HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem B: RR Crossing Quiet ZonesEUGENE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Work Session: Railroad Crossing Quiet Zones
Meeting Date: July 20, 2005 Agenda Item Number: B
Department: Public Works Staff Contact: Tom Larsen
www. eugette-or, gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-4959
ISSUE STATEMENT
The council requested a work session to discuss new federal rules effective June 24, 2005, establishing a
process to obtain a "quiet zone" designation from the Federal Railroad Administration.
BACKGROUND
The sounding of train whistles or horns is a long-established safety and warning practice. They are of
necessity loud and attention-getting. For many years, the City has received complaints from residents
who live near the tracks and are disturbed by the noise. In the late 1980s, the City attempted to obtain a
"whistle free" zone under the then-current State rules. Southern Pacific was the principal operator of
trains at that time and was strongly opposed to the "whistle free" zone. The City was successful in
obtaining an Oregon Public Utility Commission Order to establish a "whistle free" zone in August 1990,
conditioned on the City making a number of safety improvements to the crossings in the zone. Southern
Pacific appealed in Marion County Circuit Court. On appeal, the PUC Order was rescinded in
September 1991. In large part the appeal was based on a July 1990 Federal Railroad Administration
study showing a 195% increase in nighttime crossing crashes in Florida when whistles were silenced
The current operator, Union Pacific, has stated support for the status quo and current use of train horns.
The majority of citizen complaints come from the downtown and Whiteaker areas. There is no
documentation that the sounding of train horns has gotten louder or become more frequent. While horns
are sounded at other crossings in town, this discussion will focus on the stretch of railroad track between
Van Buren Street on the west to Hilyard Street on the east. See Attachment A for a vicinity map.
The "quiet zone" rule does not restrict the railroad from using train horns as a warning or safety device
when people or animals are crossing or walking along the tracks or when used for communication
between engineers and train crews. The rules specify that a "quiet zone" must be at least lA mile long,
which means the City cannot apply for "quiet zone" designation for just one downtown crossing.
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) oversees the administration of the federal rules pertaining to
"quiet zones." The FRA' s role is that of administrator, ensuring that jurisdictions comply fully with the
rules in the process of establishing a "quiet zone." The FRA's primary goal is the protection of public
safety at rail crossings. Because the process of obtaining a "quiet zone" under the new rules would
require modifications to existing grade crossings, the Oregon Department of Transportation Rail
Division must approve the design and issue the implementing order. The affected railroad, Union
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050720\S050720B.doc
Pacific, must also be involved in the design and approval process as it owns and maintains all devices
installed in the railroad right-of-way.
The new rule establishes supplemental safety measures (SSMs) required to obtain a "quiet zone." One
of the principal goals of SSMs is to prevent vehicles from weaving through the existing crossing gates.
There are several ways to accomplish this. Quad gates completely close the crossing by barring the
vehicle from ducking around the gate to the left. Various forms of channelizing islands or medians also
can be used to protect the crossing from unauthorized entry. Attachment B provides a schematic view of
these two alternatives. Other options include changing the street to a one-way street with two gates to
stop driving around a single gate or completely closing the railroad crossing to all other traffic. Under
the new rule there is a wide variety of alternatives, each with a range of construction, maintenance,
business and community costs (see attachments C and D).
The FRA rule establishes a minimum time frame of six months to complete the approval process of
establishing a "quiet zone." Approval to make modifications to the crossing must be obtained from the
ODOT Rail Division. ODOT's six- to eight-month approval process would not start until after the first
two months of the FRA process but may overlap the final four months of it. The design and
construction processes would add to the total time to finally implement a "quiet zone." Community
decisions as to the nature of the crossing modifications and a funding mechanism should proceed an
initial application for the zone.
In Oregon, Pendleton is the only city with an existing "quiet zone," which was obtained under previous
rules. Hood River is in the process of applying for "quiet zone" designation.
The new federal rule allows the creation of a "quiet zone" under three different alternatives. The first
alternative is if the local agency installs approved SSMs at all crossings in the zone. This is the most
expensive alternative but ensures a truly "quiet zone" and maximizes public safety. A zone created in
this manner will need recertification on an estimated five-year schedule. There is an option to attempt to
establish a "quiet zone" by only installing sufficient SSMs to bring the average risk index for the zone
below the current risk index with horns. This zone would require recertification on a two- to three-year
cycle. The third alternative is to propose a series of SSMs that would lower the risk index below an
established national risk level. The acceptable national risk level is higher than our current risk level and
would result in a decrease in public safety. The national index is continually updated and, if a "quiet
zone" were established under these conditions, it must be re-evaluated every year. If the national index
falls, the City would be required to install new SSMs to retain a "quiet zone" designation.
RELATED CITY POLICIES
Train horns impact both public safety and community livability policies. However, there are no specific
policies related to the sounding of train horns.
FINANCIAL, SAFETY AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
There are no City funds specifically earmarked for the construction or maintenance of the SSMs
required under the new rule to obtain a "quiet zone." Railroads, ODOT and FRA do not participate in
the cost of installing SSMs to implement a local "quiet zone." The installation costs of all SSMs would
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050720\S050720B.doc
be borne by the City. The City would need to enter into a maintenance agreement with the railroad for
any new devices installed at the crossings.
The cost to implement a "quiet zone" is dependant on the type and extent of SSMs installed.
Attachment C covers the potential range of constructions costs. The lowest cost alternative is to install
medians at six of the crossings for an estimated $115,000. While this alternative has the lowest
construction cost, the impact to businesses within 100 feet of the crossing will be high. All commercial
driveways within 100 feet of the crossing must be closed. For some businesses this could represent all
their street access. As no detailed design has been done, the cost to modify or buy business properties is
not included. For alternatives with quad gates, the minimum construction estimate is over $500,000.
Any quad gate installation may require an upgrade to the railroad detection and crossing arm pre-
emption system, estimated to cost about $2,000,000. Any quad gate installation will require the City to
enter into a maintenance agreement with the railroad. No annual maintenance cost estimate is available.
All of the existing crossings between Van Buren Street and Hilyard Street are already equipped with
dual gates and flashing lights. The gates, in conjunction with use of train horns, provide the current
standard of protection for motorists and pedestrians crossing the tracks. A "quiet zone" that met only
the reduction of the risk index below the national level would increase the risk to citizens. Installation
of SSMs at all crossing would increase crossing safety. Quad gates are the most expensive form of
SSM. While median islands have a lower construction cost, the definition of a SSM median requires the
closure of any commercial driveway within 100 feet of a railroad crossing and any street within 60 feet.
For example, a median island at Washington would require the closing of 3rd Avenue, a median island
at High Street would require the closing of 5th Avenue, and a median island at 8th and Hilyard would
require the closing of either 8th Avenue or Hilyard Street. For this reason, the attached range of
alternatives does not include medians at any of these three locations. Attachment E contains an
overview of each the crossings and the approximate 100 foot zone where commercial driveways would
be prohibited. At Monroe, Madison, and Lincoln streets the prohibition of commercial driveways could
effectively close some adjoining businesses. The construction estimates in Attachment C do not account
for loss of access or purchase of businesses.
CO[INCIL OPTIONS
Staff has identified three options for the council to consider relative to the new federal rules for railroad
crossing "quiet zones":
1. The council can accept the current level of safety, mobility and livability and direct staff to not
pursue a "quiet zone."
2. The council can take a measured approach to the "quiet zone" issue and direct staff to monitor other
jurisdictions going through the "quiet zone" process and wait to take action until there is an
established cost and procedure history.
3. The council can make establishment of a "quiet zone" a council priority, identify funding sources for
impact analyses and community outreach, and direct staff to develop detailed cost estimates and
appropriate funding mechanisms to construct and maintain enhanced SSMs at downtown crossings.
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050720\S050720B.doc
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends Option 2. The "quiet zone" rule is new and no jurisdiction has gone
through the process under the new rule so there is no implementation history. Significant funding is
required to implement the SSMs necessary to obtain "quiet zone" designation, and additional study is
required to identify funding options should the council wish to proceed with implementation.
Additional time also would allow staff to further study impacts on local businesses and the area
transportation system.
In any event, the manager recommends that any "quiet zone" application be pursued under the "risk
index with horns" criteria, not the "national risk index," to ensure the current level of protection of
public safety is maintained.
SUGGESTED MOTION
No motion is suggested.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Map of a proposed Quiet Zone
B. Detail of Quad Gate installation and median installation
C. Table with seven possible alternatives
D. Discussion of alternative scenarios
E. Details of specific crossings in the Quiet Zone
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Tom Larsen
Telephone: 682-4959
Staff E-Mail: tom.c.larsen~ci.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050720\S050720B.doc
ATTACHMENT A
OEIVAIlH
ii
!
0
'-- !i!!!!!iiiiii::N-IOONF1
O~ NOIgNIHSV~
0
('~ NOSEI3:I_-13r'
0 ~ i~ NO$IOVIAJ
~ ~JO~ 'N
ATTACHMENT B
Median I~arrier
= new median at
= exietino
gatee
No commercial driveways
within median length
Not drawn to ecale J~ July 11, 2005
ATTACHMENT C
SEVEN POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES
RR STREET
)SSlNG
Supplemental ;afety Measures Meet i~ ational Meet dsk
at all x'ings R;ok ;,, J~^ ;,,d .... ! I I .....
Altemative A Altemative B Altema live C Alternative D AltematJve E Altematiw F Alternative G
Werage Close
Quad Gates Medians Traffic X'ing ? Protect ac ess Closing driveways
where possible ~/olume
Monroe $350,000 $15,000 * 2300 Possible Close $10,00( Median * $15,000 Medlar $15,000 Median * $1 000
Madison $350,000 $20,000 * 2300 Possible Median * $20,000 Median * $2 000
~rson $400,000 $20,000 * 3250 Median * $2 000
Washington $400,000 $400,000 ~ 4800
Lawrence $450,000 $20,000 2000 Possible Median $20,000 Medlar $20,000 Median $2 ),000
Linceln $500,000 $20,000 * 2100 Possible Median * $20,000
Pead $500,000 $20,000 * 3500 Median * $2 ),000
High $500,000 $400,000 ~ 4800 Quad ~ ate $500,000 Quad Gate $500,00~ Quad gate $500,000
8th and Hilyard $500,000 $500,000 ~ 50 Possible ~
STIMATED
TRUCTION $4,300,000 $1,435,000 $520,000 $510,00( $95,000 $555,000 $11 ,000
COST
· m~ ior driveway impacts
~ ;dian requires closure of intE rsecting street
~ As part of redevelopmentJund .~rcrossing project
:~uad gate installation may ;quire RR detection upgra le costing +/- $2,000,000
All { uad gate installations will b( subject to negotiated mai~ ~tenance agreement with Union Pacific TCL 6/29 .)005
ATTACHMENT D
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS
Alternative A Quad Gates All crossings
Installing quad gates at all ten crossing will meet the SSM at all crossing requirement but
is expensive. The FRA calculator estimates the cost to add quad gates as $100,000-
$125,000 per crossing. Union Pacific estimates the cost of up-grading the gates at
$400,000 each. ODOT rail estimates a generic dual gate to quad gate up-grade at
$250,000-$500,000, but points out the close spacing of Eugene's crossings could force
up-grades to the overall detection/prediction system "costing several millions." To
provide a Quiet Zone with quad gate upgrades at all ten crossings would cost over
$1,000,000 using the FRA estimate and $4-5 million using the UP or ODOT estimate.
Both ODOT and UP say an upgrade to the detection system may be needed and could
cost up to $2,000,000. These are construction costs and do not include the annual
maintenance agreement with the UP. This alternative increases public safety by reducing
the risk index below the "index with horns."
Alternative B Channelizing Islands except where streets must be closed
Installing median islands is estimated to cost $15,000 -20,000 per crossing in the FRA
calculator. Theoretically medians at each crossing could be done for about $200,000.
There are very restrictive rules about medians requiring closure of all commercial
driveways within 100 feet of the crossing gate. Medians will have major impacts to the
existing businesses. At Jefferson Street the grain elevator driveway would be closed. On
Pearl Street the Steelhead parking lot would be closed. At Monroe, Madison and Lincoln
businesses are likely to close from lack of access or have major parking and driveway
modifications. Some accesses near every crossing will be impacted. This alternative will
increase public safety by reducing the risk index below the "index with horns."
Alternatives C, D and E Mixed SSMs meeting the national risk index
The highest risk crossing in this area is High Street. A package of $SMs consisting of
quad gates at High street and a number of median installations can lower the risk index
below the National Index. For a lower construction cost installation of 5 medians can
meet the national risk index criteria. The cost to local business from loss of access will
be much higher. If implemented this zone would be subject to annual review. These
alternatives result in an increased risk index above existing conditions.
Alternatives F Mixed SSMs meeting the risk index with horns
Medians at Van Buren, Monroe and Lincoln Streets with quad gates at High Street meet
the risk index with horns standard for a Quiet Zone. While the cost of RR crossing
improvements could be about half a million dollars, the detection upgrade could add
$2,000,000 to the cost.
Alternative G Medians as SSM, meeting the risk index with horns
Most combinations of six out of the seven crossing where median installation would not
force a street closure will meet the risk index with horns criteria. While the construction
cost is low, the cost to local businesses from loss of access and driveway modification
will be high. No detailed plans or estimate of the additional cost has been prepared.
Van Buren RR Xing ATTACHMI~NT 1~
Jun 08, 2005
N
51 0 51 102 Feet
c~,tio~: this ~,r~ i,~ based W ~(~~ E
on imprecise sourc(} data,
Text Utreet Names
S
MONROE ST. RR XING
Jun 05, 2005
56 0 56 112 Feet
../IL
Cak~t ors: this map is based ~.,,/
on imprecise source data,
,'; ~,.¢' R a i J ro a d
'~t Street Narnex ' ' ' ~ "'
Taxiots
MADISON RR XING
Jun 08, 2005
N
56 0 56 112 Feet //~
W
Cautior~: this map is based
on inlr'''p/'' q~-~ source data
:::~.~b?:,~ ! ""-, r-~ ....... ~.'j-, and for ~/
Railroad
Taxlots '$
JEFFERSON ST. RR XING
Jun 08, 2005
N
56 0 56 112 Feet ~
c~,~tior~: this ~'~ar~ ,,~ bas-~d W ~~~ E
Tax~ots $
WASHINGTON ST. RR XING
Jun 08, 2005
N
56 0 56 112 Feet
../IL
W--~ ~E
Caution: this map is based
, ,~..,~;~,~.>.5 source data,
¢55:},,,,? Railroad ....... ¢ ...... .
faxlots $
LAWRENCE ST RR XING
Jun 08, 2005
N
56 0 56 112 Feet
Caution: [his map is based W~~~ E
on imprecise source data,
Taxlots S
LINCOLN ST. RR XING
Jun 08, 2005
N
56 0 56 112 Feet
.IlL
Caution: this map is based W
E
on imprecise source data,
Railroad
Taxlots $
Pearl, RRXing
Jun 08, 2005
N
74 0 74 148 Feet
../aL.
C~u,~on. this map is based
on imprecise source data, \Il
· ~' (~, chan(zle, and for
Street Names tz~t~ ~,:~-:~
Address $
High,RRXing
Jun 08, 2005
N
74 0 74 148 Feet
JIt.
Caution: this map is based W "~~~'
E
on imprecise, source data, \Il
, ~ Railroad .
~t Street Names ~ ~:} i' ':~ ' ~:} ~ ~ r(} [~ (:: e (~) fl ~
Address S
Hilyard, RRXing
Jun 08, 2005
N
74 0 74 148 Feet //~
Caution this map is based W '~~~
E
on imprecise source data,
!q lh'cqr'( ~ (~tr~O(~ aR(~ ~0~' ~/
Street Names '~ ~ r' ~:~ rr:~ ~!{, -~ ~ m,"~{. 0 ['I~ ~'
Address S