Safe or unsafe: Railroad crossing status continues to baffle
Staff reporter
The City of Marion won the battle with Union Pacific regarding the reopening of the crossing on Burbridge Street that connects with Grant Street, because technically, only the city could initiate the closing of railroad crossing.
Union Pacific officials informed city officials more than a month ago that because of increased train traffic, increased train speed (from 40 to 50 mph), and poor vision of approaching trains, the crossing on Burbridge Street was going to be closed.
Prior to that announcement, the city had designated Burbridge Street as a truck route for access to a truck parking lot on the south end of Grant Street. The city took extra measures that included the relocation of a utility pole on Burbridge to allow semis and trailers to travel over the tracks and on the street to the truck parking lot.
In a letter dated March 3 from Michael L. Benjamin, manager of special projects industry and public for the railroad, with the "permanent closure" of the crossing, the railroad offered the city a cash donation of $45,000.
"If the crossing is permanently closed, KDOT (Kansas Department of Transportation) will fund a crossing signal project at Washington Street or other at-grade intersection that is within the city's jurisdiction," Benjamin wrote.
Two weeks later, the city contacted the railroad regarding the railroad's authority to close the crossing. In response, the railroad reopened the crossing, apparently no longer concerned about the safety issues.
So, what's changed? Why was it unsafe a month ago and now safe enough for continued use?
When asked that question, Mark Davis of Union Pacific Railroad said a public crossing should not be considered unsafe.
"It is always the driver's responsibility to yield to a train," he said.
Davis commented that railroad crossings actually become more safe when train speeds increase.
"Faster is better because 80 percent of crossing collisions occur when trains are going 49 mph or slower," Davis said. When trains travel 50 mph and faster there are fewer collisions.
The reason? Impatient drivers.
When a motorist who's in a hurry to cross a railroad track sees a slow-moving train approaching, he is more apt to cross in front of the train instead of waiting. If the train is moving at a high rate of speed, then the motorist probably will stay put until it passes because he knows it won't take as long.
"Drivers' impatience causes the crashes because they don't want to sit and wait," Davis said.
So, why was the crossing closed in the first place?
Marion City Administrator David Mayfield said Thomas Romero of Union Pacific Railroad had visited the city office and informed Mayfield of sight clearance issues at that crossing.
A letter from Benjamin indicated the railroad was interested in negotiating the closing and in return, the city could receive money and the possibility of a crossing signal on the railroad tracks on Washington Street.
"The offer is common," Davis explained. "Typically when one railroad crossing is closed another crossing will experience an increase in traffic."
How did the city get the railroad to reverse its decision to close the crossing?
"The reason for closing a crossing is to remove the probability of a train-vehicle collision," Davis said. "Before we can close a crossing, we work with the city in helping them analyze traffic flows."
Train crews can observe behavior of drivers in certain areas and determine if there are more risk-takers.
Mayfield said the train company never had the authority to close the crossing because the street on either side of the track is a dedicated, platted street. Therefore, closing the crossing would restrict street access.
With the crossing being reopened, Marion City Council did not take any formal action regarding the offer made by Union Pacific, which also negated the upgrading of crossing signage on Washington Street.
There also is a field entrance off Burbridge Street, just west of the railroad crossing. Grant Street is not wide enough to accommodate farm equipment such as a combine to gain access to that field.
"The only access is east on Burbridge and over the tracks," Mayfield said.
Davis said that what he understood was the "traffic flow did not work out as anticipated so the crossing was reopened."
"At this point, it is out of the railroad's hands," Davis said, "and into the city's for a study."
And what about the increase of train traffic to as many as 50 trains per day?
"I'm not sure where that information came from," Davis said.
Currently there are an average of 10 trains per day passing through the Marion corridor, he said.
"The best guess of a possible increase, even if there is an upswing in the economy, would be maybe one per day during the next 10 years," Davis said.
An increase in houses being built and agriculture production would dictate an increase in rail traffic.
Davis added that KDOT determines what warning devices are used on crossings because those devices are considered highway signs.
So what would it take to have signal lights at the Burbridge Street crossing?
According to Mitch Sothers, coordinating engineer of KDOT, the state agency manages the funds that are used to upgrade signals.
"The type of signal or sign is determined through federal guidelines," Sothers said. Those standards determine which crossings are upgraded from white signs to signal lights to crossing arms.
A hazard rating is given to each public crossing, Sothers said. The more automobiles and trains, the higher the rating.
"Visibility issues don't have anything to do with this rating," he said.
What about crashes that occur at crossings? Does that make the hazard rating higher?
Sothers said crash statistics are not considered for this listing but there is another fund available to upgrade those crossings, but both funds are limited.
What would it take to have the Burbridge Street crossing moved up on the hazard list? Increases in road and train traffic. A letter from the City of Marion, requesting the upgrade wouldn't hurt either.
