Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 11-13-2001 SpecialAgenda City of Plymouth Special City Council Meeting Tuesday, November 13, 2001 5:30 p.m. Employee Lunch Room, lower level Call to Order 2. Discuss Train Whistle Ordinance 3. Adjourn Agenda Number: CITY OF PLYMOUTH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO: Dwight D. Johnson, City Manager THROUGH: Craig C. Gerde C ief of Police FROM: Lt. Joel Franz SUBJECT: RAILROAD OSSING QUIET ZONES DATE: October 26, 2001 for November 13, 2001 1. ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council receive the Railroad Crossing Quiet Zone report. 2. BACKGROUND: The City Council has directed this study session based on citizen contacts requesting an extension of the ban hours up to and including a total ban of the use of train whistles. In 1993, the Plymouth City Council adopted Section 1165, which prohibited the use of train whistles between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. at gated crossings. Since the passing of this ordinance the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has proposed new rules cities would be required to meet to keep whistle ban restrictions. The proposed rule has already gone through the hearing process but no action has taken place on it because the FRA is without an Administrator at this time. Until a new Administrator is named and he/she has an opportunity to review the information nothing is expected to happen. It is expected to be at least next summer before the proposed rule is enacted. The proposed new rule requires jurisdictions wishing to keep or enact continuous quiet zones to have one of the following supplementary safety measures applied to each vehicle crossing: Temporary closure of a public highway -rail grade crossing. This would include closing the crossing during specific hours each day (corresponds with the quiet zone hours). Four -quadrant gate system. Arms must be less than two feet apart when activated. This will require extra sensors and delays on the backside to prevent cars from being trapped between the gates. Gates with medians or channelization devices. Opposing traffic lanes on both highway approaches to the crossing must be separated by either medians bounded by barrier curbs, or medians bounded by mountable curbs if equipped with channelization devices. Medians would be required to extend at least 100 feet from the gate. One way street with gates. This would require all traffic from the approaching side to be blocked. Would only require arms on one side of the track. Photo enforcement. Would require an automated means of gathering valid photographic or video evidence of violations and sufficient support and follow through by law enforcement and the judicial community. The new regulations will not take effect .for one year following the date of publication of the final rule. The proposed rule will not be finalized until the new Administrator is named and he has had an opportunity to review the entire process. A new Administrator is not expected to be named until next summer. Communities with existing quiet zones (continuous zones of at least a 1/2 mile distance) may continue with existing horn bans up to three years after the final rule is issued. This essentially gives us four and one-half years to prepare for the proposed rule; one-half year until the rule is finalized, a one-year moratorium, and three years to upgrade at -grade crossings to meet the standards set in the new regulation. A quiet zone may remain in effect if the requirements of the proposed new rule are complied with, and if the City notifies the FRA that they continue to conform to the requirements after four and one-half years from the original notification of implementation of the quiet zone, under the new rule. The FRA directed a study of wayside horns as an alternative to train whistles. This study conducted in Gering, Nebraska did not contain adequate data or analysis to permit a determination of whether a wayside horn could fully substitute for a train -borne audible warning. The FRA has concluded, "for the present it is not possible to have confidence that the wayside horn can fully compensate for the absence of the train horn at any individual crossing." S. Mark Lindsey, Chief Counsel of the FRA in his legal opinion to Congressman Lipinski dated July 17, 2000 stated in his conclusion "We believe that, until FRA has issued its final rule concerning the blowing of locomotive horns at grade crossings, States (except Florida) are free to regulate that subject matter, and local communities are free to enact whistle bans pursuant to such State laws. However, absent a State statute authorizing such a local ban, we believe such local laws are preempted." Regarding pedestrian crossings, the proposed rule states "it may be sufficient that the locomotive bell, rather than horn, be rung prior to entering a pedestrian or other non -highway crossing.. ...FRA therefore proposes to decline to exercise jurisdiction over the use of locomotive horns at such crossings." 3. DISCUSSION: The Council and Staff have received many complaints about train whistles. Many calls and a petition with seventeen signatures (attached) have requested a complete whistle ban. Several callers have requested that the city extend the whistle ban hours if we choose not to enact a complete ban. Some have requested that the ban be lengthened on weekend mornings so they could sleep longer, others have requested an earlier start so children would not be disturbed at bed time, and some have suggested that we have an afternoon ban for children's nap time. We have notified by letter, and because of the short notice, made follow-up phone calls to those individuals who signed the attached petition and also to those whose names we have that have contacted us in the past regarding the train whistle issue to advise them of this study session. The Canadian Pacific (CP) Rail has stated that 15 to 25 trains run on this track each day, and they have indicated that the number of trains traveling on the track could increase. The City Council has the authority to change the whistle ban hours or to enact a complete whistle ban. We would be required to structure at least one of the additional safety measures discussed above, into each crossing whether we made changes or maintained the current ban. The City of Minneapolis has enacted a complete whistle ban (see their attached ordinance). Of the listed crossing safety measures, only two are reasonable options for the City of Plymouth, the four -quadrant gate system or the gates with median or channelization. The four -quadrant gate system would require two additional gates being added to each crossing along with sensors and delays on the rear gates to prevent vehicles from being trapped between them. This is new technology so there are some questions about what it would take to make this work properly. It is believed that the upgrade to an existing crossing would cost between $50,000 and $100,000. If the existing gates are too old to make this system work the upgrade could cost $250,000. The CP Rail is not in favor of the four -quadrant option and recommends the median or channelization option. The CP Rail stated that if we choose the four -quadrant option they would require the City be responsible for the upkeep on the additional gates. They do not want to be liable for the additional maintenance. If a vehicle hit the rear crossing arm the City would have to replace the damaged one, which would mean we would have to have replacement arms in storage. The gates with the median or channelization option require medians being added to both sides of the track for 100 feet. This option would cost between $21,000 and $215,500 depending on the conditions of the current crossing. John Hagen has completed a detailed report on the estimated construction costs of gates with the median option for each crossing. See his attached report for details. The City of Vadnais Heights has chosen to use the median option and has already constructed medians at one crossing. They spent $68,000 to bring it up to the proposed standard. Temporary closure of the crossing or one way streets will not work in a suburban setting with limited crossings. The photo enforcement option is not permitted by Minnesota State Statute. The City has put $150,000 in the CIP for 2004 to cover at -grade crossings. 4. OPTIONS: The City Council can chose from these options: Adopt a complete whistle ban. Adjust the times of the whistle ban. Maintain the current whistle ban. The City will be required to meet the standards set in the new rule regardless of whether we maintain the current ban or decide on one of these other options. The current whistle ban has worked well. With lighter traffic during 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. hours and fewer hazards the risks have not been high. As the hours of the ban are extended the potential for having problems goes up. With the addition of more daylight hours we could expect to have whistles sounded during ban hours by engineers as perceived dangers would most likely increase. 5. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that if the City Council makes a change to the whistle ban hours that it is done uniformly and as continuous hours. The ban hours need to be easily understood by the railroad, the residents, and the City. If the City intends to keep a whistle ban, we need to budget for the required improvements and be prepared to have them installed within the four and one-half year window. DATE: November 5, 2001 TO: Joel Franz, Lieutent FROM: John M. HagentP. E., Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: WHISTLE BAN STUDY ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS OF GATES WITH MEDIAN OPTION BACKGROUND: The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has recently identified several supplementary safety measures that will effectively compensate for the lack of the use of a locomotive horn (or whistle). These safety measures include, but are not limited to the temporary closure of the highway -rail crossing, a four -quadrant gate system, gates with medians or channelizing devices, one-way street system with gates, photo enforcement, as well as other "alternative safety measures". The purpose of this memo is to summarize the costs associated with the construction of the gates with median option that will satisfy the requirements of the Whistle Ban Study. DESIGN COMPONENTS OF GATES WITH MEDIAN OPTION: According to the most recent FRA proposal, the median portion of the gates with median option needs to extend a minimum of 100 feet back from the gates. The median should consist of either a median bounded with a barrier curb (greater than 6 inches in height, but less than 9 inches), or a median bounded by a mountable curb if equipped with channelizing devices. Channelizing devices on medians may consist of delineator signs mounted at least 2.5 feet high and spaced every 7 to 14 feet. The minimum width of the median is essentially controlled by the width required to accommodate the required "Keep Right" signage placed on the ends of the medians. Given the 2 -foot wide "Keep Right" sign, and a minimum 1 -foot clearance on either side of the sign to the face of curb, the minimum median width is 4 feet. As shown in the attached sketch, the minimum width of a two-lane roadway (including a 4 -foot median) is 36 feet for an urban section, and 28 feet for a rural section. The minimum distance between the crossing gates is 44 feet for both the urban and rural sections of roadway. This distance is based on the roadway width plus 4 feet from the 6 - inch curb to the gate given an urban section, and the roadway width plus 8 feet from the outside traveled lane given a rural section. N:\pw\Engineering\GENERAL\MEMOSUohn\Whistle ban costs.doc SUBJECT: WHISTLE BAN STUDY ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS OF GATES WITH MEDIAN OPTION Page 2 PRELIMINARY COST OF RAISED CONCRETE MEDIAN: A preliminary estimate of the costs associated with the installation of a raised concrete median bounded by a barrier curb at an at -grade railroad crossing currently controlled by crossing gates is 21,000. A raised concrete median bounded by mountable curb equipped with channelizing signage would cost an estimated $22,000. These estimates represent the project costs and include construction costs, 10 percent for construction contingencies, and 20 percent for engineering, administration and legal fees. The estimates do not include costs associated with additional items that may be required at a given crossing, such as widening of the existing roadway, widening and/or improvements to the actual railroad crossing, as well as the potential relocation of the existing crossing gates. The estimated costs associated with these additional items will be presented in the following section that describes the issues at the specific at -grade crossings within the City. ISSUES AT SPECIFIC RAILROAD CROSSINGS: A total of four existing railroad - crossing locations were identified as potential candidates for the median with gate option. The existing crossing locations include the Canadian Pacific Railroad crossings with the following roadways: Vicksburg Lane, Pineview Lane, Larch Lane, and Zachary Lane Vicksburg Lane Crossing_ Vicksburg Lane in the vicinity of the railroad crossing is a 24 - foot wide, two-lane undivided roadway. The roadway has a rural section, and has 10 -foot gravel shoulders on each side of the roadway. The railroad crossing is constructed of wood timbers, and is approximately 45 feet wide. The distance between the crossing gates is approximately 46 feet. In order for the median to be added within the area between the existing crossing gates the roadway would need to be widened. The estimated costs associated with widening Vicksburg Lane in the vicinity of the railroad crossing is an additional $21,000. The total estimated costs associated with the gates with median option at the Vicksburg Lane crossing would therefore range from $42,000 to $43,000. It should be noted that there are two driveways that would be directly impacted as a result of the installation of the gates with median option. The first driveway (which provides access for several homes) is located approximately 50 feet north of the railroad crossing, and the second driveway (a field access) is located approximately 40 feet south of the railroad crossing. Access to these driveways would be restricted to a right-in/right-out condition. N:\pw\Engineering\GENERAL\MEMOSUohn\Whistle ban costs.doc SUBJECT: WHISTLE BAN STUDY ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS OF GATES WITH MEDIAN OPTION Page 3 Pineview Lane Crossing: Pineview Lane in the vicinity of the railroad crossing is a 40 - foot wide, two-lane undivided roadway. The roadway has an urban section, and has 8 -foot paved shoulders on each side of the roadway. The railroad crossing is constructed of concrete, and is approximately 40 feet wide. The distance between the crossing gates is approximately 49 feet. A median could be added to the existing roadway provided that the paved shoulders are eliminated. The total estimated costs associated with the gates with median option at the Pineview Lane crossing would range from $21,000 to $22,000. One driveway (located approximately 50 feet south of the crossing) would be directly impacted as a result of the installation of the gates with median option at the Pineview Lane railroad crossing. Access to this driveway would be restricted to a right-in/right-out condition. Larch Lane Crossing: Larch Lane in the vicinity of the railroad crossing is a 33 -foot wide, two-lane undivided roadway with an urban section. The railroad crossing is constructed of concrete, and is approximately 32 feet wide. The distance between the crossing gates is approximately 42 feet. In order for a median to be added to the existing roadway, the roadway and concrete railroad crossing would need to be widened, and the existing crossing gates would need to be relocated. The costs associated with the roadway widening are approximately $21,000. The costs associated with widening the concrete crossing would be approximately $26,000, of which the City could be expected to pick up approximately half of the cost, or approximately $13,000. The estimated cost of relocating the crossing gates would be $125,000 to $150,000 depending on the age of the existing crossing gate, and whether the crossing needs to be maintained during construction. If the crossing gates are less than five years old, or the crossing could be closed during construction, the costs associated with the relocation of the gates could be considerably less. The total estimated costs associated with the gates with median option at the Larch Lane crossing would therefore range from $180,000 to $206,000. One driveway (located approximately 80 feet south of the crossing) would be directly impacted as a result of the installation of the gates with median option at the Larch Lane railroad crossing. Access to this driveway would be restricted to a right-in/right-out condition. Zachary Lane Crossing: Zachary Lane in the vicinity of the railroad crossing is a 31 -foot wide, two-lane undivided roadway with an urban section. The railroad crossing is constructed of concrete, and is approximately 64 feet wide. The distance between the crossing gates is approximately 41 feet. In order for a median to be added to the existing roadway, the roadway and concrete crossing would need to be widened, the existing crossing gates would need to be relocated, and the existing bituminous trail on both sides N:\pw\Engineering\GENERAL\MEMOSUohn\Whistle ban costs.doc SUBJECT: WHISTLE BAN STUDY ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS OF GATES WITH MEDIAN OPTION Page 4 of the roadway would need to be relocated. The costs associated with the roadway widening are approximately $21,000. The costs associated with widening the concrete crossing would be approximately $45,000, of which the City could be expected to pick up approximately half of the cost, or approximately $22,500. The estimated cost of relocating the crossing gates would be $125,000 to $150,000 depending on the age of the existing crossing gate. Given the traffic volumes on Zachary Lane, it is assumed that the roadway and crossing would need to be kept open during construction. If the crossing gates are less than five years old the costs associated with the relocation of the gates could be considerably less. The total estimated costs associated with the gates with median option at the Zachary Lane crossing would therefore range from $189,500 to $215,500. Summary Depending on the railroad crossing, the costs associated with the gates with median option range from $21,000 for the Pineview Lane crossing, to $215,500 for the Zachary Lane crossing. If you have any questions, comments, or would like any additional information, please contact me at extension #5541. attachment cc: Daniel L. Faulkner, Director of Public Works Ronald S. Quanbeck, City Engineer Craig Gerdes, Police Chief N:\pw\Engineering\GENERAL\MEMOSUohn\Whistle ban costs.doc GacTr-S al-rbi tmsDr/kN O PTc p -J S N w.. y , .- I`. N, w.ad:a- y 1 iba-wee.n c oSS.• C 0. S UrL3RrJ SEC.Tko ^,3 vU ad' e..n I L 14 Q P52 We2 CroSS'.r.o, G 1,ec CZ S R A L. S E C- -C I o n Train Whistle Petition Please sign this petition if you would like a complete ban on the train whistle. Name (printed) Signed Address Date Telephone # V,-,Olj_fin v,d Ch 765 551—oyI j IC' ^ s"c a cjJr y 30 '`' A V S77 7 Is: 140 la(IJ 1 5 7-7-N 7 1o3 -557 -I O Y -L l S c% 5 N N- SSl - 0 7 7 Xj 7 S 7/ I .te r r _ 0) 7 76-5 --557 1-Noof -:9-4-d /qoe 5 tie lJ 3--S Train Whistle Petition Please sign this petition if you would like a complete ban on the train whistle. Municipal Code Corporation, Affiliated Municipality, 2001. Page 1 of 2 Minneapolis: Code of Ordinances Document -- 1 Hits Send its Feedback" train whistle Go! Options Help,' PREVIOUS HIT PREVIOUS PAGE NEXT PAGE NEXT HIT CODE OF ORDINANCES Title 15 OFFENSES --MISCELLANEOUS' CHAPTER 395. MINORS" 395.50. Business places not to allow violations. It is unlawful for any proprietor to permit a juvenile to remain his _establishment_during_t_he hours prohibited b_y this._c_hapter_unless_the_iuvenile _is.. accompanied by a_responsible adult or unless_ necessary for medical purposes or for an activity_officiall) recognized by a_sc_hool, church or eleemosynary organization. Wheneve_r_aiuvenile continues _to remair at such an establishment_ after the proprietor of such an establishment orders him to leave, the proprietc shall_ immediately_ notify the police departme.nt._of the violation. (Code 1960,_ As Amend., _§ 878._050) For navigation try the Table of Contents under the Options menu above. Use Reference links above move to Document Titles.) 395.50. Business places not to allow violations. It is unlawful for any proprietor to permit a juvenile to remain in his establishment during the hours prohibited by this chapter unless the juvenile is accompanied by a responsible adult or unless necessary for medical purposes or for an activity officially recognized by a school, church or eleemosynary organization. Whenever a juvenile continues to remain at such an establishment after the proprietor of such an establishment orders him to leave, the proprietor shall immediately notify the police department of the violation. (Code 1960, As Amend., § 878.050) 395.60. Other violations not authorized. This chapter shall not be construed as permitting the presence of a juvenile at any time and in any place where his presence is otherwise prohibited by law. Code 1960, As Amend., § 878.060) 395.70. Enforcement. Law enforcement officers may enforce this chapter by arrest or by the issuance of tags in a form approved by the judge of the juvenile court to any person violating the provisions of this chapter. (Code 1960, As Amend., § 878.070) CHAPTER 397. RAILROADS* Cross reference(s)--Trains blocking streets, § 427.230; trains obstructing parkway crossings, § PB 7- 10. State law reference(s)--Regulation of railroads, M.S. Chs. 218, 219. 397.10. Unnecessarily sounding whistle. No person shall sound or blow any whistle of any locomotive within the city limits, except as a warning of imminent and immediate danger to life or property. The sounding of any locomotive whistle shall be prima facie evidence that it was sounded by the engineer in charge of that locomotive. (Code 1960, As Amend., § 933.010) om_isapi.dll?advquery=train%20whistle&infobase=11490.nfo&record= { 307D } &softpage=ml 0/ 17/01 Municipal Code Corporation, Affiliated Municipality, 2001. Page 2 of 2 397.20. Crew required on switch engines. To promote the safety, welfare and convenience of the employees operating switch engines or trains in the city, and to protect and promote the public safety, welfare and convenience at places where railroads cross streets and avenues within the city, no person shall run or operate, or cause to be run or operated, on any railroad within the city any switch engine, fuel -electric switch engine, or other mechanically operated switch engine, unless said switch engine shall be manned with a crew of not less than one engineer, or operator, and one fireman, or helper. Each day that any such switch engine shall run in violation of the provisions of this section shall be deemed to be a separate offense. (Code 1960, As Amend., § 933.030) 397.30. Construction and maintenance of grade crossings. All railroad companies owning or operating railways within the limits of the city shall construct and maintain all crossings of their railway tracks and streets of the city at grade, according to the same standards and specifications as the streets which they cross when such streets are surfaced with permanent type paving. When such streets are not surfaced with permanent type paving the grade crossing area shall be maintained with a bituminous wearing surface of at least two (2) inches in thickness or with heavy paving material suitable for maintaining a smooth driving surface at a level with the upper surface of the rails of said track. Grade construction and maintenance shall include the full width or the streets to include sidewalk and boulevard space adjacent to and between such rails. Any railroad company which shall neglect or refuse to maintain in suitable condition such grade crossings shall be given written notice to comply with the provisions of this section. If, after ten (10) days of such notice said maintenance or repairs have not been effected, the city engineer will be directed to complete the necessary repairs and all costs incurred by the city for such repairs shall be assessed against the railway company responsible. (Code 1960, As Amend., § 933.050; Ord. of 6-28-74, § 1) 397.40. Switching devices prohibited in streets. No railroad company shall place or maintain any switch, frog or other switching device in connection with the railway tracks of any railroad in the city in any street. (Code 1960, As Amend., § 933.060) CHAPTER 399. DUTCH ELM DISEASE 399.10. Park and recreation board to administer. The park and recreation board, its officers, employees and agents, is hereby authorized and empowered to coordinate and perform all activities of the municipality under this chapter. (Code 1960, As Amend., § 944.010) 399.20. Nuisances declared. The following things are public nuisances whenever they may be found within the city: RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE I NEXT PAGE I NEXT HIT Municipal Code Corporation: Codes, Minutes, Custom Legal Publications om_isapi.dll?advquery=train%20whistle&infobase=11490.nfo&record={307DI&softpage= 10/17/01