Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 08/25/2009 - DOWNTOWN RAILROAD QUIET ZONE STUDY DATE: August 25, 2009 STAFF: Matt Wempe WORK SESSION ITEM Anne Aspen, Downtown Development Authority FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL Pre-taped staff presentation: available at fcgov.com/c/erk/agendas.php SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone Study. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City and Downtown Development Authority(DDA)are cooperatively working on a Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone Study (Phase I). This includes all Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific railroad crossings located within the DDA boundaries. The Study results include a number of options for each crossing,associated costs,and a checklist of necessary improvements. Selection of the preferred crossing options will include extensive public input from downtown property and business owners, and residents as well as other community stakeholders. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. What feedback would City Council like to share with staff and the DDA regarding the Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone Study? 2. Is there additional information that City Council would like to see staff and the DDA provide as part of the Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone Study? BACKGROUND The Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone Study is one of the recommendations from the Railroad Issues Study Group report(January 2008). The DDA provided$100,000 in funding for the Phase I Study and is the project manager for the study. City staff from Transportation Planning and Engineering are assisting the DDA with this project. The Phase II Study will look at the 10 railroad crossings between Mulberry and Trilby adjacent to the Mason Corridor BRT. Transportation Planning has submitted a BFO offer to fund the Phase II Study as part of the 2010-11 budget cycle. Felsburg, Holt, and Ullevig (FHU) was selected by the DDA to develop a conceptual plan and provide cost estimates for the Phase I Study area. The DDA Board has authorized FHU to proceed with finalizing the conceptual plan, including the process of selection of a preferred option for each crossing. August 25, 2009 Page 2 Selection of the preferred crossing options will include extensive public input from downtown property and business owners,and residents as well as other community stakeholders. Based on the preferred options, FHU will then develop preliminary and final engineering plans. The City Council and DDA Board will select the preferred options after the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the railroads have initially reviewed the proposed crossing options to ensure they would.meet Quiet Zone standards. The City and railroads will approve the engineering plans prior to any construction. This Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone process will include a public outreach process involving property/business owners and residents. The public outreach process is currently underdevelopment and expected to begin in September 2009. This process will be coordinated with other public outreach and involvement activities within the project area such as the Mason Corridor project and the Linden and Jefferson Street projects in the River District area. Federal Quiet Zone Regulations The detrimental impact of train noise is an increasing concern expressed by downtown residents and businesses. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) adopted first-time safety regulations in 2005 regarding the specific requirements for sounding a train horn at a crossing. Trains are now required to "blast"their horns in a two long, one short, and one long sequence when approaching a crossing. This must begin as a train approaches a crossing and continue until the train has physically entered and taken control of the crossing area. In areas with a short distance between crossings,such as Colorado State University and Old Town,this can result in prolonged train horns. In an attempt to minimize the negative impacts of this rule, the FRA set out the regulatory procedures and technical requirements necessary to implement a quiet zone. A Quiet Zone is formally defined as a railroad line with one or more consecutive public crossings where train horns are restricted. However, the engineer will still blow the horn if a hazard is perceived. The Study is based on the FRA requirements to establish a quiet zone. Communities can establish quiet zones to improve the quality of life by implementing physical improvements(i.e.,curbing,crossing gates, etc.) or non-engineering alternative safety measures (i.e., photo enforcement). Conceptual Plan Summary A project website is under development. The draft conceptual plan and attachments will be posted on the website for review. The draft conceptual plan includes several alternatives for each railroad crossing and associated costs. This also includes basic improvements to provide constant warning circuitry required by the FRA. The DDA Board approved a number of criteria to evaluate the ability of each railroad crossing alternative to contribute to the overall effort of establishing a Quiet Zone. These include noise reduction, improved safety, conformance with local plans and FRA rules, physical, aesthetic, business, and traffic impacts, and cost. The project team will meet with the BNSF and UPRR this fall to complete an in-field review of the conceptual crossing options. This review is intended to obtain the railroad's response to the conceptual crossing options and determine any additional improvements that may be necessary to implement a Quiet Zone.. August 25, 2009 Page 3 City and DDA staff are working to identify federal and state grant funding opportunities. Transportation Planning has submitted a BFO offer to fund the Phase I improvements,as well as the Phase II Quiet Zone Study. The DDA may also be willing to provide joint funding. Next Steps The project team will meet with the BNSF and UPRR this fall to complete an in-field review of the conceptual crossing options. A public outreach process is currently under development and expected to begin in September 2009. Public input will be instrumental to the selection of a preferred option for each crossing. The completed study, including the conceptual plan and preferred options for each crossing, cost estimates, and engineering plans, will be available by Spring 2010. City staff is actively pursuing grant funding for the Phase I implementation from various local, state, and federal sources. 1 Staff will continue to update the City Council throughout this project. A project website is under development. A web link will be forwarded to the City Council as soon as the AIS is available. ATTACHMENTS 1. Map of Project Area 2. PowerPoint presentation 3. Transportation Board comments from meeting August 19, 2009 4. Downtown Development Authority Board comments Attachment l Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone Study (Phase I; lion - c C)AW _ 1 T �. • �� 11 �I ,ice 4 r - r ':<J ♦♦ - ti 1,rOv _IV _ 5 r 1 .�,• A - +� 10 t Jr T� .Q lam+ i i_ F I •�" ;'! - � R Study Area O At-Grade BNSF T+r few 5 4, " Crossings At-Grade UPRR in t Ts Crossings i.\ A Created August 2009 (mhw) ATTACHMENT 2 D Jill Downtown Development Authority City of Fort Collins City Council Worksession Presentation August 25 , 2009 What feedback would City Council like to share with staff and the DDA regarding the Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone Study? Is there additional information that City Council would like to see staff and the DDA provide as part of the Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone Study? url.�vrc 1 ���IrlY E! ) !!1Jer ■ Increase in train noise due to 2005 Federal Railroad Administration rule Impacts larger area of community 96dbv . 110db ■ Train noise is incompatible with DDA' s downtown open - air amphitheater project Train noise can have a negative impact on downtown redevelopment , particularly the Mason Corridor HUMMI 3 HOLT • PUTIAVIO r� �lilr � �l �J !si r � � r] � Jr �Jill Araf ! +6: two Study Aru O AKrsEe BNSe Crvsrigs 4 • At Grade UPRR HOLT L. Crossings PULLEVIG 2 - J • . • C L !al r Tl � � ■ Why Must Trains Sound their Horns? • Congress Required By Law (49 U . S . C . 20153 ) • The Federal Railroad Administration ( FRA) has identified specific safety benefits . ■ Final Rule • Provides exceptions where risk is minimized through installation of approved safety measures • Enables communities to establish quiet zones by mitigating the silencing of horns • Requires horns to be sounded at public crossings FUMMI 5 [COLT • Tl[ITiVIQ r� �lljrJ �l ) Ii lIi r / Dn ■ What is a Quiet Zone ? • A section of a rail line that contains one or more consecutive public crossings at which locomotive horns are not routinely sounded . ■ Public Authority Designation • Implement approved Supplementary Safety Measures (SSMs) at each public crossing • Does not require application to and approval by FRA FELSBUM 6 HOLT a TJJL6VCG 3 ■ Public Authority Application • Where approved SSMs cannot be implemented • Requires application to and approval by FRA • Proposed Quiet Zone may include only Alternative Safety Measures (ASMs) or a combination of ASMs and SSMs • Requires calculation of Quiet Zone Risk Index (QZRI ) • < Nationwide Significant Risk Index ( NSRI ) • < Risk Index with Horns (RIWH ) FaMMI 7 [COLT • Tl[ITiVIQ �) i� 1 Jr / JTI � r, � �J ' !1Jr �ltll � l�jr ■ Minimum Length — '/2 mile along the Railroad right of way/track ■ All crossings must have active grade crossing warning devices • Crossing gate arms • Flashing lights R R • Bells • Constant warning circuitry • Power out indicators No TRAIN HORN ■ Advance warning signs for Quiet Zone must be installed FELSBUM 8 HOLT a TJJL6VTG 4 rry r ryire . Permanent Closure One-Way Street with Full Width Gates -06 mporary Clos e jik ayside -Quadrant Gates rn _ y �s� _ Raised Medians( Channelization with Gates 9 [COLT 6 iITI.fiY�G r�lr � rri �rriv � �rr r Il �l � �� !Ire r� Jl\Jl006 ■ Modified Supplementary Safety Measures • Not fully compliant with all of the SSM requirements (i . e . , raised median that is not of sufficient length ) ■ Engineering ASMs • Engineering Improvements • Address underlying geometric conditions that are the source of increased risk at the crossing ■ Non - Engineering Alternative Safety Measures (ASMs ) • Programmed enforcement • Public education and awareness • Photo/ Video enforcement EBLAW10 KOLT 9& uusvIc 5 r� � �, � rnrn � rir riDrj Crossings that can be treated with approved SSMs UPRR- Lincoln UPRR- Linden f s' BNSF - Linden d BNSF - College BNSF - Cherry Raised Medians/ Channelization with Gates Fa.M sec: 11 HOLT s iITI.fiYG Dr� � e pr �,' r rig rjDirj � ■ Crossings that can be treated with approved SSMs (where possible ) or ASMs BNSF- Maple BNSF- Magnolia BNSF- Laporte BNSF - Mulberry BNSF- Mountain BNSF- Myrtle ( outside DDA) BNSF-Oak BNSF- Laurel BNSF- Olive ( outside DDA) EIRABW 12 KOLT 9& PULLNVIG 6 ■ Conduct a Diagnostic Review • Includes Railroad , FRA, State ( PUC ) & Local Agency • Required for Quiet Zones with private or pedestrian crossings , but should be held for all Quiet Zones ■ Determine the appropriate Quiet Zone treatments for each grade crossing ■ Determine Mason corridor mid - block treatments ■ Verify Basic Active Warning & Circuitry Upgrades RIMMI 13 [COLT • T1IITiVIQ Jr J�J �sir ■ Refine Concept Drawings and Cost Estimates ■ Request Cost Estimate from Railroad (s ) for Railroad Work Items (trackwork , signals , circuitry) ■ Determine Agreement(s ) with Railroad (s ) ■ Prepare Draft Public Utilities Commission ( PUC ) application (s ) for improvements ■ Proceed with Final Design of Improvements FELSBUM 14 HOLT a TJJL6VTG 7 -rirrJ � Jir � � � r J�J �sr r � J Phase I Implementation Funding - ongoing City and DDA staff pursue implementation funding from federal , state , and local sources City staff is preparing ARRA funding application for September 2009 Consecutive Events — Complete by Spring 2010 Scheduling and Completion of Diagnostic Reviews Determination of Treatments Refine Concept Drawings and Cost Estimates Fa.M sec: 15 HOLT s iITI.fiYG Tiffi firs r Follow up Events — Complete by Summer/ Fall 2010 Request Cost Estimate from Railroad ( s ) for Railroad Work Items Determine Agreement( s ) with Railroad (s ) Prepare Draft Public Utilities Commission ( PUC ) applications for improvements Proceed with Final Design of Improvements EELSMUG 16 HOT r & M MTC; 8 �� !! rJJT1J rJ >~ �� IJrJ !JTiJ ' Jl What feedback would City Council like to share with staff and the DDA regarding the Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone Study? Is there additional information that City Council would like to see staff and the DDA provide as part of the Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone Study? HUMMI 17 HOLT • PUTIAVIO r � Jr �Jill r� r � �J r„ i Study Aru O MGnEe BNSf Crvsrigs lO • At Grade O UPRR HOLT i. Crossings MULLEVIG 9 � 1 TRANSPORTATION BOARD If Page 2 August 19, 2009 J ATTACHMENT 3 Minutes - DRAFT I 6. BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE—Bill Jenkins, adjunct member The Committee will review the recommended budget when it is re I�ttf6'S"�nd comments through the Transportation Board. Bike Fort Collins submitted ar c i is unusual, but allowed. The Bike Plan ins that are suggested to be reviewed/revised. M o the Coop sends people out to do community education on safe biking. 7./DISCUSSION ITEMS a. Downtown Railroad Quiet Zone—Matt Wempe Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)Administrative Rule states that trains must sound their horns in a specific sequence at a decibel level of 110. There is a drive to implement Do Railroad Quiet Zone regulations because of high density development in the DDA bounda*the potential development of a performing arts amphitheater that would be disturbed by*ainqoise. A uiet zone is a section of rail line with one or more consecutive p li c quiet at which locomotive horns are not routinely sounded. Minimum length '/z miles ovin-g the railroad right-of-way. Supplementary safety measures(SSMs)are already approvedbX the FRA, including signage, curbing, raised medians full-width gates, temporary or permanent tes,wayside horns. Alternative safety measures(ASMs)can include rai enedians at are not of sufficient length, bollards, programmed enforcement, photo/video e orcement, pub�ltVeducation and awareness. These measures require review and approval by th UPRR Lincoln, UPRR Linden, BNSF Lind` BNSF Co ge, BNSF Cherry railroad crossings could implement approved supplementary safety as res. h se measures would not require an application or approval of the FRA Other rai oad crossings in the study area would require a combination of SSMs and ASM -an pplicati p and approval of the FRA. Although this project is in th DA oun a the City Council would approve the preferred crossing options as the govemingIiody. Miller: What is the fundi- ource Wempe: The study is paid by the ) A. Construction would be grant funding. Robert: Lovelanid<h s a projec oing forward. Is there a benefit of working on this with them? Wempe: The lt dabarea is specific to each town. There could be larger issues where it might be benefic" I Bracke oveland comes up with a unique design solution we could work with them to apply it hem of How do you transition to the less frequent crossings that will be involved in the Corridor pro t? Wempe: We would look for additional funding to do that study. VanTatenhove: There is a big question mark with regard to Mason Street. Is that because of the parallel traffic running along a train with no barrier and no horn? Wempe: Typically,the PUC views Mason as one long crossing because people can cross anywhere along the line. Bracke: The trains only sound their horns when they are at an intersection where cars are crossing the tracks, not where they run parallel along the tracks. VanTatenhove: Has the railroad used parallel traffic as a precedent to disallow quiet zones?Could we clear Mason before a train comes through? Bracke: Mason is a critical street in the downtown area and we want to leave traffic flow open. TRANSPORTATION BOARD August 19, 2009 Page 3 Minutes - DRAFT McCauley: Have options other than intersection crossing been considered? Wempe: We're waiting to see what would be required. Lots of options are being considered. Crum: I live close to a couple of the crossings. The wayside horn'option shouldn't be ruled out too quickly, as each engineer has a different way of implementing the requirements. Some lay on the horn the full length of the block. Directional noise is very effective. The Mountain Vista Subarea will be affected by train noise. Thomas: Eventually the railroad will need to agree to a quiet zone. Why would they want to agree? Wempe: There is a safety component that will bring the railroad to the bargaining table. The intersection safety will improve, which will bring them to the table. Miller: Has anyone done it and are there reports showing results? Wempe: Most of the FRA data is based on areas that have quiet zones. Bracke: This study came out of an earlier study that was done by Mike Herzig an ark Radtke. VanTatenhove: Are we truly asking for greater safety for the public or greater con :'ence? Bracke: Both. b. Budget Update—Mark Jackson 2009 adjustments were due to significant decreases in revenue. Recommended budget is not released yet. $4.7 million in cuts in 2009 for Transportation $1 million in cuts for 2009 in Planning&Development $2.7 additional taken from Pavement Management($1 —re aced 22—27%thi ear); $750k in purchase orders were closed; $500k in additional dq. ent cu BLT& City Manager are wrapping up their recotn ended budge tivh''ich w' go to Council early in September. It will be shared with upper manageme _a aff nexf wee There will be a large-scale reorganization in PDT. La yo s will occur. formation will be shared with you at the September meeting. I will ask Je= Feick, PDirecto nd either Mike Freeman(CFO) or Chuck Seest, Finance Director to come. Key dates: ■ September 2, 6:30—8pm 1 co enter anyon est Room. City Manager review of recommended budget for the pu 'c and Boards ommissions. Comments due to CMO by September 29. ■ Public Hearings/ •u, cil Wo Sesstons in tember& October. ■ October 20 1"readin ■ November 32"d readin • Public heai'naSeptembe 5 &Oc er 6. ■ Septemb rd i Transportation rk Session with Council in Council Chambers.. S. AC . � ITEM IO a. tt ain Vista Subare an—Matt Wempe&Pete Wray Public Comment: Kandace Majoro omeowner. Transportation Planning addressed the questions we had the last time we were here. a have remaining concerns about weight limits and speed limits. We are concerned that there i o Police enforcement in the area. I followed an 18-wheeler down Vine on my way here tonight. a are also concerned about the congestion issue. If the grade'separation crossings cons tion follows development, we will face significant traffic bottlenecks at the intersections. T e cast/west corridors are contemplated: current Vine; realigned Vine; Conifer. We hope you will commend in the text of the Plan that the intent is not to build a truck bypass or have a defacto truck bypass. Attachment 4 f DDA Minutes May 14,2009 pg.3 be some flexibility,for example in the current economic climate with financing conditions being more difficult. Moved by Mr.Zamzow,second ve a Consent Agenda as presented with the unde rolect funding is based on the supportable tax increment at the same s etermined in the original presentation; the motion passed unanimously. RAILROAD QUIET ZONE STUDY Mow Stephanie Sangaline and Rick Haden of Felsburg,Holt&Ullevig,presented the study they had done outlining what is required to create a quiet zone downtown. Their study has identified 12 crossing within the DDA boundary plus two intersections south of the DDA which would require improvements for the downtown quiet zone to be effective;performed a field study of the 14 crossings;drafted a review workbook which details conditions at each crossing and options on how each crossing could be improved; the estimated cost of each option. In their presentation to the Board they discussed federal law and defined a quiet zone. Next steps in the process include conducting a diagnostic review with Federal Railroad Administration and railroad involvement;determine the appropriate quiet zone treatment for each crossing;determine Mason Street mid-block treatments;verify basic active warning and circuitry upgrades;review the concept drawings and estimates;determine what the railroad would need to do in preparation for the quiet zone; determine agreements with the railroads;PUC applications;public involvement;and final design. FHU estimates these steps could be completed within eighteen months. Financing options Were discussed including whether some upgrades could be accomplished in conjunction with the Mason Corridor improvements. Mr.Atteberry suggested that a City Council work session on the matter was not necessary at this time but asked that DDA staff keep Council informed of the progress. Moved by Mr.Keiffer,seconded by Mr.Callahan: To approve funding of Part 2 of Phase one of the railroad quiet zone study In the amount of$10,000 out of the initial$100,000 approved for the ' project;the motion passed unanimously. FORT COLLINS BIKE PROGRAM David"DK"Kemp,City of Fort Collins Bicycle Coordinator,presented updates on the bike program. He noted the success of the National Collegiate biking event that took place last weekend. He thanked the Board for the use of the Old Town Square kiosk for the bike library,which has been used by 2,300 members and has more bikes to use this year. The Old Town dismount zones are getting more a ate signage which will instruct cyclists and skate boarder what they can do, instead of emphasi - at they cannot do. There also has been a marketing campaign emphasizing the rules of polit g. The annual Bike to Work week will take place from June 22-28 . 151 SOUTH COLLEGE FAItADE GRANT Matt Robenalt distributed a revised staff memo and investor rkshect based on new information from the owner and general contractor regarding decorative awnings on the facade wbich were not included in the original request. Carroll Alsb er,and Jan Peterson,architect,presented the proposal. Extensive work has been done t interior of the building. The project extends the brickwork and architectural features from the c ank location to the rest of the building on both the front facade and the rear alley facade.Thi . des brick columns,cement stucco and a striking entrance canopy. An enhanced entrance will i t on College Avenue.Staff recommended funding the College Avenue facade in the amo $47,154 and the alley facade in the amount of$50,900. Some of the temporary features of ' tng tenant Drunken Monkey would remain through the term of their lease. Time was reque y the City to talk to the owners of the Drunken Monkey before a decision was made on the ge Avenue facade. Legal counsel Lucia Liley agreed that the two facades could be part of a phased request and that the owner could bring back the request if both facades were not granted in today's action.