05-14-2014 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Traffic loop detectors may be required to detect if a vehicle is stopped on the tracks. The advantage of this SSM is that no additional roadway work is usually needed for the gates to be installed. The disadvantage is that there is the potential to trap a vehicle, they are expensive to install, the City may assume maintenance of the loop detectors and the City may be responsible for the extra maintenance for the extra gates. If SSMs or Risk Index level is insufficient, Alternate Safety Measures (ASM) can be proposed to the FRA for individual crossings. These ASM can be non - engineering solutions, such as traffic enforcement, photo enforcement, or education programs. Other engineering solutions can be proposed if shown to be effective in improving safety. These may include different styles of medians or a new type of warning device. A community is required to provide documentation that an ASM is effective. This documentation may require video camera installation, review of police efforts to enforce crossing violations, or a record of public service announcements. The level of documentation is not well defined in the rules. The three most popular ASMs are: 1. Photo Enforcement of Traffic Violations — This is a system of cameras that monitor the railroad crossings and will issue traffic tickets to violators. In Minnesota, it is against state law to use photo enforcement for traffic violations. 2. Increased Traffic Enforcement — This is a program that targets traffic violations near railroad crossings. The Quiet Zone submittal would outline and document what the City has done to enforce traffic violations. 3. Partial Center Medians — This is where full length medians are not possible on both sides and a median is installed on one side. The FRA will compute a partial risk reduction, based on the crossing improvements. The FRA rules require communities to notify the FRA, the State Department of Transportation, and the railroad that they are interested in creating a quiet zone and provide a process for these interested parties to comment. The process has some built in time periods and can take 4 to 6 months to implement. If signal work is required, a year or more is a normal time frame to implement a quiet zone. If SSMs are installed according to the rules at all crossings, the community will receive an automatic approval for a quiet zone. If ASMs or other exceptions are needed, FRA review and approval will be needed, The rules are silent on the liability to either the railroad or communities who enact quiet zones. In the record of decision, the FRA discusses railroad and community liability. In the record of decision (page 66), the FRA says "As for the public authority that creates a quiet zone in accordance with this part, FRA expects that courts will apply the standard of care set by this rule, inasmuch as any quiet zone established in accordance with this part will have been established in accordance with federal law and FRA's intention to preempt State laws expressly stated." This rule, in effect, establishes the standard of care for the creating of quiet zones and the sounding of train horns, providing reassurance both to railroads and communities that no plaintiff will prevail on the basis that an audible warning has been withheld. Further, this rule making does nothing to undermine the sovereign immunity of State and local governments, where they have asserted it. The rules encourage joint establishment of quiet zones where there are multiple roadway jurisdictions. Generally, one government agency will take the lead and coordinate the process Railroad Quiet Zone Report City of Little Canada 10 LITTC 126672 Page 5