FRONT COVER. Derby Quiet Zone Study Cover

Transcription

1 FRONT COVER Derby Quiet Zone Study Cover

2 DERBY QUIET ZONE STUDY City of Derby April 9 City Council The Mayor and City Council comprise the Governing Body. These elected officials are the political leaders for the community and the governing body sets the policy for the city organization. Randy White, Mayor Rocky Cornejo, Council Member Ward I Tom Keil, Council President Ward I Jack Hezlep, Council Member Ward II Vaughn Nun, Council Member Ward II Cheryl Bannon, Council Member Ward III Andrew Swindle, Council Member Ward III John McIntosh, Council Member Ward IV Mark Staats, Council Member Ward IV City Staff The Planning and Engineering Department is comprised of traditional engineering functions as well as building trades, planning and zoning, and geographic information services. Department staff served as members of the project team for the study. Dan Squires, Director of Planning & Engineering Ky Louanghaksaphone, Assistant City Engineer Justin Givens, City Planner Consultant Team TranSystems is one of the largest engineering firms in the United States that focuses exclusively on transportation-related solutions. TranSystems served as the consultant team for the study. Jeffrey Lackey, PE, Client Manager Sara Clark, PE, Project Manager Deanne Winkelmann, AICP, Planner Tyler Ummel, PE, Engineer Derby Quiet Zone Study Page i

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER INTRODUCTION... Study Purpose... Study Area... Study Process... 4 Quiet Zone Regulations... 4 Quiet Zone Requirements... 4 Supplemental Safety Measures... 5 CHAPTER EXISTING CONDITIONS... 8 Existing Conditions... 8 Preliminary Review... 9 CHAPTER 3 DIAGNOSTIC REVIEW... Meeting Purpose... Diagnostic Review Results... CHAPTER 4 IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES... 3 Existing Quiet Zone Risk Index... 3 Future Quiet Zone Risk Index... 4 Crossing Improvement Options... 4 Quiet Zone Scenarios... 6 Phasing Options... 7 CHAPTER 5 ACTION PLAN... 9 Summary of Improvement Alternatives... 9 Study Update: New Crash at 63rd Street... 9 Steps to Acquire a Quiet Zone... Periodic Quiet Zone Updates... Quiet Zone Risk Reviews... Appendix A Existing Conditions Information Appendix B Kick-Off Meeting Notes Appendix C Diagnostic Review Meeting Notes Appendix D Improvement Concept Exhibits Appendix E Cost Estimates Appendix F Quiet Zone Risk Calculations Derby Quiet Zone Study Page ii

4 CHAPTER INTRODUCTION Study Purpose The City of Derby is a growing community in the greater Wichita region that has experienced over 3 percent population growth since and continues to develop. The Derby West End Development Plan, completed in 5, expressed concern regarding train horn noise from the multiple highwayrail grade crossings of the BNSF Railway throughout the city. In order to address noise concerns, the Plan recommended studying the feasibility of a Quiet Zone, which is a segment of rail line where the train horn is not routinely sounded at public highway-rail grade crossings. The Quiet Zone would enable the community to obtain relief from the routine sounding of train horns, improve the quality of life for residents and businesses, and likely encourage further investment along the K-5 corridor. Therefore, the purpose of the Derby Quiet Zone Study is to assess the feasibility of a Quiet Zone within the City of Derby. The study will review each crossing for safety improvement options required to establish a Quiet Zone and outline potential next steps for implementation. Noise Considerations A common descriptor for environmental noise assessment is the day-night sound level (Ldn). This description provides an accurate measure of the overall noise climate of an area. For example, as described in Exhibit, the noise experienced about, feet from the train horn is similar to the average noisy suburban to urban noise environment. Comparatively,, feet from a crossing without train horns would be similar to a quiet suburban noise environment. However, while the implementation of a Quiet Zone will allow the surrounding area to obtain the relief from the routine sounding of train horns, other noises associated with train traffic and vehicular traffic will remain. When considering the impact of the Quiet Zone, these and other considerations should be taken into account when evaluating the costs, benefits, and expectations of establishing a Quiet Zone. Exhibit : Environmental Noise Levels Noise Level (Ldn) Noise Experience 5 Quiet Suburban, feet from grade crossing without train horns 6 Noisy Suburban to Urban, feet from grade crossing with train horns 7 Urban to Noisy Urban 5 feet from grade crossing with train horns 8 Downtown City feet from grade crossing with train horns Source: Federal Railroad Administration (8) Derby Quiet Zone Study Page

5 Study Area For the purpose of this study, the study area is generally defined as the K-5 corridor from north of 63rd Street (Private Crossing) to south of 97th Street (Private Crossing). This 5. mile corridor of the BNSF Railway includes thirteen (3) highway-rail grade crossings including eight (8) public crossings and five (5) private crossings. The study area extends beyond the city limits in order to ensure that train horns are not sounded in close proximity to the community, which would negate the overall effect of the Quiet Zone if nearby crossings are not included. The crossings within the study area are outlined in Exhibit. The study area is also displayed in Exhibit 3. Exhibit : Study Area Crossings Street Name DOT Number Crossing Type Milepost Private Crossing 9387M Private.4 63rd Street 9388U Public.45 Red Powell Drive 9389B Public. Meadowlark Road 939V Public.47 Private Crossing 939C Private.5 Madison Avenue 985W Public.5 Market Street 9393R Public.76 Washington Street 9394X Public.83 Kay Street 9395E Public.98 9st Street 9396L Public 4. Private Crossing 9397T Private th Street 9398A Private 4.8 Private Crossing 94Y Private 5.3 Source: Federal Railroad Administration (8) Derby Quiet Zone Study Page

6 Exhibit 3: Study Area Map Source: TranSystems (8) Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 3

7 Study Process The study process encompasses a series of technical steps and stakeholder coordination that results in documentation of preferred improvements and phasing of a Quiet Zone. This document could also be submitted as the Notice of Intent to FRA to further the Quiet Zone establishment process. Overall, the study process includes the following steps: Chapter Introduction: This chapter defines the study purpose and study area. The Quiet Zone process and requirements are also outlined. Chapter Existing Conditions: This chapter includes a summary of data collection efforts in order to understand existing conditions at each crossing. The existing conditions are used to inform Quiet Zone calculations and discussions with stakeholders. Chapter 3 Diagnostic Review Meeting: This chapter provides a summary of stakeholder discussions that occurred at an on-site diagnostic review to evaluate each crossing for safety improvements. Chapter 4 Improvement Alternatives: Based on the diagnostic review, a series of improvement alternatives are assessed for each crossing. Quiet Zone risk calculations for future conditions with the improvement alternatives are discussed in order to understand eligibility of the proposed Quiet Zone. Concept-level design and cost estimates are also provided. Chapter 5 Action Plan: The action plan outlines a summary of preferred Quiet Zone improvements, Quiet Zone risk calculations, potential phasing options, and next steps necessary for implementation. Quiet Zone Regulations Because the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is committed to reducing the number of collisions at highway-rail grade crossings, the Train Horn Rule was established in 5 to set nationwide standards for the sounding of train horns at public highway-rail grade crossings. The Train Horn Rule also established a process for communities to obtain relief from the routine sounding of train horns by providing criteria for the establishment of a Quiet Zone. A Quiet Zone is a segment of a rail line where the locomotive horn is not routinely sounded at public highway-rail grade crossings; however, a locomotive engineer may still sound the train horn to provide a warning in an emergency situation. Because the absence of routine horn sounding increases the risk of a crossing collision, a public authority that desires to establish a Quiet Zone is required to mitigate the additional risk. Overall, a Quiet Zone can reduce the adverse impact of noise pollution created by train horns while requiring safety improvements to maintain safety for all users. Quiet Zone Requirements The initial requirements for a Quiet Zone focus on the corridor length and the warning devices installed at each crossing. A Quiet Zone must be a minimum one-half mile in length and each crossing be equipped with active grade crossing warning devices comprising of flashing lights and gates operated with constant warning time devices and power-out indicators. In addition, if a Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 4

8 roadway has pedestrian traffic and is equipped with automatic bells, the bells must remain in working condition. If pedestrian elements are added at the crossing location, automatic bells must be added as well. In order for a Quiet Zone to be established, Supplemental Safety Measures must also be implemented at public highway-rail grade crossings. One of the following conditions must be met: One or more Supplemental Safety Measures are installed at each crossing in the Quiet Zone. The Quiet Zone Risk Index is equal to or less than the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold without implementation of additional safety measures at any crossing in the Quiet Zone. Additional safety measures are implemented at selected crossings resulting in the Quiet Zone Risk Index being reduced to a level equal to or less than the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold. Additional safety measures are taken at selected crossings resulting in the Quiet Zone Risk Index being reduced to at least the level of the Risk Index with Horns. The Quiet Zone Risk Index (QZRI) is a measure of risk to the motoring public that accounts for both the increased risk due to the lack of locomotive horn use at the Quiet Zone crossings and the reduced risk due to the implementation of Supplemental Safety Measures (SSM) and Alternative Safety Measures (ASM). The Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold (NSRT) is a measure of risk calculated on a nationwide basis that reflects the average level of risk to the motoring public at public highway-rail grade crossings equipped with flashing lights and gates and at which locomotive horns are sounded. A risk level above the NSRT represents a significant risk with respect to serious injury or fatality. The Risk Index with Horns (RIWH) is a measure of risk to the motoring public when locomotive horns are routinely sounded at every public highway-rail grade crossing within a Quiet Zone. This represents the risk index before the Quiet Zone is established. Each of the index calculations can be made using the FRA Quiet Zone Calculator with the relevant information gathered for each crossing. Supplemental Safety Measures Several of the conditions necessary for establishing a Quiet Zone require additional safety measures at the crossings. A SSM is a safety system or procedure established by the appropriate authority and determined by FRA to be an effective substitute for the locomotive horn in prevention of highway-rail casualties. An ASM is a safety system or procedure, other than a SSM, established by the appropriate authority and determined by FRA to be an effective substitute for the locomotive horn in prevention of highway-rail casualties at highway-rail grade crossings. Each SSM has an effectiveness rate, a number between zero and one, which represents the reduction of the likelihood of a collision at a public highway-rail grade crossing as a result of the installation of an SSM or ASM when compared to the same crossing equipped with conventional active warning systems of flashing lights and gates. Zero effectiveness means the SSM or ASM provides no reduction in the probability of a collision. An effectiveness rating of one means that the Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 5

9 SSM or ASM is totally effective in eliminating collision risk. Measurements between zero and one reflect the percentage by which the SSM or ASM reduces the probability of a collision. Potential SSMs are described in Exhibit 4 and include the following: permanent closure, temporary closure, four-quadrant gate system, non-traversable curb medians with gates, mountable medians with channelization devices with gates, one-way streets with gates, or wayside horns. ASMs include programmed enforcement, public education and awareness, and photo enforcement. A modified SSM may be needed if there are unique circumstances pertaining to a specific crossing that prevents SSMs from being fully compliant. A modified SSM is considered an ASM and its effectiveness rating will be adjusted for any calculations. ASMs can be very beneficial safety measures and may require additional review by FRA and/or the owning railroad. Exhibit 4: Supplementary Safety Measures (SSM) Measure Description Conceptual Diagram Permanent Closure A permanent closure of the crossing to highway traffic. Effectiveness Rate:. Temporary Closure A temporary closure of the crossing to highway traffic by providing locked gates during a designated period. Effectiveness Rate:. Four-Quadrant Gate System An installation of gates at a crossing sufficient to fully block highway traffic from entering the crossing when the gates are lowered, including at least one gate for each direction of traffic on each approach. Effectiveness Rate (no detection):.8 Effectiveness Rate (with detection):.77 Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 6

10 Non-Traversable Curb Medians with Gates Medians on both highway approaches to a crossing, usually extending feet from the gate arm, to prevent highway traffic from circumventing the approach lane gates. Posted highway speed must not exceed 4 mph. Note: A minimum of 6-foot medians may be used if an intersection is within feet of the gate arm. Effectiveness Rate:.8 Mountable Medians with Channelization Devices with Gates Channelization devices on both highway approaches, usually extending feet from the gate arm, to prevent highway traffic from circumventing the approach lane gates. Note: The city will be responsible for maintaining and replacing equipment. Effectiveness Rate:.75 One-Way Streets with Gates An installation of gates such that all approaching highway lanes to the crossing are completely blocked Effectiveness Rate:.8 Wayside Horns A stationary horn located at the crossing designed to provide, upon the approach of a locomotive or train, audible warning to oncoming motorists of the approach of a train. Note: This measure is not a true SSM but can be considered a substitute for the locomotive horn. Source: Federal Railroad Association; Train Horn Final Rule (7) Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 7

11 CHAPTER EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing Conditions In order to perform the Quiet Zone calculations, crossing information is needed as inputs for the calculations. This data includes roadway information such as functional classification, number of lanes, average daily traffic, posted speed, and crashes and rail information such as warning device, number of tracks, total trains, and maximum train speed. In addition, information regarding roadway dimensions and geometry, intersection and driveway locations, traffic signal coordination, utility location, and multimodal accommodations help identify potential improvement options. The data was primarily collected from the U.S. DOT Crossing Inventory reports and verified and/or updated by local sources and field review. The existing conditions information for each crossing within the study area is summarized in Exhibit 5. Additional information for each crossing is contained in Appendix A. For all crossings, total trains per day is 34 trains with a maximum train speed of 55 mph. Exhibit 5: Existing Conditions Crossing Roadway Rail Street Name DOT Number Functional Classification Average Daily Traffic Lanes Speed Crashes Warning Device Tracks Private Crossing 9387M Rural Local 5 Stop Sign 63rd Street 9388U Rural Collector, Gates Red Powell Drive 9389B Rural Local Gates Meadowlark Road 939V Rural Local, 3 Gates Private Crossing 939C Rural Local 5 None Madison Avenue 985W Urban Local,6 3 Gates Market Street 9393R Urban Local 5,55 3 Gates Washington Street 9394X Urban Local 36 3 Gates Kay Street 9395E Urban Local 65 3 Gates 9st Street 9396L Rural Local 5 3 Gates Private Crossing 9397T Rural Local 5 Stop Sign 97th Street [Private] 9398A Rural Local 36 5 Stop Sign Private Crossing 94Y Rural Local 5 Stop Sign Source: Federal Railroad Administration (8); City of Derby (8); Kansas Department of Transportation (5) Traffic counts were not available for private crossing but average daily traffic is assumed to be minimal Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 8

12 Preliminary Review In order for a Quiet Zone to be established, SSMs must be implemented at rail crossings. A preliminary review of the crossings was conducted based on existing conditions as well as discussions with city staff during a kick-off meeting in December 7. Kick-off meeting notes are included in Appendix B. Based on the preliminary review, feasible SSM improvement options are summarized in Exhibit 6. Generally, jurisdictions will choose to implement non-traversable curb medians or channelization devices, when feasible, rather than four-quadrant gate systems due to cost. Wayside horns are not a true SSM but are considered a substitute for the locomotive horn. Exhibit 6: Preliminary Review Street Name DOT Number Permanent Closure Temporary Closure Four-Quadrant Gates Non-Traversable Medians Channelization Devices One-Way Streets Wayside Horn Private Crossing 9387M 63rd Street 9388U Red Powell Drive 9389B Meadowlark Road 939V Private Crossing 939C Madison Avenue 985W Market Street 9393R Washington Street 9394X Kay Street 9395E 9st Street 9396L Private Crossing 9397T 97th Street 9398A Private Crossing 94Y = Feasible; = Feasible if FRA Exception; = Not Feasible Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 9

13 CHAPTER 3 DIAGNOSTIC REVIEW Meeting Purpose A diagnostic review is an on-site meeting of stakeholders to evaluate rail crossings for potential improvements. The diagnostic review was held on February 3, 8 and included seventeen stakeholders that represented the City of Derby, Sedgwick County, Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT), Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and BNSF Railway. Following a safety briefing, the diagnostic review team evaluated each crossing within the study area for potential SSM/ASMs in order to reduce the Quiet Zone Risk Index (QZRI) below the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold (NSRT). The review of each crossing focused on balancing the needs of all stakeholders by providing a safe crossing solution in the most cost-effective manner. In addition to potential SSM/ASMs, the team reviewed the following elements at each crossing: Rail Condition Equipment Placement Profile Review Crossing Visibility Traffic Control (pavement markings, signage, signals) Pedestrian and Bicycle Accommodations Drainage Issues Utility Conflicts Diagnostic Review Results The diagnostic team reviewed all thirteen crossings within the study area for potential improvements. Overall, it was determined that eight crossings would be advanced for inclusion in the Quiet Zone study. Four private crossings will be excluded from the Quiet Zone due to distance from the next closest crossing: Private (9387M), Private (9397T), 97th Street (9398A), and Private (94Y). These crossings are the northernmost and three southernmost crossings under initial review. Additionally, one private crossing located near downtown Derby, Private (939C), will also be excluded from the Quiet Zone as there is no physical crossing present. This crossing is expected to be marked as closed in the FRA database. In general, the diagnostic team reached consensus regarding the preferred SSM/ASM at each crossing. These recommendations are summarized in Exhibit 7. Further details regarding SSM/ASM alternatives and associated roadway and rail improvements are documented in the Diagnostic Review Meeting Notes in Appendix C. Derby Quiet Zone Study Page

14 Exhibit 7: Diagnostic Meeting Summary Street Name DOT Number Recommendation Private Crossing 9387M Excluded from Quiet Zone due to distance from 63rd Street (approximately.45 miles) 63rd Street 9388U Preferred ASM is combination -foot non-traversable west median and eastbound exit gate Other associated improvements include advance warning signs and pavement markings. Red Powell Drive 9389B Preferred ASM is combination 6-foot non-traversable west median and eastbound exit gate Other associated improvements include roadway widening, relocation of existing gates, and advance warning signs and pavement markings. Meadowlark Road Private Crossing 939V 939C Preferred ASM is 4-foot non-traversable east median and 4-foot non-traversable west median Other associated improvements include roadway widening, new signal installation, additional sidelight assembly, and advance warning signs and pavement markings. BNSF Railway will verify if crossing is closed and update FRA inventory as appropriate Madison Avenue 985W Preferred SSM is -foot non-traversable east median and 6-foot non-traversable west median Other associated improvements include modification to right-inright-out intersection at Water Street and advance warning signs and pavement markings. Market Street 9393R Preferred SSM is 6-foot non-traversable east median and 6-foot non-traversable west median Other associated improvements include driveway relocation in southwest quadrant, sidewalk installation (by others), and advance warning signs and pavement markings. Washington Street 9394X Preferred SSM is a closure OR -foot non-traversable east median and 6-foot non-traversable west median Other associated improvements include roadway widening, relocation of existing gates, modification to right-in-right-out intersection at Buckner Street, and advance warning signs and pavement markings. Derby Quiet Zone Study Page

15 Kay Street 9395E Preferred SSM is 6-foot non-traversable east median and 6-foot non-traversable west median Construction plans to upgrade to 4-foot typical section in late 8 or early 9. Other associated improvements include roadway widening, relocation of existing gates, modification to right-in-right-out driveway in southwest quadrant, constant warning time devices, and advance warning signs and pavement markings. 9st Street 9396L Preferred SSM is 6-foot non-traversable east median and 6-foot non-traversable west median Other associated improvements include relocation of driveway in southwest quadrant, roadway widening, relocation of existing gates, utility modifications, rail equipment upgrades, and advance warning signs and pavement markings. Private Crossing 9397T Excluded from Quiet Zone due to distance from 9st Street (approximately.45 miles) 97th Street 9398A Excluded from Quiet Zone due to distance from 9st Street (approximately.8 miles) Private Crossing 94Y Excluded from Quiet Zone due to distance from 9st Street (approximately. miles) Source: TranSystems, Diagnostic Review Meeting Notes (8) Derby Quiet Zone Study Page

16 CHAPTER 4 IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES Existing Quiet Zone Risk Index Before a rail segment can become a Quiet Zone, a scenario must be created which makes the QZRI lower than or equal to the NSRT. The NSRT may change from year to year due to crashes and incidents that affect the nationwide calculation. The current NSRT, which was last updated in April 7, is 4,73. In order to remain a Quiet Zone, the QZRI must remain below the RIWH in subsequent years. This can be ensured by establishing a QZRI substantially lower than the RIWH. Quiet Zone calculations were performed for the refined study corridor from 63rd Street to 9st Street. Existing risk by crossing and for the study corridor are outlined in Exhibit 8. The existing QZRI for the study corridor without any SSM/ASM improvements is 5,57, which is significantly higher than NSRT of 4,73. The existing RIWH for the study corridor is 3,57. The existing risk is particularly high at two crossings, 63rd Street and Red Powell Drive, due to recent crashes. A crash occurred in 6 at 63rd Street when a vehicle went around the lowered gate and was struck by a train moving approximately 4 mph. Another crash occurred in 7 at Red Powell Drive when a vehicle stopped on the tracks (suicide attempt - injury) and was struck by a train moving approximately 4 mph. As a result of the high existing QZRI, SSM/ASMs will be required to obtain Quiet Zone designation. Note: Quiet Zone calculations are based on crashes within the past five years. Exhibit 8: Existing Quiet Zone Risk Index Street Name DOT Number Existing Risk Existing QZRI Existing RIWH 63rd Street 9388U 7,94.9 Red Powell Drive 9389B 8,74.9 Meadowlark Road 939V 4,88.67 Madison Avenue 985W 6,67.4 Market Street 9393R 37,98. 5,57.3 3,56.8 Washington Street 9394X,336.8 Kay Street 9395E 3,5.7 9st Street 9396L 9,3.3 Source: TranSystems, Quiet Zone Calculator (8) Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 3

17 Future Quiet Zone Risk Index To reduce the risk, SSM/ASMs can be installed at each crossing to substitute for the locomotive horn. Based on the preferred improvements discussed during the diagnostic review, the following crossing improvement options were developed. Conceptual exhibits and cost estimates for each crossing are included in Appendix D and Appendix E, respectively. Crossing Improvement Options 63rd Street 9388U Due to the adjacent K-5 intersection, the SSM-required 6-foot east median would impact turning movements. Therefore, combination three-quadrant gates and non-traversable medians is the preferred ASM improvement to ensure a median does not impact turning movements. The concept includes a 3-foot east median with an eastbound exit gate and a -foot west median. The existing median would likely require reconstruction to meet the -foot width requirement to accommodate median-mounted gates and the 8-inch height requirement to ensure the median meets non-traversable requirements. In order for non-traversable medians to be implemented, the posted speed along this roadway segment must be lowered from the current 45 mph limit to 4 mph. These and other associated crossing improvements are estimated to cost approximately $39,9. Subsequent to drafting of this report, a multiple fatality crash occurred at the 63rd Street crossing in September 8. The crash information is not yet available in the FRA Quiet Zone calculator, but it appears unlikely that a Quiet Zone can be established that includes this crossing. The impact of this most recent crash on the feasibility of Quiet Zone implementation is discussed further in Chapter 5. Red Powell Drive 9389B Due to the adjacent K-5 intersection, the SSM-required 6-foot east median would impact turning movements. A driveway located in the southwest quadrant may also impact the feasibility of a 6- foot west median. Therefore, combination three-quadrant gates and non-traversable medians were discussed as the preferred ASM improvement to ensure medians did not impact turning movements. However, after further review, it was determined that both the east and west medians could be extended to nearly 6 feet without impacting turning movements. Therefore, the concept includes a 54-foot east median and a 5-foot west median. These and other associated crossing improvements are estimated to cost approximately $37,6. Meadowlark Road 939V Due to the adjacent K-5 intersection, the SSM-required 6-foot east median would impact turning movements. McIntosh Road, located in the southwest quadrant, also impacts the feasibility of a SSM-required 6-foot west median. Therefore, the concept includes a 4-foot east median and a 4- foot west median to ensure medians do not impact turning movements. These and other associated crossing improvements are estimated to cost approximately $398,. Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 4

18 Madison Avenue 985W While an east median can be installed to meet the SSM-required -foot median, Water Street located in the southwest quadrant impacts the feasibility of a SSM-required 6-foot west median. Therefore, the concept includes a -foot east median and an 85-foot west median with a right-inright-out intersection at Water Street. The 85-foot west median ensures reasonable access is provided to Water Street and also does not impact the driveway of an existing commercial business located in the southwest quadrant. These and other associated crossing improvements are estimated to cost approximately $5,7. Market Street 9393R While an east median can be installed to meet the SSM-required 6-foot median, a driveway in the southwest quadrant impacts the feasibility of a SSM-required 6-foot west median. However, it is feasible to relocate the driveway to the west in order to accommodate a 6-foot west median. Therefore, the concept includes a 6-foot east median and a 6-foot west median with a relocated driveway. These and other associated crossing improvements are estimated to cost approximately $44,9. Washington Street 9394X Two alternatives were explored for the Washington Street crossing. Due to very low traffic volumes and the proximity to nearby crossings at Market Street and Kay Street, there is potential to close the Washington Street crossing. Therefore, Alternative concept includes a crossing closure, removal of rail equipment, and dead-end treatments on either side of the crossing. These and other associated crossing improvements are estimated to cost approximately $5,7. If the city desires for the crossing to remain open, non-traversable medians could be installed. While an east median can be installed to meet the SSM-required -foot median length, Buckner Street located in the southwest quadrant impacts the feasibility of a SSM-required 6-foot west median. Therefore, Alternative concept includes a -foot east median and a 6-foot west median with a right-in-right-out intersection at Buckner Street. These and other associated crossing improvements are estimated to cost approximately $38,. As a result of the recent fatality crash at 63rd Street in September 8, it is likely that BNSF Railway will strongly encourage the City of Derby to close the Washington Street crossing. BNSF Railway has considerable influence in the Quiet Zone approval process and it may not be feasible to obtain Quiet Zone approval without closing the Washington Street crossing. Kay Street 9395E While an east median can be installed to meet the SSM-required 6-foot median length, a driveway in the southwest quadrant impacts the feasibility of a SSM-required 6-foot west median. However, the property in the southwest quadrant also has a second driveway with access to Kay Street via Buckner Street. As such, it was determined that the west median would not adversely impact access to this property as another access point was available. Therefore, this concept includes a 7-foot east median and a 6-foot west median. These and other associated crossing improvements are estimated to cost approximately $89,7. A significant portion of the cost for this crossing is due to Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 5

19 the need to upgrade constant warning time devices. It is also worth noting that the City of Derby has plans to upgrade Kay Street to the industrial typical section in the near future. Some of the costs associated with Quiet Zone improvements may be absorbed into the overall roadway project. 9st Street 9396L Due to the adjacent K-5 intersection, the SSM-required 6-foot east median would impact turning movements. A driveway to a city facility in the southwest quadrant also impacts the feasibility of a SSM-required -foot west median. However, as the property in the southwest quadrant is owned by the City of Derby, the driveway can be relocated in order to accommodate the west median. Therefore, this concept includes a 4-foot east median and a 7-foot west median with driveway relocation. These and other associated crossing improvements are estimated to cost approximately $86,4. A significant portion of the cost for this crossing is due to the need to upgrade power-out indicators. Based on available GIS data and field review, this crossing location in particular is anticipated to have utility conflicts (water, sewer, electric) that will need to be accounted for during survey, design, and construction. Quiet Zone Scenarios Based on the existing conditions data and the preferred SSM/ASM crossing improvements discussed above, two Quiet Zone scenarios were assessed. Scenario A includes a permanent closure at Washington Street while Scenario B includes non-traversable medians at Washington Street. Both scenarios meet the requirements for establishment of a Quiet Zone with a QZRI lower than the NSRT. However, Scenario A with the permanent closure at Washington Street produces the lowest QZRI of the two scenarios. Quiet Zone risk calculations are included in Appendix F. Scenario A This scenario, outlined in Exhibit 9, includes a permanent closure (Alternative ) at Washington Street with traffic diverted to Kay Street. Five of the eight crossing improvements are considered ASMs based on median length and/or right-in-right-out intersections. Scenario A yields a future QZRI of 3,6, which is lower than the NSRT of 4,73, and would therefore qualify for Quiet Zone establishment. The estimated construction cost for this scenario is approximately $.35 million. After accounting for additional costs such as potential right-of-way acquisition (5%), utility relocation (%), engineering design (%), and construction inspection (7%), the total cost to implement the Quiet Zone is approximately $.78 million. Scenario B This scenario, outlined in Exhibit, includes non-traversable medians (Alternative ), rather than a permanent closure, at Washington Street. Six of the eight crossing improvements are considered ASMs based on median length and/or right-in-right-out intersections. Scenario B yields a future QZRI of 3,6, which is lower than the NSRT of 4,73, and would therefore qualify for Quiet Zone establishment. The estimated construction cost for this scenario is approximately $.46 million. After accounting for additional costs such as potential right-of-way acquisition (5%), utility relocation (%), engineering design (%), and construction inspection (7%), the total cost to implement the Quiet Zone is approximately $.93 million. Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 6

20 Exhibit 9: Scenario A - Future Quiet Zone Risk Index Street Name Quiet Zone Improvement Type Future Risk Future QZRI 63rd Street Three-Quadrant Gates / Non-Traversable Medians ASM 36, Red Powell Drive Non-Traversable Medians ASM 4,76.94 Meadowlark Road Non-Traversable Medians ASM 9,78.58 Madison Avenue Non-Traversable Medians ASM 5, ,59.9 Market Street Non-Traversable Medians SSM 7,596.4 Washington Street Permanent Closure SSM. Kay Street Non-Traversable Medians SSM 5, st Street Non-Traversable Medians ASM 6,453.3 Source: TranSystems, Quiet Zone Calculator (8) Exhibit : Scenario B - Future Quiet Zone Risk Index Street Name Quiet Zone Improvement Type Future Risk Future QZRI 63rd Street Three-Quadrant Gates / Non-Traversable Medians ASM 36, Red Powell Drive Non-Traversable Medians ASM 4,76.94 Meadowlark Road Non-Traversable Medians ASM 8, Madison Avenue Non-Traversable Medians ASM 5,53.48 Market Street Non-Traversable Medians SSM 7, ,599.8 Washington Street Non-Traversable Medians ASM 4,67.6 Kay Street Non-Traversable Medians SSM 4,65.5 9st Street Non-Traversable Medians ASM 6,453.3 Source: TranSystems, Quiet Zone Calculator (8) Phasing Options Due to the distance between some crossings (more than.5 miles), it is feasible to phase the improvements into three Quiet Zone phases: North: 63rd Street, Red Powell Drive, Meadowlark Road Central: Madison Avenue, Market Street, Washington Street, Kay Street South: 9st Street Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 7

21 Phasing the Quiet Zone can also help implement the Quiet Zone over time as funding is available for improvements. However, each Quiet Zone phase must have a QZRI below the NSRT. As outlined in Exhibit, the central phase and south phase each yield a QZRI significantly below the NSRT. However, due to recent crashes at 63rd Street and Red Powell Drive, the QZRI for the north phase is substantially higher than the NSRT. If the City of Derby waits at least five years before implementing the north phase (assuming no future crashes occur), the most recent crashes will no longer be accounted for in Quiet Zone risk calculations. At this point, the resulting QZRI would likely fall below the NSRT and the north phase could be implemented. However, as the risk index is subject to recalculation, there is the potential for future crashes to impact calculations. An additional alternative to explore at the northernmost crossings (or any crossing) is wayside horns. Wayside horns are stationary horns located at a crossing that provide an audible warning to motorists and pedestrians upon the approach of a locomotive or train. Wayside horns are not a true SSM but are considered a substitute for the locomotive horn. The horns do not create a completely quiet corridor, but do reduce the overall ambient noise at the crossing by focusing the sound to a condensed, localized area near the crossing. Therefore, they are an alternative option at crossings where the risk calculation and/or cost of improvements make implementing a Quiet Zone less feasible. Wayside horn installation costs approximately $, to $, per crossing. Exhibit : Phasing Options Street Name Quiet Zone Improvement Type Future Risk Future QZRI North 63rd Street Three-Quadrant Gates / Non-Traversable Medians ASM 36, Red Powell Drive Non-Traversable Medians ASM 4, ,933.3 Meadowlark Road Non-Traversable Medians ASM 8, Madison Avenue Non-Traversable Medians ASM 5,53.48 Central Market Street Non-Traversable Medians SSM 7,596.4 Washington Street Non-Traversable Medians ASM 4,67.6 5, Kay Street Non-Traversable Medians SSM 4,65.5 South 9st Street Non-Traversable Medians ASM 6, ,453.3 Source: TranSystems, Quiet Zone Calculator (8) Note: As the 63rd Street crossing is more than.5 miles away from Red Powell Drive (approximately.75 miles), it is possible to segment the north phase even further into two phases: (A) 63rd Street, (B) Red Powell Drive and Meadowlark Road. However, each segment must still yield a QZRI below the NSRT. Based on current data, neither Phase A nor Phase B would yield a QZRI that meets the requirements for establishment of a Quiet Zone. Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 8

22 CHAPTER 5 ACTION PLAN Summary of Improvement Alternatives This report has been prepared for the City of Derby to study the feasibility of installing SSM/ASMs to create a Quiet Zone within the city. Based on stakeholder input at the diagnostic review meeting and additional analysis, the most common preferred SSM/ASM was non-traversable medians. In some cases, the non-traversable medians would be considered ASMs and require additional approval by FRA due to median length and/or right-in-right-out intersections. Non-traversable medians are generally preferred by jurisdictions as they are typically the most cost-effective solution compared to crossings that may require exit gates. The only crossing that would require the installation of exit gates (combination three-quadrant gates/non-traversable medians) is 63rd Street. Based on the existing conditions data and the preferred SSM/ASM crossing improvements, two Quiet Zone scenarios were assessed. Scenario A includes a permanent closure at Washington Street while Scenario B includes non-traversable medians at Washington Street. Both scenarios meet the requirements for establishment of a Quiet Zone with a QZRI lower than the NSRT. However, Scenario A with the permanent closure at Washington Street produces the lowest QZRI of the two scenarios. Based on concept-level cost estimates, construction cost for the study corridor is approximately $.35 to $.46 million. After accounting for additional costs such as potential right-of-way acquisition (5%), utility relocation (%), engineering design (%), and construction inspection (7%), the total cost to implement the Quiet Zone is approximately $.78 to $.93 million. Due to the distance between some crossings (more than.5 miles), it is also feasible to phase the improvements into three Quiet Zone phases: north, central, and south. Phasing can help implement the Quiet Zone over time as funding is available for improvements. However, each Quiet Zone phase must have a QZRI below the NSRT. The central phase and south phase each yield a QZRI substantially below the NSRT. However, due to recent crashes at 63rd Street and Red Powell Drive, the QZRI for the north phase is substantially higher than the NSRT. Therefore, at this time, the Quiet Zone would need to be implemented as an entire study corridor in order for all eight crossings to meet risk threshold requirements. However, if the City of Derby waits at least five years before implementing the north phase (assuming no future crashes occur), the most recent crashes will no longer be accounted for in the Quiet Zone risk calculations. If this occurs, implementing the Quiet Zone in multiple phases is likely feasible. Study Update: New Crash at 63rd Street After completion of the Quiet Zone study, a crash occurred at the 63rd Street crossing in September 8 that resulted in two fatalities. The existing risk index for the 63rd Street crossing was already high primarily due to a previous crash in 6. Although the FRA Quiet Zone calculator is not yet updated with the new crash information, it is likely that the most recent crash is going to significantly increase the existing risk index for this crossing, resulting in an overall corridor QZRI higher than Derby Quiet Zone Study Page 9

23 NSRT. Therefore, the establishment of a Quiet Zone from 63rd Street to 9st Street would not be feasible if attempted in only one phase. However, 63rd Street is approximately.75 miles from the next closest crossing (Red Powell Drive) and could be excluded from the Quiet Zone. After further discussion with city staff, another scenario was developed which excludes 63rd Street from the Quiet Zone. This scenario, Scenario C, includes the.8-mile rail corridor from Red Powell Drive to 9st Street. As a result of the crash, it is likely that BNSF Railway will strongly encourage the City of Derby to consider closure of the Washington Street crossing rather than implement non-traversable medians. This scenario, outlined in Exhibit, yields a future QZRI of 9,76, which is significantly lower than the NSRT of 4,73, and would therefore qualify for Quiet Zone establishment. The estimated construction cost for this scenario is approximately $98,. After accounting for additional costs such as potential right-of-way acquisition (5%), utility relocation (%), engineering design (%), and construction inspection (7%), the total cost to implement the Quiet Zone is approximately $.9 million. Note: The City of Derby could consider wayside horns at the 63rd Street crossing. Exhibit : Scenario C - Future Quiet Zone Risk Index Street Name Quiet Zone Improvement Type Future Risk Future QZRI 63rd Street NOT INCLUDED Red Powell Drive Non-Traversable Medians ASM 4,76.94 Meadowlark Road Non-Traversable Medians ASM 8, Madison Avenue Non-Traversable Medians ASM 5,53.48 Market Street Non-Traversable Medians SSM 7, , Washington Street Permanent Closure SSM. Kay Street Non-Traversable Medians SSM 4,65.5 9st Street Non-Traversable Medians ASM 6,453.3 Source: TranSystems, Quiet Zone Calculator (8) It is likely that BNSF Railway would highly encourage the city to consider closure of the Washington Street crossing. However, if Washington Street remains open with non-traversable curb medians, the future risk index is 4,67.6 for the crossing. Therefore, the future QZRI for the scenario is, This would also add an additional $5, to the total cost to implement the Quiet Zone. Steps to Acquire a Quiet Zone The FRA Train Horn Rule also established a formal process to apply for a Quiet Zone. This study and the diagnostic review meeting was conducted following these guidelines, but no formal application process has been initiated. The basic steps to initiate a Quiet Zone application in the City of Derby are generally complete because the Quiet Zone(s) will be more than one-half mile in length and the majority of the crossings Derby Quiet Zone Study Page

24 are currently equipped with active warning devices comprised of flashing lights and gates with constant warning devices and power-out indicators. Constant warning time is not currently in place at the Kay Street crossing and would therefore require upgrades during construction to meet basic Quiet Zone requirements. Power-out indicators would also be required at the 9st Street crossing. As the diagnostic review has been completed during this study, the process to create a new Quiet Zone can be initiated by following the action steps outlined below. Installation of a Quiet Zone is a process that could take up to two years when factoring in application filing and comment periods as well as design, material acquisition, and construction.. Update the FRA Crossing Inventory with current information with FRA and KDOT assistance. This step will include confirming closure of a private crossing (939C).. Calculate and/or confirm Quiet Zone Risk Index values using the FRA Quiet Zone calculator. 3. Determine and/or confirm appropriate SSM/ASMs to install at each crossing. 4. File a Notice of Intent with FRA. The recommended SSM/ASMs will be reviewed by FRA, KDOT, and BNSF Railway to determine if they will meet Quiet Zone requirements before installation. The Notice of Intent commences a 6-day comment period in which each party may submit information or comments about the proposed Quiet Zone. If ASMs are used to reduce risk, an additional application must also be submitted to FRA. FRA typically provides a written decision on the application within three to four months after it is received. During this time frame, the city would respond to any comments and work towards comment resolution with each party as necessary. BNSF Railway will also coordinate with the city after the issuance of a Notice of Intent to refine cost estimates for rail-related items as applicable. 5. Install SSM/ASMs and update the FRA Crossing Inventory with the new crossing information. 6. Provide a Notice of Establishment and implement the Quiet Zone. The Notice of Establishment shall provide the date upon which the Quiet Zone will be established, but in no event shall the date be earlier than days before the date of the mailing. Install signage at each crossing to notify motorists and pedestrians that the train horn will not sound. This is the final step that will silence the train horns. Periodic Quiet Zone Updates Based on the Train Horn Rule, the city must provide written affirmation to FRA that the Quiet Zone continues to conform to SSM/ASM requirements every 4.5 to 5 years. At this time, updated and accurate FRA Crossing Inventory forms must also be provided. Quiet Zone Risk Reviews FRA will not conduct annual risk reviews for Quiet Zones established by reducing the QZRI at or below the RIWH. However, FRA has the discretion to review the status of a Quiet Zone at any time if deemed appropriate. For example, Quiet Zone status may be terminated if: Derby Quiet Zone Study Page

25 Safety systems and measures implemented within the Quiet Zone do not fully compensate for the absence of the locomotive horn due to increased substantial risk (For example: Quiet Zone status may be terminated if several crashes occur within a five-year time frame and the re-calculated QZRI is higher than the RIWH). Significant risk with respect to loss of life or serious personal injury exists within the Quiet Zone. (For example: Frequent fatal crashes occur at a crossing and the operating railroad expresses concern with the Quiet Zone.) Documentation relied upon to establish the Quiet Zone continues substantial errors that may have an adverse impact on public safety. (For example: Roadway characteristics used to perform Quiet Zone calculations were drastically inaccurate.) If one of these cases exist, FRA may terminate the Quiet Zone six months from the date of notification unless the city takes the following actions: Within six months of notification, provide a written commitment to lower the risk index and include a discussion of the specific steps to be taken by the city to increase safety at the crossings within the Quiet Zone. Within three years of notification, complete implementation of additional SSM/ASMs sufficient to reduce the QZRI to a level at or below the RIWH. Derby Quiet Zone Study Page

26 APPENDIX A Existing Conditions Information Derby Quiet Zone Study Appendix

27 U. S. DOT CROSSING INVENTORY FORM DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION OMB No. 3-7 Instructions for the initial reporting of the following types of new or previously unreported crossings: For public highway-rail grade crossings, complete the entire inventory Form. For private highway-rail grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For public pathway grade crossings (including pedestrian station grade crossings), complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For Private pathway grade crossings, complete the Header, Parts I and II, and the Submission Information section. For grade-separated highway-rail or pathway crossings (including pedestrian station crossings), complete the Header, Part I, and the Submission Information section. For changes to existing data, complete the Header, Part I Items -3, and the Submission Information section, in addition to the updated data fields. Note: For private crossings only, Part I Item and Part III Item.K. are required unless otherwise noted. An asterisk * denotes an optional field. A. Revision Date B. Reporting Agency C. Reason for Update (Select only one) D. DOT Crossing (MM/DD/YYYY) / / Railroad Transit Change in Data New Crossing Closed No Train Traffic Quiet Zone Update Inventory Number State Other Re-Open Date Change Only Change in Primary Operating RR Part I: Location and Classification Information Admin. Correction 9387M. Primary Operating Railroad BNSF Railway Company [BNSF]. State KANSAS 3. County SEDGWICK 4. City / Municipality In 5. Street/Road Name & Block Number PRIVATE 6. Highway Type & No. Near WICHITA (Street/Road Name) * (Block Number) Not Yet Reported by State 7. Do Other Railroads Operate a Separate Track at Crossing? Yes No If Yes, Specify RR,,, 8. Do Other Railroads Operate Over Your Track at Crossing? Yes No If Yes, Specify RR, UP,, 9. Railroad Division or Region. Railroad Subdivision or District. Branch or Line Name. RR Milepost.35 None KANSAS None ARKANSAS CITY None NEWTON-ARK CITY (prefix) (nnnn.nnn) (suffix) 3. Line Segment 4. Nearest RR Timetable 5. Parent RR (if applicable) 6. Crossing Owner (if applicable) * Station * 74 DERBY N/A N/A BNSF 7. Crossing Type 8. Crossing Purpose 9. Crossing Position. Public Access. Type of Train. Average Passenger Public Private Highway Pathway, Ped. Station, Ped. At Grade RR Under RR Over (if Private Crossing) Yes No Freight Intercity Passenger Commuter Transit Shared Use Transit Tourist/Other Train Count Per Day Less Than One Per Day Number Per Day 3. Type of Land Use Open Space Farm Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Recreational RR Yard 4. Is there an Adjacent Crossing with a Separate Number? 5. Quiet Zone (FRA provided) Yes No If Yes, Provide Crossing Number 6. HSR Corridor ID 7. Latitude in decimal degrees No 4 Hr Partial Chicago Excused Date Established 8. Longitude in decimal degrees 9. Lat/Long Source N/A (WGS84 std: nn.nnnnnnn) (WGS84 std: -nnn.nnnnnnn) A. Railroad Use * 3.A. State Use * 3.B. Railroad Use * 3.B. State Use * 3.C. Railroad Use * 3.C. State Use * 3.D. Railroad Use * 3.D. State Use * 3.A. Narrative (Railroad Use) * 3.B. Narrative (State Use) * Actual Estimated 33. Emergency Notification Telephone No. (posted) 34. Railroad Contact (Telephone No.) 35. State Contact (Telephone No.) Part II: Railroad Information. Estimated Number of Daily Train Movements.A. Total Day Thru Trains.B. Total Night Thru Trains.C. Total Switching Trains.D. Total Transit Trains.E. Check if Less Than (6 AM to 6 PM) (6 PM to 6 AM) One Movement Per Day 7 7 How many trains per week?. Year of Train Count Data (YYYY) 3. Speed of Train at Crossing 3.A. Maximum Timetable Speed (mph) B. Typical Speed Range Over Crossing (mph) From to Type and Count of Tracks Main Siding Yard Transit Industry 5. Train Detection (Main Track only) Constant Warning Time Motion Detection AFO PTC DC Other None 6. Is Track Signaled? 7.A. Event Recorder Yes No Yes No 7.B. Remote Health Monitoring Yes No FORM FRA F 68.7 (Rev. 3/5) OMB approval expires 3/3/8 Page OF