional gate at the exit
locations. Gate systems are always supplemented by flashing lights. Seven crossings in the
study are equipped with two-quadrant gates.The presence of gates is noted in Figure 1
above.
Train Detection
The gates and flashing light systems are activated by approaching trains through a train
detection system. The two train detection systems used in the Shakopee crossings include
constant warning time (CWT) detection and motion detection. Motion detection systems are
activated when a train passes over the detector set a specific distance from the crossing.
These detectors are placed and programmed such that a minimum of 20 seconds warning
time is provided (based on typical approach speeds) before the train arrives at the crossing.
Because of this configuration, trains traveling faster or slower than usual will result in
inconsistent warning times. This can potentially cause confusion and frustration for roadway
users. If the warning device activates for much longer than usual (over 40 – 50 seconds) due
to a slower than usual train, the motorist might think the warning device is broken and
ignore it. This is especially problematic at crossings where motorists cannot see the train
approaching. CWT detection systems handle this issue by measuring the speed of
approaching trains and activating the warning devices for a consistent duration.
The warning devices present at each of the Shakopee crossings are summarized in Table 1.
This information was collected through a combination of field review, coordination with
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 5 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
UPRR and MnDOT, and review of the FRA grade crossing inventory. The current FRA
grade crossing inventory forms are included in Appendix A.
Table 1.Summary of Current Crossing Warning Devices
Mile Crossing Public/ Flashing Train
Street Gates
Post ID Private Lights Detection
29.13 Business Entrance 185339D Private None None None
28.96 W Third Avenue 185338W Private None None None
28.69 Rahr Entrance 921273M Private None None None
28.46 Rahr Entrance 921272F Private None None None
28.30 Apgar Street 185336HPublic Yes Two-Quad CWT
Apgar Street
28.31 924101P Public None None None
(Spur Track)
28.22 Scott Street 185335B Public Yes Two-Quad CWT
28.15 Atwood Street 185334U Public Yes Two-Quad CWT
28.08 Fuller Street 185322F Public Yes None CWT
28.01 Holmes Street 185331YPublic Yes None Motion Det.
27.94 Lewis Street185330S Public Yes None Motion Det.
27.87 Sommerville Street 185329X Public Yes None CWT
27.79 Spencer Street185328R Public Yes None CWT
27.58 Market Street 187077F Public Yes None Motion Det.
27.51 Minnesota Street 185327J Public Yes None Motion Det.
CSAH 17
27.14 186975E Public Yes Two-Quad CWT
(Marschall St)
26.87 Cavanaugh Drive 185325V Private None None None
26.71 Sarazin Street 185324N Public Yes Two-Quad CWT
26.40 Shenandoah Drive187073D Public Yes Two-Quad CWT
185323G
25.17 Canterbury Road Public Yes Two-Quad CWT
Crash History
In the last fiveyears, there have been only two highway-rail crashes at crossings in the study
area: one at Canterbury Road and one at the Apgar Street spur crossing. In both instances,
there were no injuries or fatalities. The low number of crashes is likely due to the low
volume of trains, low speed of trains, and low traffic volumes relative. The speed of trains,
traffic volumes, and safety warning devices all contribute to the risk for crashes. FRA grade
crossing accident/incident reports for these crashes are included in Appendix B.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 6 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
III.TRAIN SAFETY ANALYSIS
With the sharp increase in train volumes throughout Minnesota and the Midwest, rail safety
is becoming a prominent issue for many communities. This has become a particularly
sensitive issue given the increase in shipments of crudeoilby rail originating from the
Bakken oil field in North Dakota. Recent derailments of crude oil by rail have increased
public concern and scrutiny of rail safety issues.
With this in mind, the City of Shakopee is concerned about the potential safety impacts of
allowing an increase in train speeds from 10 mph to 25 mph through the downtown area.
While an increase in train speed would reduce the amount of delay caused to motorists, the
downtown area is dense, highly travelled, and would be significantly impacted by a
derailment orcollision.
While it is impossible to predict train derailments and collisions with any certainty, many
independent factors may be reviewed in order to understand their relative importance to
railroad safety. The following section of the report presents a qualitative review of these
factors. The information presented is based on a literature review of train safety studies
including the following reports and studies:
Analysis of Derailments by Accident Cause
(http://trrjournalonline.trb.org/doi/10.3141/2261-21)
Analysis of Causes of Major Train Derailment and Their Effect on Accident Rates
(http://railtec.illinois.edu/CEE/pdf/Journal%20Papers/2012/Liu%20et%20al%20
2012.pdf)
Assessment of Crude by Rail (CBR) Safety Issues in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
(http://www.scribd.com/doc/274852355/Assessment-of-Crude-by-Rail-CBR-
Safety-Issues-in-Commonwealth-of-Pennsylvania)
Derailment Probability Analyses and Modeling of Mainline Freight Trains
(http://railtec.illinois.edu/CEE/pdf/Conference%20Proceedings/2005/Anderson
%20and%20Barkan%202005.pdf)
Railroad Derailment Factors Affecting Hazardous Materials Transportation Risk
(http://railtec.illinois.edu/CEE/pdf/Journal%20Papers/2003/Barkan%20et%20all
%202003.pdf)
The two main areas of focus for this review are the risk of derailment and risk of collision.
The following sections review the many variables influencing rail safety with focus on the
relative influence of train speed on derailments and collisions.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 7 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
Risk of Derailment
Track condition, train speed, train length, and environmental factors such as number of
highway-rail crossings can all affect the likelihood and severity of train derailments. When
transporting commodities in an urban area, especially those that are hazardous, it is
important to understand how each of these factors contributes to derailments. The following
section provides an overview of the predominant categories of derailment and the basic
factors used to predict derailment frequency and severity. This review focuses only on
mainline activity as siding and yard derailments have different causes and are usually less
severe due to lower speeds.
Types of Derailments
Derailments have a variety of causes that are influenced by a number of contributing factors.
Oftentimes a derailment is a result of several factors occurring at once. Influences on
derailment risk include the FRA track classification, type of track and railroad, train length,
track geometry, and train control system. The FRA requires detailed reports for all
significant accidents or incidents associated with railroad train operations. This database of
incidents has helped researchers to understand the causes and likelihood of derailments.
All collisions and derailments fall within one of five categories in the FRA accident database.
These include:
1.Track
2.Equipment
3.Human Factors
4.Signals
5.Miscellaneous
Within these categories are over 100 subcategories. The majority of derailments are caused
by track failure, equipment failure, or human factors and these categories are reviewed in
more detail below. However, there are often multiple factors at play so it is difficult to
ascertain just how much risk is associated with a specific factor such as increase in train
speed.
Track Causes
The number one cause of derailment regardless of speed, train size, or rail classification is a
broken rail or weld. Instances of broken rails or welds are mostly influenced by the volume
of car-miles carried over the rail. It is difficult for railroads to identify this particular failure,
which is why it is such a prevalent cause of derailment. Visual inspection is not effective at
locating potential rail failures. New ultra-sonic testing can be conducted but it is costly and
not 100 percent effective. Other track-related failures include geometry, wide gauge (distance
between rails) and buckling. The frequency and severity of track-related derailmentstend to
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 8 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
be influenced by train speed and weight (i.e., faster and heavier trains are more likely to
derail than slower and lighter trains).
Equipment Causes
Rail equipment failures are another potential cause of derailment. The most prevalent
equipment-related derailments are caused by bearing failure and broken wheels. These
failures are often attributed to heat buildup. This may be exacerbated by high speed or
operational factors such as excessive breaking on hills. Sensors are available that can register
wheel and bearing temperature to help address the issue.
Human Factors
Human factors-related derailments may be caused by inadequate train handling (ensuring
proper spacing between cars and speed), improper vehicle movement through a grade
crossing, or trespassing on tracks. The issues of train handling and movement can be
regulated with sensors on the train. Positive Train Control (PTC) systems are examples of
this approach. Among other things, the PTC system uses sensors to measure train speed and
automatically adjust the train’s throttle if it is not within an acceptable range for the track
segment. The system can also slow or stop the train completely to prevent a collision with
another train on the track. However, it cannot prevent derailments caused by improper
vehicle movements through a grade crossing. The FRA has published final regulations
requiring all Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) Class 1 railroad mainlines to
implement PTC systems. The original deadline for this implementation was December 31,
2015, but was recently extended by three years to December 31, 2018.
Predicting Derailment
The risk of derailment is usually determined by using a mix of variables such as track miles,
car-miles, speed, and FRA track classification. With over 100 different causes, these variables
are usually the underlying factors that contributed to the cause of derailment.
Train-Miles and Car-Miles
Two factors that increase the likelihood of derailment are train miles and car-miles. Train-
miles are the number of miles each individual train operates. Car-miles account for the size
of trains by multiplying the train-miles of each individual train by the number of cars in its
consist. Train-miles affect derailment because they relate to the time spent for a human to
operate the train. The longer the train operates the more likelihood of human error. More
train-miles expose the operator to more potential conflicts at key locations such as grade
crossings and switch points. Car-miles influence derailments because of the number of
components that may fail. Longer trains have more wheels, axles, and bearings that could
potentially fail. Shorter trains reduce the risk associated with car-miles but increase risk
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 9 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
related to more train-miles. This is because more trains will need to run to meet the same
level of service.
Speed and Train Length
The number of cars that derail are directly related to the speed and length of the train. For
example, as shown in Figure 2, a 100-car train traveling at 25 miles per hour is expected to
have twice as many cars derail as compared to the same size train traveling at 10 miles per
hour. Furthermore, a train traveling at 40 miles per hour is expected to have nearly three
times as many cars derail as compared to the same size train traveling at 10 miles per hour.
Figure 2.Cars Derailed by Residual Train Length and Speed (S)
Source: Derailment Probability Analyses and Modeling of Mainline Freight Trains
This is because the point of derailment (POD) is more likely to be near the front of the train
at higher speeds. The closer the POD is to the front,the more likely the preceding cars will
also derail resulting in longer trains having a higher severity. Furthermore, the more cars
involved in a derailment also contribute to the likelihood that potentially hazardous material
will be released from the container. This is particularly important in understanding the risks
associated with the transportation of hazardous material.
Severity
Another important aspect of a derailment is the severity. This is typically expressedas the
expected number of derailed cars per derailment. The severity of a derailment is influenced
by the speed ofthe train, length of the train, and cause of the derailment. If a train is
operating at an appropriate speed and is of moderate length the likelihood and severity of a
derailment is low. This is especially true for higher-class tracks that have less risk of
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 10 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
derailment. The relationship between track class and severity is explored further in the
following section.
Track Classification
The FRA distinguishes five standard classes for freight tracks. These classifications set
standards for track condition, geometry, and provide a maximum operating speed. Class 1
track represents the lowest standard (outside of excepted track) and has a maximum freight
train speed of 10 mph. As the track class increases, so does the maximum train speed
allowed. In order to allow higher train speeds, tracks in the higher FRA classifications must
be built and maintained to much more stringent standards. Because of these higher
standards, the frequency of derailments on higher-class tracks is lower. However, since the
higher-class tracks allow for faster train speed, the derailments that do occur are at a higher
severity. The relationship between track class, derailment rate, and derailment severity is
shown in Figure 3below.
Figure 3.Relationship between Track Class, Derailment Rate, and Derailment Severity for All
Accident Causes
Source: Analysis of Derailments by Accident Cause
As track class increases, the higher track standards result in fewer derailments per billion car-
miles as well as fewer cars derailed per billion car-miles. With Shakopee’s upgrade from Class
3 to Class 4 tracks, it should be expected that the probability of a derailment would decrease.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 11 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
Based on the figure above, the expected number of derailed cars per billion car-miles on
Class 4 track is less than half of the rate expected for Class 3 track. However, due to the
higher speeds involved, the severity of derailments on Class 4 track is expected to be more
severe than on Class 3 tracks (an increase from approximately nine cars per derailment to
approximately 10 cars per derailment).
There are many factors at play when evaluating risk of derailment. Speed, size, and
environmental factors all contribute to the cause and severity of derailment. At slower
speeds, derailments are more likely to be caused by track-related issues while at higher
speeds, derailments are more likely to be the result of human factors or equipment-related
issues.
Risk of Collisions
The risk of a collision at individual crossings is typically calculated using the U.S.
2
Department of Transportation’s Accident Prediction Model. This model estimates the
probability of collisions at crossings based on a number of characteristics such as train
volumes and speed, roadway volumes and speed, intersection geometry, and recentcrash
3
history. The FRA’s online Quiet Zone calculator takes this model one step further to
calculate a risk index by incorporating up-to-date average costs of fatal and injury crashes.
The resulting numbers are most commonly used as unitless indices to compare risk levels
before and after various safety improvements, as well as to compare risk levels between
crossings. However, the risk index actually represents the estimated annual cost to society
for each crossing based on the probability of crashes, the severity of those crashes, and the
average cost associated with each crash severity.
Based on the ALJ ruling that the speed limit should remain at 10 mph “until Union Pacific
and Shakopee can improve the safety and warning mechanisms” in the corridor, SRF
conducted a risk assessment to identify the types of crossing improvements that would be
necessary to maintain the existing risk levels in the corridor. An increase in the speed from
10 mph to 25 mph will increase the risk at each crossing. Additional safety improvements
were evaluated to judge their effectiveness in counteracting this increase.
The extents of this analysis included only those crossings that would be affected by a change
in speed. These include the 10 downtown crossing located between Apgar Street and
Minnesota Street. The other crossings in the corridor would maintain their existing speed
limits of 30 mph or greater.
The results of this analysis are shown in Table 2. The first column in blue represents the
existing risk levels in the corridor at 10 mph. The second column in orange represents the
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/xings/com_roaduser/07010/sec03.htm
2
https://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/quiet/
3
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 12 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
change in risk levels following the increase in speed to 25 mph. The third column in gray
represents the risk levels after additional crossing upgrade are implemented at some of the
crossings. The upgrades included in this scenario include the installation of two-quadrant
gate systems at the crossings that are currently only equipped with flashing lights. The cost
estimate of $400,000 per crossing is based on coordination with MnDOT, UPRR, and
similar upgrades recently installed at Apgar Street and Scott Street. This information is also
presented graphically in Figure 4.
The average existing risk level for these crossings is 5,509. After the increase in train speed,
the risk is anticipated to rise to 7,414. The installation of gate upgrades at seven of the 10
crossings will bring the risk down to 6,050, still 10 percent higher than the existing risk level.
No risk reduction is credited for Apgar Street, Scott Street, or Atwood Street since these
crossings are already equipped with these gate upgrades. The estimated total cost of these
improvements is $2,800,000.
Table 2.Risk Impact of Speed Increase and Minimum Crossing Upgrades
Risk Index: Risk Index: Risk Index:
10 mph 25 mph 25 mph with
with with Additional
Estimated
Existing Existing Improve-
Street ConditionsConditions ments Improvement Cost
APGAR ST 3,054 4,575 4,575 None -
SCOTT ST 2,432 3,630 3,630 None -
ATWOOD ST 5,777 7,682 7,682 None -
FULLER ST 5,639 7,499 5,537 Gate Upgrade $400,000
HOLMES ST6,187 8,228 6,209 Gate Upgrade $400,000
LEWIS ST 6,138 8,162 6,147 Gate Upgrade $400,000
SOMMERVILLE ST 6,513 8,661 6,622 Gate Upgrade $400,000
SPENCER ST 8,866 11,791 9,969 Gate Upgrade $400,000
MARKET ST 5,411 7,157 5,245 Gate Upgrade $400,000
MINNESOTA ST5,078 6,754 4,879 Gate Upgrade $400,000
5,509 7,414 6,050 $ 2,800,000
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 13 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
Figure 4.Risk Impact of Speed Increase and Minimum Crossing Upgrades
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
An alternative analysis was completed to identify the additional improvements necessary to
bring the risk level at 25 mph to an equal or lower level than the existing risk level at 10
mph. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 3andcloselymirror the results of the
previous analysis. In addition to the installation of two-quadrant gate systems, an additional
four-quadrant gate system is proposed at Spencer Street.The cost estimate of $900,000 for
this improvement is also based on coordination with MnDOT and UPRR. This information
is also presented graphically in Figure 5.
The addition of the four-quadrant gate significantly reduces the risk level at Spencer Street
and brings the average risk level down to 5,232, five percent lower than the existing risk
level.It is important to note that while the average risk level in the corridor is lowered to
below the existing risk level, individual crossings (specifically Apgar Street, Scott Street, and
Atwood Street) will have risk levels that are higher than their current levels.The estimated
total cost of these improvements is $3,300,000.
Table 3.Risk Impact of Speed Increase and Additional Crossing Upgrades
Risk Index: Risk Index: Risk Index:
10 mph 25 mph 25 mph with
with with Additional
Existing Existing Improve-Estimated
Street ConditionsConditions ments Improvement Cost
APGAR ST 3,054 4,575 4,575 None -
SCOTT ST 2,432 3,630 3,630 None -
ATWOOD ST 5,777 7,682 7,682 None -
FULLER ST 5,639 7,499 5,537 Gate Upgrade $400,000
HOLMES ST6,187 8,228 6,209 Gate Upgrade $400,000
LEWIS ST 6,138 8,162 6,147 Gate Upgrade $400,000
SOMMERVILLE ST 6,513 8,661 6,622 Gate Upgrade $400,000
SPENCER ST 8,866 11,791 1,794 4-Quad Gates $900,000
MARKET ST 5,411 7,157 5,245 Gate Upgrade $400,000
MINNESOTA ST5,078 6,754 4,879 Gate Upgrade $400,000
5,509 7,414 5,232 $3,300,000
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 14 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
Figure 5.Risk Impact of Speed Increase and Additional Crossing Upgrades
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
Crossing Improvement Options
There are multiple options available for upgrading the warning devices at crossings to reduce
the risk of collisions in the corridor. There is no one size fits all treatment for railroad
crossing controls. The limited crash history in Shakopee speaks to the effectiveness of the
current warning devices. However, increases to roadway traffic volumes and railroad
volumes and speed will increase the collision risk at these crossings and the current warning
devices may not be sufficient. The improvement options summarized below are consistent
with the recommendations of the FRA’s Train Horn Rule as it applies to quiet zone safety
improvements. Each of the options has a range of safety benefits as well as potential
limitations and drawbacks. Cost estimates are also included for each improvement option.
These represent planning level costs. More detailed cost estimates should be prepared before
committing to a specific improvement scenario.
Basic Crossing Upgrade (Gates, Flashing Lights, and CWT)
The most basic crossing improvement available is an upgrade to gates, flashing lights and
constant warning time (CWT) train detection as described previously in the Current Warning
Devices section. The relative safety benefit of this upgrade depends on the existing crossing
characteristics and warning devices (crossbucks/stop sign vs. flashing lights). An upgrade
from flashing lights results in a risk reduction of approximately 15 to 20 percent. For quiet
zone purposes, this upgrade is mandatory for each crossing in the proposed quiet zone
corridor.
The cost of this improvement is typically estimated at $250,000 per crossing. However,
based on specific site conditions at these crossings, the estimated upgrade cost is $400,000.
This estimate is based on coordination with MnDOT and UPRR as well as the cost of
similar upgrades at Apgar Street and Scott Street. The main reason for the higher cost is the
difficulty of installing CWT. For CWT to function correctly, the detectors must be placed at
a specific distance from the crossing. Due to the high density of crossings through the
downtown area, the detectors at each crossing must be wired to “look through” the adjacent
crossings. This added wiring complexity is the driver behind the increased cost estimate. The
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 15 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
installation of these crossing upgrades is handled by the railroad and construction costs are
determined on a crossing-by-crossing basis.
Non-Traversable Medians/Channelization Devices
The purpose of two-quadrant gates is to provide a physical barrier to prevent motorists from
travelling over the crossing when a train is approaching. However, it is not uncommon for
motorists to ignore the warning and circumvent the gate to “beat the train.” One strategy to
address this illegal maneuver is the use of non-traversable medians or channelization devices.
Motorists must drive over the median or through the channelization devices in order to
circumvent the gate. To qualify as “non-traversable”, the median must be at least six inches
tall, but heights of eight or even ten inches are recommended where possible. This extra
height eliminates the risk of installing substandard medians through construction error and
provides an opportunity to install a pavement overlay in the future without affecting the
effectiveness of the medians.
Medians provide risk reduction of 80 percent, comparable to other crossing improvement
options. At a cost of approximately $300 per linear foot ($60,000 for two 100-foot medians
at a crossing), medians provide a very cost-effective option. Channelization devices provide a
risk reduction of 75 percent and cost less than medians at approximately $20,000 to $30,000
for 200 feet of delineators. However, channelization devices are more susceptible to damage
from roadway vehicles and must be continually maintained to ensure their effectiveness.
Unfortunately, the unique configuration of the downtown Shakopee crossings prevents the
use of medians or channelization devices. Installation of either improvement would block
through-traffic on Second Avenue. As such, they are not viable options for the downtown
crossings, but may be used on other crossings in the corridor.
Four-Quadrant Gates
A four-quadrant gate system consists of four gates that block both the approach and
departure side of the roadway. It prevents motorists from driving around the gate arm as it
completely blocks the roadway. Vehicle detection loops are often installed in between the
gates to ensure that the exit gates do not close until the crossing is clear, preventing vehicles
from being “trapped.”
Four-quadrant gates provide risk reduction of between 77 and 82 percent, but typically cost
between $700,000 and $800,000 per crossing. For the Shakopee crossings, a cost of $900,000
was assumed based on coordination with MnDOT and UPRR. The higher than average cost
is due to the complexities of CWT installation cited earlier. While expensive, four-quadrant
gates are often the only improvement option available for the Shakopee crossings.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 16 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Train Safety Analysis
Closures
Crossing closure is a very effective means of achieving risk reduction in a corridor as the risk
at the closed crossing is completely eliminated. However, because the crossing is
permanently closed to vehicular and pedestrian traffic, the impacts to traffic patterns in the
surrounding area must be understood before pursuing this option. Good candidates for
closure include crossings with low traffic volumes and alternate crossings located nearby. It
is assumed that the traffic volumes at the crossing will be diverted to adjacent crossing,
slightly increasing their risk levels. Typically, some sort of concrete barrieror fence is
constructed to prevent motorists and pedestrians from entering the crossing.
From the railroad perspective, closures are highly desirable as they eliminate a point of
potential conflict for their trains. Both the railroads and MnDOT will typically provide a
financial incentive of $7,500 each for a closure. While this sum is relatively small, it is usually
enough to pay for the closure modification, making this a cost-neutral improvement. In
some cases, the railroad may also be willing to contribute more funding if multiple closures
are proposed.
One-Way Streets
Another crossing improvement option is to convert a two-way street to a one-way street.
Two gate arms on one side prevent all motorists from entering the crossing. This is
appropriate when it is feasible to change the traffic flow of the roadway. This option
generally requires a second “paired” street to be converted to one-way to provide a travel
option in the opposite direction.
Wayside Horns
Wayside horns are an improvement option that attempts to reduce train horn noise rather
than fully eliminate it. Wayside horn units are mast mounted at each crossing and direct the
horn noise at the roadway approaches. Theoretically, the horn sound is more concentrated in
a single area and less disruptive due to the directed nature of the horns. However, many
communities that have installed these devices have been unhappy with the results and are in
the process of replacing them with other improvement options. Wayside horns were
discussed as an option during this study, but none have been recommended for installation.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 17 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
IV.QUIET ZONE ANALYSIS
Overview
The sounding of horns at highway-rail crossings is regulated by the FRA under federal law
49 CRF Part 222 – Use of Locomotive Horns at Public Highway-Rail Grade Crossings.
Train Horn Rule). The Train Horn Rule requires railroads to sound their horns at all public
crossings and specifies the decibel level, sounding pattern, and timing. Subpart C of the Rule
outlines the steps necessary to implement a quiet zone, defined as a grouping of one or more
consecutive crossings at which the routine sounding of horns is not required. Horns may still
be sounded in the case of an emergency or when construction activities are taking place next
to the track, but the routine sounding of every train is eliminated.
Minimum Requirements
A quiet zone must be at least one half-mile long and there must be at least one quarter-mile
spacing between the last quiet zone crossing and the next non-quiet zone crossing. The
purpose of this requirement is to ensure that horns sounded for non-quiet zone crossings do
not interfere with the quiet zone. Depending on the train speed, a locomotive will begin
sounding its horn at a distance of up to one quarter-mile from the crossing. If a second
crossing were located within that quarter-mile distance, the locomotive would be required to
sound its horn for the first crossing before it arrived at the second crossing, making a quiet
zone impossible at the second crossing.
At a minimum, each public crossing in the proposed zone must have gates and flashing
lights with power out indicators, and constant warning time (CWT) detectors. The Train
Horn Rule does not require that private crossings be equipped to this same standard.
However, private crossings within the limits of the potential quiet zone are reviewed during
the diagnostic meeting to identify any safety issues or other concerns.
Risk Calculations
The FRA evaluates potential quiet zones using a complex risk assessment calculation. The
FRA’s online Quiet Zone Calculator is used to calculate the risk index at each crossing. This
risk index is a measure based on a number of conditions such as train volumes and speed,
highway traffic volumes, crossing geometry, and crash history.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 18 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
The FRA determines the viability of quiet zone implementation by comparing three risk
index values:
QZRI – The Quiet Zone Risk Index is the average of the risk indices for each
crossing in a proposed quiet zoneassuming horns are not routinely sounded.
RIWH – The Risk Index With Horns is the average risk index for each crossing
in a proposed quiet zone assuming no additional safety improvements and the
routine sounding of horns.
NSRT – The Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold is the average risk level for
all highway-rail crossings in the United States that are equipped with flashing
lights and gates and at which locomotive horns are routinely sounded. The
NSRT is recalculated annually to reflect existing risk trends. The current value of
the NSRT is 14,347.
The QZRI for a proposed quiet zone is reduced through the implementation of FRA-
approved Supplementary Safety measures (SSMs) and/or Alternative Safety Measures
(ASMs).
If the QZRI is reduced below the NSRT alone, the quiet zone may be implemented, but the
FRA will conduct an annual risk review to ensure that the quiet zone improvements still
comply with the Quiet Zone Final Rule and that the QZRI is still below the NSRT.
If the QZRI is reduced below the RIWH using SSMs at every crossing, the quiet zone may
be implemented and the public authority must provide an update to the FRA every five years
stating that the safety measures implemented to achieve the quiet zone are still in place as
proposed. If the QZRI is reduced below the RIWH without the use of SSMs at every
crossing, this update to the FRA must be provided every three years.
Approved Crossing Improvements
The FRA has pre-approved a variety of Supplementary Safety Measures (SSMs) to be used to
improve safety at each crossing. These options and their corresponding risk reduction values
are as follows:
Closure or Grade Separation (100 percent risk reduction)
Four-Quadrant Gates (77-82 percent risk reduction)
Channelization Devices (e.g. Tuff Curb, Qwick Kurb) (75 percent risk reduction)
Non-Traversable Medians (80 percent risk reduction)
One-Way Street (82 percent risk reduction)
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 19 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Of these improvements, four-quadrant gates and non-traversable medians are the most
commonly used. Channelization devices are also frequently used in place of non-traversable
medians where cost, narrow roadway width, or other roadway conditions must be
considered. However, the delineators can be damaged easily during snow removal
operations, necessitating ongoing monitoring and maintenance. Non-traversable medians
and channelization devices must also meet minimum length requirements in order to be used
for full risk reduction credit.
The FRA mandates that medians/delineators must extend a minimum of 100 feet from the
crossing gate arm. However, a 60-foot median/delineator is also acceptable if a longer
median/delineator would interfere with either a public roadway or a commercial driveway.
Medians and delineators that are shorter than these standards may still be used, but are
considered Alternative Safety Measures (ASMs). Risk reduction for reduced length medians
is applied on a prorated basis. The use of ASMs for risk reduction credit triggers a
requirement for the public authority to submit a Quiet Zone Application. This additional
documentation carries a 60-day review period and allows the FRA to confirm the risk
reduction effectiveness of ASMs estimated by the public authority.
Quiet Zone Review and Implementation Process
This section outlines the steps necessary for quiet zone implementation from the initial
review process through the final FRA documentation. Each step of the process is described
in more detail below.
Diagnostic Meeting
The diagnostic is an on-site field review meeting between the City, railroad, and other
stakeholders affected by the proposed quiet zone. The purpose of this meeting is for the
group to collectively identify the most appropriate SSMs and/or ASMs at each crossing and
to discuss any safety concerns or other issues noted within the corridor. The diagnostic
meeting for the proposed Shakopee quiet zone was conducted on June 30, 2015. The
meeting included representatives from the City, UPRR, the FRA, MnDOT, and private
businesses adjacent to the private crossings. A summary of the discussion items and the
identification of potential crossing improvement options with detailed specification are
included in Appendix C.
Throughout this process, SRF has been in close coordination with the Shakopee City
Council’s Railroad Safety Committee. Meeting minutes for the two meetings with this
committee are included in Appendix D.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 20 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Determination of Preferred Crossing Improvements
Based on the information presented in this report, the City will determine whether it is
appropriate to proceed with quiet zone implementation. Four crossing improvement
scenarios have been developed for review and consideration by the City.
Submit Notice of Intent
Once the preferred crossing improvements are selected, the first step in the quiet zone
implementation process is the submittal of a Quiet Zone Notice of Intent (NOI) to the FRA
and other stakeholders (UPRR, MnDOT, private businesses, etc.). The purpose of the NOI
is to officially alert the stakeholders of the City’s intent to implement a quiet zone. The
proposed crossing improvements and any other pertinent information are also typically
summarized in this document. All recipients of the NOI are allowed 60 days to provide
comments.
Submit Quiet Zone Application
In cases where ASMs are used for crossing improvements, the FRA requires the submittal of
a Quiet Zone Application. This purpose of the Application is to allow the FRA to confirm
the risk reduction rates assumed for the ASM improvements. The Application is subject to a
60-day review, but based on prior experience, the City should anticipate a review period of
six to nine months.
Install Proposed Crossing Improvements
Once the NOI and Application have been approved by the FRA and any comments from
stakeholders have been addressed, the City may begin the physical construction of the
preferred crossing improvements. The City may also begin this installation prior to approval
of the two documents, but any changes to the improvements by the FRA must be
incorporated.
Submit Notice of Establishment
Once these improvements have been constructed, the final step is the submittal of a Notice
of Quiet Zone Establishment (NOE) to the FRA and all applicable stakeholders. The
railroad must cease the routine sounding of horns 21 days after the submittal of the NOE.
The City will be required to provide an update to the FRA every one to five years
(depending on which qualification criteria are used to establish the quiet zone) confirming
that the improvements proposed in the NOE are still in place and functional. The FRA will
inform the City when these updates are required.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 21 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Crossing Improvement Scenarios
Four crossing improvement scenarios were developed for this study, all of which would
qualify the corridor for quiet zone implementation. Based on discussions with the City, it
was determined that the official extents of the quiet zone would be from the private crossing
on the west side of the Rahr facility to Shenandoah Drive. Canterbury Drive was excluded
from the scenarios at this time.
All four scenarios were calculated based on the most recent daily traffic counts and train
volumes. For each scenario, the analysis was completed twice: once assuming a train speed
of 10 mph and a second time assuming a train speed of 25 mph. A summary of the various
crossing improvement scenarios and their total estimated constructions costs are
summarized in Table 4. The detailed risk calculation worksheets are included in Appendix E.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 22 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Scenario 4a and 4b:
25 mph
mph
7,5366,679
Quadrant Quadrant Quadrant Quadrant Existing Medians
on
Medians with
Access Closure
No Closures
Ways
Minimum Minimum Minimum 4,877,500
UpgradesUpgrades
rades
25
Medians
Delineators
14,347
NoneNoneNone
GateGateGateGate
-
or One
Upg
----
10 mph
FourFourFourFour
mph
6,3315,424
$
10
Scenario 3a and 3b:
Way ConversionWay Conversion
25 mph
mph
7,5366,679
Existing Medians
Quadrant Quadrant
on
Medians with
Access Closure
Minimum Minimum Minimum 3,937,500
Ways
UpgradesUpgradesUpgrades
25
Medians
Delineators
14,347
NoneNoneNone
GateGate
-
One
--
mph10 mph
FourFour
6,3315,424
$
--
OneOne
10
Quadrant adrant Quadrant Existing Medians
on
Medians with
Access Closure
cenario 2b
(25 mph):
m
Minimum 3,577,500
UpgradesUpgrades
Medians
Closures
Delineators
14,347
7,5366,307
Minimu
NoneNoneNone CloseClose
GateGateGate
Qu
---
FourFourFour
S
$
Existing Medians
Quadrant Quadrant
on
Medians with
osure
Scenario 2a
(10 mph):
3,077,500
Minimum Minimum Minimum
UpgradesUpgradesUpgrades
osures Medians
Delineators
14,347
6,3315,666
NoneNoneNone
CloseClose
Access Cl
GateGate
23
--
Cl
FourFour
$
with
Existing Medians
on
Medians with
Access Closure
Scenario 1b
(25 mph):
Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum 2,077,500
Minimal
Improvements
UpgradesUpgradesUpgradesUpgradesUpgrades
Medians
Closures
Delineators
14,347
7,5368,757
NoneNoneNone CloseClose
Crossing Improvement Scenario Summary
$
Improvements
Scenario 1a
2,800,000
(10 mph): Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study
Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum
Minimal
UpgradesUpgradesUpgradesUpgradesUpgradesUpgradesUpgrades
14,34710,560
6,331
NoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNone
$
SHENANDOAH DRIVE
MARSCHALL ROAD
SOMMERVILLE ST
MINNESOTA ST
TOTAL COST
ATWOOD ST
SPENCER ST
SARAZIN ST
HOLMES ST MARKET ST
FULLER ST
APGAR ST
SCOTT ST
LEWIS ST
QZRI
SRT
RIWH
N
Table 4.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Scenario 1: Minimal Improvements
Scenario 1 includes onlythe minimum upgrades necessary to achieve a quiet zone by
installing improvements sufficient to bring the QZRI below theNSRT threshold.
Implementing a quiet zone using the NSRT threshold (rather than the RIWH threshold)
requires an annual risk evaluation by the FRA. If traffic volumes and/or train volumes
increase, or if there are collisions at one or more crossings, the QZRI may rise to a level
above the NSRT. Additionally, the NSRT is updated annually and may become lower than
the current value of 14,347. In the event that this occurs, the City would have three years to
implement additional improvements sufficient to bring the QZRI below the NSRT.
Scenario 1a assumes that trains will operate at 10 mph. All crossings that are not currently
equipped with gates (Fuller Street to Minnesota Street) would be upgraded to the minimum
requirements of gates, flashing lights, and CWT. While the upgraded gates do not provide
risk reduction, the resulting QZRI for the corridor is below the NSRT, but not below the
RIWH. The estimated cost for these crossing upgrades is $2,800,000.
Figure 6.Scenario 1a: 10 mph
Risk Index With HornsBaseline Quiet Zone Risk IndexFinal Quiet Zone Risk Index
(Existing Conditions)(After Removing Horns)
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
-
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 24 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Scenario 1b assumes trains will operate at 25 mph. The higher train speed increases the
QZRI to the point that it will not meet the NSRT threshold without additional crossing
improvements. Scenario 1b assumes the following improvements:
Closure of the Fuller Street and Minnesota Street crossings
Installation of channelized delineators on the existing medians at Marschall Road
Installation of medians at Sarazin Street and partial closure of the commercial
access in the southwest quadrant of the intersection.
Installation of medians Shenandoah Dr.
These additional crossing improvements reduce the QZRI to a level below the NSRT, but
not below the RIWH. This represents the least expensive scenario at $2,077,500.
Figure 7.Scenario 1b: 25 MPH
Risk Index With HornsBaseline Quiet Zone Risk IndexFinal Quiet Zone Risk Index
(Existing Conditions)(After Removing Horns)
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
-
Scenario 2: Closures Used
Scenario 2 utilizes closures at Fuller Street and Minnesota Street. It assumes that these road
closures would be fully closed to both vehicles and pedestrians. Scenario 2a assumes trains
operating at 10 mph. All crossings that are not currently equipped with gates would be
upgraded to the minimum requirements of gates, flashing lights, and CWT. Scenario 2a
assumes the following improvements:
Installation of four-quadrant gates at Spencer Street and Market Street.
Installation of channelized delineators on the existing medians at Marschall Road
Installation of medians at Sarazin Street and partial closure of the commercial
access in the southwest quadrant of the intersection.
Installation of medians at Shenandoah Drive
These improvements qualify the corridor by reducing the QZRI to below the RIWH. The
estimated cost of these improvements is $3,077,500.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 25 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Figure 8.Scenario 2a: 10 MPH
Risk Index With HornsBaseline Quiet Zone Risk IndexFinal Quiet Zone Risk Index
(Existing Conditions)(After Removing Horns)
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
-
Scenario 2b assumes trains operating at 25 mph. The proposed improvements are identical
to those proposed under 2a with the exception of one additional set of four-quadrant gates
at Sommerville Street. These extra four-quadrant gates are necessary to balance the increased
risk resulting from the higher train speeds. These improvements qualify the corridor by
reducing the QZRI to below the RIWH. The estimated cost of these improvements is
$3,577,500.
Figure 9.Scenario 2b: 25 MPH
Risk Index With HornsBaseline Quiet Zone Risk IndexFinal Quiet Zone Risk Index
(Existing Conditions)(After Removing Horns)
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
-
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 26 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Scenario 3: One-Ways Used
One-way street conversions are the focus of Scenario 3. This scenario was developed in
order to reduce costs associated with four-quadrant gates and still allow all crossings to
remain open. Converting a street to one-way is an effective alternative to installing the more
expensive four-quadrant gate systems. With one-way streets, only two gates on one side of
the crossing need to be installed to prevent traffic from circumventing the warning devices.
This results in lower installation and equipment costs as compared to a four-quadrant gate.
However, significant modifications to traffic flow are required to implement one-way streets
in Shakopee. Pairing of one-way streets is generally required to promote adequate traffic
flow and reduce confusion. After discussions with the City, it was determined that Holmes
Street and Sommerville Street provided the best opportunity for conversion to a one-way
pair.
Scenarios 3a and 3b assume train speeds of 10 mph and 25 mph respectively. Improvements
under each scenario were identical and assumed the following:
Conversion of Holmes Street and Sommerville Streets to one-ways
Installation of four-quadrant gates at Lewis Street and Spencer Street
Installation of channelized delineators on the existing medians at Marschall Road
Installation of medians at Sarazin Street and partial closure of the commercial
access in the southwest quadrant of the intersection.
Installation of medians at Shenandoah Dr.
These improvements qualify the corridor by reducing the QZRI to below the RIWH. The
estimated cost of these improvements is $3,937,500.
Figure 10. Scenario 3a: 10 MPH
Risk Index With HornsBaseline Quiet Zone Risk IndexFinal Quiet Zone Risk Index
(Existing Conditions)(After Removing Horns)
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
-
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 27 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Figure 11. Scenario 3b: 25 MPH
Risk Index With HornsBaseline Quiet Zone Risk IndexFinal Quiet Zone Risk Index
(Existing Conditions)(After Removing Horns)
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
-
Scenario 4: No Closures or One-Ways
The focus of Scenario 4 is minimal impact to existing conditions by avoiding the use of
closures or one-way streets. Four-quadrant gates are the primary safety measure used in this
scenario. Scenarios 4a and 4b assume train speeds of 10 mph and 25 mph respectively.
Improvements under each scenario were identical and assumed the following:
Installation of four-quadrant gates at Holmes Street, Lewis Street, Sommerville
Street, and Spencer Street
Installation of channelized delineators on the existing medians at Marschall Road
Installation of medians at Sarazin Street and partial closure of the commercial
access in the southwest quadrant of the intersection.
Installation of medians at Shenandoah Drive.
These improvements qualify the corridor by reducing the QZRI to below the RIWH.
However, this is also the most expensive of the scenarios with an estimated cost of
$4,877,500.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 28 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Figure 12.Scenario 4a: 10 MPH
Risk Index With HornsBaseline Quiet Zone Risk IndexFinal Quiet Zone Risk Index
(Existing Conditions)(After Removing Horns)
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
-
Figure 13. Scenario 4b: 25 MPH
Risk Index With HornsBaseline Quiet Zone Risk IndexFinal Quiet Zone Risk Index
(Existing Conditions)(After Removing Horns)
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
-
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 29 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Conclusions
V.CONCLUSIONS
This study evaluated the potential effects on safety as a result of increasing train speed
through downtown Shakopee from the current 10 mph to 25 mph. Both the risk of train
derailment and the risk of collision at each crossing were evaluated.
Evaluating the change in derailment risk is difficult given the many influencing factors such
as speed, train length, and track condition. A review of existing literature on train safety finds
that poor track condition is the most prominent cause of derailments, regardless of all other
factors. Track classification standards also play a strong role in predicting both the severity
and the likelihood of derailments. The findings of this review show that as track
classification increases, the severity of derailments increases slightly (due to higher speeds),
but the likelihood of a derailment is significantly diminished. The UPRR track through
downtown Shakopee is currently classified as a class 4 track with a maximum speed of 60
mph. With a proposed speed increase from 10 mph to 25 mph, the potential change in
derailment likelihood and severity is not anticipated to be significant.
The findings of this review also show that an increase in train speed will increase the
collision risk at highway-rail at-grade crossings. The proposed increase in train speed from
10 mph to 25 mph will only affect the 10 downtown crossing located between Apgar Street
and Minnesota Street and the current warning devices at these crossings may not be
sufficient. Upgrading the warning devices at crossings to gates, flashing lights, and CWT
detectors would largely mitigate the increase in collision risk at many of these crossings.
This study also evaluated the potential for the implementation of a quiet zone through the
City based on the requirements of the FRA’s Train Horn Rule. With guidance from the
Shakopee City Council Railroad Safety Committee, a number of crossing improvement
scenarios were developed based on the goals and needs of the City. The estimated
construction costs for the scenarios ranged from $2,077,500 to $4,877,500. Many of the
construction costs were related to necessary gate and signal system upgrades. The proposed
scenarios were also presented at a Shakopee City Council workshop.
Due to high costs, a recent decline in UPRR train volumes, and a lack of financial
commitments from other partners (UPRR, MnDOT, Hennepin County, etc.) the Committee
is not recommending the implementation of a quiet zone at this time. The Committee
recommends that the train speed limit in the downtown portion of the corridor remain at 10
mph. If the City wishes to proceed with quiet zone implementation at some point in the
future, the information in this report will form the basis of that undertaking, but will need to
be updated to reflect any significant changes in train/traffic volumes, existing crossing
warning devices, and other site conditions.
Shakopee Train Safety/Quiet Zone Study 30 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Appendix A: USDOT Crossing Inventory Forms
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
10042006
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185339D
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
PVT
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEPVT
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0029.13
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
88
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7939033-93.5484770
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
220
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
40
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
2030
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
10/04/2006185339D
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
22
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
8
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
0
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
0
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
0
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
0
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
88
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
8
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
1976000100050
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
10042010
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185338W
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
W 3RD AVE
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMUN 75
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0028.96
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7956010-93.5408020
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
DEAD END STREETDEAD END STREET
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
49
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
2049
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
10/04/2010185338W
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
22
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
1
Specify Type _______________Count __________
1
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
0
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
0
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
0
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
0
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
5
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
31
2014
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
2009000050050
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
08042006
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
921273M
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
PRIVATE
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEE
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0028.69
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMANKATO SUB
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
88
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
000
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
0
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
00
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
02
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
08/04/2006921273M
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
8
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
0
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
0
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
0
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
0
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
0
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
08042006
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
921272F
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
PRIVATE
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEE
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0028.46
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMANKATO SUB
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
88
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
49
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
149
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
01
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
08/04/2006921272F
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
Yes No
8
02
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
8
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
0
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
0
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
0
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
0
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
1
88
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
0
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
04042014
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185336H
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
APGAR ST
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMSAS101
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0028.30
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
924101P
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7968560-93.5321620
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
924101P IS 84' NORTH OF CROSSING.924101P IS 84' NORTH OF CROSSING.
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
222
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
30
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
510
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
04/04/2014185336H
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
88
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
0
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
2 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
6
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
0
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
2SIDELIGHT
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
1,720
2014
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
2011001520054
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
10042010
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185335B
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
SCOTT ST
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMUN 38
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0028.22
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7970469-93.5307100
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
10
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
510
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
10/04/2010185335B
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
20
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
0
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
2
7
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
0
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
0
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
0
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
2014
616
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
2009000675053
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
88
_____/_____/_________
07132009
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185334U
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
ATWOOD ST
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMUN 40
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0028.15
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7972065-93.5292815
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
10
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
510
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
07/13/2009185334U
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
22
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
0
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____ 7
2 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
0
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
2
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
3SIDELIGHT
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
1,177
2014
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
1988000600050
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
10042010
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185332F
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
FULLER ST
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMUN 44
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0028.08
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7973531-93.5278320
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
F0554
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
10
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
510
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
10/04/2010185332F
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
2
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
6
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
1
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
2SIDE
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
8
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-500
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
917
2014
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
2009000675051
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
10042010
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185331Y
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
HOLMES ST
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMSAS102
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0028.01
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7975367-93.5263950
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
F0554A
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
10
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
510
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
10/04/2010185331Y
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
88
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
2
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
0
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
1
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
0
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
1,212
2014
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
2009001800050
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
10042006
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185330S
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
LEWIS ST
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMUN 50
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0027.94
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7977210-93.5249525
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
F0554B
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
10
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
510
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
10/04/2006185330S
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
2
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
0
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
1
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
2NOT GIVEN
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
1,183
2014
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
1997001500050
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
09042010
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185329X
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
SOMMERVILLE ST
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMUN 54
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0027.87
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7967990-93.5232010
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
F1844
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
10
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
510
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
09/04/2010185329X
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
22
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
2
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
6
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
2
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
2SIDE
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
1,418
2014
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
2009000675050
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
10012010
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185328R
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
SPENCER ST
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMSAS114
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0027.79
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7980878-93.5220805
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
F1845
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
10
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
510
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
10/01/2010185328R
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
2
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
6
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
2
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
2SIDE
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
3,840
2014
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
2009004025050
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
12042006
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
187077F
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
MARKET ST
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMSAS103
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0027.58
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAM
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7986391-93.5177630
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
F1595
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
322
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
10
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
110
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
12/04/2006187077F
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
2
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
2
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
0
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
1
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
2NOT GIVEN
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
828
2014
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
2003001250052
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
10042006
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185327J
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
MINNESOTA ST
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMUN 74
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0027.51
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7988173-93.5163675
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
F1606
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
10
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
110
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
10/04/2006185327J
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
2
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
2
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
10
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
2
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
1
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
2SIDE
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
674
2014
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
1988000630050
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
07042013
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
186975E
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
MARSCHALL ROAD
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEECSAH 17
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0027.14
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMANKATOML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7988620-93.5145340
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
F1146
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
40
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
2540
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
07/04/2013186975E
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
88
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
8
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
0
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
2 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
4
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
2
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
0
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
8
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
3
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-500
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
35
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
8
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
8
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
2011010600066
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
88
_____/_____/_________
12022005
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185325V
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
CAVANAUGH DR
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEE
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0026.87
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
8
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.8004372-93.5036725
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
000
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
0
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
00
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
0
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
12/02/2005185325V
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
Yes No
8
02
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
8
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
0
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
0 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
0
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
0
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
0
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
8
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
19700
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
10042010
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185324N
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
SARAZIN ST
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMSAS111
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0026.71
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.7994500-93.5095210
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
F1843
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
40
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
2530
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
10/04/2010185324N
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
88
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
0
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
0
Roadway _____
2 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
4
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
2
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
0
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
2
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
1,250
2012
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
2009001200050
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
10042006
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
187073D
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
SHENANDOAH DRIVE
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEEMUN 192
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0026.40
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMANKATOSHAKOPEE
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.8016466-93.4941875
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
8
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
F1457
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
320
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
40
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
1040
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
10/04/2006187073D
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
8
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
88
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
2
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
2
Roadway _____
2 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
8
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
1
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
0
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
4
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
30
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
88
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
88
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
1,050
2012
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
1988004000051
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 2130-0017
Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory
Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including
pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header,
Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part
I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items 1-3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the
updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item 20 and Part III Item 2.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional
field.
A. Revision DateB. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing
(MM/DD/YYYY) Inventory Number
Railroad Transit Change in New Closed No Train Quiet
8
_____/_____/_________
10042006
Data Crossing Traffic Zone Update
State Other Re-Open Date Change in Primary Admin.
185323G
8
Change Only Operating RRCorrection
Part I: Location and Classification Information
1. Primary Operating Railroad 2. State 3. County
_____________________________________________________ ________________________________ ____________________________________
Union Pacific Railroad Company \[UP\]MINNESOTASCOTT
4. City / Municipality5. Street/Road Name & Block Number 6. Highway Type & No.
In ________________________________| __________________
CANTERBURY RD
8
Near __________________________ (Street/Road Name) |* (Block Number) _______________________________________
SHAKOPEECSAH 83
7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No
88
If Yes, Specify RR If Yes, Specify RR
____________, ____________, ____________, _____________ ____________, ____________, ____________, _____________
9. Railroad Division or Region 10. Railroad Subdivision or District 11. Branch or Line Name 12. RR Milepost
_______|____________|____________
0025.17
None _______________________ None _______________________ None _______________________ (prefix) | (nnnn.nnn) | (suffix)
TWIN CITIESMERRIAMML
13. Line Segment 14. Nearest RR Timetable 15. Parent RR (if applicable) 16. Crossing Owner (if applicable)
* Station *
_________________________ __________________________N/A _____________________________ N/A _________________________________
7610SHAKOPEE
17. Crossing Type 18. Crossing Purpose 19. Crossing Position 20. Public Access 21. Type of Train22. Average Passenger
Highway At Grade (if Private Crossing) Freight Transit Train Count Per Day
88
Less Than One Per Day
Public Pathway, Ped. RR Under Yes Intercity Passenger Shared Use Transit
8
Private Station, Ped. RR Over No Commuter Tourist/Other Number Per Day_____
0
23. Type of Land Use
Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard
8
24. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 25. Quiet Zone (FRA provided)
Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number __________________ No 24 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established _________________
8
8
26. HSR Corridor ID 27. Latitude in decimal degrees 28. Longitude in decimal degrees29. Lat/Long Source
44.8015900-93.4927900
__________________ N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) Actual Estimated
30.A. Railroad Use * 31.A. State Use *
F1370
30.B. Railroad Use * 31.B. State Use *
30.C. Railroad Use * 31.C. State Use *
30.D. Railroad Use *31.D. State Use *
32.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) *32.B. Narrative (State Use) *
33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted)34. Railroad Contact(Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.)
800-848-8715651-366-3667
_______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Part II: Railroad Information
1. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements
1.A. Total Day Thru Trains1.B. Total Night Thru Trains 1.C. Total Switching Trains 1.D. Total Transit Trains 1.E. Check if Less Than
(6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day
__________ __________ __________ __________ How many trains per week? ______
323
2. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY)3. Speed of Train at Crossing
3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) __________
30
__________ 3.B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From __________ to __________
2030
4. Type and Count of Tracks
Main __________ Siding __________ Yard __________ Transit __________ Industry __________
1
5. Train Detection (Main Track only)
Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None
8
6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring
Yes No Yes No Yes No
8
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 1 OF 2
U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM
A. Revision Date (MM/DD/YYYY)PAGE 2 D. Crossing Inventory Number (7 char.)
10/04/2006185323G
Part III: Highway or Pathway Traffic Control Device Information
1.Are there 2. Types of Passive Traffic Control Devices associated with the Crossing
Signs or Signals?
2.A. Crossbuck 2.B. STOP Signs (R1-1) 2.C. YIELD Signs (R1-2) 2.D. Advance Warning Signs (Check all that apply; include count) None
Assemblies (count) (count) (count)
W10-1 ________ W10-3 ________ W10-11 __________
8
Yes No
8
00
W10-2 ________ W10-4 ________ W10-12 __________
2.E. Low Ground Clearance Sign 2.F. Pavement Markings 2.G. Channelization 2.H. EXEMPT Sign 2.I. ENS Sign (I-13)
(W10-5) Devices/Medians(R15-3) Displayed
Yes (count_______) Yes Yes
Stop LinesDynamic Envelope All Approaches Median
No No No
RR Xing Symbols None One Approach None
8
88
2.J. Other MUTCD Signs Yes No 2.K. Private Crossing 2.L. LED Enhanced Signs (List types)
8
Signs (if private)
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Specify Type _______________Count __________
Yes No
Specify Type _______________
Count __________
3. Types of Train Activated Warning Devices at the Grade Crossing (specify count of each device for all that apply)
3.A. Gate Arms 3.B. Gate Configuration 3.C. Cantilevered (or Bridged)Flashing Light 3.D. Mast Mounted Flashing Lights 3.E. Total Count of
(count) Structures (count) (count of masts) _________Flashing Light Pairs
0
2 Quad Full (Barrier) Over Traffic Lane _____ Incandescent Incandescent LED
2
Roadway _____
2 3 Quad Resistance Back Lights Included Side Lights
0
Pedestrian _____
4 Quad Median Gates Not Over Traffic Lane _____ LED Included
0
3.F. Installation Date of Current 3.G. Wayside Horn 3.H. Highway Traffic Signals Controlling 3.I. Bells
Active Warning Devices: (MM/YYYY) Crossing (count)
Yes Installed on (MM/YYYY) ______/__________
______/___________ Not Required Yes No
1
8
No
3.J. Non-Train Active Warning 3.K. Other Flashing Lights or Warning Devices
Flagging/Flagman Manually Operated Signals Watchman Floodlighting None Count ___________ Specify type ______________________
0
4.A. Does nearby Hwy 4.B. Hwy Traffic Signal 4.C. Hwy Traffic Signal Preemption 5. Highway Traffic Pre-Signals 6. Highway Monitoring Devices
Intersection have Interconnection Yes No (Check all that apply)
Not Interconnected
Traffic Signals? Yes - Photo/Video Recording
For Traffic Signals Yes – Vehicle Presence Detection
Simultaneous Storage Distance *____________
8
8
Yes No For Warning Signs None
Advance Stop Line Distance * ____________
8
Part IV: Physical Characteristics
1. Traffic Lanes Crossing Railroad One-way Traffic 2. Is Roadway/Pathway 3. Does Track Run Down a Street? 4. Is Crossing Illuminated? (Street
Two-way TrafficPaved? lights within approx. 50 feet from
Number of Lanes _______ Divided Traffic Yes No Yes No nearest rail) Yes No
4
888
5. Crossing Surface (on Main Track, multiple types allowed) Installation Date * (MM/YYYY) _______/__________ Width *______________ Length * _______________
1 Timber 2 Asphalt 3 Asphalt and Timber 4 Concrete 5 Concrete and Rubber 6 Rubber 7 Metal
8
8 Unconsolidated 9 Composite 10 Other (specify) ________________________________________________________
6. Intersecting Roadway within 500 feet?7. Smallest Crossing Angle 8. Is Commercial Power Available? *
Yes No If Yes, Approximate Distance (feet) _________________ 0° – 29° 30° –59° 60° - 90° Yes No
-75
888
Part V: Public Highway Information
1. Highway System 2. Functional Classification of Road at Crossing 3.Is Crossing on State Highway 4. Highway Speed Limit
(0) Rural (1) Urban System? ___________ MPH
50
8
Yes No
(01) Interstate Highway System (1) Interstate (5) Major Collector Posted Statutory
888
(02) Other Nat Hwy System (NHS) (2) Other Freeways and Expressways
5. Linear Referencing System (LRS Route ID)*
(03) Federal AID, Not NHS (3) Other Principal Arterial (6) Minor Collector
6. LRS Milepost *
(08) Non-Federal Aid (4) Minor Arterial (7) Local
8
7. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)8. Estimated Percent Trucks 9. Regularly Used by School Buses? 10. Emergency Services Route
2011
6,700
Year _______ AADT _____________ ___________________ % Yes No Average Number per Day ___________ Yes No
2003006100050
8
Submission Information -
This information is used for administrative purposes and is not available on the public website.
Submitted by __________________________________ Organization _______________________________________ Phone _______________ Date _____________
Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for information collection is 2130-0017. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection, including for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, MS-25
Washington, DC 20590.
FORM FRA F 6180.71 (Rev. 3/15) OMB approval expires 3/31/2018 Page 2 OF 2
Quiet Zone Analysis
Appendix B: Highway-Rail Grade Crossing
Accident/Incident Reports
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONHIGHWAY-RAIL GRADE CROSSING
OMB Approval No. 2130-0500
ACCIDENT/INCIDENT REPORT
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION (FRA)
1.Name of Reporting Railroad1a. Alphabetic Code1b. Railroad Accident/Incident No.
UP
1014TC011
Union Pacific RR Co. \[UP \]
2b. Railroad Accident/Incident No.
2.Name of Other Railroad or Other Entity Filling for Equipment Involved in Train Accident/Incident2a. Alphabetic Code
3. Name of Railroad or Other Entity Responsible for Track Maintenance3a. Alphabetic Code
3b. Railroad Accident/Incident No.
(single entry)
Union Pacific RR Co. \[UP \]1014TC011
UP
4. U.S. DOT Grade Crossing ID No.
5. Date of Accident/Incident6. Time of Accident/Incident
year
month
day
185323G
AMPM
1
0
12014
7 12:15
7. Nearest Railroad Station8. Subdivision9. County10. StateCode
MN
SHAKOPEEMANKATO SUBSCOTT Abbr.
27
11. City(if in a city)12. Highway Name or No.
SHAKOPEECANTERBURY ROAD
PublicPrivate
Highway User InvolvedRail Equipment Involved
(moving)
4. Car(s)A. Train pulling- RCL
13. Type17. Equipment
(standing)
B. Train pushing- RCL
5. Car(s)
(units pulling)
C. Truck-trailer1. Train
F. Bus
J. Other Motor Vehicle
(moving)
6. Light loco(s)C. Train standing- RCL
(units pushing)
2. Train
Code
A. AutoD. Pick-up truckK. Pedestrian
G. School Bus
Code
D. EMU Locomotive(s)
(standing)
7. Light loco(s)
(standing)
3. Train
E. VanH. Motorcycle
(specify)
B. TruckM. Other 1
A
E. DMU Locomotive(s)
(specify)
8. Other
18. Position of Car Unit in Train
(geographical)
14. Vehicle Speed15. DirectionCode
35
(est. mph at impact)
2
1
1. North2. South3. East4. West
16. Position1. Stalled or stuck on crossing4. Trapped on crossing by traffic
19. Circumstance
Code
Code
2. Stopped on Crossing
5. Blocked on crossing by gates
1. Rail equipment struck highway user2. Rail equipment struck by highway user
1
3
3. Moving over crossing
20a. Was the highway user and/or rail equipment involved20b. Was there a hazardous materials release by
Code
Code
in the impact transporting hazardous materials?
4
4 1. Highway User2. Rail Equipment3. Both4. Neither
1. Highway User2. Rail Equipment3. Both4. Neither
20c. State here the name and quantity of the hazardous material released, if any
(single entry)
21. Temperature22. VisibilityCode23. Weather(single entry)Code
F
562
4
(specify if minus)1. Dawn2. Day3. Dusk4. Dark1. Clear2. Cloudy3. Rain4. Fog5. Sleet6. Snow
24. Type of Equipment5. Single Car
1. Freight Train9. Maint./inspect. car
D. EMU
25. Track Type Used by RailCode26. Track Number or Name
Consist
2. Passenger Train-Pulling
6. Cut of cars E. DMU
A. Spec. MoW Equip.
Equipment Involved
(single entry)
Code
7. Yard/Switching
3. Commuter Train-Pulling
B. Passenger Train-Pushing
SINGLE MAIN
1
1
2. Yard3. Siding4. Industry
1. Main
4. Work Train8. Light loco(s)
C. Commuter Train-Pushing
27. FRA Track28. Number ofCode31. Time Table Direction
30. Consist Speed(Recorded speed if available)
29. Number of Cars
Code
R. Recorded1. North3. East
Class (1-9,X)Locomotive
4
4R
12 mph
22 E. Estimated2. South4. West
Units
32. Type of33. Signaled Crossing Warning34. Roadway Conditions
1. Gates4. Wig wags7. Crossbucks10. Flagged by crew
A. Dry
Crossing
(See reverse side for
B. Wet
2. Cantilever FLS5. Hwy. traffic signals8. Stop signs11. Other(specify)
C.Snow/Slush
instructions and codes)
Warning
D.Ice
Code
3. Standard FLS6. Audible9. Watchman12. None
Code
E. Sand,Mud,Dirt,Oil,Gravel
Code(s)
0102030607A
3
F.Water (Standing, Moving )
36. Crossing Warning Interconnected37. Crossing Illuminated by Street
35. Location of Warning
1. Both SidesLights or Special Lights
with Highway Signals
Code
Code
Code
2. Side of Vehicle Approach
1. Yes2. No3. Unknown
12
2. No 1
1. Yes3. Unknown
3. Opposite Side of Vehicle Approach
5. Other(specify)
41. Highway User
38.Hignway40. Highway User Went Behind or in Front of Train
39.Highway User's Gender
6. Went around/thru temporary barricade
1. Went around the gate
and Struck or was Struck by Second Train
User's
(if yes, see instructions)
2. Stopped and then proceeded
AgeCode
Code
1. MaleCode
3. Did not stop7. Went thru the gate
1. Yes3. Unknown 5
21
2. No
11
2. Female
8. Suicide/Attempted suicide
4. Stopped on crossing
42. Driver Passed Standing(primary obstruction)
Code43. View of Track Obscured by
Code
Highway Vehicle
1. Permanent Structure7. Other (specify)
3. Passing Train5. Vegetation
18
1. Yes2. No3. Unknown
2. Standing railroad equipment4. Topography6. Highway Vehicles8. Not Obstructed
44. Driver was45. Was Driver in the Vehicle?Code
KilledInjured
1
1. Yes2. No
Casualties to:
1. Killed2. Injured
3. Uninjured
3
47. Highway Vehicle Property Damage48. Total Number of Vehicle Occupants
46. Highway-Rail Crossing Users
00
$7,500
(including driver)2
(est. dollar damage)
49. Railroad Employees
Code
51. Is a Rail Equipment Accident /
50. Total Number of People on Train
0
0
Incident Report Being Filed
(include passengers and train crew)2
2
00
52. Passengers on Train
2. No
1. Yes
53a. Special Study Block
Video Taken?53b. Special Study Block
YesNo
Video Used?YesNo
54. Narrative Description(Be specific, and continue on separate sheet if necessary)
HIGHWAY USER'S ACTIONS: OTHER: VEHICLE DROVE ONTO CROSSING PRIOR TO GATES COMING DOWN. TRAIN STRUCK THE DRIVER SIDE BETWEEN THE ENGINE
COMPARTMENT AND FRONT DOOR/NO INJURIES.
55. Typed Name and Title56. Signature57. Date
NOTE: This report is part of the reporting railroad's accident report pursuant to the accident reports statute and, as such shall not 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...." 49 U.S.C. 20903. See 49 C.F.R. 225.7 (b).
FORM FRA F 6180.57 (Rev. 08/10)
* NOTE THAT ALL CASUALTIES MUST BE REPORTED ON FORM FRA F 6180.55A
OMB approval expires 02/28/2014
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONHIGHWAY-RAIL GRADE CROSSING
OMB Approval No. 2130-0500
ACCIDENT/INCIDENT REPORT
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION (FRA)
1.Name of Reporting Railroad1a. Alphabetic Code1b. Railroad Accident/Incident No.
UP
0114TC010
Union Pacific RR Co. \[UP \]
2b. Railroad Accident/Incident No.
2.Name of Other Railroad or Other Entity Filling for Equipment Involved in Train Accident/Incident2a. Alphabetic Code
3. Name of Railroad or Other Entity Responsible for Track Maintenance3a. Alphabetic Code
3b. Railroad Accident/Incident No.
(single entry)
XXX
XRAH
4. U.S. DOT Grade Crossing ID No.
5. Date of Accident/Incident6. Time of Accident/Incident
year
month
day
924101P
AMPM
0
1
22014
2 6:50
7. Nearest Railroad Station8. Subdivision9. County10. StateCode
MN
SHAKOPEEMANKATO SUBSCOTT Abbr.
27
11. City(if in a city)12. Highway Name or No.
SHAKOPEEAPGAR STREET
PublicPrivate
Highway User InvolvedRail Equipment Involved
(moving)
4. Car(s)A. Train pulling- RCL
13. Type17. Equipment
(standing)
B. Train pushing- RCL
5. Car(s)
(units pulling)
C. Truck-trailer1. Train
F. Bus
J. Other Motor Vehicle
(moving)
6. Light loco(s)C. Train standing- RCL
(units pushing)
2. Train
Code
A. AutoD. Pick-up truckK. Pedestrian
G. School Bus
Code
D. EMU Locomotive(s)
(standing)
7. Light loco(s)
(standing)
3. Train
E. VanH. Motorcycle
(specify)
B. TruckM. Other 2
A
E. DMU Locomotive(s)
(specify)
8. Other
18. Position of Car Unit in Train
(geographical)
14. Vehicle Speed15. DirectionCode
30
(est. mph at impact)
2
1
1. North2. South3. East4. West
16. Position1. Stalled or stuck on crossing4. Trapped on crossing by traffic
19. Circumstance
Code
Code
2. Stopped on Crossing
5. Blocked on crossing by gates
1. Rail equipment struck highway user2. Rail equipment struck by highway user
1
3
3. Moving over crossing
20a. Was the highway user and/or rail equipment involved20b. Was there a hazardous materials release by
Code
Code
in the impact transporting hazardous materials?
4
4 1. Highway User2. Rail Equipment3. Both4. Neither
1. Highway User2. Rail Equipment3. Both4. Neither
20c. State here the name and quantity of the hazardous material released, if any
(single entry)
21. Temperature22. VisibilityCode23. Weather(single entry)Code
F
11
1
(specify if minus)1. Dawn2. Day3. Dusk4. Dark1. Clear2. Cloudy3. Rain4. Fog5. Sleet6. Snow
24. Type of Equipment5. Single Car
1. Freight Train9. Maint./inspect. car
D. EMU
25. Track Type Used by RailCode26. Track Number or Name
Consist
2. Passenger Train-Pulling
6. Cut of cars E. DMU
A. Spec. MoW Equip.
Equipment Involved
(single entry)
Code
7. Yard/Switching
3. Commuter Train-Pulling
B. Passenger Train-Pushing
INDU
4
1
2. Yard3. Siding4. Industry
1. Main
4. Work Train8. Light loco(s)
C. Commuter Train-Pushing
27. FRA Track28. Number ofCode31. Time Table Direction
30. Consist Speed(Recorded speed if available)
29. Number of Cars
Code
R. Recorded1. North3. East
Class (1-9,X)Locomotive
4
5E
12 mph
28 E. Estimated2. South4. West
Units
32. Type of33. Signaled Crossing Warning34. Roadway Conditions
1. Gates4. Wig wags7. Crossbucks10. Flagged by crew
A. Dry
Crossing
(See reverse side for
B. Wet
2. Cantilever FLS5. Hwy. traffic signals8. Stop signs11. Other(specify)
C.Snow/Slush
instructions and codes)
Warning
D.Ice
Code
3. Standard FLS6. Audible9. Watchman12. None
Code
E. Sand,Mud,Dirt,Oil,Gravel
Code(s)
07D
F.Water (Standing, Moving )
36. Crossing Warning Interconnected37. Crossing Illuminated by Street
35. Location of Warning
1. Both SidesLights or Special Lights
with Highway Signals
Code
Code
Code
2. Side of Vehicle Approach
1. Yes2. No3. Unknown
11
2. No
1. Yes3. Unknown
3. Opposite Side of Vehicle Approach
5. Other(specify)
41. Highway User
38.Hignway40. Highway User Went Behind or in Front of Train
39.Highway User's Gender
6. Went around/thru temporary barricade
1. Went around the gate
and Struck or was Struck by Second Train
User's
(if yes, see instructions)
2. Stopped and then proceeded
AgeCode
Code
1. MaleCode
3. Did not stop7. Went thru the gate
1. Yes3. Unknown 3
30
2. No
12
2. Female
8. Suicide/Attempted suicide
4. Stopped on crossing
42. Driver Passed Standing(primary obstruction)
Code43. View of Track Obscured by
Code
Highway Vehicle
1. Permanent Structure7. Other (specify)
3. Passing Train5. Vegetation
28
1. Yes2. No3. Unknown
2. Standing railroad equipment4. Topography6. Highway Vehicles8. Not Obstructed
44. Driver was45. Was Driver in the Vehicle?Code
KilledInjured
1
1. Yes2. No
Casualties to:
1. Killed2. Injured
3. Uninjured
3
47. Highway Vehicle Property Damage48. Total Number of Vehicle Occupants
46. Highway-Rail Crossing Users
00
$2,000
(including driver)1
(est. dollar damage)
49. Railroad Employees
Code
51. Is a Rail Equipment Accident /
50. Total Number of People on Train
0
0
Incident Report Being Filed
(include passengers and train crew)2
2
00
52. Passengers on Train
2. No
1. Yes
53a. Special Study Block
Video Taken?53b. Special Study Block
YesNo
Video Used?YesNo
54. Narrative Description(Be specific, and continue on separate sheet if necessary)
HIGHWAY USER'S ACTIONS: DID NOT STOP. TRAIN STRUCK VEHICLE BY THE FAR SIDE LADDER OF CAR UP94879. THE DRIVER LEFT THE SCENE OF ACCIDENT AND THEN
RETURNED/NO INJURIES.
55. Typed Name and Title56. Signature57. Date
NOTE: This report is part of the reporting railroad's accident report pursuant to the accident reports statute and, as such shall not 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...." 49 U.S.C. 20903. See 49 C.F.R. 225.7 (b).
FORM FRA F 6180.57 (Rev. 08/10)
* NOTE THAT ALL CASUALTIES MUST BE REPORTED ON FORM FRA F 6180.55A
OMB approval expires 02/28/2014
Quiet Zone Analysis
Appendix C: Diagnostic Review Meeting Summary
SRF No. 8834
SHAKOPEE, MN
QUIET ZONEDIAGNOSTIC MEETING
MEETING MINUTES
June 30, 2015
ATTENDEES:
Bruce Loney, City of Shakopee Kyle Nodgaard, UPRR
Will Reynolds, City of Shakopee Melinda DuBay UPRR
Mike Luce, City of Shakopee Zak Chaney, UPRR
Tammy Wagner, FRA Chris Ryan, SRF Consulting
Jim Weatherhead, MnDOT BrieAnna Simon, SRF Consulting
Mike Blackley UPRR
The diagnostic meeting participants met at Shakopee City Hall to discuss the Shakopee Quiet Zone
Assessment Study and the diagnostic field review. A copy of the sign-in sheet with contact
information is provided as an attachment. The meeting began with introductions and a brief project
overview. The purpose of the meeting was to investigate and gather input on the various
Supplemental Safety Measure (SSM) and Alternative Safety Measure (ASM) options available to
the city as they begin their quiet zone assessment process. The meeting was also intended to
identify any other concerns or issues related to the crossings such as safety, traffic, operations, etc.
Twenty crossings, located along the Union Pacific railroad between 3rd Avenue and Canterbury
Road, were identified for review. Sixteen of these crossings are public. The railroad in this area
runs down the center of 2nd Avenue for much of the corridor. Meeting packets were distributed to
the diagnostic team. The packets included the following materials:
Blank evaluation forms for each crossing for diagnostic team members to document their
1.
preferred SSM/ASM improvement options and other field notes.
8.5x11 aerial map of the railroad and an aerial map of each crossing
2.
Preliminary risk calculations
3.
Quiet Zone terminology reference sheet
4.
U.S. Department of Transportation Crossing Inventory Forms
5.
U.S. Department of Transportation Accident Reports (within the past 5 years)
6.
Many of the crossings in the proposed corridor are equipped only with flashing lights. In order to
implement a quiet zone, each public crossing must be equipped with the minimum requirements
of gates, flashing lights, and constant warning time (CWT) detectors. Due to the close spacing of
the crossings through the downtown area, the installation of CWT detectors is anticipated to be
more difficult than usual. MnDOT and UP representatives noted that each upgrade would cost
between $300,000 and $400,000.
One way of limiting the need for these minimum requirements would be through the closure of
one or more crossings. MnDOT noted that they would contribute $10,000 per closure if the City
pursues this option. UP noted that they would also contribute funding for closures. However, the
1
Shakopee, MN Quiet Zone Page 2
Diagnostic Team Meeting Minutes
exact amount would depend on the location and the number of closures implemented. The
diagnostic team also noted that these closures would need to be full closures rather than
conversions to pedestrian-only crossings. The diagnostic team recommended that fencing should
be used if any crossings are closed in order to prevent pedestrian trespassing. There must be a 10-
foot clear distance between the fence and the track. This clear distance would likely require
substantial roadway modifications and would potentially impact parking availability. While a
fence would not be required per the FRA Train Horn Rule, UP indicated that a decision to not
install a fence may impact their potential funding contributions.
The following is a summary of issues noted by the diagnostic team that apply to one or more
crossings in the proposed quiet zone corridor:
nd
considered for installation along 2 Avenue.
The implementation of gates, flashing lights, and CWT detectors at each crossing will
require the installation of additional signal cabinets. Many existing signal cabinets would
also need to be upgraded to a larger size. If a quiet zone is pursued, the City will coordinate
with UP to identify the specific locations of these cabinets.
A summary of the notes, discussion items, and recommended SSM/ASM improvements for each
crossing is provided in the tables on the following pages.
Private185339D
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 1 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
High vegetation growth and vehicle storage near crossing provides sight restrictions to both rail and
oncoming traffic.
Many of the vehicles near this crossing appear to be parked on UP right-of-way.
The on-site manager noted that he would prefer that trains keep sounding horns for employee safety. Due
to sight limitation and the use of larger vehicles crossing the train tracks, the train horn provides an
additional safety measure.
Additional warning signage will be required if this crossing becomes a quiet zone.
The City will coordinate with the property owner on any action taken at this crossing for quiet zone
implementation.
Shakopee, MN Quiet Zone Page 3
Diagnostic Team Meeting Minutes
West 3 Avenue185338W
rd
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 1 No
Wayside Horns 2 Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure If crossing is actually private, no treatment
One-Way Streets
Notes:
Frontage road speed is signed for 30 mph but due to curvature of the roadway and sight line, only one
vehicle can cross the tracks at a given time at an approximate speed of 20-25 mph max.
On account of the narrow roadway width (21 ft.) and skew at this crossing, the use of non-traversable
medians or channelized delineators will not be feasible at this crossing.
Nearby driveway access to the northeast will need fencing or another type of barrier to ensure vehicles do
not cut through gates when a train is approaching.
High vegetation growth provides sightline restrictions.
Diagnostic team recommends providing only the minimum treatments of lights and gates.
While this crossing is noted as public in the FRA grade crossing inventory, it is treated by the city as private
(local property owners are responsible for plowing, etc.). Following the diagnostic meeting, the City and
MnDOT reviewed historic right-of-way maps for this area and determined that the crossing should in fact
be listed as private.
Private: Rahr Entrance921273M
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 1 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
Approximately 30-50 crossings per day (Rahr employees).
Train
A gate provides restriction to all those crossing without a key card between the times of 6:00 p.m. and 5:00
a.m.
The City will coordinate with the property owner on any action taken at this crossing for quiet zone
implementation.
Shakopee, MN Quiet Zone Page 4
Diagnostic Team Meeting Minutes
Private: Rahr Entrance921272F
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 1 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
Approximately 75-100 crossings per day (Rahr employees).
Additional signage (crossbuck, stop sign) will be needed on the southbound approach. Bollards should be
placed around the sign post for protection.
The City will coordinate with the property owner on any action taken at this crossing for quiet zone
implementation.
Apgar Street185336H
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
1 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 2 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
Crossing currently meets all minimum requirements.
Apgar Street (Spur Crossing)924101P
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
1 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 2 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
Crossing currently meets all minimum requirements.
If a 4-quadrant gate is installed at this crossing the signal will need to be coordinated with the mainline
Apgar crossing gate to prevent queued vehicles from being trapped on the tracks.
This crossing is separate from the other mainline crossings listed in the review and would be evaluated as a
separate quiet zone upon implementation.
Shakopee, MN Quiet Zone Page 5
Diagnostic Team Meeting Minutes
Scott Street185335B
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
1 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 3 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
2 Closure
2 One-Way Streets
Notes:
Crossing currently meets all minimum requirements.
Atwood Street185334U
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
1 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 3 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
2 Closure
2 One-Way Streets
Notes:
Crossing currently meets all minimum requirements.
The Diagnostic Team recommends the installation of a pedestrian signage at this crossing (,,
and
The existing wooden bollards around the pedestrian crossing are located at the correct offset distance
from the track (8.5 feet).
Fuller Street185332F
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
1 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 3 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
2 Closure
2 One-Way Streets
Notes:
This crossing will need to be upgraded to meet the minimum requirements.
A larger signal cabinet would be needed to accommodate gate and signal upgrades (corner of public
parking lot may be a possible location).
The power lines over the crossing may need to be relocated in order to installed gates.
Shakopee, MN Quiet Zone Page 6
Diagnostic Team Meeting Minutes
Holmes Street185331Y
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
1 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 4 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
2 Closure
3 One-Way Streets
Notes:
This crossing will need to be upgraded to meet the minimum requirements.
The Diagnostic Team would not recommend keeping the pedestrian access open at this location if this
access is a full closure.
Additional pedestrian signage will be needed if a 4-quadrant gate is installed.
Lewis Street185330S
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
1 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 3 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
2 Closure
2 One-Way Streets
Notes:
This crossing will need to be upgraded to meet the minimum requirements.
A larger signal cabinet will be needed to accommodate gate and signals upgraded (corner of public parking
lot may be a possible location).
Sommerville Street185329X
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
1 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 3 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
2 Closure
2 One-Way Streets
Notes:
This crossing will need to be upgraded to meet the minimum requirements.
The existing signal cabinet is large enough to support a full upgrade.
Shakopee, MN Quiet Zone Page 7
Diagnostic Team Meeting Minutes
Spencer Street185328R
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
1 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 3 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
2 Closure
2 One-Way Streets
Notes:
This crossing will need to be upgraded to meet the minimum requirements.
The Diagnostic Team recommends the need for pedestrian channelization at crosswalk.
The signal cabinet at Summerville Street currently services Spencer Street. In order accommodate a full
signal upgrade an additional cabinet will be needed at this crossing.
Curb bumpouts will be needed in order to install the signal masts. The required spacing is 15 feet from the
rail to the center of the signal mast. This may require additional roadway modifications.
Market Street187077F
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
1 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 2 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
This crossing will need to be upgraded to meet the minimum requirements.
A larger signal cabinet will be needed to accommodate a full signal upgrade.
Narrow side streets of 12 ft. from rail to curb will cause difficulties with a signal and gate installation.
Due to the current roadway width (42 feet) and on-street parking close to the crossing, sight lines to the
mast-mounted clashing lights are blocked and cantilever-mounted flashing lights are in place at this
location.
In order to eliminate the cantilever, lane widths will need to be narrowed to standard 12 ft. with no on
street parking.
Standard pedestrian signage and upgrades is recommended at this location.
Shakopee, MN Quiet Zone Page 8
Diagnostic Team Meeting Minutes
Minnesota Street185327J
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
1 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators 3 No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
2 Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
This crossing will need to be upgraded to meet the minimum requirements.
A larger signal cabinet will be needed to accommodate a full signal upgrade.
Minnesota Street ends in a cul-de-sac a few block south of the crossing, making this a good candidate for
closure.
CSAH 17 (Marschall Street)186975E
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
2 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians 1 Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
Crossing currently meets all minimum requirements.
Medians are currently in place at this crossing. However, they do not appear to be compliant with the FRA
Train Horn Rule requirements. Non-traversable medians must be at least 6 inches high and there must be
no more than 2 feet of lateral distance between the end of the lowered gate arm and the non-traversable
portion of the median.
Private: Cavanaugh Drive185325V
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators X No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
FRA offered a crash safety day, training, or railroad safety programs. However, owners noted trainings
would be difficult since drivers come from all over the country.
The city noted that there is a potential for gates and signals to be installed at this location at either the
owners expense or in partnership with the city.
Private business owners and manages noted they both like the train horn and would like to see the horn
continued in the future for employee safety. Owners and managers feel this would be an
unsafe/dangerous crossing without the presence of a train horn.
Diagnostic Team Meeting Minutes from June 30, 2015 will be sent to business owner.
Shakopee, MN Quiet Zone Page 9
Diagnostic Team Meeting Minutes
Sarazin Street185324N
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
X Non-Traversable Medians Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
Crossing currently meets all minimum requirements.
Closure of a private gravel access north of crossing, along with the installation of a 100 ft. non-traversable
median.
Installation of a 50 ft. non-traversable median to Cavanaugh Drive, along with radius improvement to
Cavanaugh Drive.
Shakopee, MN Quiet Zone Page 10
Diagnostic Team Meeting Minutes
Shenandoah Drive187073D
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
X 4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians X Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
Crossing currently meets all minimum requirements.
Installation of 4-quadrant gates and a non-traversable median. The city will review roadway geometrics to
determine the best fit design with truck movements.
Recommendation of improved signage on median.
Canterbury Road185323G
FRA Crossing ID:
Crossing Improvement Options (Rank Top 3):
4-Quadrant Gate 3-Quadrant Gate
Non-Traversable Medians X Reduced Length Non-Traversable Medians
ASMs:
SSMs:
Channelized Delineators Reduced Length Channelized Delineators No
Wayside Horns Other (Describe): Treatment
Closure
One-Way Streets
Notes:
Crossing currently meets all minimum requirements.
Possibility for a 48 ft. non-traversable median between double stripes to rail, along with a 60 ft. non-
traversable median between rail to light.
Quiet Zone Analysis
Appendix D: City of Shakopee City Council’s
Railroad Safety Committee Meeting Minutes
Record of Meeting
SRF No. 8834
Location:
Shakopee City Hall Conference Room
Client:
City of Shakopee
Date:
June 1, 2015
Subject:
Railroad Safety Committee Meeting 1
Attendees:
Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
Kris Wilson, Acting City Administrator
Samantha DiMaggio, Economic Development Coordinator
Matt Lehman, Councilor
Mike Luce, Councilor
From:
Andy Mielke, SRF Consulting Group Inc.
Chris Ryan, SRF Consulting Group Inc.
Summary of Meeting
The purpose of this meeting was to present information to the Railroad Safety Committee regarding
the train safety and quiet zone review process and to gain additional feedback and information on
the project.
SRF began by presenting an overview of the quiet zone implementation process. At a minimum
each crossing must be equipped with gates, flashing lights, and constant warning time (CWT)
detectors. Many of the Shakopee crossings are currently equipped with only flashing lights and
would need to be upgraded to be eligible for the quiet zone. This minimum upgrade is typically
estimated at approximately $250,000, but the final cost is determined by the railroad on a crossing by
crossing basis.
SRF also presented the various supplementary safety measures (SSMs) and alternative safety
measures (ASMs) that are pre-approved by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for use in
quiet zones. The purpose of these safety measures is the increase the safety of the crossings to
balance the decrease in safety as a result of removing the routine sounding of the horn. Non-
traversable medians are the most commonly used crossing improvement due to their relatively low
cost (approximately $10,000 to $100,000 per crossing) and high effectiveness. However, the physical
layout of the rail corridor through downtown Shakopee with parallel roadways immediately adjacent
to the railroad prevents the use of medians. The most likely candidates for improvement at these
crossings are four-quadrant gates or the implementation of one-way streets.
Another potential improvement option is closure. A closure eliminates all risk at a crossing, but will
increase the risk at adjacent crossings due to diverted traffic and will also have potential impacts on
the traffic flow on nearby roadways. In the event that a crossing improvement scenario is developed
Bruce Loney June 1, 2015
City of Shakopee Page 2
which included crossing closures, SRF will also complete a review of the impacts to traffic on
adjacent roadways. SRF also noted that crossing closures are highly desired by the railroads and can
sometimes be used as a bargaining tool to get funding contributions from the railroad. The
conversion of a crossing to a pedestrian crossing was also discussed. While this would eliminate the
risk at the crossing from a quiet zone perspective, railroads typically will not provide funding
contributions unless the crossing is closed completely. It was also noted that the closure of crossings
may require the installation of fencing to prevent pedestrians from trespassing over railroad right of
way.
SRF then presented a preliminary summary of the risk analysis for each crossing. The risk analysis is
based on a formula developed by the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Federal Railroad
Administration that takes into account a number of factors including existing railroad and highway
volumes and speeds, crossing geometry, and previous crash history. Canterbury Road is currently the
crossing with the highest risk due to relatively higher traffic volumes and a rail-vehicle crash that
occurred within the past five years. Analysis was also completed to assess the change in risk as a
result of the potential increase in speed from 10 mph to 25 mph through the downtown area. If this
speed change is implemented, the risk levels at these crossings would increase by approximately 50
percent.
It was also noted that the potential speed limit change is proposed at 25 mph rather than 15 or 20
mph due to railroad operational concerns. Railroads typically avoid train speeds between 12 and 24
mph since this increases the risk of harmonic rock and roll, a phenomenon which can cause some
rail cars to rock back and force, increasing the risk of derailment.
bargaining chip to be used in negotiation with the railroads for the funding of rail safety and/or
quiet zone improvements. However, concern was expressed regarding the potentially greater impacts
in the event of a derailment. Concern was also expressed about the potential vibrational impacts on
older buildings in town. SRF will work with the City and the Railroad Safety Committee to
determine if additional vibrational analysis and field measurements should be completed as part of
the train safety evaluation.
A quiet zone diagnostic meeting is scheduled for June 30. The purpose of this meeting is to meet
with the FRA, Union Pacific Railroad, and the Minnesota Department of Transportation to review
each crossing and identify the potential crossing improvements and other safety improvements that
would be necessary for quiet zone implementation. Bruce Loney noted that the City will look into
scheduling a small bus to help facilitate the field review portion of this meeting.
Record of Meeting
SRF No. 8834
Location:
Shakopee City Hall Council Chambers
Client:
City of Shakopee
Date:
August 10, 2015
Subject:
Railroad Safety Committee Meeting 2
Attendees:
Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
Bill Reynolds, City Administrator
Matt Lehman, Councilor
Mike Luce, Councilor
Chris Dellwo, Shakopee PD
From:
Andy Mielke, SRF Consulting Group Inc.
Chris Ryan, SRF Consulting Group Inc.
Summary of Meeting
The purpose of this meeting was to present information from the diagnostic meeting to the Railroad
Safety Committee. Various improvements options and scenarios were presented to the Committee
as well. The following summary was provided:
1.The diagnostic meeting was held on June 30. Meeting participants included the City of
Shakopee, Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), MnDOT, and the Union Pacific Railroad.
Private crossing representatives also participated in discussions at their crossings. A summary of
the meeting and results are presented below:
Cost of minimum upgrades (Gates, Flashing Lights, Constant Warning Time)
Typically estimated at $250k
o
Estimated for Shakopee at $400k
o
Higher cost due to complicated CWT installation caused by proximity and
number of crossings.
Jim Weatherhead (MnDOT) noted that the recent upgrades at Apgar cost
$400k. We will use this as our base cost for minimum upgrades.
Closures
UP and FRA prefer full closures over conversion to pedestrian crossings
o
No funds will be contributed to pedestrian conversion
Tammy Wagner (FRA)
pedestrian conversion. We believe this is incorrect since pedestrian crossings
uphill battle for
conversion.
For full closures, the diagnostic team recommended fencing between adjacent
o
crossings to prevent trespassing.
Bruce Loney August 10, 2015
City of Shakopee Page 2
f fencing in the event of a
closure might affect UP funding contributions.
Multiple instances of trespassing were witnessed during the meeting.
rd
West 3 Avenue public/private status
Classified as public in FRA crossing inventory
o
Review by MnDOT found that this should be classified as a private crossing
o
A private status means that trains will only sound horns if there is someone stopped
o
at the crossing. No horns if no one is there. This reclassification means the quiet
zone starting point can be moved to the Rahr crossings.
Signal Cabinet Locations
To allow for minimum upgrades, many new signal cabinets would need to be
o
installed and existing cabinets would need to be expanded. Some potential locations
were identified during the meeting but further coordination would be needed
between the City, UP, and property owners to finalize the locations.
Majority of the private business crossing owners are indifferent to or not in favor of the
quiet zone mainly because they want to ensure safety for their employees. These crossings
include:
rd
185339D: Private Business Access off of 3 Ave
o
921273M: Rahr Access
o
921272F: Rahr Access
o
185325V: Cavanaugh Dr
o
2.Various safety improvement options at each crossing were discussed with the Committee.
These include:
Closures
Generally done at no cost to the city. Assumes funding contribution from
o
UP/MnDOT totaling $15,000 to cover roadway closure improvements (i.e., curb
work, etc.).
Based on the initial traffic review, it is recommended that the crossings at Holmes
o
Street, Lewis Street, Sommerville Street, and Spencer Street remain open.
Potential crossing closure options include either Market or Minnesota and the Fuller
o
Street crossing.
If the Fuller Street crossing is closed, may look to potentially move the TH
101 traffic signal to Atwood Street.
Minnesota Street has no pertinent issues.
The Apgar and Scott crossing could also be potential crossing options. However,
o
these crossings are already equipped with the minimum improvements necessary for
a quiet zone. Closing either of these crossing would not make use of this prior
investment.
Medians or Delineators
The installation of delineators is possible at the Marschall Road crossing on top of
o
the existing medianemental
safety measure (SSM) and qualify for full QZ credit.
Only other potential median location is at Sarazin Street.
o
One-way Streets
Bruce Loney August 10, 2015
City of Shakopee Page 3
Based on a review of traffic circulation through the downtown area, one-way streets
o
could be made at Holmes Street (SB) and Sommerville Street (NB).
It is recommended to keep Lewis Street as a two-way street.
o
Four Quadrant Gates
During the diagnostic meeting, the UPRR stated that they prefer a 15-foot offset for
o
gate posts from the nearest rail. However, based on a review of the MUTCD, only
12-
install four-quadrant gates the crossings along the Second Street corridor where
minimal ROW is available. The newest gates at Apgar Street and Scott Street use the
12-foot offset.
3.Various crossing improvement scenarios were reviewed and discussed with the Railroad Safety
Committee. The scenarios discussed are presented below and the results are included
Attachment A.
Scenario 0: Train speed increase; maintain existing safety, only minimum upgrades - No
quiet zone. Need to determine what upgrades are needed to balance increased train speed.
Scenario 1: This scenario looked at no speed increase and no closures. It would qualify for a
QZ by getting below the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold (NSRT) which is the
national average for QZs. This risk level fluctuates and may presents problems in the future
if the NSRT decreases.
Scenario 2: This scenario included an increase in train speed and no crossing closures. This
scenario is below the Risk Index With Horns (RIWH) which is the level of risk currently
Scenario 3: This scenario included an increase in train speed and two crossing closures
(Fuller Street and Minnesota Street).
Closures eliminates the need for gate upgrades at Fuller Street and Minnesota Street
o
Eliminates the need for four-quad gates at Lewis Street
o
The Committee had various responses and suggestions regarding the Scenarios presented
above. These included:
Run additional scenarios with the Shenandoah Drive crossing.
o
Run additional scenarios without the one-way pairs (i.e., update Scenarios 1, 2, and
o
3). The Committee felt that the conversion to one-way pairs is probably not feasible
at this time and should be kept separate from the QZ analysis.
Conduct some sensitivity analysis with increased train/vehicle traffic to see what
o
happens to the risk levels.
The Committee would like to get input from additional City Council members on
o
these scenarios. They suggested having a Council Workshop to inform them about
the QZ process and get their input on the proposed improvements with these
scenarios. A closes City Council session was also recommended at some point to
discuss the negotiations with the UPRR on the improvement costs, speed increases,
and closures.
$400,000$400,000$400,000$400,000$400,000$400,000$400,000
2,800,000
Estimated Cost
MINNESOTA ST
$
MARKET ST
Improvement
Gate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate Upgrade
NoneNoneNone
SPENCER ST
25 mph with Additional
6,050
4,5753,6307,6825,5376,2096,1476,6229,9695,2454,879
Improvements
Risk Index:
SOMMERVILLE ST
Scenario 0: No Quiet Zone; Train Speed Increase; Maintain Existing Safety; Only Minimum Upgrades
11,791 7,414
4,5753,6307,6827,4998,2288,1628,6617,1576,754
25 mph with Existing
LEWIS ST
Risk Index:
Conditions
HOLMES ST
5,509
3,0542,4325,7775,6396,1876,1386,5138,8665,4115,078
10 mph with Existing
Risk Index:
FULLER ST
Conditions
ATWOOD ST
Existing Warning D
Flashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing Lights
SCOTT ST
GatesGatesGates
SOMMERVILLE ST
MINNESOTA ST
ATWOOD ST
SPENCER ST
APGAR ST
HOLMES ST
MARKET ST
FULLER ST
APGAR ST
SCOTT ST
LEWIS ST
Street
185336H185335B185334U185332F185331Y185330S185329X185328R187077F185327J
14,00012,00010,000
8,0006,0004,0002,0000
Crossing
$400,000$400,000$400,000$400,000$900,000$400,000$400,000
3,300,000
Estimated Cost
MINNESOTA ST
$
MARKET ST
Improvement
4-Quad Gates
Gate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate Upgrade
NoneNoneNone
SPENCER ST
25 mph with Additional
5,232
4,5753,6307,6825,5376,2096,1476,6221,7945,2454,879
Improvements
Risk Index:
Scenario 0: No Quiet Zone; Train Speed Increase; Maintain Existing Safety; Minimum Upgrades plus 4-Quad
SOMMERVILLE ST
11,791 7,414
4,5753,6307,6827,4998,2288,1628,6617,1576,754
25 mph with Existing
LEWIS ST
Risk Index:
Conditions
HOLMES ST
5,509
3,0542,4325,7775,6396,1876,1386,5138,8665,4115,078
10 mph with Existing
Risk Index:
FULLER ST
Conditions
ATWOOD ST
Existing Warning D
Flashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing Lights
SCOTT ST
GatesGatesGates
SOMMERVILLE ST
MINNESOTA ST
ATWOOD ST
SPENCER ST
APGAR ST
HOLMES ST
MARKET ST
FULLER ST
APGAR ST
SCOTT ST
LEWIS ST
Street
185336H185335B185334U185332F185331Y185330S185329X185328R187077F185327J
14,00012,00010,000
8,0006,0004,0002,0000
Crossing
Below NSRT of 14,347
Below RIWH
9,8935,346
5,0934,0579,6366,9457,7877,7108,30612,5046,6146,12028,76515,1755,0934,0579,6366,9451,4021,3881,4952,2516,6146,12015,1024,047
Final Quiet Zone Final Quiet Zone
Risk IndexRisk Index
400,000400,000400,000400,000400,000400,000400,000400,000430,000900,000430,000900,000400,000400,00020,00057,500
2,800,0003,937,500
Estimated CostEstimated Cost
--------
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$
$ $
Medians; Access Closure
ImprovementImprovement
One-Way ConversionOne-Way Conversion
4-Quadrant Gave4-Quadrant Gave
Gate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate Upgrade
Delineators
NoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNone
5,093 4,057 9,636 6,945
7,787 7,710 8,306 6,614 6,120
5,093 4,057 9,636 6,945
7,787 7,710 8,306 6,614 6,120
12,504 28,765 15,175 12,504
28,765 15,175
9,8939,893
Baseline Quiet Zone Risk Baseline Quiet Zone Risk
IndexIndex
3,0542,4325,7774,1644,6694,6234,9807,4963,9653,66917,2459,0983,0542,4325,7774,1644,6694,6234,9807,4963,9653,66917,2459,098
5,9315,931
Risk Index With HornsRisk Index With Horns
Existing Warning DExisting Warning D
Flashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing
LightsFlashing Lights
Scenario 1: No Speed Increase; No ClosuresScenario 1: No Speed Increase; No Closures
GatesGatesGatesGatesGatesGatesGatesGatesGatesGates
MARSCHALL ROADMARSCHALL ROAD
SOMMERVILLE STSOMMERVILLE ST
MINNESOTA STMINNESOTA ST
ATWOOD STATWOOD ST
SPENCER STSPENCER ST
SARAZIN STSARAZIN ST
HOLMES STMARKET STHOLMES STMARKET ST
FULLER STFULLER ST
APGAR STAPGAR ST
SCOTT STSCOTT ST
LEWIS STLEWIS ST
StreetStreet
185336H185335B185334U185332F185331Y185330S185329X185328R187077F185327J186975E185324N185336H185335B185334U185332F185331Y185330S185329X185328R187077F185327J186975E185324N
CrossingCrossing
Below RIWH
6,7856,386
8,4146,05612,8149,2361,8641,8461,9882,9938,7498,13915,2824,047 8,414 6,056 14,423
- 2,001 10,254 1,988 2,993 11,173 - 15,2824,047 Below RIWH
Final Quiet Zone Final Quiet Zone
Risk IndexRisk Index
400,000430,000900,000430,000900,000400,000400,00020,00057,500430,000400,000430,000900,000400,00020,00057,500
3,937,5002,637,500
Estimated CostEstimated Cost
--------
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $
Medians; Access ClosureMedians; Access Closure
ImprovementImprovement
One-Way ConversionOne-Way ConversionOne-Way ConversionOne-Way Conversion
4-Quadrant Gave4-Quadrant Gave4-Quadrant Gave
Gate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate UpgradeGate Upgrade
DelineatorsDelineators
NoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNoneCloseClose
12,814 10,356 10,254 11,046
16,628 28,765 15,175 12,814 10,356
10,254 11,046 16,628 28,765 15,175
8,414 6,056 9,236 8,749
8,139 8,414 6,056 9,236 8,749
8,139
12,13612,136
Baseline Quiet Zone Risk Baseline Quiet Zone Risk
IndexIndex
17,245 17,245
5,044 3,630 7,682 5,537
6,209 6,147 6,622 9,969 5,245
4,879 9,098 5,044 3,630 7,682
5,537 6,209 6,147 6,622
9,969 5,245 4,879 9,098
7,2767,276
Risk Index With HornsRisk Index With Horns
Existing Warning DExisting Warning D
Flashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing LightsFlashing
LightsFlashing Lights
Scenario 3: Increased Speed; Two Closures
GatesGatesGatesGatesGatesGatesGatesGatesGatesGates
Scenario 2: Increased Speed; No Closures
MARSCHALL ROADMARSCHALL ROAD
SOMMERVILLE STSOMMERVILLE ST
MINNESOTA STMINNESOTA ST
ATWOOD STATWOOD ST
SPENCER STSPENCER ST
HOLMES STSARAZIN STHOLMES STSARAZIN ST
MARKET STMARKET ST
FULLER STFULLER ST
APGAR STAPGAR ST
SCOTT STSCOTT ST
LEWIS STLEWIS ST
StreetStreet
185336H185335B185334U185332F185331Y185330S185329X185328R187077F185327J186975E185324N185336H185335B185334U185332F185331Y185330S185329X185328R187077F185327J186975E185324N
CrossingCrossing
Quiet Zone Analysis
Appendix E: Quiet Zone Risk Calculations
south
northnorth
40/60
50/6040/60
north;
south;south;
35/60
100'100'
(14,347)(14,347)
14,42311,11910,25411,04616,62811,173
7,6306,056
8,757
5,0934,0579,6366,9457,7877,7108,30612,5046,6146,12028,76515,17518,563 10,560 15,2824,0476,188
Zone
Zone
Index
Index
Quiet
Quiet
NSRTNSRT
Risk
Risk
Final
Final
BelowBelow
Cost
Cost
Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000 2,800,000 Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Delineators20,000Clo
sure57,500 2,077,500
Horns)ImprovementEstimated IndexImprovementEstimated
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Access
Medians;
Medians
NoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNoneCloseClose
GateGateGateGateGateGateGateGateGateGateGateGate
12,50428,76515,17518,56312,81410,35610,25411,04616,62828,76515,17518,563
10,56012,570
Removing 5,0934,0579,6366,9457,7877,7108,3066,6146,1207,6306,0569,2368,7498,139
Index
Quiet
Quiet
Risk
Risk
Baseline
Baseline
(After
Zone Zone
Conditions)
Horns
Horns
3,0542,4325,7774,1644,6694,6234,9807,4963,9653,66917,2459,09811,129 6,331 17,24511,129 7,536
4,5743,6307,6825,5376,2096,1476,6229,9695,2454,8799,098
Index
Index
(Existing
With
Risk RiskWith
Closures
STGates00STGates00STGates00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00ROADGates00STGates00DRIVEGates00STGates00STGates00STGates00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00R
OADGates00STGates00DRIVEGates00
SSMPreSSM
SSMPreSSM
with
Improvements
Improvements
Devices
Warning
D
Minimal
Minimal
Warning
STFlashing
STFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashing
Existing
CrossingStreetExisting
Threshold;
Threshold;
NSRT
NSRT
185329XSOMMERVILLE185329XSOMMERVILLE
187073DSHENANDOAH187073DSHENANDOAH
mph;
mph;
186975EMARSCHALL186975EMARSCHALL
185327JMINNESOTA185327JMINNESOTA
185334UATWOOD185334UATWOOD
185328RSPENCER185328RSPENCER
HOLMESHOLMES
187077FMARKET187077FMARKET
185324NSARAZIN185324NSARAZIN
185332FFULLER185332FFULLER
185336HAPGAR185336HAPGAR
CrossingStreet
185335BSCOTT185335BSCOTT
25
10 185330SLEWIS185330SLEWIS
1b:
1a:
ScenarioScenario
185331185331
YY
southsouth
northnorthnorthnorth
40/6040/60
50/6040/6050/6040/60
north;north;
south;south;south;south;
35/6035/60
100'100'100'100'
90%84%
14,42311,11910,254
7,6306,056
5,6666,307
5,0934,05710,8468,3617,7108,3062,2511,52015,2824,0476,1881,9882,9932,01115,2824,0476,188
Zone
Zone
Index
Index
Quiet
Quiet
Risk
Risk
Final
Final
Cost
Cost
Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Gave900,000Gave900,000Delineators20,000Closure57,500 3,077,500 Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Gave900,000Gave900,000Gave900,000Delineators20,000Closure57,500
3,577,500
Horns)ImprovementEstimated IndexImprovementEstimated
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
AccessAccess
QuadrantQuadrantQuadrantQuadrantQuadrant
Medians;Medians;
MediansMedians
NoneNoneNoneCloseCloseNoneNoneNoneCloseClose
GateGateGateGateGate
44444
12,50428,76515,17518,56312,81410,35610,25411,04616,62828,76515,17518,563
10,56012,570
Removing 5,0934,0579,6366,9457,7877,7108,3066,6146,1207,6306,0569,2368,7498,139
Index
Quiet
Quiet
Risk
Risk
Baseline
Baseline
(After
Zone Zone
Conditions)
Horns
Horns
3,0542,4325,7774,1644,6694,6234,9807,4963,9653,66917,2459,09811,129 6,331 17,24511,129 7,536
4,5743,6307,6825,5376,2096,1476,6229,9695,2454,8799,098
Index
Index
(Existing
With
Risk RiskWith
STGates00STGates00STGates00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00ROADGates00STGates00DRIVEGates00STGates00STGates00STGates00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00R
OADGates00STGates00DRIVEGates00
SSMPreSSM
SSMPreSSM
Devices
Warning
D
Closures
Closures
Warning
STFlashing
STFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashing
Existing
CrossingStreetExisting
Threshold;
Threshold;
RIWH
RIWH
185329XSOMMERVILLE185329XSOMMERVILLE
187073DSHENANDOAH187073DSHENANDOAH
mph;
mph;
186975EMARSCHALL186975EMARSCHALL
185327JMINNESOTA185327JMINNESOTA
185334UATWOOD185334UATWOOD
185328RSPENCER185328RSPENCER
HOLMESHOLMES
187077FMARKET187077FMARKET
185324NSARAZIN185324NSARAZIN
185332FFULLER185332FFULLER
185336HAPGAR185336HAPGAR
CrossingStreet
185335BSCOTT185335BSCOTT
25
10 185330SLEWIS185330SLEWIS
2b:
2a:
ScenarioScenario
185331185331
YY
southsouth
northnorthnorthnorth
40/6040/60
50/6040/6050/6040/60
north;north;
south;south;south;south;
35/6035/60
100'100'100'100'
86%89%
5,4246,679
5,0934,0579,6366,9451,4021,3881,4952,2516,6146,12015,2824,0476,1887,6306,05612,8149,2361,8641,8461,9882,9938,7498,13915,2824,0476,188
Zone
Zone
Index
Index
Quiet
Quiet
Risk
Risk
Final
Final
Cost
Cost
Upgrade400,000Conversion430,000Gave900,000Conversion430,000Gave900,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Delineators20,000Closure57,500 3,937,500 Upgrade400,000Conversion430,000Gave900,000Conversion430,000G
ave900,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Delineators20,000Closure57,500 3,937,500
Horns)ImprovementEstimated IndexImprovementEstimated
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
AccessAccess
QuadrantQuadrantQuadrantQuadrant
Medians;Medians;
Way
WayWayWay
MediansMedians
NoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNone
GateGateGateGateGateGate
OneOneOneOne
4444
12,50428,76515,17518,56312,81410,35610,25411,04616,62828,76515,17518,563
10,56012,570
Removing 5,0934,0579,6366,9457,7877,7108,3066,6146,1207,6306,0569,2368,7498,139
Index
Quiet
Quiet
Risk
Risk
Baseline
Baseline
(After
Zone Zone
Conditions)
Horns
Horns
3,0542,4325,7774,1644,6694,6234,9807,4963,9653,66917,2459,09811,129 6,331 17,24511,129 7,536
4,5743,6307,6825,5376,2096,1476,6229,9695,2454,8799,098
Index
Index
(Existing
With
Risk RiskWith
STGates00STGates00STGates00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00ROADGates00STGates00DRIVEGates00STGates00STGates00STGates00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00R
OADGates00STGates00DRIVEGates00
SSMPreSSM
SSMPreSSM
Devices
Warning
Ways
Ways
D
Warning
One
One STFlashing
STFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashing
Existing
CrossingStreetExisting
Threshold;
Threshold;
RIWH
RIWH
185329XSOMMERVILLE185329XSOMMERVILLE
187073DSHENANDOAH187073DSHENANDOAH
mph;
mph;
186975EMARSCHALL186975EMARSCHALL
185327JMINNESOTA185327JMINNESOTA
185334UATWOOD185334UATWOOD
185328RSPENCER185328RSPENCER
HOLMESHOLMES
187077FMARKET187077FMARKET
185324NSARAZIN185324NSARAZIN
185332FFULLER185332FFULLER
185336HAPGAR185336HAPGAR
CrossingStreet
185335BSCOTT185335BSCOTT
25
10 185330SLEWIS185330SLEWIS
3b:
3a:
ScenarioScenario
185331185331
YY
southsouth
northnorthnorthnorth
40/6040/60
50/6040/6050/6040/60
north;north;
south;south;south;south;
35/6035/60
100'100'100'100'
86%89%
5,4246,679
5,0934,0579,6366,9451,4021,3881,4952,2516,6146,12015,2824,0476,1887,6306,05612,8149,2361,8641,8461,9882,9938,7498,13915,2824,0476,188
Zone
Zone
Index
Index
Quiet
Quiet
Risk
Risk
Final
Final
Cost
Cost
Upgrade400,000Gate900,000Gate900,000Gate900,000Gate900,000Upgrade400,000Upgrade400,000Delineators20,000Closure57,500 4,877,500 Upgrade400,000Gave900,000Gave900,000Gave900,000Gave900,000Upgrade400,000
Upgrade400,000Delineators20,000Closure57,500 4,877,500
Horns)ImprovementEstimated IndexImprovementEstimated
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
AccessAccess
QuadrantQuadrantQuadrantQuadrantQuadrantQuadrantQuadrantQuadrant
Medians;Medians;
MediansMedians
NoneNoneNoneNoneNoneNone
GateGateGateGateGateGate
44444444
12,50428,76515,17518,56312,81410,35610,25411,04616,62828,76515,17518,563
10,56012,570
Removing 5,0934,0579,6366,9457,7877,7108,3066,6146,1207,6306,0569,2368,7498,139
Index
Quiet
Quiet
Risk
Risk
Baseline
Baseline
(After
Zone Zone
Conditions)
Horns
Horns
3,0542,4325,7774,1644,6694,6234,9807,4963,9653,66917,2459,09811,129 6,331 17,24511,129 7,536
4,5743,6307,6825,5376,2096,1476,6229,9695,2454,8799,098
Index
Index
(Existing
With
Risk RiskWith
STGates00STGates00STGates00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00ROADGates00STGates00DRIVEGates00STGates00STGates00STGates00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00Lights00R
OADGates00STGates00DRIVEGates00
SSMPreSSM
SSMPreSSM
Ways
Ways
One
One
or
or
Devices Closures
Closures
Warning
D
Warning
STFlashing
STFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashingSTFlashing
Existing
CrossingStreetExisting
No
No
Threshold;
Threshold;
RIWH
RIWH
185329XSOMMERVILLE185329XSOMMERVILLE
187073DSHENANDOAH187073DSHENANDOAH
mph;
mph;
186975EMARSCHALL186975EMARSCHALL
185327JMINNESOTA185327JMINNESOTA
185334UATWOOD185334UATWOOD
185328RSPENCER185328RSPENCER
HOLMESHOLMES
187077FMARKET187077FMARKET
185324NSARAZIN185324NSARAZIN
185332FFULLER185332FFULLER
185336HAPGAR185336HAPGAR
CrossingStreet
185335BSCOTT185335BSCOTT
25
10 185330SLEWIS185330SLEWIS
4b:
4a:
ScenarioScenario
185331185331
YY
FundstransferredelectronicallyJanuary20,2016toFebruary2,2016
PAYROLL
$ 254,928.40
FIT/FICA77,931.35$
STATEINCOMETAX16,170.65$
PERA79,332.55$
HEALTHCARESAVINGS6,286.16$
HEALTHSAVINGSACC
T
$5,895.78
FLEXSPENDINGACCT4,513.24$
NATIONWIDEDEFCOMP12,571.77$
ICMADEFERREDCOMP1,709.62$
MSRS3,001.64$
CHILDSUPPORT$
TAXLEVY$
TOTAL462,341.16$
Page 1 of 1
1/28/2016 4:30:44 PM
Page 1 of 1
1/28/2016 4:32:04 PM
RESOLUTION NO. 7680
A RESOLUTION CHANGING THE MARCH 1, 2016
COUNCIL MEETING DATE
_____________________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, The Shakopee City Code has set the first Tuesday of each month as the regular
meeting date for the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Code allows the City Council to change the meeting date by
adopting a resolution at least one week prior to the regularly scheduled meeting.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THECITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA, that the March 1, 2016regularly scheduled City Council meeting be changed to March 2,
2016 at 7:00 p.m.
Adopted in Adjourned Regular Session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,
nd
held this 2day of February, 2016.
______________________________________
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
_________________________________
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 7677
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
ACCEPTING THEDONATION OF TENLAPTOPS FROM KROLL ONTRACK
_____________________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS,on November 6, 2002, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5794, which
established procedure relating to the receipt of gifts and donations by the City; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 5794 specifies that donations valued at more than $1,000 shall be
accepted by resolution of the City Council, and shall require a two-thirds majority of the Council for
acceptance; and
WHEREAS, Kroll Ontrack has graciously donated ten laptops to the IT Department to enhance
our current training environment.
WHEREAS, such a donation will be used for the benefit of effective employee training and help
provide staff with additional mobility and flexibility during training sessions.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA, that the donation of ten laptops is gratefully accepted; and
FURTHER, that city staff is directed to send a letter to the donor, acknowledging receipt of the
gift and expressing the appreciation of the City Council.
Adopted in the regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this
nd
2day of February, 2016.
____________________________________
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
___________________________________
City Clerk
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 7679
RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTSTO MINNESTOA
INVESTMENT FUND GRANT AND LOAN AGREEMENTSFOR
ROSEMOUNT,INC.AND RELATED DOCUMENTS
WHEREAS, Rosemount,Inc., a manufacturer of pressure,temperature,flow,level, and safety measurement
instrumentation,acquired and renovated a facility within the City of Shakopee which is being used for
manufacturing, research,development, office and warehouse space; and
WHEREAS, in2013,Rosemount, Inc.plannedanexpansionthatqualifiedforMinnesotaInvestmentFund
financingthroughtheMinnesotaDepartmentofEmploymentandEconomicDevelopment(DEED),for
whichtheCitywouldactasaconduit. MinnesotaInvestmentFundgrantsareawardedtolocal government
unitswhoprovideloanstoassistexpandingbusinesses; and
WHEREAS, the City ofShakopee wasawardeda$500,000MinnesotaInvestmentFundGranttoprovide
aforgivable loantoRosemount, Inc.for the purpose of purchasing equipment for their ShakopeeFacility;
and
WHEREAS, theStateofMinnesotahasenteredintoacontractwiththeCityofShakopee,datedFebruary 25,
2014,requiringthatRosemount, Inc.retain1,983 full time jobs in Minnesota plus add an additional 125 new
positionswithinthe State within twoyearsoftheGrantAgreementexpirationdateof March 15, 2016.
Rosemount, Inc.hasinformedCityStaffthattheywillnotmeetthejobgoalbytherequiredexpiration date
andrequestedthatthe City of Shakopee consideraone-yearextensionofthegrant and loan agreements; and
WHEREAS,theCity'sagreementwiththeStateauthorizestheCitytoconsideranextensionofthiskind if
theCityCouncilfindsittobeappropriate, the expiration date would be extended to March 15, 2017; and
WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Shakopee held a duly noticed public hearing on February 2,
2016, related to the one year extension request and amendments to thegrant and loan agreements between
Rosemount, Inc., the Department of Employment and Economic Development and the City of Shakopeeand
that all interested parties were given the opportunity to be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVEDthat, as a result of this action, the Mayor and the City
Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, are hereby authorized to execute such agreements and
amendments thereto, as are necessary toextend the expirationdate of the Grant and Loan Agreements to
March 15, 2017.
Sworn and Executed Under My Hand this ______________ Day of _______________, 2016.
Mayor
ATTEST:
Finance Director/City Clerk
2
Section 151.039 High Density Residential District (R-4)
Subdv. 1. Purpose.
The purpose of the High Density Residential Zone is to provide areas for the development of
high density residential uses that are in close proximity to collector and arterial roadways or
transit. The High Density Residential zoning district allows for the development of multiple-
family housing from 14.01 units per acre to 40 units per acre, and provides increased housing
choices and affordability in the community. Increased density also allows for the clustering of
units near environmentally sensitive areas and the downtown and riverfront area.
Subdv. 2 Permitted Uses:
A. Multiple Family Dwellings
B. Utility services
C. Utility service structures, subject to the following requirements:
1. shall not be a water tower or electrical substation, or a building to house sanitary
lift station controls;
2.
3. may only be used to provide weather protection for utility equipment;
4. shall be designed, placed, and landscaped as necessary to assure that it blends
with the neighboring uses, and is unobtrusive; and
5. shall comply with all applicable design standards
D. Public recreation
E. Residential Facilities serving 6 or fewer persons
F. Day care facilities serving 12 or fewer persons
Subdv. 3. Conditional Uses:
A. Daycare Centers serving greater than 13 persons
B.
C. Residential Facilities serving 7-16 persons
D. Multiple principal structures on one lot
Subdv. 4. Permitted Accessory Uses:
A. Apartment Leasing Offices
B. Open off-street parking spaces not to exceed 2.5 spaces / unit for a development
C. Garages
D. Fences
E. Gardens and other horticultural uses not involving retail sales
F. Solar equipment
G. Swimming pools
H. Tennis courts
I. Receive only satellite dish antennas and other antennas
J. Communication service apparatus / device(s) as permitted accessory uses, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Shall be co-located on an existing tower or existing structure. Any co-located
other portion of any structure. Such co-located apparatus/ device shall be designed
and located in such a way that its appearance and surface finish minimizes visibility
off-site;
2. Lights and or flashing equipment shall not be permitted unless required by state or
federal agencies;
3. Signage shall not be allowed on the communication service apparatus / device(s)
other than danger or warning type signs;
4. Must provide proof from a professional engineer that the equipment will not interfere
with existing communications for public safety purposes ;
5. Applicable provisions of the City Code, including provisions of the State Building
Code therein adopted, shall be complied with;
6. All obsolete or unused antennas and accompanying accessory facilities shall be
removed within twelve (12) months of the cessation of operations at the site unless a
time extension is approved by the City. After the facilities are removed, the site shall
be restored to its original or an approved state. The user of the antenna and/ or
accessory facilities shall be responsible for the removal of facilities and restoration of
the site.
7. The applicant shall submit a plan illustrating all anticipated future location sites for
communication towers and/or communication device(s)/ apparatus;
8. Wireless telecommunication towers and antennas will only be considered for City
parks when the following conditions exist and if those areas are recommended by the
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and approved by the City Council:
a. City parks of sufficient size and character that are adjacent to an existing
commercial or industrial use;
b. Commercial recreation areas and major playfields used primarily by adults.
9. All revenue generated through the lease of a City park for wireless
telecommunication towers and antennas shall be transferred to the Park Reserve
Fund.
K. Other accessory uses, as determined by the Zoning Administrator
Subdv. 5. Design Standards
Within the R-4, High Density Residential Zone, no land shall be used and no structure shall be
constructed or used, except in conformance with the following requirements:
R-4D (R-4 Lots within the
area that lies east of the
intersection of 3rd Ave W
and CSAH 69 and north
of 3rd Avenue (both East
R-4T(R-4 Lots within and West) extended east
1/4 mile walking to Sarazin Street, south of
distance by sidewalk the city boundary, and
or trail to an operating west of the extension of
R-4 transit station) Sarazin Street northward)
Minimum Lot Width 150' 150' 142'
Minimum Lot Depth 200' 200' 100'
Minimum Lot Size 1 acre 1 acre 20,000 square feet
14.01 units /
Minimum Density Acre 14.01 units / Acre 14.01 units / Acre
Maximum Base Density 24 units/ Acre 28 units / Acre 36 units / Acre
Density Bonus for lots within 1/4 mile walking
distance by sidewalk or trail to public park or
open space greater than 2 acres, that is intended
to be used for recreation purposes 2 units / Acre 2 units / Acre 2 units / Acre
Density Bonus for developments with at least 50
square feet per unit of indoor community space,
indoor or outdoor recreation facilities such as
swimming pools, tennis courts, outdoor cooking
facilities, and similar facilities available for use
by occupants. Open space is not counted in this
calculation. 2 units / Acre 2 units / Acre 2 units / Acre
Maximum Impervious Surface 60% 65% 75%
1/2 Building Height, or
Minimum Front Yard Setback 50' 50' 15', whichever is greater
1/2 Building Height, or
Minimum Rear Yard Setback 40' 40' 15', whichever is greater
1/2 Building Height, or
Minimum Street Side Setback 30' 30' 15', whichever is greater
1/2 Building
Height or 20', 1/2 Building Height or
whichever is 20', whichever is 1/2 Building Height, or
Minimum Side Yard Setback greater greater 15', whichever is greater
Minimum Structure Setback to Arterial 1/2 Building Height, or
Roadway 50' 50' 15', whichever is greater
Minimum Distance Between Buildings within a
development 25' 25' 20'
Minimum Parking Setback to Arterial Roadway 25' 25' 25'
Maximum Structure Height 45' 45' 45'
2.25 spaces /
Minimum off-street parking spaces unit 2.0 spaces / unit 1.75 spaces / unit
Off-street parking requirement reduction (for
sites within 1/4 mile of a transit stop accessible 0.10 spaces /
by a sidewalk or trail) unit N/A 0.10 spaces / unit
S TS ATOKAD
NESOTASTS
S
TS TEKRAM
S TS RELLUF
S TS DOOWTA
UseAcresSquare-footageADT Rate per ITEPM Peak RateEst. ADT
Applebee's1.55581489.95/1000 SF7.49/1000 SF523
Arby's (Southbridge)1.173710496/1000 SF33.48/1000 SF1841
Cub9.0968393102.24/1000 SF10.5/1000 SF6993
Dean Lakes Health2.462000036.13/1000 SF3.46/1000 SF723
Discount Tire1.29795224.87/1000 SF4.15/1000 SF198
Hampton Inn 2.5587 Rooms, 262598.17 / Occ. Room0.59/Room711
Home Depot12.1110473629.8/1000 SF2.37/1000 SF3121
Kindercare1.441027079.26/1000 SF12.46/1000 SF814
Kohl's7.178719466.4/1000 SF3.83/1000 SF5790
Sam's Club16.6114131641.8/1000 SF4.24/1000 SF5907
Slumberland3.44406625.06/1000 SF0.45/1000 SF206
Walgreen's1.61449088/1000 SF10.35/1000 SF1277
Wells Fargo (Vierling Dr)1.044644148/1000 SF25.82/1000 SF687
Addison Buildings 1 & 213.98202 units6.65 / Unit0.62 / unit1344
Sand Cos Proposal12.6300 units6.65/Unit0.62/unit1995
Median SF Home0.251 unit10/unit1/unit10
Est. PM Peak2015 Prop. Taxes
44$43,726.00
124$38,088.00
718$246,654.00
69$134,466.00
33$48,716.00
51$100,094.00
248$280,474.00
128$50,420.00
334$273,582.00
599$410,268.00
18$130,158.00
150$88,820.00
120$36,210.00
126$285,596.00
186Est. $450,000-$600,000
1$2,450.00
S TS NOIGEL
INGSLN
R S TS TUMWAHS
TS SARAM
RD LIART
S TS GAEKMUAN
RIC
G
S TS EIRIARP
STS
RD EDISREVIR
ATOKAD
S TS
ETAVI
RP
LRT
YAWAKCUT S TS ATOSENNIM
LIH
E RD ELADL
S TS ATOSENNIM
S TS ATOSENNIM
ST S
RKET
MA
MARKETSTS
S TS N
IAM
S TS NIAM
TC
EYR
S LRT LLIHTOOF
NL ERIHSKROY
STS
07 MLOH
S TS SE
EN
LRT EKAL EKIP
DR EKAL EKIP
LP DROF
XO
YDR
EWA
STS
NL
A
NL DOOWGOD
S TS YALC
RD GNIWDER
M TS
S DR SKRA
WN
DR ANNE
KCM
DR ANNEKCM
RD KRAP YELLAV
DR EKAL SNAED
S TS SMADA
DISON
MA
EORNOM
S TS
D
J
S TS NOSKCA
S TS NERUB NAV
RRAH
S TS NOSI
RD C
SID
S TS RELYT
N
NL KRALWODAEM
TS
RD NROHGA
O
MEG
ADR
W
Y
T
N
AC
RD ECNEDNE
PEDNI
J
RD DNOMRO
TS SMAILLIW
H DR
ANDOA
SHEN
ED
NL YNAL
YAW SDNOP
S NL
DLA
REM
E
P
NL NILBUD
TSEHC
RL
A
TS DRIBGN
IMMUH
A
E
DR
TS TTIRREM
S NEZAH
T
TS DLEIFIRREM
SNEHOH
TC NIET
S TS RELLIM
S TS TFIWS
S TS YESMAR
AHCSRAM
DR LLS DR LLAHCSRAM
S TS NOIGEL
S TS TUMWAHS
NL NEERGREVE
IRIARP
S TS E
DR
S
S
DAKOTAST
S TS ATOSENNIMTCREVOLC
S TS ATOSENNIM
S TS TEKRAM
T
SYT
O
S TS NIA
M
S TS NI
AM
TS H
CRA
NO
M
97 DR OC
tS recnepS97 DR OCVA ENI
LNWOT
VA ENILNWOT
97 DR OC
V
A ENILESAB
97 DR OC
TS N
APRAT
O
P
TS ERIH
S
O
NL ETAGELPPA
L
STSRE
LLUF
S TS RAGPA
T
TS
SEMAJ
S TS YALC
TS NAISEIRF
S DR S
KRAM T
S
INIP
TS A
S
TS S
MAD
A
DR N
WOTSYRAM
S TS SMADA
S TS YCNIUQ
RIC YCNIUQ
REFFEJ
S TS NOSIDAM
OESTS
MONR
S TS NOSKCAJ
S TS NERUB NAV
RRAH
S TS NOSI
S TS RELYT
S KLOP
S T
HC
\\
\\
S
DR LLAHCSRAM
S TS GA
EKMUAN
TS EIRIARP
S
NL
RPS GNILIOB
SGNI
TS SARAM
S TS ATOKAD
RD LIART
S TS ATOSENNI
M
RD EDISREVIRCS TS TEKRAM
DR TDRAHNELHUM
E
TAVIRP
S TS NIAM
LRT YAWAKCUT
E RD ELADLLIH
\\\\\\
\\
E RD ELAD
NITRAM
L
L
IHTOOF
NL ERI
HSKROY
S TS SIWE
L
S TS RELLUF
DR EKAL EKIP
RD
S TS DOOWTA
S TS TTO
CS
GPA
S TS RA
N
TT ST
SCO
P
S TS ECREI
Y DR
A
S TS YALC
A
NL DOOWGOD
S DR SKRAM TNIAS
RD GNIWDER
W
N DR ANNE
KCM
DR ANNEKCM
RD KRAP YELLAV
E DR EKAL SNAED
S TS SMADA
LP KRAP
S TS NOSREFFEJ
S TS EORNOM
S RIC LAIRTSUDNI S
SON ST
JACK
S DR YRUBRETNAC
RD CSID
P
N
NL KRALWODAEM
OHGATS
RD NR
M
K
CANERBUR
RD ECNEDNEPEDN
I
J
RD DNOMRO
LIW
TS SMAIL
RD LANIDRAC
ODNANEHSS
RD HA DR LLAHCSRAM
NL YNALED
YAW SDNOP
YJ
A
TN
URA
S
S
S
S
NL NILBUD
EHC
APL
M
E
RIC ECAEP
TS TTI
RREM
TS NEZAH
NL YBUR
TS DLEIFIRREMD S
SCHALL R
TS NIZARAS
S TS RELLIM
S TS YELBIS
E TRL
AWNE
SH
S TS
NOIGEL
N
TC NOTSEW
E
W
NL NEERGREVE
D
RDS
EDIOC
E
DR
TC REVOLC
T
TEBI
YL
TS
TS DAETSE
S TS RECNEPS
VA ENILN
WOT
97 DR OC
97 DR OC
S TS SIWEL
S TS REL
LUF
S TS ECREIP
TS NAISEIRF
NIP
TS AI
T
S TS SMADA
S TS YCNIUQ
S TS NOSIDAM
S TS EORNOM
S TS NOSKCAJ
S TS NOSIRRAH
LYT
S TS RE
S TS KLOP
Applicant Narrative:
The rezoning of Southbridge Crossings to R-4 provides great opportunity for the City to follow
Smart Growth principals as it promotes high density growth in an established compact, walkable
urban center. The Southbridge Crossing development will also be a transit-orientated and
walkable center with mixed used development that will offer a range of housing choices and
many employment opportunities. The site also has great access to major transit corridors and
will promote housing opportunities which will assist the community to meet the housing needs
for the growing employment which is vital for employers.
As the growth of Shakopee continues, multifamily housing will be an important need for the
community so it can offer housing options for its residents. The location of R-4 housing at this
location is a great opportunity for multifamily development without significant impacts to low
density housing.
Title
1 inch = 752 feet
November 25, 2015
Map Powered by DataLink
from WSB & Associates
Title
1 inch = 188 feet
November 25, 2015
Map Powered by DataLink
from WSB & Associates
Southbridge Crossing
Shakopee, MN
CONCEPT PLAN
22.5’ setback
50’ setback
70 Unit Apartment
E
e
v
A
h
t
3
1
t
en
sm
Ea
ne
li
pe
Pi
er
wat
rm
Sto
t
en
m
s
Ea
ine
el
ip
P
S
t
a
g
150 Unit Apartment
e
c
o
a
c
h
Trail
R
o
a
d
Playground
40’
Existing trees
setback
(massings) typ.
CENTRAL
GREEN
Trail
Shelter
buildingcommunity
Pool
t
n
e
m
t
r
a
p
A
t
i
n
U
0
8
22.5’ setback
*PARKING SUMMARY:
304 Surface Parking Stalls
Trail connection
to South
Revised: January 28, 2016
Southbridge Crossing
Shakopee, MN
4
BUILDING CONCEPT
Area for Stormwater and Greenspace
t
n
e
sm
Ea
ne
li
pe
Pi
Area for 75 Additional Parking Stalls
t
en
m
s
Ea
ine
el
ip
P
75 Unit Apartment
n
i
a
M
r
e
t
a
W
220 Surface Parking Stalls
S
24
t
a
g
e
c
23
o
a
75 Unit Apartment
Playground
c
h
R
o
a
d
S
t
o
7
r
m
5
U
Poolw
n
a
i
t
t
e
A
r
p
a
Leasing
r
CENTRAL
t
m
26
GREEN e
n
9
t
7132
35
t
n
e
m
t
r
a
p
A
t
i
n
U
5
7
water
feature
*PARKING SUMMARY:
220 Surface Parking Stalls
+ Additional Room for 75 Stalls =
295 Stalls
Prepared: November 4, 2011
Southbridge Crossing
Shakopee, MN
SITE PLAN CONCEPT
60 Unit Apartment
.
E
.
v
A
h
t
3
1
nt
e
m
as
E
e 30
in
el
ip
P
117 Surface Parking Stalls*
54
6
Play
27
nt
e
m
as
E
e
in
el
ip
P
ground
S
t
o
n
r
i
60 Unit Apartment
m
a
M
w
r
e
t
a
a
t
We
r
29
S
214 Surface Parking Stalls*
t
a
60 Unit Apartment
24
g
e
c
20
o
a
Playground
27
c
S
h
t
o
r
R
m
o
w
a
a
CENTRAL
d
t
e
6
r
GREEN
27
0
U
Pool
n
i
t
A
p
a
Leasing20
r
t
m
e
n
11
t
37
19
water
27
feature
S
t
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
t
n
e
m
t
r
a
p
A
t
i
n
U
0
6
C
r
o
s
*PARKING SUMMARY:
s
i
n
331 Tolal Surface Parking Stalls
g
s
B
o
u
l
e
v
a
r
d
Prepared: November 4, 2011
City of Shakopee
aĻƒƚƩğƓķǒƒ
TO: Kyle Sobota, Senior Planner
FROM: Jacob Busiahn, Natural Resources Technician
SUBJECT: Rezoning B1 to R4-Comp Plan Amendment & Text Amendment
Southbridge Crossings
PID #: 27-424002-0
CASE #: 15073
SUBLEDGER #: 115073
DATE: November 20th, 2015
The staff review indicates a request to review a rezoning of B1 to R4 comp plan amendment and
text amendment located west of Stagecoach Rd, south of 13 th Ave and north of Hanson Ave.
Due to the proposed development plans more closely resembling commercial buildings/site
development than single family residential, it is recommended the site be treated as commercial
use in regards to the Tree Preservation Regulations (151.113) vs. residential use.
This review should be considered preliminary, as more comments will follow with additional
submittals. However, the natural resources division offers the following comments at this time
to the applicant and to the planning department:
General Conditions
1.The Tree Preservation Regulations (151.113) apply to this property. The proposed use of
multi-family residential housing shall be treated as commercial site development in
regards to the Tree Preservation Regulations (151.113).
Recommendation
Natural resources staff recommends approval of the Rezoning B1 to R4-Comp Plan Amendment
& Text Amendment application subject to the items listed above being attached as conditions of
the approval.
1 of 1
City of Shakopee
aĻƒƚƩğƓķǒƒ
TO: Kyle Sobota, Senior Planner
FROM: Joe Swentek, Project Engineer
SUBJECT: Rezoning Property from Highway Business (B-1) to Multiple Family
Residential (R-4), Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Text Amendment
PID #: 27-434002-0
CASE #: 15073
SUBLEDGER #: 115073
DATE: November 23, 2015
The application indicates a request to rezone the above referenced property to a newly created
multiple family designation, a comprehensive plan amendment and for a text amendment. The
rd
12.6 acre property is Outlot A of the Southbridge Crossings East 3 Addition and is located
north of the transit station along Stagecoach Road.
The engineering department has completed its review of the requests and offers the following
preliminary comments at this time for the applicant and for the planning department:
1.A detailed traffic analysis will need to be performed to determine the impacts the
rezoning request will have on existing infrastructure. Any required improvements to
accommodate development will be the responsibility of the future developer.
2.The future developer should be aware a through-street extension from Crossings
Boulevard to Stagecoach Road will be required. The preferred connection point is at
th
13 Avenue.
3.The future developer should be aware the current curb cut on the north side of the
existing Crossings Boulevard cul-de-sac is intended to be a shared access with the
property to the west. It is preferred this connection be used as the access to eliminate
poor intersection angles.
4.The future developer should investigate the possibility of eliminating the Crossings
Boulevard cul-de-sac as part of a future development. It seems that with the shared
access concept a cul-de-sac is unnecessary.
5.The future developer should contact the Minnesota Department of Transportation
(MNDoT) regarding permission to upsize their existing storm basin for development
purposes. This approach could help create more pervious area.
H:\\BOAA-PC\\2015\\12-03\\Sand_Enginering_Memo.docx
ORDINANCE NO. 926
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,
AMENDING THE ZONING MAP ADOPTED IN CITY CODE SEC. 151.003 BY REZONING
RD
OUTLOT A, SOUTHBRIDGE CROSSINGS EAST 3 ADDITION FROM HIGHWAY BUSINESS (B-
1) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-4) ZONE
WHEREAS
, Sand Companies, applicant and Shakopee Crossings LTD Partnership, property owner,
rd
have applied to rezone Outlot A, Southbridge Crossings East 3 Addition from the Highway Business (B-1)
Zone to the High Density Residential (R-4) Zone; and
WHEREAS,
the property is legally described as:
Outlot A Southbridge Crossings East 3rd Addition, Scott County, Minnesota
(PID No. 27-434002-0)
WHEREAS,
notices were duly sent and posted, and a public hearing was held before the Planning
Commission on December 3, 2015, at which time all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard;
and
WHEREAS,
the Planning Commission has recommended to the City Council that the subject
property be rezoned as stated; and
WHEREAS
, the City Council heard the matter at its meeting on December 15, 2015 and February 2,
2016; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED
,that the City Council of the City of Shakopee hereby
adopts the following findings of facts relative to the above-named request:
Criteria #1 The original zoning ordinance is in error.
Finding #1 The current ordinance allows the site to be developed as a residential development with a
commercial component. The proposed rezoning allows the proposed to be developed as only
residential.
Criteria #2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place.
Finding #2 Significant changes in goals or policy have taken place. The City desires to create opportunities
for high density residential housing to have multiple styles housing available for residents.
Criteria #3 Significant changes in development patterns have occurred.
Finding #3 No significant changes in development patterns have occurred.
Criteria #4 The Comprehensive Plan requires a different provision.
1
Finding #4 The comprehensive plan is proposed to be amended by Resolution No. 7660 to adjust the
guiding for this property from Commercial to High Density Residential
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED
, that the request to rezone the property as stated in this ordinance
is hereby approved.
Passed in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this 2nd day of February,
2016.
_______________________________
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Attest:
_________________________
City Clerk
Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the ______ day of _____________, 20___.
2
RESOLUTION NO. 7660
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,
RD
REGUIDING OUTLOT A, SOUTHBRIDGE CROSSINGS EAST 3 ADDITION FROM
COMMERCIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IN THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS
, Sand Companies, applicant and Shakopee Crossings LTD Partnership, property owner,
rd
have applied to reguide Outlot A, Southbridge Crossings East 3 Addition from Commercial to High
Density Residential; and
WHEREAS,
the property is legally described as:
Outlot A Southbridge Crossings East 3rd Addition, Scott County, Minnesota
(PID No. 27-434002-0)
WHEREAS,
notices were duly sent and posted, and a public hearing was held before the Planning
Commission on December 3, 2015, at which time all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard;
and
WHEREAS,
the Planning Commission has recommended to the City Council that the subject
property be reguided as stated; and
WHEREAS
, the City Council heard the matter at its meeting on December 15, 2015 and February 2,
2016; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
,that the City Council of the City of Shakopee hereby
adopts the following findings of facts relative to the above-named request:
Criteria #1 The original zoning ordinance is in error.
Finding #1 The current guiding and zoning allows the site to be developed as a residential development
with a commercial component. The proposed re-guiding allows the property to be developed as
solely residential use.
Criteria #2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place.
Finding #2 Significant changes in goals or policy have taken place. The City desires to create opportunities
for high density residential housing to have multiple styles housing available for residents.
Criteria #3 Significant changes in development patterns have occurred.
Finding #3 No significant changes in development patterns have occurred.
Criteria #4 The Comprehensive Plan requires a different provision.
1
Finding #4 This proposed amendment would re-guide the proposed use of the subject property from
Commercial to High Density Residential.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
, that the request to re-guide the property as stated in this resolution
is hereby approved.
Passed in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this 2nd day of February,
2016.
_______________________________
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Attest:
_________________________
City Clerk
2
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Certification
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................... II
FIGURES ............................................................................................................................. III
TABLES ............................................................................................................................... III
APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................... III
STUDY MANAGEMENT TEAM ............................................................................................ IV
AGENCY PARTICIPATION .................................................................................................... IV
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ V
STUDY APPROACH.................................................................................................. V
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ....................................................................................... V
NEXT STEPS ............................................................................................................ V
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ........................................................................................................ 3
PROPERTY OWNER MEETINGS ............................................................................... 3
OPEN HOUSE .......................................................................................................... 3
WEBSITE ................................................................................................................. 4
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR IMPROVEMENTS ....................................................................... 4
PROJECT PURPOSE ................................................................................................. 4
PROJECT NEED ....................................................................................................... 4
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ............................................................................................ 6
STUDY AREA ........................................................................................................... 6
TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS ......................................................... 6
DATA COLLECTION........................................................................................... 7
OPERATIONS .................................................................................................... 7
SAFETY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 10
ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING ACCESSES ........................................................... 12
ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................. 14
CORRIDOR VISION ............................................................................................................. 14
SYSTEM CONNECTIVITY OPTIONS ........................................................................ 14
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT CONCEPTS ................................................................ 17
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS .............................................................................. 17
TRAFFIC FORECASTS ...................................................................................... 19
INTERSECTION GUIDELINES ........................................................................... 19
NEAR TERM IMPROVEMENTS ....................................................................... 24
FUTURE CONCEPTS ........................................................................................ 26
GRADE-SEPARATED RAIL CROSSING OPTIONS..................................................... 30
CH 83 GRADE SEPARATED RAIL CROSSING ................................................... 31
INNOVATION BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATED CROSSING .......................... 31
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .................................................................................................. 34
NEXT STEPS ....................................................................................................................... 35
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Table of Contents
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page ii
FIGURES
Figure 1 Study Area .................................................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2 Existing Traffic Volumes (March 2015) ........................................................................................ 8
Figure 3 Existing Traffic Volumes (Summer 2015) ..................................................................................... 9
Figure 4 Crash History .............................................................................................................................. 11
Figure 5 Existing Access Locations ........................................................................................................... 13
Figure 6 System Connectivity Option 1 .................................................................................................... 15
Figure 7 System Connectivity Option 2 .................................................................................................... 16
Figure 8 CH 83 Development Forecasts ................................................................................................... 18
Figure 9 Additional Corridor Development .............................................................................................. 18
Figure 10 Summer Build Conditions ......................................................................................................... 20
Figure 11 Holiday Build Conditions .......................................................................................................... 21
Figure 12 Intersection Conflict Points (Source: MnDOT Traffic Safety Fundamentals Handbook) ......... 22
Figure 13 Intersection Functional Area (Source: TRB Access Management Manual).............................. 23
Figure 14 Near Term Improvements at 12 th Avenue ............................................................................... 25
Figure 15 Near Term Improvements at 4 th Avenue ................................................................................. 25
Figure 16 Future Concept 1 ...................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 17 Future Concept 2 ...................................................................................................................... 29
Figure 18 CH 83 Grade Separated Rail Crossing....................................................................................... 32
Figure 19 Innovation Boulevard Grade Separated Crossing .................................................................... 33
TABLES
APPENDICES
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Figures
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page iii
STUDY MANAGEMENT TEAM
RepresentativeAgencyTitle
Bruce LoneyCity of ShakopeePublic Works Director/City Engineer
Jeff WeyandtCity of ShakopeeAssistant City Engineer
Samantha DiMaggioCity of ShakopeeEconomic Development Coordinator
Lisa FreeseScottCountyTransportation Planning Director
Stacy CrakesScott County CDABusiness Development Manager
Kevin SchwartzMnDOTSignal Optimization Engineer
Diane LangenbachMnDOTSouth Area Engineer
David SheenMnDOTTraffic Engineer
Chris ChromyBolton & MenkConsultant Project Manager
Angie BersawBolton & MenkSenior Transportation Planner
Jacob BongardBolton & MenkProject Engineer
AGENCY PARTICIPATION
This study was conducted by Bolton & Menk, Inc., with oversight, public involvement participation and
direction provided by a Study Management Team (SMT). The SMT included representatives from the
City of Shakopee, Scott County, and MnDOT.
Appendix A
includes minutes from the SMT meetings.
Public participation was also a key component of the study. Public outreach included individual meetings
with property owners and two public open houses.
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Study Management Team
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
STUDY APPROACH
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
NEXT STEPS
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Executive Summary
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page v
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Executive Summary
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page vi
INTRODUCTION
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Introduction
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 1
CLIENT
LOGO
Text
International
Paper
ï
GXW
Anchor Glass &
Cokem
Container Corporation
International
RTL
Const.
MN Work
Force Center
Canterbury
Barenscheer Blvd
Park
Polaris/Cokem
(Kin Properties)
Ý
GXW
CyberPower
Systems USA
(United Properties)
12th Ave E
Ashley Furniture/
Furniture Mart
+¡
t
C
d
an
dl
o
o
W
17th Av
e E
p
GXW
King Ave
ann Ln
Jarm
I
Legend
18th Ave E
01,000
Feet
Source: City of Shakopee Zoning Map
FIGURE 1
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
PROPERTY OWNER MEETINGS
OPEN HOUSE
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Public Involvement
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 3
WEBSITE
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT PURPOSE
PROJECT NEED
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Purpose and Need for Improvements
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 4
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 5
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
STUDY AREA
TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Background Information
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 6
DATA COLLECTION
OPERATIONS
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Background Information
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 7
Service Layer Credits: Scott County GIS
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
March Existing
CLIENT
LOGO
City of ShakopeeOctober, 2015
Valleyfair
Valleyfair
...........
Canterbury Parkk
Canterbury Parkkkk
r
rrr
BARENSCHEER BLVD
1
1
.......
....
.
..........
SECRETARIAT DR
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
..
..
.
A
DEANL
I
Legend
March Existing Peak Volumes
AM
E
...........
0700
Feet
Source: Scott County
FIGURE 2
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
Summer Existing
City of Shakopee
FIGURE 3
SAFETY ANALYSIS
TrafficTotalCrash Statewide Severity Statewide CrashCritical
//
IntersectionControlCrashesRateAverageRateAverageRateCrash Rate
0.23
* Railroad crossing between CSAH 101 and Valley Industrial Blvd N experienced 3 crashes between 2010-2014
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Background Information
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 10
Valley Park Dr S
lP kraP
Valley Industrial Cir S
naC
dR yrubret
ywkP norahS
Shenandoah Dr
Service Layer Credits:
Date Saved: 12/7/2015 12:30:24 PM
Map Document: \\\\Arcserver1\\gis\\SHAK\\T42109988\\ESRI\\Maps\\Reported Crashes from 2010 - 2014.mxd
ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING ACCESSES
Scott County Minimum Access Spacing Guidelines
Scott County Minimum Access Spacing Guidelines
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Background Information
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 12
Valley Park Dr S
P
lP kra
Valley Industrial Cir S
retnaC
dR yrub
1043 ft
3523 ft724 ft
682 ft790 ft
91173 ft
1
9
ft
norahS
ywkP
Shenandoah Dr
Service Layer Credits:
Date Saved: 12/7/2015 12:32:47 PM
Map Document: \\\\Arcserver1\\gis\\SHAK\\T42109988\\ESRI\\Maps\\Existing Access Locations.mxd
ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS
CORRIDOR VISION
SYSTEM CONNECTIVITY OPTIONS
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 14
r
airD
F
y
lP kraP
Valley Industrial Cir S
C
bretna
dR yru
rD csiD
Shenandoah Dr
n
L
dl
ar
e
m
E
T
ebmi
C r
t
d
R
a
be
h
s
y
G
a
n
Service Layer Credits:
S hsA
t
Date Saved: 12/22/2015 9:20:34 AM
Map Document: \\\\Arcserver1\\gis\\SHAK\\T42109988\\ESRI\\Maps\\System Connectivity Future Concept 1.mxd
r
airD
F
y
lP kraP
Valley Industrial Cir S
C
bretna
dR yru
rD csiD
Shenandoah Dr
n
L
dl
ar
e
m
E
T
ebmi
C r
t
d
R
a
be
h
s
y
G
a
n
Service Layer Credits:
S hsA
t
Date Saved: 12/23/2015 2:07:49 PM
Map Document: \\\\Arcserver1\\gis\\SHAK\\T42109988\\ESRI\\Maps\\System Connectivity Future Concept 2.mxd
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT CONCEPTS
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
Amazon Retail Distribution Center:
Additional Growth:
Undeveloped Properties South of TH 169:
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 17
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 18
TRAFFIC FORECASTS
INTERSECTION GUIDELINES
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 19
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
Summer Future Build Conditions
City of Shakopee
FIGURE 10
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
Holiday Future Build Conditions
City of Shakopee
FIGURE 11
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 22
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 23
NEAR TERM IMPROVEMENTS
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 24
X
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 25
FUTURE CONCEPTS
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 26
Avenue is important to businesses on the east side of CH
o
83. Super America, Culvers, Warner Stellian and Ashley Furniture expressed concern
th
with loss of left-turns at the existing 12 Avenue with this concept. They rely on
th
southbound CH 83 traffic accessing 12 Avenue to get to their businesses as much as
northbound traffic. They said this is particularly important during the summer months
when traffic is higher due to Valley Fair and Canterbury Park operations.
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 28
o
o
o
o
o
o
GRADE-SEPARATED RAIL CROSSING OPTIONS
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 30
CH 83 GRADE SEPARATED RAIL CROSSING
o
INNOVATION BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATED CROSSING
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Corridor Vision
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 31
FIGURE 19
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Implementation Plan
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 34
NEXT STEPS
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. T42.109988 Next Steps
County Highway 83 (Canterbury Road) Corridor Readiness Study Page 35
APPENDIX A
CSAH83CRS
ORRIDOR EADINESS TUDY
SMTM#1
TUDYANAGEMENT EAM EETING
May 12, 2015,1:00-2:30 PM
Shakopee Police Training Room (475 Gorman Street)
MEETING SUMMARY
A:
TTENDEES
1.Welcome and Introductions
2.Review Study Goals
3.Review Current Development Activity Map
4.Review Scope of Services and Schedule
5.Discuss Public Involvement Plan
6.Next Steps
CSAH83CRS
ORRIDOR EADINESS TUDY
SMTM#2
TUDYANAGEMENT EAM EETING
June 16, 2015,1:00-2:30 PM
Shakopee City Hall (129 Holmes Street)
MEETING SUMMARY
A:
TTENDEES
1.Welcome and Meeting Overview
2.Environmental Screening Results
3.Traffic Study Update
4.Access Blueprint
5.Review Draft Open House Materials
6.Next Steps
Note:
Following the meeting, the next SMT meeting date was set for August 4, 2015 from 1:00-2:30 pm
at the Shakopee City Hall.
CSAH83CRS
ORRIDOR EADINESS TUDY
SMTM#3
TUDYANAGEMENT EAM EETING
August 4, 2015,1:00-2:30 PM
Shakopee City Hall (129 Holmes Street)
MEETING SUMMARY
A:
TTENDEES
1.Review Open House Feedback
2.Discuss Initial Access Options Feedback
3.Traffic Study Update
4.Review Draft Concepts
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
5.Discuss Evaluation Criteria
6.Next Steps
CSAH83CRS
ORRIDOR EADINESSTUDY
SMTM#4
TUDYANAGEMENTEAMEETING
October 14, 2015, 10:00 – 11:30 AM
Shakopee City Hall (129 Holmes Street)
MEETING SUMMARY
A:
TTENDEES
Bruce Loney, City of Shakopee Diane Langenbach, MnDOT
Samantha DiMaggio, City of Shakopee David Sheen, MnDOT
Mark Noble, City of Shakopee Chris Chromy, Bolton & Menk
Lisa Freese, Scott County Angie Bersaw, Bolton & Menk
Stacy Crakes, Scott County CDA Jake Bongard, Bolton & Menk
Kevin Schwartz, MnDOT
1.Review Property Owner Feedback
Chris reported Bolton & Menk and city staff met with Canterbury Park, United Properties and
Kin Properties (teleconference) within the past 2-3 months. The purpose of this coordination was
to gather their input on potential access modifications along CH 83 and to learn what
works/doesn’t work for their businesses. Chris recapped the input received:
Canterbury’s development plans remain in flux and a wholesale moving of the barns was
determined not to be financially feasible. Chris said Canterbury is still considering
options for smaller development areas occurring in phases over time. Chris said
Canterbury did not have major objections to either of the future concepts but recognized
that Future Concept 1 may give them more flexibility to better accommodate a future
redevelopment of the first row of barns since this concept allows for a separation of event
traffic from future development traffic on their site.
th
Mark said Canterbury’s plat is going to Planning Commission on November 5. Lisa said
she would like to better understand right-of-way needs along CH 83 for all of the
concepts under consideration. Bruce with Cantebury’s plat under consideration, now was
the time to request additional right-of-way if needed.
Kin Properties desires to maintain two full accesses to their site. They did not have
concerns with moving their guard shack in general. The loss of parking along the south
side of their building is not as critical to them as the loss of parking on the west side.
They said the proximity of parking to the loading docks is important to their users. The
west and east side loading docks are used equally. Kin Properties does not support a
public road connection into their property at their north driveway. Also, they use the rail
access to their property and would not be open to any changes that would affect their rail
access.
United Properties was open to consideration of Future Concept 2 which creates a new
city street alignment on the west side of their property as long as their existing parking on
could be maintained.
Page 2
2.Review Revised Concepts
Chris reviewed each of the three concept under consideration as follows:
2017 Project – Chris reviewed this project which includes capacity and safety
th
improvements at the 12 Avenue intersection. This includes signal operations/phasing
th
improvements, addition of dual left turn lanes, additional lanes on the west leg of 12
Avenue, access modifications and trail addition. Jake confirmed the outside curblines of
this project will work with either of the future concepts. Jake noted the existing trail is
outside of the right-of-way.
Lisa requested a right-of-way figure from Bolton & Menk showing two options to
acquire 150’ of standard minor arterial right-of-way. She requested the first option show
the amount of right-of-way needed if acquired all from the west side of CH 83 and the
second option show the right-of-way acquired from both sides equally.
The SMT requested the name of this concept be changed to Near Term Project because
th
not all of it is currently programmed for 2017. Only the 4 Avenue Project is
th
programmed for 2017. The City/County will likely make signal modifications at 12
Avenue/CH 83 in 2016 but the trail additions and turn lane improvements are not
currently programmed.
Future Concept 1 – Chris reviewed Future Concept 1 which moves the primary
intersection spacing of the first intersection north of the north interchange ramp. A new
intersection would be created to serve Canterbury Park, requiring relocations of the first
th
row of barns, and a new city street connection to CH 83 on the east side. The existing 12
Avenue access would be modified to a ¾ access. Chris reviewed the rest of the primary
intersection locations at the north Kin Properties driveway, a realigned Valley Industrial
th
Blvd South, 4 Avenue and CH 101.
Chris stated this concept achieves better access spacing near TH 169 and therefore can
accommodate high levels of future traffic. It also favors future development by
accommodating redevelopment plans on the Canterbury site. Chris noted the challenges
with this concept which include access and connectivity changes for existing businesses
and requires substantial investment and private cooperation.
Future Concept 2 – Chris reviewed Future Concept 2. He noted this concept maintains
th
12 Avenue as a primary full access intersection. The next primary intersection was
placed ¼ mile north and then the rest of the corridor is consistent with Future Concept 1.
th
Chris stated this concept favors existing businesses by maintaining full access at 12
Avenue. However, this concept is more limited in its ability to maintain future traffic
th
flow at 12 Avenue since the majority of traffic – event and future development – will
th
still access the Canterbury site through 12 Avenue. This leaves less flexibility for future
development and still requires significant investment to implement.
Chris reported this concept has a big impact to Kin Properties with the right-in/right-out
at their south driveway. However, their site could be potentially reconfigured to
accommodate full access at their north driveway. Lisa said it would be good to know how
many of their trucks go south on TH 169. If their primary direction is north on TH 169,
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\1_Corres\\A_Meetings\\SMT\\SMT 4_2015-10-14\\SMT 4 Meeting Summary.doc
Page 3
more could be redirected to use CH 101.
3.Traffic Study Update
Jake provided a review of the traffic study analysis and findings. The following discussion was
held on the traffic study:
Jake noted the 2017 Project was included in the build condition.
Lisa said the County has a county-wide project to improve signal operations programmed
th
for 2018. She said it may be possible to advance the 12 Avenue signal improvements to
2017.
Jake confirmed there is no mitigation on the interchange ramps included with the 2017
Project.
Jake said the Near Term Project does not provide much flexibility to accommodate future
redevelopment. He noted the intersection started to fail at 30% more traffic than existing
conditions.
Lisa asked what was assumed for Canterbury redevelopment in the model. Chris
explained that no Canterbury redevelopment was assumed since the uncertainty of what
that development might be is so high. Lisa requested that the study report be clear that the
Canterbury redevelopment was not included but can be added to the model in the future if
it becomes more certain.
4.Next Steps
Angie reviewed the next steps which includes additional coordination with property owners and a
final public open house. The SMT reviewed the plan for open house materials. Bruce and Lisa
requested the system connectivity maps be included at the open house. David requested the
symbols for primary and secondary intersections be modified to something other than circles. He
noted there is often confusion that these are indicated roundabouts.
The public open house date was set for November 16, 2015 from 4-6 pm at Canterbury. Angie
will work with city staff and the chamber to spread the word about the open house.
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\1_Corres\\A_Meetings\\SMT\\SMT 4_2015-10-14\\SMT 4 Meeting Summary.doc
APPENDIX B
City of Shakopee CH 83 (Canterbury Road)
Corridor Readiness Study
Open House #1
June 30, 2015 5:00 to 7:00 PM
Canterbury Park
Purpose:
The purpose of the CH 83 (Canterbury Road) Open House was to introduce the study and gather input
on issues, needs and opportunities within the study area.
Attendees:
Approximately 30 business representatives and interested citizens signed-in at the open house. City,
county, and consultant project staff were also in attendance.
Materials Presented:
The meeting was set up in an open house format giving attendees the opportunity to view materials and
visit with project staff at their leisure. The following information was available for public review and
input:
CH 83 Study Purpose
Growth Areas
Existing Traffic Operations
Crash History
Existing Access Inventory
Access Management
Comment Forms
Comments Received:
Public input was collected throughout the duration of the open house through discussions with staff and
written comments. The following summarizes public comments collected:
Written Comments
One participant would like to know the type and number of collisions and other accidents at the
intersection of Valley View Road and Canterbury Road.
Verbal Comments
Add a pedestrian/bicycle connection along CH 83 to the Minnesota Valley State Trail, north of
CH 101. Growth in employees in this area has increased the desire to walk/bike to work.
Additionally, many pedestrians/bicyclists are walking along the roadside of CH 101 and CH 83 to
get to the Minnesota Workforce Center located on CH 83.
Difficult for pedestrian/bicyclists to cross the CH 83 corridor. Need a safe crossing point north of
Highway 169 near Culvers/Super America. Also need a safer way to cross at the CH 16/CH 83
Page 1 of 2
signal. This is a wide intersection and is difficult for pedestrians/bicyclists to cross with all of the
traffic movements/lanes of traffic.
One person questioned whether or not the
Restaurant & Lounge (Disc Drive) is needed.
Many attendees acknowledged a high number of crashes along the corridor. Safety was a
primary concern.
Speeds on CH 83 seem too high.
The railroad poses a problem as it blocks CH 83 and Valley Park Drive for 10 minutes or more at
th
times; vehicles on Valley Park Drive make U-turns and use 12 Avenue/CH 83 to avoid waiting
for the train.
th
Add double left-turn lanes to the westbound approach of 12 Avenue turning onto CH 83.
Difficult during peak periods to take a left out of the Culvers driveway onto 12 th Avenue.
th
Eastbound to northbound left turn at the 17 Avenue/CH 83 signal is difficult. Green arrow only
lets a few cars through on a cycle.
Many businesses that have access off 12 th Avenue are on similar work shifts causing peak
morning and evening rushes. Businesses off of Valley Industrial Blvd have shifts that are more
spread out throughout the day.
Flashing yellow arrows might help at some intersections. Consider adding on eastbound and
westbound approaches at the CH 83/12 th Avenue traffic signal near Culvers.
North Highway 169 off-ramp backs up in the morning; sometimes all the way to the mainline.
This backup also happens during Canterbury, Valley Fair, and/or Mystic Lake events.
General consensus that improvements to CH 83 area are needed. Questions on timing, who pays
and what type of improvements would be considered.
Many businesses interested in discussing improvement options further, particularly if they
include changes to access at driveways or intersections.
Page 2 of 2
City of Shakopee CH 83 (Canterbury Road)
Corridor Readiness Study
Open House #2
November 16, 2015 4:00 to 6:00 PM
Canterbury Park
Purpose:
The purpose of the CH 83 (Canterbury Road) Open House was to gather public and business input on the
range of roadway and access improvement concepts under consideration.
Attendees:
Approximately 22 business representatives and interested citizens signed-in at the open house. City,
county, and consultant project staff were also in attendance.
Materials Presented:
The meeting was set up in an open house format giving attendees the opportunity to view materials and
visit with project staff at their leisure. A brief presentation began at 5:00 PM. The following information
was available for public review and input:
CH 83 Study Purpose
Growth Areas
Draft Improvement Concepts (Near Term Project, Future Concept 1, Future Concept 2)
Draft System Connectivity Concepts
Comment Forms
Comments Received:
Public input was collected throughout the duration of the open house through discussions with staff and
written comments. The following summarizes public comments collected:
Written Comments
One participant expressed support of the incorporation of trails and sidewalk additions in any
alternative design chosen. The participant want to ensure safe accommodations are provided for
pedestrians and bicyclists.
One participant suggested that if changes needed to be made that double turning lanes for all left
turns would improve conditions and future roadway improvements may not be needed beyond
that.
The General Manager for Holiday Inn Express and Suites favors Future Concept 2, suggesting that
discussions with other business owners has uncovered a lack of support for Future Concept 1. There
thth
were concerns that the re-routed 12 Avenue with no immediate left hand turn onto existing 12
Avenue would make it difficult for customers and guests to get to the businesses.
Page 1 of 2
One expressed that current access is sufficient but acknowledged the back-ups at 12 th Avenue. He
suggested double left turn lanes on 12 th Avenue and two left turn lanes at the CH 83 and 12 th
Avenue intersection would be sufficient to help with traffic flow.
One participant expressed a desire for CH 16 between CR 21 and CH 83 be improved as it is a 2-lane
roadway with no shoulders and is a safety concern.
One participant suggested that his company located here because of the existing road system and
would prefer no changes, but recognizes the benefit of double turn lanes.
A representative of the Shakopee Bicycle Advisory Committee suggested a trail along 12 th Avenue
East, east of CH 83, and consideration of 3-lane for 12 th Avenue East. This participant also suggested
not building streets near retail without pedestrian facilities.
Page 2 of 2
APPENDIX C
M E M O R A N D U M
Date: December 1, 2015
To: Bruce Loney, P.E.
City Engineer, City of Shakopee, MN
From: Jacob Bongard, P.E.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Subject: CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study Traffic Considerations Memorandum
I. Introduction
The objective of this report is to document and summarize the traffic operations for the County
State Aid Highway (CSAH) 83 corridor located in the City of Shakopee, Scott County, MN. The
CSAH 83 corridor readiness study is needed to anticipate future traffic demands and make a
cohesive plan to address capacity, safety, and supporting roadway network needs for this area.
This report will consist of existing traffic conditions, crash history, expected future traffic
conditions, proposed design concepts and other traffic and design recommendations.
II. Background
CSAH 83 is a minor arterial roadway providing a northbound and southbound connection
between Trunk Highway (TH) 169 and other regional facilities such as CSAH 101, 16, 42, and
82. CSAH 83 provides access to some of the largest attractions in the metro area including
Canterbury Park, Valley Fair, Mystic Lake Casino, and supporting services for attraction visitors.
In addition to these entertainment areas, CSAH 83 provides access to a significant concentration
of industrial development and future economic development areas. The City of Shakopee is
experiencing an increase in development in the area surrounding CSAH 83 including a potential
expansion of Canterbury Park, Amazon retail distribution center, and several manufacturing and
industrial facilities. There are multiple undeveloped parcels within a close proximity of the
CSAH 83 corridor that contribute to the growth anticipated throughout the study area.
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 2
III. Measure of Effectiveness
The operational analysis results are described as a Level of Service (LOS) ranging from A to F.
These letters serve to describe a range of operating conditions for different types of facilities.
LOS is calculated based on the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, which defines the level of
service, based on control delay. Control delay is the delay experienced by vehicles slowing down
as they are approaching the intersection, the wait time at the intersection, and the time for the
vehicle to speed up through the intersection and enter into the traffic stream. The average
intersection control delay is a volume weighted average of delay experienced by all motorists
entering the intersection on all intersection approaches. The control delay is modeled within the
macroscopic analysis software, Trafficware Synchro, and microscopic analysis software,
Trafficware SimTraffic. LOS A through D is commonly taken as an acceptable design year LOS,
but LOS C is generally perceived to be the acceptable limit in non-metropolitan communities.
LOS F indicates an intersection where demand exceeds capacity and drivers experience
substantial delay.
The LOS and its associated intersection delay for a signalized and unsignalized intersection is
Table 1
presented below in . The delay threshold for unsignalized intersections is lower for each
LOS compared to signalized intersections, which accounts for the fact that people expect a higher
level of service when at a stop-controlled intersection.
Table 1: Level of Service Criteria
Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection
LOS Control Delay per Vehicle (sec.) Control Delay per Vehicle (sec.)
A
10 10
B
>10 and 20 >10 and 15
C
>20 and 35 >15 and 25
D
>35 and 55 >25 and 35
E
>55 and 80 >35 and 50
F >80 >50
IV. Existing Conditions
A traffic analysis was completed to evaluate operations at 13 intersection on or near CSAH 83
corridor. CSAH 83 consists of a four-lane roadway carrying approximately 7,200 vehicles per
day near CSAH 101 and 18,300 to 23,900 vehicles per day near the TH 169 interchange. The
corridor consists of both signals and stop control conditions with turn lanes at some, but not all
intersections. The existing traffic conditions produce delays and safety issues during events at
Canterbury Park and Mystic lake Casino, especially when these events occur during weekday
peak hour traffic.
A. Data Collection
1. Traffic Counts
Wenck Associates provided 3 hour traffic counts for the time period of 4:00 pm to 7:00
pm in March of 2015. These counts were used to establish a base condition for the
amount of traffic that typically utilizes the corridor. The PM Peak hour counts are shown
Figure 1
in . 13-hour traffic counts were collected in June of 2015 from 6:00 am to 7:00
pm. A Thursday in June was selected to capture both typical Valley Fair traffic as well as
traffic related to events at Canterbury Park. Three peak hour traffic periods were selected
for analysis: AM peak hour (7:00-8:00 AM), PM peak hour (4:30-5:30 PM), and Shift
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 3
Change peak hour (6:00-7:00 PM). The Shift Change peak hour was included to evaluate
traffic conditions during Canterbury Park events in the summer months and employee
shift changes at the amazon industrial building year-round. The 13-hour traffic counts
were collected at the following intersections:
CSAH 83 at CSAH 101
CSAH 83 at Valley Industrial Blvd. N.
CSAH 83 at 4 th Avenue E.
CSAH 83 at Valley Industrial Blvd. S.
CSAH 83 at Barenscheer Blvd.
CSAH 83 at 12 th Avenue
CSAH 83 at Secretariat Drive
CSAH 83 at North TH 169 Ramp
CSAH 83 at South TH 169 Ramp
CSAH 83 at Dean Lakes Blvd.
CSAH 83 at CSAH 16
Eagle Creek Blvd. at Vierling Drive
Vierling Drive at 12 th Avenue
Figure 2
shows the existing summer intersection traffic counts.
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
SyeaLvrerreCdttocS:sCGIytunoS
.....
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
March Existing
CLIENT
LOGO
City of ShakopeeOctober, 2015
FIH¾
Valleyfair
Valleyfair
FIH¾
4TH AVE E
BED¬
Canterbury Park
Canterbury Park
k
kkk
r
rrr
BARENSCHEER BLVD
12TH AV
E E
12
TH AVE E
SECRETARIAT DR
)s
)s
D
E
A
N
L
A
K
E
S
B
LV
D
BED¬
A
DEANL
Legend
March Existing Peak Volumes
AM BEDh
BEDh
17THE
AVE
0700
Feet
Source: Scott County
FIGURE1
SyeaLvrerreCdttocS:sCGIytunoS
.....
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
Summer Existing
CLIENT
LOGO
City of ShakopeeOctober, 2015
FIH¾
Valleyfair
Valleyfair
FIH¾
4TH AVE E
BED¬
Canterbury Park
Canterbury Park
k
kkk
r
rrr
BARENSCHEER BLVD
E
12TH AV
E E
12
TH AVE E
SECRETARIAT DR
)s
)s
D
E
A
N
L
A
K
E
S
B
LV
D
BED¬
A
DEANL
Legend
Summer Existing Peak Volumes
AM (PM) \[Shift Change\]BEDh
BEDh
17THE
AVE
0700
Feet
Source: Scott County
FIGURE2
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 6
B. Operations
Table 2
details the existing traffic operations analysis completed using Wenck Associates
March 2015 traffic counts. Data was not provided for all intersections or peak periods in
the study area; therefore, these results were used to establish a base condition for the
existing traffic operations.
Table 2: March 2015 Existing Traffic Operations Analysis
Table 3
details the existing traffic operation analysis completed for the three peak hour considerations in
June of 2015 for all primary and secondary public intersections in the study area. Analysis based upon
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 7
Table 3: Summer 2015 Existing Traffic Operations Analysis
Max Approach Queue
Limiting
Intersection Maximum Max
Intersection and Traffic ControlPeak HourMovement
Delay*- LOSDelay-LOS**DirectionQueue (ft)
Average
***Queue (ft)
****
AM8A15BWBLNB L4891
CSAH 83 & CSAH 101
PM10A22CWBLWB L56105
Signal
Shift Change9A15BWBLWB L5393
AM2A6AWBLWB LR726
PM2A7AWBLWB LR4072
CSAH 83 & Valley Ind. Blvd. North
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A6AWBLWB LR1239
AM3A10AEBLEB LR5498
CSAH 83 & 4th Street
3A10AEBLEB LR5797
Side Street Stop Control
PM
Shift Change3A8AEBLEB LR5086
AM3A12BWBLWB LR3368
CSAH 83 & Valley Ind. Blvd. South
PM2A9AWBLWB LR4888
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change1A6AWBLWB LR2654
AM2A3ANBLEB LR931
CSAH 83 & Shenandoah Drive
PM2A15BEBLNB LT2563
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A5ANBLNB LT2156
AM10A52DWBLWB L79149
CSAH 83 & 12th Avenue
PM48D153FWBLWB TR416647
Signal
Shift Change40DFWBLWB L436785
115
AM2A4AEBREB R2650
PM3A12BEBREB R59107
CSAH 83 & Secretaroat Dr.
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A6AEBREB T3559
AM28C55DNBLWB LT305755
CSAH 83 & North TH 169 Ramp
PM24C55DWBTWB LT271434
Signal
Shift Change27C58ENBLWB LT287431
AM16B49DEBLEB LT254388
CSAH 83 & South TH 169 Ramp
PM17B60EEBLSB T118361
Signal
Shift Change14B74EEBTEB LT125220
AM42D133FNBLNB T207533
CSAH 83 & Eagle Creek Blvd./
Dean Lakes Blvd. PM47D197FEBLEB T202581
Signal
Shift Change23C89FWBTSB T105198
AM25C58ENBLNB T168307
CSAH 83 & CSAH 16
PM24C60ENBLSB T82155
Signal
Shift Change19B65EWBLNB T71137
AM7A10AEBTWB TR3862
Vierling Dr. & Eagle Creek Blvd.
PM9A12BEBTWB TR4377
Stop Control
Shift Change8A11BEBTWB TR4267
AM2A7ANBLNB R3140
Vierling Dr. &12th Avenue
PM3A11BNBLNB R3150
Side Street Stop ControlShift Change7A35DNBLNB L76142
*Delay in seconds per vehicle
**Maximum delay and LOS on any approach and/or movement
***Limiting Movement is the highest delay movement.
****Max Queue refers to the 95% Queue (Passenger car stored length = 25 ft, Heavy vehicle stored length = 45 ft)
Traffic operations show similar results between Wenck traffic counts and Summer traffic
counts. The existing traffic operations analysis indicates that there are only two
intersections presenting conditions worse than LOS C during the summer of 2015. The
portion of the study area along CSAH 83 between 12 th avenue and CSAH 16 has some
th
movements of concern. The intersections of CSAH 83 at 12 Avenue, North TH 169
Ramp, South TH 169 Ramp, Eagle Creek Blvd. and CSHA 16 all experience limiting
movement delays with LOS D or worse. All of the limiting movements at the
aforementioned intersections involve traffic traveling northbound and southbound along
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 8
th
CSAH 83. Maximum queue lengths at the intersections of CSAH 83 at 12 Avenue,
North TH 169 Ramp, South TH 169 Ramp, and Eagle Creek Blvd. extend longer than the
provided turn lane storage. This is a safety concern and it is anticipated to be amplified
during events.
The intersection of CSAH 83 and Eagle Creek Blvd. /Dean Lakes Blvd. has an overall
LOS D during the AM and PM peak periods. Furthermore, all left turning movements
and east and westbound thru movements have LOS F. Improvements were completed at
the intersection of CSAH 83 and Eagle Creek Blvd. /Dean Lake Blvd. in 2004 where two
thru lanes and dual left turn lanes were provided for all approaches. Additionally, a single
right turn lane is provided for the north, south and west approaches and dual right turn
lanes are provided for the east approach. The current capacity at this intersection
suggests that these specific movement delays are expected in order to provide and overall
sufficient LOS.
th
The intersection of CSAH 83 and 12 Avenue has an overall LOS D during the PM and
Shift Change peak periods. The limiting movement for this intersection is the westbound
left turning movement. Additionally, field observations revealed weaving issues are
generated when motorists attempt to complete a northbound left turn at the intersection
after turning right onto northbound CSAH 83 at the North TH 169 Ramp. The current
1/8-mile spacing between these two intersections is half of that required within the Scott
County Minimum Access Spacing Guidelines between full access intersections. This
problem is amplified during events at Canterbury Park when northbound left turn lane
storage reaches capacity and traffic backs up into the North TH 169 Ramp intersection.
C. Safety
There have been a total of 175 crashes within the study area over the past five years (2010-2014).
No fatal crashes were documented during this time period. However, two incapacitating crashes
and 12 non-capacitating injuries occurred. The remaining crashes involved possible injury or
Figure 3
property damage only. The number of crashes and there severity are shown in .
Additionally, there were three crashes located at the railroad crossing with CSAH 83 just south of
Figure 3
CSAH 101 in this time period that are not shown in . Detailed crash reports are provided
Appendix B
in of this report.
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 9
Figure 3: Intersection Crash Frequency and Severity (2010-2014)
45
40
1
1
35
6
4
30
s
e
h
25
s
a
r
18
C
f
o
r
20
1
e
b
2
m
u
322
N
15
10
13
2
10
1
2
115
14
1
111
5
410
9
1
26
5
33
2
1
0
PDOPossible InjuryNon-IncapacitatingIncapacitatingFatal
Statewide average crash rates, severity rates and critical crash rates were attained from MnDOT
using the most up-to-date version of the State Aid for Local Transportation (SALT) Intersection
Table 4
Green Sheets. compares the study area intersection crash and severity rates to statewide
averages. Crash rates were developed using the most recent AADT volumes provided by
MnDOT. 13-hour turning movement counts were adjusted to represent daily volumes where
AADTs were not available.
According to the Traffic Safety Fundamentals Handbook developed by MnDOT, the critical crash
rate is the most accurate and statistically reliable method for identifying hazardous crash
locations. It accounts for the design of the facility, type of intersection control, amount of
e
calculated crash rate is greater than the critical crash rate for the intersection. The results can be
Table 4
found in the far right columns of .
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 10
Table 4: Intersection Crash Rates
th
The intersections of CSAH 83 at 12 Avenue and CSAH 16 display crash rates greater
than the critical crash rates. The intersections of CSAH 83 at Valley Industrial Blvd. N,
4 th Avenue E. and Valley Industrial Blvd. S., as well as Eagle Creek Blvd. at Vierling
Drive, all display rates greater than statewide average but do not display the same amount
of risk as the rates remain below the critical crash rate.
The following language provides crash summaries at key intersections throughout the
study area:
th
CSAH 83 at 12 Ave (Signal)
39 total crashes reported - 12 crashes were left turns, 10 crashes were right
angles, and 10 crashes were rear ends.
1 crash involved a pedestrian.
2 of the crashes were the result of weather and/or poor road conditions.
1 crashed resulted in a non-capacitating injury. All other crashes were either
possible injury of property damage only.
CSAH 83 at CSAH 16 (Signal)
37 total crashes reported.
65% of crashes involved rear end collisions. A contributing factor may be the
high northbound approach speeds at this intersection.
1 incapacitating injury occurred involving a vehicle making a left turn on a red
light.
62% of crashes resulted in possible injury or worse.
1 crash involved person on a bicycle when a vehicle failed to yield.
CSAH 83 at CSAH 101 (Signal)
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 11
1 incapacitating injury involving a northbound and eastbound vehicle.
Eagle Creek Blvd. at Vierling Drive (All-Way-Stop-Control)
10 of 14 crashes involved right angle crashes
V. Traffic Forecasts
A traffic forecast was developed for the study corridor using future daily traffic volumes attained from the
2040 Scott County travel demand model in conjunction with information attained from prior studies and
the City of Shakopee.
The turning movement counts collected in June of 2015 were used as the baseline for developing 2037
peak hour turning movement counts for AM, PM, and Shift Change peak periods during the summer
months as well as a Holiday time period. The summer time period was selected to evaluate conditions
when the recreational vehicle traffic traveling to and from Canterbury Park and Valley Fair reaches its
peak. The Holiday period was also considered to evaluate the influx of traffic generated by the seasonal
hiring and increased production occurring at the large industrial and manufacturing facilities during the
months of November and December. The shift in traffic patterns between the summer and Holiday
scenarios is the basis for which multiple evaluations are necessary to ensure the proposed mitigation is
adequate in accommodating the anticipated future traffic volumes.
It was determined following the completion of traffic counts that minor adjustments were needed to
account for a shift in traffic patterns developed by a construction project involving road closures on
CSAH 101 approximately three miles west of the study area. The peak hour turning movement counts
completed by Wenck Consulting in the spring, prior to the road closure, were used as a means to adjust
the collected traffic volumes to represent typical conditions. Existing Holiday traffic volumes were
generated by removing additional summer traffic observed when comparing the March traffic counts to
those collected in June. The primary adjustments included removing the trips traveling to and from
Canterbury Park and Valley Fair via CSAH 83.
The City Economic Development Coordinator was consulted regarding development anticipated along the
CSAH 83 corridor as a way to identify key parcels that have completed recent expansion projects, are
currently expanding, or are intending to expand in the future. The findings from this discussion are shown
Figure 4,
in below. The figure includes business names, types of business, and lastly the number of
additional jobs that are expected to be generated from the proposed expansion. All assumptions were
based upon development occurring following the turning movement counts completed on June 11, 2015.
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 12
Figure 4: CSAH 83 Development Forecasts
In addition to the anticipated development shown in Figure 3, vehicle trips generated by the nearly one
million square-foot Amazon facility, which is currently under construction, in the northeast corner of the
th
4 Avenue at Shenandoah Drive intersection is included within the evaluation. The traffic impact study
completed for the site includes detailed information provided by the project owner for the number of trips
expected to enter and exit the site during the PM (4:305:30 pm) and Shift Change (6:00-7:00 pm) peak
hours. AM peak hour volumes were developed using the inverse values of those displayed for the PM
Table 5
peak hour. As shown in below, a significant number of additional trips are generated during the
holiday months when compared to the typical months of January through October.
Table 5: Amazon facility Vehicle Trips
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 13
The basis of distribution for the above mentioned trips originated from the methodology adopted in the
previously developed AUAR for the Amazon Facility site. The trip distribution percentages used within
the study were based upon the nearby roadway network, existing and expected future traffic patterns,
locations of the subject development in relation to major attractions and population concentrations, and
information provided within a previous AUAR. The North Parcel distribution is based upon the findings
of this document. The middle and south parcel distributions were modified to reflect the change in traffic
patterns and desired routes by both cars and trucks traveling to and from the proposed development. The
assumption is that TH 169 becomes the primary roadway serving the proposed development in the middle
and south locations due to proximity, ease of access, and travel time.
Figure 5: Trip Distribution By Location
Figure 4
The remaining development sites identified within were then evaluated to determine the number
of vehicle trips generated by each site, the trip distribution that applies, and lastly the trip path that each
Figure 5
vehicle trip will take through the network. The distribution of trip ends is shown in , above.
Similar methodology was used in projecting the influx of seasonal trips developed by the Shutterfly
facility with access off Dean Lakes Boulevard, south of TH 169. Additional trips are anticipated to
occupy the network in the months of November and December as staffing is escalated to meet the
increased demand during the holiday season. Baseline vehicle trip estimates were established using a
Table 5
similar rate to that assumed for the Amazon Facility, see , but values were reduced to account for
the footprint of the building being approximately ¼ of the size. It was then determined that vehicles trips
to/from the Amazon Facility increase by approximately 7x of that observed during periods of standard
operation throughout the holiday season. This rate was applied to the projected existing vehicle trips
entering/exiting the site and the difference between the holiday trips and that during typical operations
was applied to network during the Holiday evaluation period.
The final development incorporated within the 2037 traffic forecast involves the undeveloped properties
Figure 6
located south of TH 169, adjacent to CSAH 83. The parcels identified in are currently used for
agricultural or mining purposes, but are anticipated to be redeveloped into commercial, residential, and
industrial properties in the future. TAZ (Transportation Analysis Zone) information including population,
households, retail jobs, and non-retail jobs was reviewed to better understand the output from the 2040
travel demand model. Trip generation was used to represent the majority of the growth anticipated within
the corridor, but it did not encapsulate the growth anticipated south of TH 169 as the precise land use
proposed on each parcel has not yet been identified.
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 14
Figure 6: Additional Corridor Development
These vehicle trips were projected by first establishing a yearly growth rate based upon a comparison of
existing daily traffic volumes and values displayed in the 2040 Travel Demand Model. The existing peak
hour turning movement counts were used as the basis for which the growth was distributed as the vast
majority of trips were anticipated to be traveling to and from TH 169. Therefore the additional vehicle
trips added to the network travel through the intersection of CSAH 83 at CSAH 16 and disperse into the
network based upon the distribution of the existing system.
Figure 7Figure 8
and provide the forecasted AM, PM, and Shift Change Peak Hour traffic volumes for
the Summer and Holiday evaluation periods.
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
SyeaLvrerreCdttocS:sCGIytunoS
.....
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
Summer Future Build Conditions
CLIENT
LOGO
City of ShakopeeOctober, 2015
FIH¾
Valleyfair
Valleyfair
FIH¾
4TH AVE E
BED¬
Canterbury Park
Canterbury Park
k
kkk
r
rrr
BARENSCHEER BLVD
E
12TH AV
E E
12
TH AVE E
SECRETARIAT DR
)s
)s
D
E
A
N
L
A
K
E
S
B
LV
D
BED¬
A
DEANL
Legend
Summer Future Peak Volumes
AM (PM) \[Shift Change\]BEDh
BEDh
17THE
AVE
0700
Feet
Source: Scott County
FIGURE7
SyeaLvrerreCdttocS:sCGIytunoS
.....
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
Holiday Future Build Conditions
CLIENT
LOGO
City of ShakopeeOctober, 2015
FIH¾
Valleyfair
Valleyfair
FIH¾
4TH AVE E
BED¬
Canterbury Park
Canterbury Park
k
kkk
r
rrr
BARENSCHEER BLVD
E
12TH AV
E E
12
TH AVE E
SECRETARIAT DR
)s
)s
D
E
A
N
L
A
K
E
S
B
LV
D
BED¬
A
DEANL
Legend
Holiday Future Peak Volumes
AM (PM) \[Shift Change\]BEDh
BEDh
17THE
AVE
0700
Feet
Source: Scott County
FIGURE8
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 17
VI. Future Operations
A traffic operations analysis was completed using the existing roadway network along with future
forecasted traffic volumes. The analysis was completed for both the summer and holiday
Tables 6 and 7
evaluation periods. detail the anticipated future traffic operation analysis if no
changes are made to the existing roadway.
A. Summer
Table 6: Traffic Operations Analysis - Summer Future Build Conditions with Existing Geometry
Max Approach Queue
Limiting
Intersection Maximum Max
Intersection and Traffic ControlPeak HourMovement Average
Delay*- LOSDelay-LOS**DirectionQueue (ft)
***Queue (ft)
****
AM9A19BWBLEB T5791
CSAH 83 & CSAH 101
PM12B32CWBLEB T75111
Signal
Shift Change10A19BWBLWB L4880
AM2A8AWBLWB LR624
CSAH 83 & Valley Ind. Blvd. North
PM2A8AWBLWB LR3560
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change1A6AWBLWB LR1336
AM3A11BEBLEB LR4881
CSAH 83 & 4th Street
PM3A11BEBLEB LR5490
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change4A11BEBLEB LR5894
AM2A10AWBLWB LR2852
CSAH 83 & Valley Ind. Blvd. South
PM2A9AWBLWB LR4376
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change1A7AWBLWB LR2142
AM2A6AEBLEB LR830
CSAH 83 & Barenscheer Blvd.
PM2A13BEBLEB LR2756
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A5ANBLNB LT2250
AM12B60EWBLWB L103183
CSAH 83 & 12th Avenue
PM68E439FWBLWB TR704883
Signal
Shift Change67E348FWBLWB TR6341003
AM2A4AEBREB R2650
CSAH 83 & Secretariat Dr.
PM2A9AEBREB R4879
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A5AEBREB R3359
AM29C51DWBLWB LT275651
CSAH 83 & North TH 169 Ramp
PM45D104FWBLWB LT670768
Signal
Shift Change37D70EWBLWB LT560794
AM39D208FEBREB LT448848
CSAH 83 & South TH 169 Ramp
PM32C171FSBLSB T483813
Signal
Shift Change17B80ESBLEB LT118197
AM96F574FSBLNB T6491183
CSAH 83 & Eagle Creek Blvd./
Dean Lakes Blvd. PM31C120FSBLSB T157251
Signal
Shift Change18B70EWBTSB T110188
AM132F447FWBRWB T9661677
CSAH 83 & CSAH 16
PM50D188FWBTWB T407923
Signal
Shift Change25C67EWBTWB T147228
AM7A10AEBTWB LT3165
Vierling Dr. & Eagle Creek Blvd.
PM9A12BEBTWB LT4990
Stop Control
Shift Change8A11BEBTWB LT4476
AM2A7ANBLNB R3347
Vierling Dr. & 12th Avenue
PM3A11BNBLWB L3155
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change6A28DNBLNB L70133
*Delay in seconds per vehicle
**Maximum delay and LOS on any approach and/or movement
***Limiting Movement is the highest delay movement.
****Max Queue refers to the 95% Queue (Passenger car stored length = 25 ft, Heavy vehicle stored length = 45 ft)
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 18
B. Holiday
Table 7: Traffic Operations Analysis - Holiday Future Build Conditions with Existing Geometry
Max Approach Queue
Limiting
Intersection Maximum Max
Intersection and Traffic ControlPeak HourAverage
Delay*- LOSDelay-LOS**DirectionQueue (ft)
Movement
***Queue (ft)
****
AM9A20BWBLEB T6094
CSAH 83 & CSAH 101
PM12B30CWBLEB T76111
Signal
Shift Change11B20BWBLWB T67108
AM2A5AWBLWB LR727
CSAH 83 & Valley Ind. Blvd. North
PM2A8AWBLWB LR3658
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A6AWBLWB LR1336
AM6A24CEBLEB LR93181
CSAH 83 & 4th Avenue
PM5A16CEBL82132
Side Street Stop Control
EB LR
Shift Change51F113FEBLEB LR6491293
AM2A15BWBLWB LR2958
CSAH 83 & Valley Ind. Blvd. South
PM3A12BWBLWB LR4885
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A16CWBLWB LR2447
AM2A5ANBLEB LR728
CSAH 83 & Barenscheer Blvd.
PM2A15BEBLEB LR2556
Shift Change2A6ANBLNB LT3677
Side Street Stop Control
AM12B64EWBLWB L102192
CSAH 83 & 12th Avenue
PM63E425FWBLWB TR718811
Signal
57E329FWBLWB TR6391003
Shift Change
AM4A39EEBRSB T21139
CSAH 83 & Secretariat Dr.
PM5A33DEBREB R74239
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A11BEBREB R4070
AM48D94FWBLWB LT650835
CSAH 83 & North TH 169 Ramp
PM51D142FWBLWB LT678719
Signal
Shift Change50D146FWBLWB LT682697
AM41DFEBLEB LT539894
CSAH 83 & South TH 169 Ramp169
PM40D192FSBLSB T588824
Signal
Shift Change37D193FSBLSB T583825
AM97F411FSBL7571355
CSAH 83 & Eagle Creek Blvd./
NB T
Dean Lakes Blvd. PM41D170FSBLWB T199720
Signal
Shift Change33C136FSBLSB L186381
AM176F473FWBRWB T9221681
CSAH 83 & CSAH 16
PM38D125FWBTWB T236415
Signal
Shift Change25C57EWBTWB T134194
AM7A10AEBTNB TR3962
Vierling Dr. & Eagle Creek Blvd.
PM9A12BEBTWB LT4782
Stop Control
Shift Change9A11BWBTWB LT4781
AM2A7ANBLNB R3350
Vierling Dr. & 12th Avenue
PM3A9ANBLNB LT2750
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change4A12BNBLNB LT4678
*Delay in seconds per vehicle
**Maximum delay and LOS on any approach and/or movement
***Limiting Movement is the highest delay movement.
****Max Queue refers to the 95% Queue (Passenger car stored length = 25 ft, Heavy vehicle stored length = 45 ft)
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 19
C. Future Operations Analysis
The traffic operation analysis utilizing forecasted traffic volumes on the existing roadway
network revealed that multiple intersections are expected to operate at a LOS E or worse
during various peak hours. The large increase in traffic due to the Amazon Facility during
the holiday season is anticipated to increase the delay at the CSAH 83 and 4 th Avenue
stop controlled intersection to an unacceptable LOS during the Shift Change period of the
day.
It is anticipated that current operational issues present at the 12 th avenue intersection will
worsen beyond acceptable levels and cause significant delays and queuing at multiple
th
movements. The westbound approach is most impacted as continued growth along 12
Avenue creates a larger demand while the existing capacity remains as it is today.
The TH 169 ramp intersections are also expected to see additional delays as traffic
volumes rise and the capacity of the intersection remains constant. Overall intersection
operations remain acceptable, but the delay and queuing of individual movements is
impacted by the increase in conflicting vehicle movements.
The intersections of CSAH 83 at Eagle Creek Blvd./Dean Lakes Blvd. and CSAH 16 are
anticipated to see an increase in vehicles LOS and delays, but this is likely the product of
signal timing at the intersection. An improvement project was completed at these
intersections within the last decade that developed enough capacity to last well into the
future. Each approach was provided, at a minimum, a single right-turn lane, two thru
lanes, and two left-turn lanes.
VII. Mitigations
th
Traffic concerns at CSAH 83 and 4 Avenue intersection include eastbound traffic during the
th
Shift Change Peak Hour. The mitigations to the CSAH 83 and 4 Avenue intersection are as
follows:
Add northbound left turn lane and expand road to accommodate for center median.
Add eastbound right turn lane.
th
Traffic concerns at CSAH 83 and 12 Avenue intersection include northbound and westbound
th
left turning movements. The mitigation to the CSAH 83 and 12 Avenue intersection are as
follows:
Add westbound left turn lane for a total of two left turn lanes and one thru right turn lane.
Allow protected movement for westbound left turns.
Add northbound left turn lane for total of two left turn lanes, two thru lanes and one right
turn lane. Allow protected movement for northbound left turns.
Expand the segment of 12 th Avenue west of CSAH 83 to Disc Drive from the existing
variable one-lane/two-lane westbound exit lanes to a continuous two westbound lanes
with dedicated turn lanes.
th
The existing sidewalk on the east side of CSAH 83 between the TH 169 north ramp and 12
Avenue is to be kept in place. The existing curb and gutter should be kept in place as well to
reduce right-of-way implications. The addition of the dual northbound left turn lanes results in
changes to the median and alignment for the north leg of the intersection. Any additional right-of
way necessary to construct the proposed expansion project at the intersection of CSAH 83 and
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 20
th
12 Avenue would occur on the north side of the road.
The improvement project would also include the installation of permitted-protected flashing
yellow arrow heads for the single eastbound and southbound left turns at the intersection to
improve operations and reduce vehicles queues.
Figure 9
See for Near-Term mitigation layout.
A. Summer
Table 8: Traffic Operations Analysis - Summer Future Build Conditions with Mitigations
Max Approach Queue
Limiting
Intersection Maximum Max
Intersection and Traffic ControlPeak HourMovement Average
Delay*- LOSDelay-LOS**DirectionQueue (ft)
***Queue (ft)
****
AM9A20BWBLEB T6096
CSAH 83 & CSAH 101
PM12B33CWBLEB T75108
Signal
Shift Change10A19BWBLWB L5088
AM2A6AWBLSB LT730
CSAH 83 & Valley Ind. Blvd. North
PM2A8AWBLWB LR3868
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A6AWBLWB LR1539
AM3A11BEBLEB LR4572
CSAH 83 & 4th Street
PM3A10AEBLEB LR5082
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change4A11BEBLEB LR6092
AM2A11BWBLWB LR2747
CSAH 83 & Valley Ind. Blvd. South
PM2A9AWBLWB LR4280
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change1A7AWBLWB LR2344
AM2A11BEBLEB LR727
CSAH 83 & Barenscheer Blvd.
PM2A9AEBLNB LT2054
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A5ANBLNB LT2352
AM16B50DSBLNB L89135
CSAH 83 & 12th Avenue
PM22C41DEBLWB L135228
Signal
Shift Change24C41DEBLNB L152221
AM2A4AEBREB R2748
CSAH 83 & Secretariat Dr.
PM3A13BEBREB R56105
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A8AEBREB R3563
AM20B37DNBLNB T139207
CSAH 83 & North TH 169 Ramp
PM24C58EWBTWB LT277387
Signal
Shift Change20B37DNBLWB LT228310
AM14B49DSBLEB LT210344
CSAH 83 & South TH 169 Ramp
PM16B40DSBLEB R116197
Signal
Shift Change13B40DSBLEB LT105176
AM52D83FWBTNB T7291310
CSAH 83 & Eagle Creek Blvd./
Dean Lakes Blvd. PM27C51DEBLNB T318358
Signal
Shift Change17B58EEBTSB T123217
AM144F280FWBRWB T7381516
CSAH 83 & CSAH 16
PM27C48DWBLNB T130200
Signal
Shift Change21C46DNBLNB T120189
AM7A11BEBTNB TR3961
Vierling Dr. & Eagle Creek Blvd.
PM9A12BEBTWB LT4877
Stop Control
Shift Change8A11BEBTWB LT4369
AM2A5ANBRNB R3348
Vierling Dr. & 12th Avenue
PM4A12BNBLWB L1550
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change8A25CNBLNB L63117
*Delay in seconds per vehicle
**Maximum delay and LOS on any approach and/or movement
***Limiting Movement is the highest delay movement.
****Max Queue refers to the 95% Queue (Passenger car stored length = 25 ft, Heavy vehicle stored length = 45 ft)
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 21
B. Holiday
Table 9: Traffic Operations Analysis - Holiday Future Build Conditions with Mitigations
Max Approach Queue
Limiting
Intersection Maximum Max
Intersection and Traffic ControlPeak HourAverage
Delay*- LOSDelay-LOS**DirectionQueue (ft)
Movement
***Queue (ft)
****
AM9A20BNBTEB T6293
CSAH 83 & CSAH 101
PM12B31CWBLEB T74111
Signal
Shift Change11B21CWBLWB T72109
AM1A8AWBLWB LR830
CSAH 83 & Valley Ind. Blvd. North
PM2A8AWBLWB LR4167
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A7AWBLWB LR1743
AM4A18CEBLEB R4471
CSAH 83 & 4th Avenue
PM4A17CEBL5688
Side Street Stop Control
EB R
Shift Change10A36EEBLEB R109181
AM3A17CWBLWB LR3269
CSAH 83 & Valley Ind. Blvd. South
PM3A13BWBLWB LR4987
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change2A17CWBLWB LR2656
AM3A5ANBLNB LT1141
CSAH 83 & Barenscheer Blvd.
PM3A25CEBLNB LT3680
Shift Change4A11BNBLNB LT49106
Side Street Stop Control
AM16B50DSBLNB R99186
CSAH 83 & 12th Avenue
PM23C47DEBLSB T173262
Signal
19B48DEBLSB T148228
Shift Change
AM3A5AEBREB R2850
CSAH 83 & Secretariat Dr.
PM4A20CEBREB R60117
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change3A12BEBREB R3564
AM20B33CNBLWB R256389
CSAH 83 & North TH 169 Ramp
PM29C59ENBLWB LT350559
Signal
Shift Change28C65EWBTWB LT319478
AM17B39DSBLEB LT226341
CSAH 83 & South TH 169 Ramp
PM17B39DEBLEB R127228
Signal
Shift Change18B55DEBTEB LT155250
AM63E88FNBT10191187
CSAH 83 & Eagle Creek Blvd./
NB T
Dean Lakes Blvd. PM29C76EEBLSB T249332
Signal
Shift Change28C54DEBTNB T197337
AM187F370FNBRNB T9981398
CSAH 83 & CSAH 16
PM29C58EWBLNB T135223
Signal
Shift Change24C52DEBLNB T139225
AM7A11BEBTNB TR4060
Vierling Dr. & Eagle Creek Blvd.
PM9A10AWBTWB LT4980
Stop Control
Shift Change8A11BEBTWB TR4676
AM2A7ANBLNB R3348
Vierling Dr. & 12th Avenue
PM4A11BNBLNB L3146
Side Street Stop Control
Shift Change4A13BNBLNB L5190
*Delay in seconds per vehicle
**Maximum delay and LOS on any approach and/or movement
***Limiting Movement is the highest delay movement.
****Max Queue refers to the 95% Queue (Passenger car stored length = 25 ft, Heavy vehicle stored length = 45 ft)
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
FIGURE 9
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 23
C. Mitigation Operations Analysis
A traffic operations analysis was completed to understand the effectiveness of the
proposed improvements in accommodating the traffic volumes forecasted at study area
intersections in the year 2037. In general, the mitigation is anticipated to reduce the
overall delay at multiple intersections that were previously anticipated to exceed
acceptable levels of service with the existing geometry. This includes the intersection of
thth
CSAH 83 at 4 Avenue, CSAH 83 at 12 Avenue, CSAH 83 at TH 169 North Ramp, and
CSAH 83 at TH 169 South Ramp. Geometric improvements were not completed at the
TH 169 Ramp intersections, but the traffic flow improvements at the 12 th Avenue
intersection allowed traffic to more effectively move through the intersection.
The intersections of CSAH 83 at Eagle Creek Blvd./Dean Lakes Blvd. and CSAH 16 are
anticipated to continue to operate at a LOS D or worse during the AM Peak Hour of the
summer and holiday evaluation periods. As mentioned previously, the capacity of these
intersections should be able to accommodate the anticipated volumes and traffic signal
timings will likely need to be adjusted to improve overall operations at the intersection.
In addition to the reduction in vehicle delays at the intersection, the mitigations are
anticipated to reduce maximum queue lengths to within the allotted storage lengths for
turn lanes at 12 th Avenue and 4 th Avenue. Reducing the queue lengths and keeping
turning vehicles in their turn lanes is an important safety measure. These mitigations,
th
specifically adding a second northbound left turn lane at 12 Avenue, should reduce
existing queuing back up into the North TH 169 Ramp intersection.
VIII. Future Concepts
Two future concepts were developed based on the current and potential development in the area.
These concepts were developed with the idea that the aforementioned mitigation concept would
be implemented. Primary intersection spacing of ¼ mile is maintained along CSAH 83. The
following ideas were maintained for both future concepts:
th
Provide a continuation of the existing 12 Avenue to Vierling Drive with a 30 mph curve
to establish a continuous roadway. The existing Canterbury Park entrance connects to this
road at a stop-controlled T-Intersection.
Eliminate the skewed angle between CSAH 83 and Valley Industrial Blvd. South by
curving road to meet CSAH 83 at a 90 degree angle.
Re-route Barenscheer Blvd. along the north edge of Canterbury property connecting to
CSAH 83 to form the fourth leg of the new Valley Industrial Blvd. South intersection.
This becomes a new primary intersection along CSAH 83.
Establish a Primary intersection between Valley Industrial Blvd. South and 12 th Ave.
Add turn lanes and medians along CSAH 83 from 12 th Avenue to CSAH 101.
A. Future Concept 1
th
The intent of Future Concept 1 is to address issues at the CSAH 83 and 12 Avenue
intersection and provide additional capacity for future development anticipated within the
corridor. The following outlines the major changes to the roadway:
th
Re-route 12 Avenue to the north where it intersects CSAH 83 roughly halfway
th
between existing 12 Avenue and Barenscheer Blvd.
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 24
th
Mitigate existing the existing intersection of CSAH 83 and 12 Avenue to restrict
access and allow only left turns to only northbound traffic. Minor approaches of
existing 12 th Avenue would be right-in/right-out only.
Construct new roadway on east side of Super America extending from the north
thth
side of 12 avenue and curving to meet CSAH 83 at the new 12 Avenue
intersection. This intersection is established as a primary intersection as the
restricted access existing 12 th Avenue would become a secondary intersection.
The proposed concept is anticipated to improve intersection operations and functionality
of the segment of CSAH 83 immediately north of TH 169. The increase in primary
intersection spacing from 1/8-mile to ¼-mile provides additional space for vehicle
queuing and extra time for a motorist to merge over multiple lanes of traffic when
thth
traveling between TH 169 and 12 Avenue. Re-routing 12 Avenue would require the
relocation of seven Canterbury horse stables. The new roadway on the east side of CSAH
83 is design to allow for more storage for westbound traffic approaching CSAH 83. The
proposed improvements would impact parking at Polaris, United and the strip mall
properties in the area, but would provide an improved access to CSAH 83 that provides
additional capacity in comparison to existing geometry.
This concept has the potential to create new parcels of varying sizes along CSAH 83. All
of these parcels are potential revenue streams for property owners.
Figure 10
See for future concept 1 layout.
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
FIGURE 10
X
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 26
B. Future Concept 2
Future concept 2 involves no changes to mitigations at the CSAH 83 and 12 th Avenue
intersection. This concept creates two new primary intersections along CSAH 83
allowing for additional access points and greater potential in accommodating future
development.
Figure 11
See for future concept 2 layout.
IX. Canterbury Development
Canterbury Park is considering renovating their property along CSAH 83 and 12 th Avenue. This
would require relocation of their horse stables in order to create usable parcels more suitable for
development. The economic development team for the City of Shakopee was used as the primary
resource for information regarding the expected uses of land redevelopment.
A. Canterbury Development Traffic Forecasting
In addition to traffic forecasts already discussed in this report, trip forecasts for the
Canterbury Park renovation were developed using the information within the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual: 8 th Edition. The economic
development team for the City of Shakopee provided information on expected land use,
type of facility, and size of facility. More detailed information regarding trip generation is
Appendix D.
included in
Vehicles trips were distributed throughout the CSAH 83 roadway network using the
middle segment of trip distribution table found in Section V.
B. Canterbury Development Concepts
Development in the area, specifically the new Amazon retail facility, adds a significant
amount of traffic to CSAH 83. The proposed Canterbury Park renovation results in a
significant increase in traffic entering and existing the Canterbury site from CSAH 83.
This turning movements to and from CSAH 83 has significant intersection operational
and signal timing implications as the anticipated demand exceed capacity with the
proposed geometry and signal timings. Each concept was developed without any changes
to the geometry of CSAH 83, south of the north TH 169 Ramp. Therefore, expanding the
roadway beyond 4 lanes was not analyzed as additional thru lanes would likely require
the reconstruction of the existing TH 169 bridge.
The following text details three roadway concepts and the anticipated operational benefits
and deficiencies for the proposed Canterbury Park renovation. All Canterbury
development concepts were analyzed for the Summer and Holiday evaluation periods in
the year 2037 during the AM, PM and Shift Change Peak Hours.
Intersections south of TH 169 are expected to operate similarly to the future build with
mitigations traffic operation analysis described in the Section VII. These intersection will
not be included within any further evaluation for this reason..
1. Canterbury Concept 1
a) Geometry
Canterbury Concept 1 is similar to Future Concept 1. 12 th Avenue is
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
FIGURE 11
X
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 28
re-routed north adjusting the primary intersection further away from TH
169. A new road adjacent to this new primary intersection would curve
south navigating the east side of the strip mall and Super America then
th
curve east connecting with existing 12 Avenue. Barenscheer Blvd. at
CSAH 83 would be developed into a primary signalized intersection.
Appendix D
See for details.
b) Operations
Operations during the Summer and Holiday PM Peak hour, and during
the Holiday Shift Change Hour, show LOS D or worse throughout the
corridor. Generally, traffic on minor streets controlled by side street stop
controls, have difficulty finding sufficient gaps to enter onto CSAH 83.
This concept resolves concerns at CSAH 83 and 12 th Avenue involving
northbound left-turning and westbound left-turning vehicle conflicts.
Overall, Canterbury Concept 1 allows for traffic to more easily travel
north and west to enter Canterbury Park but creates operational concerns
for side street traffic and southbound traffic on CSAH 83.
2. Canterbury Concept 2
a) Geometry
Canterbury Concept 2 is similar to Future Concept 2. Dual westbound
and northbound left-turn lanes are implemented at the CSAH 83 and 12 th
Avenue intersection. A new primary signalized intersection is located ¼
th
mile north of 12 Avenue on CSAH 83. This new intersection would be
a major access point future redevelopment on the Canterbury Park site.
The existing intersection of Barenscheer Blvd. and CSAH 83 would be
severed. Multiple access points along CSAH 83 would be closed and re-
routed as to not disrupt traffic on CSAH 83.
b) Operations
Operations during the Summer PM Peak Hour are anticipated to have a
th
LOS E at the 12 Avenue intersection, and LOS D at the North TH 169
Ramp and new Canterbury Park renovation entrance. However, during
the Holiday period, multiple intersections have increased intersection
delay. Vehicles attempting to enter CSAH 83 from a minor street
experience excessive delays. The two main access points to the
Canterbury Park site, 12 th Avenue and new primary intersections, would
require significant geometric improvements to achieve sufficient levels
of delay and queuing with the anticipated future traffic volumes.
3. Canterbury Concept 3
a) Geometry
Canterbury Concept 3 is similar to Canterbury Concept 2 except it
requires an interchange modification at TH 169. This interchange would
require a total acquisition of Americas Best Value Inn & Suites.
Southbound traffic on TH 169 would be able to freely enter southbound
CSAH 83. Access points to the Canterbury renovation are similar to
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Page 29
Canterbury Concept 2.
b) Operations
North TH 169 Ramp was modeled using a stop control for traffic exiting
TH 169 and making right turns onto CSAH 83. This movement
experiences long delays and queuing. However, the main access points
to the renovation show improvement over Canterbury Concept 2.
Vehicles attempting to enter CSAH 83 from a minor street experience
excessive delays.
X. Recommendations/Conclusions
The information provided within this document summarizes the anticipated development within
the corridor, traffic operations, and safety characteristics present throughout the CSAH 83
Corridor Readiness Study area. The findings are presented in a way to allow decision-makers to
fully understand the existing conditions as well as the benefits and consequences developed with
a variety of proposed improvements. The intent is not to make recommendations regarding the
corridor, but to provide the information necessary to guide the decision makers to a future design
concept that best suits the needs of the corridor.
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Appendix A
Traffic Counts
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Appendix B
Crash Information
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
Other
1111111
Pedestrian
1
Bicycle
1
Parked Car
1
Head On
112
Crash Type
Sideswipe
124261641
Left-Turn
12
2212221
ROR
211212
* Railroad crossing between CSAH 101 and Valley Industrial Blvd N experienced 3 crashes between 2010-2014
Rear End
1024
3113637
Right Angle
tĻƩ Ў ĻğƩƭ
1010
tĻƩ ĻğƩ
4121456
Crashes
Total
ЎБ͵Ќ
ЊАЎ
10391913203714
484160
Traffic SignalTraffic SignalTraffic SignalTraffic SignalTraffic SignalTraffic Signal
Thru-StopThru-StopThru-StopThru-StopThru-StopThru-Stop
Control
Traffic
Stop
CSAH 83 at Valley Industrial Blvd NCSAH 83 at Valley Industrial Blvd S
CSAH 83 at North TH 169 RampCSAH 83 at South TH 169 Ramp
Eagle Creek Blvd at Vierling Dr
CSAH 83 at Dean Lakes Blvd
CSAH 83 at Shenandoah Dr
CSAH 83 at Secretariat Dr
Intersection
Vierling Dr at 12th Ave
CSAH 83 at CSAH 101
CSAH 83 at 4th Ave E
CSAH 83 at CSAH 16
CSAH 83 at 12th Ave
Property Damage
3215101411
326359
Possible Injury
1018
4211161223
Crash Severity
Non-Incapacitating
2112114
Incapacitating
11
Fatal
Crashes
Total
10391913203714
484160
Traffic SignalTraffic SignalTraffic SignalTraffic SignalTraffic SignalTraffic Signal
All-Way Stop
Thru-StopThru-StopThru-StopThru-StopThru-StopThru-Stop
Control
Traffic
CSAH 83 at Valley Industrial Blvd NCSAH 83 at Valley Industrial Blvd S
CSAH 83 at North TH 169 RampCSAH 83 at South TH 169 Ramp
Eagle Creek Blvd at Vierling Dr
CSAH 83 at Dean Lakes Blvd
CSAH 83 at Shenandoah Dr
CSAH 83 at Secretariat Dr
Intersection
Vierling Dr at 12th Ave
CSAH 83 at CSAH 101
CSAH 83 at 4th Ave E
CSAH 83 at CSAH 16
CSAH 83 at 12th Ave
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Appendix C
Simtraffic Reports
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Study
12/01/2015
Appendix D
Canterbury Park Development Concepts
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\CSAH 83 Corridor Readiness Traffic Memorandum.docx
APPENDIX D
EnvironmentalScreening
CSAH83CorridorReadinessStudy
ConsiderationsExistingConditions
SEETopics
Theneedforanairqualityanalysis,conformitydetermination,or
ΘImpactstoairquality
AirQuality
MobileSourceAirToxicsanalysiswillbedeterminedonceindividual
ΘMobilesourceairtoxins
improvementprojectsareidentified.*
ΘComplywithfederalnoisecriteriaand
Theneedforanoiseanalysiswillbedeterminedonceindividual
TrafficNoise
MinnesotaNoiseStandards
improvementprojectsareidentified.*
ΘIdentifyofsensitivenoisereceptors
Constructionnoisewillbefurtherconsideredinafuture
ΘComplywithfederalnoisecriteriaand
environmentalreview.*Cityordinancescanregulatethedaytime
ConstructionNoise
MinnesotaNoiseStandards
hoursofconstructionactivitiesinordertominimizepotentialimpacts
ΘIdentifyofsensitivenoisereceptors
jacentareas.
toad
ΘThestudyareafallswithintheLowerMinnesotawatershedofthe
MinnesotaRiverBasin.TheMinnesotaRiverrepresentstheonly
impairedstreamnearthestudyarea.
Effectstowaterresources.Wetlandsthat
ΘSeveralwetlandsarelocatedwithinandaroundthestudyarea(see
maybeimpactedbypartialorcomplete
WaterResources
Figure1).Onlyonewetlandispotentiallylocatedwithintheexisting
filling,excavationordrainage,orseverance
rightofwayalongtheeastsideofCSAH83,northofValleyIndustrial
ofwatersupply
BlvdN.
ΘNoPWIWatercourseswereidentifiedinthearea.
100yearfloodplainsareassociatedwiththeMinnesotaRivertothe
Developmentencroachmentsonthe100
Floodplains
northofCSAH83andCSAH101.No100yearfloodplaininimmediate
yearfloodplain
studyarea.
SurfaceWater
Drainageinfrastructurealterationsandimpervioussurfaceadditions
Effectsofdrainagemodifications.Runoff
Drainage/Water
mayaffectthebodiesofwater.Tobeconsideredinfuture
effectstoprotectedlakesandwatercourses
environmentalreview.*
Quality
ΘDNRNHISdatasuggeststhreatened,endangered,andrarespecies
ΘUniquehabitatsdonotexistwithinthestudyarea.Specieshavebeenidentifiedwithin
Wildlife,Threatened
ΘWidenedsectionamileoftheCSAH83and101intersection.
andEndangered
ΘFederalandstatelistedthreatenedandΘGISDatadelineatingMNDNR,DivisionofWildlifeManagement
Species
endangeredspeciesAreas(WMA)showthatWMA'sarenonexistentwithinthestudy
area.
ΘTroutstreams
ΘFishmigrations
Fisheries
Therearenodesignatedtroutstreamswithinthestudyarea.
ΘSpawningruns
ΘUniquehabitats
ΘNativeplantcommunities
Mostofthestudyareaisdevelopedindustrial,majorrecreationand
ΘLandscapevegetation
businesswithalteredvegetation(SeeFigure2).Thereispotentialfor
Vegetation
ΘFunctionalvegetation
wildlifehabitatinstudyarea.Tobeconsideredinfuture
ΘHighvaluevegetation
environmentalreview.*
ΘHazardtrees
6/15/2015
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\ScreeningSpreadsheet_ShakopeeCSAH83.xls
EnvironmentalScreening
CSAH83CorridorReadinessStudy
ConsiderationsExistingConditions
SEETopics
ΘGasTransmissionPipelines(scaledependent)parallelUSHighway
169andcrossthestudyareajustnorthofthesouthboundramp.
Θ69kVACpowerlinescrossCSAH83betweenCountyHighway101
andCountyHighway16(4thAveE).
Θ345kVACand230kVACpowertransmissionlinescrossCSAH83
betweenUSHighway169andCountyHighway16.
ΘMinnesotaElectricTransmissionPlanningidentifiestwosubstations;
ImpactstoutilitiesmayincuradditionalonelocatedontheeasternsideofthejunctionofCSAH83andCSAH
Utilities
projectcosts.101(Notidentifiedthroughaerialphotos)andonefurthereastaway
fromthestudyarea.
ΘAnothersubstationislocatedtothenorthofEagleCreekBoulevard
southofUSHighway169asitapproachesCSAH83.
ΘImprovementsalongCSAH83mayrequireminorutilityrelocations
aswellascreatetemporaryservicedisruptionsattimeof
construction.
ΘTobeconsideredinfutureenvironmentalreview.*
ΘFarmlandoccursonthewesternsideofCSAH83justnorthof
BarenscheerBoulevardaswellasthenorthwesterncornerofCSAH83
and17thAvenue(CSAH16).
ΘThestudyareaisfoundwithinstreamterracesandoutwashplains.
ΘMinimizationofeffectstoagriculturalland
ΘCharacterizedasmostlywelldrainedtoexcessivelydrainedfine
FarmlandandSoils
ΘPropertiesofsoils
sands,loamsandsiltyloams.
ΘSuitabilityforroadwayconstruction
ΘPrimefarmlandandsoilsofstatewideimportanceareidentified
withinthestudyarea
ΘSoilsuitabilityoffarmlandimpactswillbeaddressedinafuture
environmentalreview.*
ΘErosionaleffects
Erosion
Tobeconsideredinafutureenvironmentalreview.*
ΘWaterpollution
ΘKnownhistoryofcontaminationinthestudyarea(SeeFigure3)
Θ4knownhazardouswastesitesalongCSAH83northofHighway
169.
Θ3areasofmultipleactivities
Contaminated
Disturbanceofcontaminatedproperties
Θ1PetroleumbrownfieldlocatedeastofCSAHbetweenCSAH16and
Properties mayincreaseprojectcost
USHighway169.
ΘMoredetailedinvestigationsmayberecommendedforproperties
withexisting/pastlandusesthatmayhaveusedhazardous/chemical
waste.Tobeconsideredinafutureenvironmentalreview.*
6/15/2015
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\ScreeningSpreadsheet_ShakopeeCSAH83.xls
EnvironmentalScreening
CSAH83CorridorReadinessStudy
ConsiderationsExistingConditions
SEETopics
ΘParksandrecreationareas
ΘLandandWaterConservation(LAWCON)
funds
ΘWildlife&waterfowlrefuges
ΘHistoricsitesΘKillarneyHillsParkislocatedsouthofUSHighway169offofCSAH
ΘLandscapes16andmeetstheSection4(f)criteria.
ΘHighwaysΘLangdonTerraceParkisapproximately1150feetsoutheastofthe
ParksandRecreation
ΘBridgesjunctionofCSAH16andCSAH83andmeetstheSection4(f)criteria.
Areas(Section4f/6f
ΘBuildings&districtsΘNoLAWCONlistedparksarepresentwithinthestudyarea.
Resources)
ΘWildlifemanagementareasΘNoSchoolsidentifiedinthestudyarea.
ΘSchoolplaygroundsΘAnyimpactstoparksandrecreationalareastobeconsideredina
ΘFairgroundsfutureenvironmentalreview*(SeeFigure4).
ΘPublicmultipleuselandholdings
ΘPublicgolfcourses
ΘArchaeologicalsites
ΘWild&scenicrivers
Studyareaincludesamediumdensityresidential(R2)development
andaplannedresidentialdistrict(PRD)withpotentialforminorityand
Disproportionateeffectstolowincomeorlowincomepopulations.Nodisproportionatelyhighoradverse
EnvironmentalJustice
minoritypopulationsimpactsareexpectedasresultofimprovementstotheimmediate
CSAH83corridor.(SeeFigure2)Tobeconsideredinfuture
environmentalreview.*
Additionalrightofwaymayneedtobeacquiredforfuture
improvementprojects.Temporaryeasementsandchangestolocal
RightofWayand
Effectsofrightofwayacquisitionroadwayandpropertyaccesspointsarealsolikely.Anyimpacts
Relocation
resultingfromrightofwayacquisition,relocationoraccesschanges
willbeidentifiedinafutureenvironmentalreview.*
ΘScenicintrusion
ΘGrading,Trails
ΘVegetationmodifications
ΘBridgesTheproposedprojectisnotanticipatedtoresultinadversevisual
VisualQuality
ΘWallsimpacts.
ΘLighting
ΘFencing
ΘRailings
ΘHospitalsΘhƓĻplaceofworshipwasidentifiedincloseproximitytothestudy
ΘSchoolsarea.ThisislocatedwithintheCanterburyParkComplex.
ΘLibrariesΘShakopeeFireStation#2islocatedat2700VierlingDrEastroughly
SocialandCommunity
ΘChurchestwothirdsofamilewestofthejunctionofCSAH83andUSHighway
ΘGovernmentbuildings169.Noimpactsanticipated.Tobeconsideredinfuture
ΘPostofficesenvironmentalreview.*
ΘThenearestknownarchaeologicalorhistoricalresourceis
Buildingsthatexceed50yearsinage,
approximately0.75milesfromthestudyarea.
CulturalResources
archaeologicalsites,andTraditionalCulturalΘShakopeeMdewakantonSiouxCommunityislocatedsoutheastof
Properties.CSAH16.Noimpactsanticipated,tobeconsideredinfuture
environmentalreview.*
6/15/2015
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\ScreeningSpreadsheet_ShakopeeCSAH83.xls
EnvironmentalScreening
CSAH83CorridorReadinessStudy
ConsiderationsExistingConditions
SEETopics
ΘTrailscurrentlyexistalongbothsidesofCSAH83southofCSAH16
andalongtheeastsideofCSAH83betweenCSAH16and12th
Avenue.
Pedestrian&Bicycle
ΘTrailsalsoexistthroughouttheresidentialarealocatedonthe
Bicycleandpedestriansafety
Facilities easternsideofCSAH83betweenUSHighway169andCSAH16and
alongCanterburyAccessRoad,EagleCreekBlvd,andVierlingDrive
westofCSAH83.
Tobeconsideredinfutureenvironmentalreview.*(SeeFigure4)
ΘStudyareaisservicedbyRoute496,ShakopeeLocalRoute.
ΘThereisonetransitstoplocatedatWorkForceCenterlocated
Transit&Intermodal
Allmodesoftransportationandexistingapproximately1000feetnorthofBarenscheerBoulevard
Issues facilitiesforalternatives.ΘTwoothertransitroutesrunperpendiculartothestudyareaalong
USHighway169andCSAH16.
ΘTobeconsideredinfutureenvironmentalreview.*
*Additionalstudyconsiderationswillbepursuedwhenimprovementsareidentified.
6/15/2015
H:\\Shak\\T42109988\\2_Preliminary\\C_Reports\\ScreeningSpreadsheet_ShakopeeCSAH83.xls
Figure 1: Water Resources
County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 83 Corridor Readiness Study
CLIENT
LOGO
City of ShakopeeJune, 2015
I
Legend
Text
GXïW
Study Corridor
Wetlands
01,000
Feet
Source: DNR, MPCA, USFWS, Scott County MN
4th Ave E
y 16
Co Hw
Barenshceer Blvd
GXÝW
12th Ave E
r
D
t
a
i
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
S
+¡
D
e
a
n
L
a
k
e
s
B
lv
d
17
th Ave E
GXpW
King Ave
y
a
W
k
c
o
l
n
i
K
Ln
ann
Jarm
Rymark Ct
18th Ave E
County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 83 Corridor Readiness StudyFigure 2: Land Use
CLIENT
LOGO
City of ShakopeeJune, 2015
Text
MR
I1
GXïW
I2
AG
44444444A
I1
I2
MR
Barenscheer Blvd
I2
GXÝW
I2
B1
12th Ave E
R1B
I
Legend
BP
BP
B1
A
4
4
MR 4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Study Corridor
R1B
+¡
Study Corridor
AG
Zoning
AG, Agricultural Preservation
BP
R2
B1, Highway Business
R1B
4
4
4
4
B2, Highway Business 44
4
4
4
4
4
4
44
A
B3, Central Business District
B1
BP
BP, Business Park
RRB1
R2
CC, Community Commercial
BP
I1, Light Industry
I2, Heavy Industry
MR, Major Recreation
R2
AG
NC, Neighborhood Commercial
R2
B1
RR
NONE Established
PRD, Planned Residential District
R2
R1A, Low Density Residential
R1B
44
4444444A
R1B, Urban Residential
GXpW
PRD
King Ave
PRD
R1C, Old Shakopee Residential
A
4
44
4
4
44
4
4
R1BR1B 4
R2, Medium Density Residential
R2
PRD
PRD
PRD
R3, Multiple Family Residential
R1B
4A
4444
4444
RR, Rural Residential RR
R2
PRD
AG
SRR, Sewered Rural Residential
44444444A
PRD
AG
01,000
PRD
R1B
444444444A
Feet
PRD
PRD
Source: City of Shakopee Zoning Map
R1B
R1B
County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 83 Corridor Readiness StudyFigure 3: Possible Contamination & Recorded Wells
CLIENT
LOGO
City of ShakopeeJune, 2015
Text
GXïW
#
#
444A
44444
#
#
Barenscheer Blvd
#
GXÝW
#
#
#
12th Ave E
#
A
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
#
I
Legend
+¡
County Well Index
#
Abandoned
#
#
Commercial
#
Domestic 4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
A
#
Elevator
#
#
##
#
Industrial
#
#
#
Irrigation
#
#
#
#
Monitor
#
#
Test
MPCA Whats In My Neighborhood Sites
#
Air Permit
Construction Stormwater Permit
Feedlot
4444444
44A
GXpW
Hazardous Waste, Small to Minimal QG
King Ave
#
Industrial Stormwater Permit
A
4
44
4
4
44
44
4
Leak Site
#
#
Multiple Activities
444A
4444
44
##
Petroleum Brownfield
#
#
44444A
444
Tank Site
#
Voluntary Investigation & Cleanup (VIC)
44
4444444A
Study Corridor
#
#
Study Corridor
#
01,000
Feet
Source: MPCA, Scott County MN, MNGeo
#
County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 83 Corridor Readiness StudyFigure 4: Parks, Trails & Educational Properties
CLIENT
LOGO
City of ShakopeeJune, 2015
Text
GXïW
44444444A
Barenscheer Blvd
GXÝW
12th Ave E
A
44
4
44
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
+¡
4
4
4
4
44
4
4
4
4
4
4
44
A
Killarney Hills
Park
44444
4444A
GXpW
King Ave
I
A
4
44
Legend 4
4
4
4
44
4
4A
4444
4444
Langdon
Trails
Terrace Park
Parks
44444444A
Study Corridor
444444444A
Study Corridor
01,000
Feet
Source:
RESOLUTION NO. 7676
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MEDIA RELATIONS POLICY FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee strives to provide timely, accurate and consistent information to the
public through its own communication tools and the media; and
WHEREAS, the City aims to provide staff and elected officials with guidance on how to respond to
media inquiries, as well as proactively contact the media to inform and educate the public, in
adherence with Minnesota information and data privacy laws; and
WHEREAS, from time to time there is a need to adopt policies in order to remain current with industry
standards and City goals;
NOW, BE IT RESOLOVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the City
of Shakopee Media Relations Policy is adopted as attached and effective Feb. 2, 2016.
nd
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 2 day of
February 2016.
___________________________________
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
____________________________________
City Clerk
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
MEDIA RELATIONS POLICY
INTRODUCTION
The City of Shakopee strives to provide timely, accurate and consistent information to the public.
Although the City has its own communication tools (newsletters, website, email, social media,
Government Access television, etc.), at times it is necessary and beneficial to work with the media to
inform and educate the public.
In the interest of fostering a positive and professional relationship with the media, the City of
Shakopee and its representatives will do the following:
Adhere to the Minnesota Public Information Act and the Minnesota Data Practices Act
Respond to media inquiries with accurate information in a timely manner
Proactively contact the media regarding matters that positively or negatively affect City
services and facilities and that impact the lives of Shakopee residents
Follow a formal procedure for releasing information pertaining to sensitive and/or
controversial matters.
PURPOSE
To outline the Citys expectations regarding the distribution of information to the media. This includes
when, who and how to relate with the media to ensure the City of Shakopee delivers timely, accurate
and consistent information to the public.
A. GENERAL PROCEDURES FOR MEDIA INQUIRIES
City of Shakopee employees may be contacted by the media for a variety of reasons. All employees are
authorized to provide the media information on routine matters, such as an upcoming event or basic
facts about a particular service (e.g., parking restrictions), provided the subject is that employees area
of expertise. Employees who do not feel comfortable answering the medias questions may refer the
inquiry to their department head or the Communications Coordinator. All media inquiries are to be
addressed within a reasonable time frame. If the information sought is not available within a
reasonable time frame, the media should be provided with an estimate of when the information will
be provided to them.
More in-depth inquires and requests for interviews are to be referred to the department head
responsible for the subject being focused upon. That manager may designate a spokesperson for the
inquiry, if appropriate. Upon receiving a request for information or an interview, the department head
is advised to ask the reporter the following prior to the interview:
Focus of the story
Deadline
General information being sought from the City
City of Shakopee Media Relations Policy Draft 2.2.16 Page 1 of 3
Department heads should notify the Communications Coordinator and City Administrator whenever a
City employee is approached by the media. The Communications Coordinator can also provide
assistance in responding to the media inquiry and preparing for the interview. If the department head
desires, the Communications Coordinator will sit in on the interview.
The Communications Coordinator is responsible for notifying the City Administrator and the City
Council when a news story regarding the City of Shakopee may appear on television or the
newspaper.
B. GENERAL PROCEDURES FOR CONTACTING THE MEDIA
All department heads have a responsibility in recognizing when an issue positive or negative may
need to be communicated to the public or when an issue might capture the attention of the news
media. Department heads are to alert the Communications Coordinator when such situations exist.
The Communications Coordinator will then advise how to proceed, consulting with the City
Administrator and any other appropriate personnel necessary.
C. PRESS RELEASES
Press releases shall be issued by the Communications Division with assistance and approval from the
department in charge of the issue. The City Administrator and the City Council shall be copied on all
press releases relating to issues not considered routine. Upon issuing a press release, the affected
department shall have a spokesperson available to handle calls from media wanting additional
information.
The Police Department and Fire Department may issue press releases in public safety situations. All
press releases are to include the departments logo; a contact name, phone number and email
address; and the date. The Communications Coordinator shall be copied on all press releases.
D. PRESS CONFERENCES
Press conferences may be necessary to address matters that have captured significant media
attention. The Communications Coordinator will advise when a press conference may be necessary.
The Communications Division will work with department heads to determine the location, time and
place of the conference and alert all appropriate media. The Coordinator also will recommend and
prepare the spokesperson for the press conference. No department shall hold a press conference
without the involvement of the Communication Division.
E. DATA PRACTICES AND PUBLIC INFORMATION LAWS
The release of information to the media and the general public shall be done in adherence to the
Minnesota Data Practices and Public Information acts. Employees who are unsure whether the
information being sought is covered by these laws are advised to consult their department head
and/or the Communications Coordinator. The City Administrator and, if necessary, the City Attorney
may be contacted if further clarification is needed.
F. PERSONAL POINTS OF VIEW
It is recognized that all employees have the right to their personal points of view regarding any issue.
However, personal points of view may conflict with the Citys official policy. Therefore, City employees
City of Shakopee Media Relations Policy Draft 2.2.16 Page 2 of 3
who write letters to the editor of any newspaper may not use official City stationary. If an employee or
City Council member chooses to identify himself or herself as a City employee in any personal letter or
email to the editor, he or she must include language which states the views set forth in the letter do
not represent the views of the City but rather are the employees personally held opinions. Similar
disclaimers must be given if an employee addresses a public meeting, participates in a radio talk show
or is interviewed for a radio or television program unless the employee is officially representing the
City. Employees who are representing the City in any of the above formats must identify themselves as
an official spokesperson for the City.
G. ELECTED OFFICIALS
Elected officials respond to media inquiries at their own discretion. Council members are asked to
notify the City Administrator and Communications Coordinator when they have contact with the
media. If requested, the Communications Coordinator can provide assistance in responding to the
media inquiry and preparing for the interview.
Council members should not comment on any open, active investigation (internal or criminal) but
rather refer all inquiries to the Communications Coordinator.
City of Shakopee Media Relations Policy Draft 2.2.16 Page 3 of 3