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