After several years of meetings and discussions with Southern Pacific, Olive Drive residents and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the CPUC denied the City of Davis’ request for an at-grade railroad crossing at a meeting held on February 13, 2013, according to a release from the city of Davis.
The Commission’s determination stated “It is not possible to construct the proposed at-grade crossing in a manner that will ensure safe use.”
“The City was not notified of the Commission’s February 13th meeting,” the release stated.
On August 11, 2011, the City of Davis filed an application to construct a state of the art at-grade pedestrian/bicycle crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks connecting the Southern Pacific Depot to the Olive Drive neighborhood.
Mayor Joe Krovoza stated in the city’s release, “It is beyond comprehension that the CPUC could find that a crossing that existed for over 70 years without an accident is all of a sudden unsafe because we want to add warning bells and lights. To deny the City and public the opportunity to make their case to the full Commission before an action was taken goes contrary to the concept of good government.”
The City Council will meet with staff to determine the City’s response and future action on this project, the release continued.
The proposed crossing would have consisted of warning devices and gates at the main access point to the Depot platform from the Olive Drive neighborhood. On the south side of the tracks there would be a pathway leading west to the existing gate openings to the two housing sites adjacent to the track and extending east to the extension of Hickory Lane.
In addition, the City of Davis has requested an emergency vehicle-only access point in the vicinity of L Street connecting to Olive Drive.
Mayor Joe Krovoza stated in 2011, “The City of Davis has a strong commitment to improving public safety over or under the railroad tracks.”
“Over the past 20 years Davis has invested millions of dollars of local money in providing safe access across Interstate 80 and the railroad tracks,” the Mayor said in a statement in the city’s press release. “Past projects have included the Mace Blvd. widening, Dave Pelz pedestrian/bike overcrossing, Pole Line Road vehicle/pedestrian/bike overcrossing, Richards Blvd. interchange improvements, Putah Creek pedestrian/bike undercrossing of I-80 and the railroad tracks and improvements at the train station. A safe crossing at the Depot represents the last access link between a residential area south of the tracks and the remainder of Davis. The residents of Olive Drive deserve safe access to the rest of town.”
Although Union Pacific Railroad had constructed concrete plates providing a smooth pathway across the tracks from the Olive Drive neighborhood to the Davis platform, recently Union Pacific Railroad removed those plates and informed the city that it intended to construct a 3800-foot-long fence. Union Pacific allowed the city to provide input related only to the color of the fence.
The city contended that if its application were approved, it would provide for improved safety for residents, particularly in contrast to the fence proposed by Union Pacific Railroad.
Moreover, the city argued “that a fence by itself is more dangerous than a fence with an at-grade crossing. A fence alone would push pedestrians/bikes to the ends of the fence for crossing purposes at locations where trains are traveling faster and where there have historically been fatalities.”
The city stated, “It is hoped that a fence in conjunction with the at-grade crossing would prevent situations such as the most recent fatality along the tracks, while allowing access to and from the Olive Drive neighborhood.”
Unfortunately, as the Vanguard reported back in June 2011, the State of California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) along with the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Association (CCJPA) have opposed an at-grade crossing.
The CPUC argued, “Union Pacific Railroad proposes to build an 8′ high 3800 foot long fence. Union Pacific Railroad has not provided any studies or documents showing that there is a safety issue with the existing condition. Nor has Union Pacific addressed safety issues that will be caused by the proposed fence. The Union Pacific fence proposal does not address ways to mitigate its perceived safety concerns that do not create new or additional safety concerns on the railroad tracks and in the tracks. There was no analysis of how train traffic and patterns would affect the safety of your proposed at-grade crossing.”
In contrast to the city, the CPUC staff was of the opinion that a grade-separated pedestrian/bicycle crossing is the safest mitigation measure for this location. They write, “A grade-separated crossing would eliminate all potential conflicts between pedestrians, bicyclist and trains.”
They added, “There, is no substantial evidence in this MND [mitigated negative declaration] to support the City of Davis proposal for an at-grade pedestrian crossing as opposed to a grade-separated pedestrian crossing, because it is feasible to construct a grade-separated crossing. While the City states that the most logical location for any crossing is in the vicinity of the SP Depot train station, there is no safety analysis provided in the MND to support this proposal.”
CPUC noted that they disagree with the statement, “The at-grade crossing in the vicinity of the depot would provide a safe, cost effective crossing for users at this location.”
“While it may be less-expensive, an at-grade crossing does not eliminate all hazards when compared to a grade-separated crossing,” the CPUC added.
In September of 2011, the city announced that Union Pacific began construction of the fence along the tracks at the Davis Train Depot, blocking access to the Olive Drive neighborhood from the depot.
The city was angered by the lack of cooperation from the railroad and the lack of consultation on the fence.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
THe fence went up quickly didn’t it? If this had been approved, they would have had to remove the fence? seems catch 22 to expect them to..realize two entities but am sure they are aware….
No, if this had been approved there would have been a designated crossing spot where people could cross the tracks safely. Now they have to travel half a mile out of their way to do it.
how would it have affected the fence if it had been approved?
SODA – I don’t think conversations got that far but a gate of some sort probably would have been installed in the fence (perhaps near where there used to be one).
This was probably never going to happen. UP abhors level crossings, they own the land and they are simply one of the most powerful companies in the US. By powerful I mean they pretty much control final decisions about track crossings and I doubt that a PUC would really take them on–especially if the issue is framed as a public safety issue. BTW, UP also owns the tracks that run north from the depot (Northern California leases them from UP). If and when the Cannery is developed (no matter how it is developed) the UP is unlikely to provide a level crossing even for emergency vehicles to access the property from the west. They are also making it difficult for the City to improve the street crossings at 8th and 4th streets due to demands about how improvements should be done. Those crossings are extremely dangerous for bicyclists and nasty even for cars.
yes, it seemed a long shot….thx Robb. The fence is so stark; I see it coming over Poleline.
Mayor Joe wrote:
> Over the past 20 years Davis has invested millions
> of dollars of local money in providing safe access
> across Interstate 80 and the railroad tracks
It seems like the best idea is to invest some more money and dig two holes under the tracks at 2nd & L so bikes, pedestrians and cars can all get under the tracks to Olive. This would allow some cars to get off 80 at Olive and avoid the big mess at the Richards exit every morning when traffic backs up getting under the tracks into downtown Davis.
P.S. As I have said before if I could make one change to the city of Davis it would be to widen the Richards railroad undercrossing…
[i]”Now they have to travel half a mile out of their way to do it.”[/i]
There is a perfectly safe crossing 50 yards from Slatter’s Court at Richards Blvd.
Moreover, how freaking lazy are these people who are unwilling to walk or bicycle a short distance to cross legally and safely at the historic Richards underpass? Doing so not only gives them a little exercise. It also affords them the opportunity to experience one of Davis’s landmark properties.
It should be the policy of the city of Davis to encourage walking and bicycling [i]longer distances[/i], not shorter. I suggest assigning Robb Davis to a new GODAMN* committee to study this issue, hopefully with the goal of getting ttesspassers and slackers in shape.
—
*Get Olive Drive Ass Moving Now
[img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZLRb9kgIYss/USfBGzZAOmI/AAAAAAAAA3E/AG2VWnt4DjA/s1600/olive+drive.jpg[/img]
Rich I will gladly serve on a committee like the one you’re suggesting if you agree to serve on it with me! This could be fun.
RR: ” I suggest assigning Robb Davis to a new GODAMN* committee to study this issue.”
RD: “I will gladly serve on a committee like the one you’re suggesting if you agree to serve on it with me!”
RR: “Sounds like a godamn good time to me.”
As I showed in my in-depth studies in 2011, only a fraction (probably two) of the 16 railroad deaths in/around Davis in the last 20 years would have been prevented by the fence, meaning the investment could have been better deployed if the goal was to reduce deaths.
The CPUC is CORRECT that a grade separation is safer, but the argument is specious. The reason the city pursued the at-grade alternative is that it was AFFORDABLE. After numerous tries, the City has not been able to secure funds for a grade separated alternative, and it may be decades if ever before that occurs.
The argument that people should use Richard’s because it is longer and they are lazy is completely backwards. Cities encourages types of transportation use by the amount of investment that makes a mode convenient. The crossing from downtown to Olive Drive makes for a safe and convenient connection for pedestrians and bicycles in several directions especially to the bike path between the tracks and the freeway. Olive drive is a key connection for linking the City by alternative transportation.
I predicted that deaths in and near Davis on the tracks would continue at a rate of roughly one every one to two years, due to the virtual ineffectiveness of the fence. Recently a suicide occurred near the Pole Line over-crossing, a year-and-a-half since the fence was built. As well, a bicyclist was recently hit by a car going against the light at Richards/Olive, Davis’ “worst intersection” according to the Davis Wiki. Would that person have been hit by a train if they used the gated and signaled crossing proposed by the City? It is only a matter of time until one of these collisions at Richards/Olive results in fatality or serious injury.
[i]”[b]As I showed[/b] in my in-depth studies in 2011, only a fraction (probably two) of the 16 railroad deaths in/around Davis in the last 20 years would have been prevented by the fence …”[/i]
I suspect that is not what you showed. More likely, you showed that only 2 of the 16 were not suicides, the other 14 deaths probably were suicides.
What you need to understand is that successful suicide is (mostly) a product of severe depression and opportunity. It takes both. And my understanding is that most suicidal depressions come in waves. That is, a person may be overwhelmingly depressed for finite periods of time, but (even without medical intervention) less depressed most of the time. When they try to kill themselves, it is in one of those finite periods of extreme depression.
What an unfenced railroad in an easily accessible urban area represents is opportunity. It’s much like having a gun in your house. The more opportunities a person with untreated depression has, the more likely that person will successfully kill himself when he is at a nadir.
Ultimately, the answer is psychiatric and psychological help. But in the interim, it is bad public policy to needlessly create greater opportunities for those who are severely depressed to kill themselves.
To me, a gun at home or a trafficked rail crossing next door would not increase the likelihood I would kill myself, because I am not depressed and never have been. I would guess that is true for most people. But for those with bipolar or untreated depression, it’s a really bad idea to have guns in the home or publicly accessible facilities which make it easier for them to kill themselves.
I would guess that most people who do commit suicide could have been treated by anti-depressant medications and lived normal lives. But if we give them an easy avenue to kill themselves when they are not being treated, those normal lives will have been lost for no purpose.
I know personally someone who committed suicide in an area that the railroad had spent huge sums of money on fencing, signs, lighting and even had a volunteer on duty to deter people from committing suicide at the crossing. He simply walked to another access point. In Japan they cannonball of the platforms of high-speed rail trains since the lines are all fenced (at great expense). Thankfully this family was honest with the press about their sons’ mental illness, and the suicide spree finally slowed. The recent suicide in Davis was not deterred by the fence either. The tracks remain largely accessible and there are no plans to increase fencing. Davis plans included closing the Arboretum crossing, the site of the greatest number of deaths at a single Davis location. Your summary of what my research uncovered is incorrect. There are numerous reasons for the deaths; they are infrequent and unpredictable and therefore any strategy to deter them virtually impossible to implement. The point is, sober people crossing the tracks to get to the other side, like the proverbial chicken, were not killed by trains.
Rich. I respectfully suggest you check your measurements. The line you drew doesn’t go to the entry to Slater’s Court but rather to the driveway into an apartment complex across the street that is closer to Richards Blvd. But not 50 yards from Richards, it is much farther. Four times farther. The Slater’s Court driveway is 700 feet from the Richards intersection. And it doesn’t get pedestrians to a crossing. It gets them to a location that is very hostile to pedestrians. Many drivers westbound at that intersection have impatiently cut through the neighborhood on Olive Drive after exiting I-80. They are hoping to jump the line of cars exiting 80 at Richards by making a quick right turn towards the tunnel. Unless held up by traffic ahead of them, these drivers almost always roll through the red light and are seldom yielding to pedestrians in that crosswalk as they should. (Rule #1 in the Caltrans Complete Intersections design manual is “Observe.) Once pedestrians get across Richards, assuming they survive the trip, they walk downhill into a tight tunnel that they share with two-way bicycle traffic moving at speed after accelerating downhill. Then they must wait for the interminably long traffic signals at the 1st Street intersection to cycle, cross 1st, wait again to cross E, walk to F Street to cross while watching for cars turning left onto F who have no stop sign, then navigate to the train station. This walk is over 3,000 feet, must more than half a mile. If I were a parent living on Olive Drive, I would not allow my child to walk or bike that route to get to schools north of the tracks. I would drive them. How does that contribute to our emissions reduction or exercise efforts? That fence needs to come down and a proper at-grade crossing installed, as has been done in dozens of locations all over California. PS: I’ll volunteer for your godamn committee, and will be happy to serve as the designated fact checker.
Respectfully, I agree that an at-grade crossing is needed. However, a fence was part of any plan. The fence is needed to funnel people to the crossing, otherwise, many will cross elsewhere. The city of course would not have put up the industrial-silver undulating ugliness that we are stuck with probably forever. Also, the city planned to run the fence east another 1000′ or so, so it wouldn’t stop at a point directly across from a back path entrance and a bar. Where UP ended the fence is exactly where the suicide was a few weeks ago. Was the person crossing the tracks there to get around the fence where it ends, a spot the city told UP was dangerous, and thus UP’s design actually contributed to the death? We will never know for sure., but it’s possible. I thought I’d suggest that since someone suggested in comments a year ago that our mayor contributed to the last death on the tracks by delaying the fence in trying to stop its construction until a decision could be made on the crossing, and UP strongly implied the same thing of Davis more generally at the PUC hearings. Turnabout is fair play.
I retract my snarky comment and apologize to UP, as the suicide was indeed further east I am reminded. I do maintain however that where they chose to end the fence was a poor choice and it should have ended further east where it is less convenient and more difficult to cross the tracks. One can easily see the well-used pedestrian paths that go around the fence at the east end, and they lead right to Sudwerk and the Bike path that goes under the Pole Line overcrossing.
Rich,
From a previous conversation you I had on this site, I am aware that you have a loved one who suffers from mental illness. I sympathize with your situation and emotional concerns about suicide. However I would like to point out that suicidal beings have an uncanny ability to get the job done when they really want to end their lives.
Like you, I have a connection to mental illness, having run the physical plant for Marin Parents for Mental Recovery for four years. During that time two of residents, who I had daily contact with, committed suicide. Somehow, each person managed to get from the Marin Lodge residential treatment facility in west Marin, to the toll booth of the GoldenGate Bridge, where they jumped to their deaths. Both of these folks were daily under the watchful eye of counselors, but somehow managed to avoid taking their medications and were apparently in a decompensated state when they chose to end their suffering.
My point, with regards to the railroad fence/crossing issue in Davis, is that people who want to kill themselves are not even going to be slowed down by a fence along only one side of a rail track. Adding a necessary at grade crossing makes no difference in the mental illness equation.
Until we, as a society, stop ignoring mental illness we are going to continue to experience these tragedies like the recent Newtown shootings. We need to spend less money locking up folks in prison for self medicating, and more money learning about why they do so. I wish you nothing but the best with your mentally ill loved one!