Loading...
2022-09-27 - Agendas - Final City Council Transportation Committee Tuesday, September 27, 2022 5:30 pm or Immediately Following Agenda Session NOTICE: THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE WILL BE HELD VIRTUALLY WITH NO PHYSICAL LOCATION TO ATTEND VIDEO CONFERENCING BY ZOOM WILL BE USED FOR THIS MEETING. TO REGISTER FOR THE MEETING GO TO THIS Registration Link Members: Sarah Bunch, Chairperson; Sonia Harvey; Holly Hertzberg; Mark Kinion City Staff: Chris Brown, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Terry Gulley, Asst. PW Director for Operations/Transportation Services Director Agenda: 1. New Business: A. Razorback/15th Railroad Agreement – An agreement with AMMR for expansion of the existing crossing on 15th Street and installation of new crossing gates and hardware for coordination with our proposed traffic signal at the intersection of Razorback and 15th. (Staff requests a recommendation of approval from the Committee to the City Council) B. Carbon Reduction Program Grant - A Resolution expressing the willingness of the City of Fayetteville to apply for and utilize Carbon Reduction Program (CRP) funding for street lighting improvement projects at major intersections and other city owned facilities and streets. (Staff requests a recommendation of approval from the Committee to the City Council) C. I-49/MLK Interchange Trail Tunnel – Presentation of the cost estimate for the proposed Shiloh Trail tunnel under MLK and proposal of alternatives for consideration. D. Railroad Crossing Elimination Study Grant – A resolution to express willingness to provide matching funds for a grant providing funds for the study of railroad crossings withing the City of Fayetteville. (Staff requests a recommendation of approval from the Committee to the City Council) 2. Adjourn Comments: Purchase Order Number: Change Order Number: Previous Ordinance or Resolution # Approval Date: Original Contract Number: 46020.7222 Project Number Budget Impact: 15th St. / Razorback Rd. Intersection Fund Streets Project (2019 Bonds)4702.860.7222‐5809.00 Account Number Project Title City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2022‐0884 Legistar File ID 10/4/2022 City Council Meeting Date ‐ Agenda Item Only Staff recommends approval of a Railroad Crossing Agreement with the Arkansas and Missouri Railroad (AMRR) in  the amount of $839,774.60 for the modifications required for the Razorback Rd. and 15th St. Intersection Project,  approval of a project contingency of $80,000.00, and approval of a budget adjustment. N/A for Non‐Agenda Item  Action Recommendation: Submitted By Matt Casey ENGINEERING (621) Division / Department 9/15/2022 Submitted Date Yes 3,059,155.30$                     919,774.60$                        Must Attach Completed Budget Adjustment! V20210527 Budgeted Item? Does item have a cost? Budget Adjustment Attached? Current Budget Funds Obligated Current Balance Item Cost Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget 21,218,438.00$                   18,159,282.70$                   Yes Yes 919,775.00$                        3,059,155.70$                     MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2022 TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Susan Norton, Chief of Staff Chris Brown, Public Works Director FROM: Matt Casey, Engineering Design Manager DATE: September 15, 2022 SUBJECT: Railroad Crossing Agreement with the Arkansas and Missouri Railroad (AMRR) in the amount of $839,774.60 for the modifications required for the Razorback Rd. and 15th St. Intersection Project, approval of a project contingency of $80,000.00, and approval of a budget adjustment RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a Railroad Crossing Agreement with the Arkansas and Missouri Railroad (AMRR) in the amount of $839,774.60 for the modifications required for the Razorback Rd. and 15th St. Intersection Project, approval of a project contingency of $80,000.00, and approval of a budget adjustment BACKGROUND: The intersection of Razorback Road and 15th Street is a large intersection with multiple lanes entering the intersection on each leg. The intersection is currently controlled as a four way stop with stop signs on each leg. Being located in close vicinity of the Baum-Walker Stadium, Pinnacle Foods, and multiple apartment complexes, this intersection sees a high volume of traffic. Improvements to this intersection were identified as a priority project in the 2019 Transportation Bond Program. The City of Fayetteville Engineering Division evaluated both a roundabout and signal design for this location. Concepts for both options were presented to the Transportation Committee in October of 2019. Due to the higher cost of construction for the roundabout and the potential for high pedestrian traffic, it was decided to move forward with the signal design. The Engineering Division has completed the design and is in the process of permitting this project through ArDOT and the railroad. DISCUSSION: With the proposed road widening and sidewalk installation, some modifications are required for the existing railroad crossing. The improvements include widening of the crossing as well as new crossing gates and lights that will be interconnected with the new traffic signal. AMRR has presented an agreement to the City for the design work and the construction necessary for the improvements and widening of the railroad crossing in the amount of $839,774.60. 2 BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: The design and construction for this project will be paid for with the funds from the 2019 Transportation Bond Fund. Attachments: AMRR agreement RAILROAD CROSSING UPGRADE COST AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT This Agreement, made and entered into this _14th_ day of September, 2022, by and between the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas (hereinafter “City”) and The Arkansas & Missouri Railroad Company, (hereinafter “AMRR”), WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, City is in the process of planning an upgrade to the existing warning system (gates and lights) at the railroad crossing intersecting 15th Street (also known as Highway 16) and Razorback Road within the City limits at railroad milepost 354.07 which is DOT Project # 667203Y. The City proposes, for the benefit of the public, to upgrade this crossing, pursuant to the Exhibits referenced below, all of which are incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, it is understood that the contemplated crossing upgrade will be financed solely from funds appropriated by City and expended under its regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and agreements contained in this agreement, subject to the provisions of the recitals above, it is agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1.AMRR has provided an estimate for the cost of the crossing upgrade which is attached as Exhibit 1. The parties understand that the estimate is $839,774.60 and the parties acknowledge that the ultimate cost of the crossing upgrade could be under or over this estimate. Upon final completion of the project, all said materials and crossing equipment shall become the property of AMRR. 2.AMRR shall be reimbursed 100% of the actual cost (labor and material) for installing the new equipment and its invoices will be paid promptly. Material will be billed as it is ordered by AMRR. The City acknowledges that any work within 25 feet of the tracks requires a Flagging Services Agreement for railroad track protection, including, but not limited to, railroad flagging which is charged at the rate of $150 per hour. A Flagging Services Agreement will be executed simultaneously with the execution of this Agreement. 3.Maintenance and Repairs. The parties acknowledge that the crossing and equipment will require maintenance and repairs due to normal wear and tear and possibly damage from accidents, negligence or acts of nature. The City will not be liable for any damages caused solely by the negligence of AMRR. If damages are caused to the crossing and/or equipment by the acts of 3rd parties, AMRR and the City will coordinate to pursue any cause of action against said 3rd parties to recover the costs of repairs and any amount recovered will be applied accordingly. If the recovery is less than the cost of repairs then AMRR and the City of Fayetteville agree to share in the cost of needed repairs. The crossing shall be maintained until such time as the parties mutually agree otherwise or upon a date certain that the crossing should be closed. 4. Incorporated Documents: The following documents are attached as Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 respectively and are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth herein word for word: Exhibit 1: Estimate of costs; Exhibit 2: Review of grade crossing performed by Alfred Benesch and Company for the City, dated October 7, 2021 and Revised July 20, 2022; Exhibit 3: Plans and specifications prepared by the Engineering Division of the City. 5. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to its subject matter and may not be modified or amended orally. 6. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of Arkansas. 7. Binding Effect. The provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of each of the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. 8. Both parties acknowledge that the signatories below have the appropriate authority to sign on behalf of the party they represent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals this ___ day of ________, 2022. THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS Approved by:___________________________ Signature _____________________________________ Print Name _____________________________________ Title ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF ARKANSAS ) ) §§ COUNTY OF ___________ ) On this _________ day of ______________, 2022, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public, duly commissioned, qualified, and acting, within and for said County and State, appeared in person, _____________________________, to me personally well-known who stated that he/she is the ______________________ for the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS, and is duly authorized in his/her capacity to execute the foregoing instrument and for and in the name and behalf of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and further stated and acknowledged that he/she had so signed, executed, and delivered said foregoing instrument for the consideration, uses, and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal the day and year stated above. __________________________________ Notary Public My Commission Expires: ____________________ ARKANSAS & MISSOURI RAILROAD COMPANY Approved by: ___________________________ Signature CAREN L. KRASKA Print Name President Title ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF ARKANSAS ) ) §§ COUNTY OF ___________ ) On this _________ day of ______________, 2022, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public, duly commissioned, qualified, and acting, within and for said County and State, appeared in person, CAREN L. KRASKA, to me personally well-known who stated that she is the President of ARKANSAS & MISSOURI RAILROAD COMPANY and is duly authorized in her capacity to execute the foregoing instrument and for and in the name and behalf of Arkansas & Missouri Railroad Company, and further stated and acknowledged that she had so signed, executed, and delivered said foregoing instrument for the consideration, uses, and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal the day and year stated above. __________________________________ Notary Public My Commission Expires: ____________________ Arkansaas & Missouri Railroad Date:August 23, 2022 306 E. Emma Ave Springdale, AR 72764 To: Job: Prepared by: Jeromy Houchin Item #Qty Unit Unit Price Line Total 1 2 EA 85,025.00$ 170,050.00$ 2 12.000 EA 1,100.00$ 13,200.00$ 3 150.000 TN 25.00$ 3,750.00$ 4 8.000 EA 85.00$ 680.00$ 5 1.000 KG 290.00$ 290.00$ 6 50.000 EA 0.38$ 19.00$ 7 26.000 EA 135.00$ 3,510.00$ 8 56.875 FT 215.00$ 12,228.13$ 9 3.1 TN 1,500.00$ 4,650.00$ 10 50 EA 224.50$ 11,225.00$ 11 225 EA 3.90$ 877.50$ 12 4 EA 2,450.00$ 9,800.00$ 13 8 EA 200.00$ 1,600.00$ 14 150 TN 19.00$ 2,850.00$ 15 20 TN 100.00$ 2,000.00$ 236,729.63$ Tax 23,081.14$ Shipping 7,500.00$ Subtotal (material)267,310.76$ Item #Qty Unit Unit Price Line Total 1 1 LS 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$ 2 2 EA 25,000.00$ 50,000.00$ 3 1 LS 291,001.40$ 291,001.40$ 4 15 DY 1,250.00$ 18,750.00$ 5 5 DY 3,950.00$ 19,750.00$ 6 2 DY 3,500.00$ 7,000.00$ 7 5 DY 1,500.00$ 7,500.00$ 8 1 LS 1,000.00$ 1,000.00$ 9 1 LS 25,000.00$ 25,000.00$ 10 1 LS 7,500.00$ 7,500.00$ Subtotal (Labor)432,501.40$ Contingency 139,962.43$ Total 839,774.60$ 15th (HWY 16) and Razorback Rd. New crossing warning system (interconnected), new road crossing, 2 turnouts. 2 Person Surfacing Crew Operator Oversized Load Permit Fees Asphalt Contractor Road Closure Transition Rails Welding Kits Ballast Asphalt 4 Person Crew Attn: Matt Blanchard - Matt Casey Description Labor & Services Lock Washers Description Material #4 Mainline Railroad Ballast 115# Bars - Pair Bolts City of Fayetteville 115# Welding Kits RH 115# #9 Turnouts RBM Insulated 115# New to 1/4" Worn - Transition Rail Construct, Install and Surface #9 Turnout Engineering Design Flagging CWS - Riotech (Engineering, Material and Labor) Concrete Crossing Panels 115# Rail Pre-Plated Ties Pandrol Clips Exhibit 1 GLWA-SOQ-020 | 0 Review of Interconnected Review of Interconnected Highway-Rail Grade Crossing DOT# 667203Y West 15th Street (State Highway 16) Fayetteville, AR Arkansas & Missouri Railroad MP 354.07, 1st Subdivision Prepared by Alfred Benesch & Company for City of Fayetteville October 7, 2021 Revised July 20, 2022 Copyright 2021, of Alfred Benesch & Company. All rights reserved [17 U.S.C.]. This report and its content are the property of Alfred Benesch & Company. Use, reuse, reproduction or modification of this plan or design information, or any part thereof, is strictly prohibited, except by written permission of this firm. This document is governed by 23 U.S.C. § 409. Exhibit 2 (pages 6 - 28) City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 1 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document Highway-Rail Grade Crossing DOT# 667203Y West 15th Street (State Highway 16) Fayetteville, Arkansas Arkansas & Missouri Railroad MP 354.07, 1st Subdivision Prepared by: I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Arkansas. This report represents an electronic version of the original hard copy report, sealed, signed and dated by Nicole L. Jackson, PE, PTOE. The content of the electronically transmitted report can be confirmed by referring to the original hard copy that will be kept on file with Alfred Benesch & Company. ______________________________________ Nicole L. Jackson, PE, PTOE Arkansas License No. 16265 City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 2 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................3 1.1 Project Information ...................................................................................................................................3 1.2 References.................................................................................................................................................4 2 PARTIES OF INTEREST .............................................................................................................................4 3 RAILROAD PREEMPTION DESIGN ELEMENTS ...........................................................................................5 3.1 Railroad Characteristics ............................................................................................................................5 3.2 Traffic Characteristics ................................................................................................................................5 4 REQUESTED RAILROAD PREEMPTION TIME .............................................................................................7 5 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................................8 5.1 Design Recommendations ........................................................................................................................8 5.2 Implementation Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 10 6 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................................... 11 APPENDIX A – REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 12 APPENDIX B – END NOTES ............................................................................................................................ 13 APPENDIX C – PREEMPTION CALCULATION FORM ......................................................................................... 20 TABLE OF CONTENTS City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 3 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Information Alfred Benesch & Company (Benesch) conducted a review of the highway-rail grade crossing (DOT# 667203Y) on the Arkansas & Missouri Railroad (Railroad), 1st Subdivision located near the intersection of West 15th Street (State Highway 16) and Razorback Road (State Highway 112) in Fayetteville, Arkansas. The review incorporates an analysis of the preemption calculations and additional design documents provided by the City of Fayetteville (Agency) and the Railroad. FIGURE 1 – W 15TH ST (SH 16) @ R AZORBACK R D (SH 112), DOT# 667203Y The Agency requested advance preemption time for this highway-rail grade crossing. This report expands on the proposed preemption time requirements and provides recommendations to improve the preemption operations in accordance with the referenced material, MUTCD and industry best practices. Benesch and the Railroad recognize that the decision to incorporate any recommendations made within this report is determined by the highway agency or authority with jurisdiction and the regulatory agency with statutory authority (where applicable) in accordance with requirements set forth in the 2009 MUTCD Second Edition, Section 8A.01. The actions of the Railroad are limited. City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 4 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document 1.2 References The following documents were submitted by the Agency and Railroad to assist in the review:  TXDOT Preemption Calculation Form dated June 17, 2022  Razorback Rd (Hwy 112) & 15th St (Hwy 16) intersection Improvements Pavement Marking and Signage Plans dated February 23, 2021  Razorback Rd (Hwy 112) & 15th St (Hwy 16) intersection Improvements Traffic Signals, Signals, Mast Arms and Conduit Plan dated March 30, 2021  Preemption Request Form dated July 6, 2022 Appendix A contains additional documents, reference material and manuals on recommended practices which were utilized to further evaluate the interconnection design and operation of the highway-rail grade crossing. 2 PARTIES OF INTEREST The main contact information for each entity during the preemption review process is outlined below: T ABLE 1 - CONTACT INFORMATION Agency: Matt Blanchard, PE Staff Engineer City of Fayetteville 125 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 mblanchard@fayetteville-ar.gov 479-575-8205 ARDOT: Paulette Rice, PMP Railroad Coordinator Arkansas Department of Transportation PO Box 2261 Little Rock, AR 72203 paulette.rice@ardot.gov 501-569-2557 Railroad: Jeromy Houchin Chief Engineer Arkansas & Missouri Railroad 306 East Emma Avenue Springdale, AR 72764 jeromyh@amrailroad.com 479-790-0647 City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 5 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document 3 RAILROAD PREEMPTION DESIGN ELEMENTS The Agency must take into account a number of design elements when providing preemption control1 by interconnecting the railroad active warning system with the traffic signal equipment. The grade crossing circuit design, roadway layout and traffic signal design all provide information on the existing and any proposed characteristics for the grade crossing and adjacent intersection. The following sections outline the railroad and traffic characteristics that were identified during the review. NOTE: Benesch has not field verified the values presented on the preemption calculation form. However, an overview of the grade crossing through Google Earth and the plans provided was conducted to review the measurements and values. 3.1 Railroad Characteristics  The Railroad operates on one main line track siding track through the grade crossing.  Flashing-light signals with automatic gates are proposed at the grade crossing.  Overhead flashing-light signals are provided for the eastbound and westbound approach on West 15th Street (State Highway 16).  Pedestrian flashing-light signals with automatic gates are proposed on the pedestrian pathways in all quadrants. 3.2 Traffic Characteristics  The roadway consists of three lanes proposed over the tracks approaching the intersection with Razorback Road (State Highway 112).  The proposed traffic signal controller is McCain ATC eX2.  The proposed traffic signal controller firmware is Omni eX.  The clear storage distance2 (CSD) is 166 feet.  The minimum track clearance distance 3 (MTCD) is 38 feet.  The design vehicle4 is a 75-foot tractor trailer. 1 Preemption Control – A special sequence of signal phases and timing to expedite and/or provide additional clearance time for vehicles to clear the tracks prior to the arrival of rail traffic (MUTCD 2009 Second Edition, Chapter 4D, Section 4D.03). 2 Clear Storage Distance – The distance available for vehicle storage measured between 6 feet from the rail nearest the intersection to the intersection stop line or the normal stopping point on the highway (MUTCD 2009 Second Edition, Chapter 1A, Section 1A.13). 3 Minimum Track Clearance Distance – For standard two-quadrant warning devices, the minimum track clearance distance is the length along a highway at one or more railroad or light rail transit tracks, measured from the highway stop line, warning device, or 12 feet perpendicular to the track center line, to 6 feet beyond the furthest track(s) measured perpendicular to the far rail, along the center line or edge line of the highway, as appropriate, to obtain the longest distance (MUTCD 2009 Second Edition, Chapter 1A, Section 1A.13). 4 Design Vehicle – The longest vehicle permitted by statute of the road authority (State or other) on that roadway (AREMA, Part 3.3.10, D. 4.). City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 6 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document  The approach grade is indicated to be 0.9% in the preemption calculations.  The proposed right-of-way transfer time 5 (RWTT) for APT is as follows: T ABLE 2 - RIGHT OF WAY TRANSFER TIME Traffic Signal Preemption Timing Values Preempt Delay Time 6 0.0 Controller Response Time to Preempt 7 0.0 Minimum Green Time 5 Other Green Time 0 Yellow Change Time 4.0 Red Clearance Time + 4.3 Total Vehicle Interval Time 13.3 Minimum Walk Time 0 Pedestrian Change (PC) Time 0 Yellow Change Time 0 Red Clearance Time + 0 Total Pedestrian Interval Time 0 Max: Total Vehicle or Total Pedestrian Interval Time 13.3 Additional RWTT + 0 Maximum RWTT 13.3 5 Right-of-Way Transfer Time – The maximum amount of time needed for the worst-case condition, prior to the display of the track clearance green interval. This includes any railroad or light rail transit or highway traffic signal control equipment time to react to the preemption call, and any traffic control signal green, pedestrian walk and clearance, yellow change, and red clearance intervals for conflicting traffic (MUTCD 2009 Second Edition, Chapter 1A, Section 1A.13). 6 Preempt Delay Time – The amount of time, in seconds, that the traffic signal controller is programmed to wait from the initial receipt of a preempt call until the call is “verified” and considered a viable request for transfer into preemption mode. Preempt delay time should be a whole number value entered into the controller unit for purposes of preempt call validation, and may not be available on all manufacturer’s controllers (TXDOT, July 2017, Form 2304 Instructions). 7 Controller Response Time to Preempt – The time that elapses while the controller unit electronically registers the preempt call. The controller manufacturer should be consulted to find the correct value (in seconds) for use (TXDOT, July 2017, Form 2304 Instructions). City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 7 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document 4 REQUESTED RAILROAD PREEMPTION TIME The table below summarizes the railroad preemption time proposed for the highway-rail grade crossing: T ABLE 3 - R AILROAD PREEMPTION VALUES Preemption Values Minimum Time (MT)8 20 Clearance Time (CT)9* + 1 Prescribed Warning Time 10 (MT + CT) 21 Buffer Time (BT)11* 5 Advance Preemption Time (APT) + 24 Programmed System Design Time (SDT)12 minus Equipment Response Time (ERT)13* [SDT – ERT] (Subject to AREMA 50-second limitation) 50 Equipment Response Time (ERT)* + 5 Total Approach Time or System Design Time (SDT) 55 *To Be Confirmed by Railroad during Approach Design The Agency requests 24 seconds of APT (see Appendix D for more information on the preemption values). 8 Minimum Time (MT) – Grade crossing warning devices shall operate for a minimum of 20 seconds for normal operation of through trains (49 C.F.R. 234.225, AREMA, Part 3.3.10, C. 1.). 9 Clearance Time (CT) – If the MTCD exceeds 35 feet, clearance time is one second for each additional 10 feet, or portion thereof, over 35 feet. (AREMA, Part 3.3.10, C.2a) 10 Prescribed Warning Time [Minimum Warning Time] (PWT) – For through train movements, prescribed warning time (minimum warning time) is the least amount of time active warning devices shall operate prior to the arrival of a train at a grade crossing (AREMA, Part 3.3.10, D. 8.). 11 Buffer Time (BT) – Buffer Time is discretionary and may be provided in addition to MT, CT and EGCT to accommodate for minor variations in train handling, track circuit variability and allowable tolerances within locomotive speed measurement apparatus (AREMA, Part 3.3.10, C. 5.). 12 System Design Time (SDT) – The sum of the Prescribed Warning Time, BT, Equipment Response Time (ERT-A, C and D) and APT. (AREMA, Part 3.3.10, C. 10.) 13 Equipment Response Time– This parameter is the time provided in accordance with the manufacturers recommendations for equipment acquisition (response) time for train detection (AREMA, Part 3.3.10, C. 6a.). City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 8 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document 5 RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations have been proposed to improve the railroad preemption operations and overall safety of the grade crossing in accordance with any applicable federal, state or local regulations/guidelines and industry best or recommended practice. The MUTCD provides that the Agency has sole responsibility in determining the operational design and any time required for railroad preemption operations at an interconnected grade crossing. The Agency should carefully review each recommendation, as numerous solutions may exist for any problem identified. 5.1 Design Recommendations  The Agency has requested the following interconnection circuits A on the attached Traffic Signal Preemption Request Form (ITE). The Agency shall ensure the circuitry involving both the traffic signal and railroad are fully operational at the time of implementation:  Advance Preemption Circuit B  Supervised Circuit C  Crossing Active Circuit D  Gate Down Circuit E  Traffic Signal Health Circuit F NOTE: Descriptions for each interconnection circuits and configuration along with some example interface methodsG can be found in Appendix B.  The Agency has specified, on the attached Preemption Request Form, an interconnection cable adequate for the requested interconnection circuits and configuration (ITE 2019). The Agency is responsible for providing and maintaining the interconnection cable, pull boxes and conduit needed for the requested preemption operations from the traffic signal equipment to the Railroad equipment house. All equipment must be installed prior to the Railroad construction phase. For safety purposes, it is recommended that the interconnection power provided by the Agency for the interconnection be limited to a maximum of 28 Vac or Vdc.  Determine an adequate preemption clearance interval minimum time H that allows sufficient opportunity for a design vehicle to clear the grade crossing (TRB 2017). The preemption clearance interval is the programmed minimum time and phases in the preemption plan settings of the traffic signal controller that are displayed for highway users which may be stopped in the MTCD and CSD. MUTCD 2009 Second Edition, Chapter 8C, Section 8C.09, Paragraph 6: “The highway agency or authority with jurisdiction and the regulatory agency with statutory authority, if applicable, should jointly determine the preemption operation and the timing of traffic control signals interconnected with highway-rail grade crossings adjacent to signalized highway intersections.” City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 9 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document While normally displayed as green indications and frequently referred to as track clearance green, the preemption clearance interval may be displayed as all-red indications or some combination of flashing and steady indications based on site specific needs. The amount of traffic clearance green time for this grade crossing is dependent on the interconnect circuits chosen for the grade crossing:  A gate down circuit is proposed in the traffic signal design. Since the Agency has elected to request a gate down circuit from the railroad, the preemption clearance interval programmed as track clearance green should be displayed a minimum of 27 seconds which is the queue clearance time 14 determined by the preemption calculations. Due to the length of the CSD, the Agency should consider extending the track clearance green by a minimum of 5 seconds after receipt of the gate down indication from the grade crossing warning system.  Implement a maximum preemption timer I (ITE 2019). If, for any reason, the traffic signal controller preemption remains active for an extended period of time, this timer allows the controller to exit the preemption plan and enter an all-red flash mode.  Consider providing a back-up power supply for the traffic signal equipment (MUTCD 2009 Second Edition). Traffic signal systems interconnected to grade crossing warning systems should be provided with a back-up power supply. In doing so, the traffic signal controller is equipped for continued operation in the event of power outages and a track clearance interval can be provided during a train event under these conditions.  Consider relocating the proposed left and right and through arrow pavement markings a minimum of 100 feet in advance of the grade crossing (FHWA 2019). Drivers may interpret the highway-rail grade crossing as a highway-highway intersection in certain situations if the arrow pavement markings are installed too close to the grade crossing (low light, poor visibility due to fog or other, impaired driver) and can increase the potential for drivers to turn onto the tracks. These arrow markings should be placed further away from the grade crossing so that drivers do not associate the arrow markings with the highway-rail grade crossing.  Consider installation of “DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS” (R8-8) sign downstream of the grade crossing (MUTCD 2009 Second Edition). These signs should be installed when the potential for vehicles to stop 14 Queue Clearance Time – The time required for the design vehicle of maximum length stopped just inside the MTCD to start up and move through and clear the entire MTCD. If pre-signals are present, this time shall be long enough to allow the vehicle to move through the intersection, or to clear the tracks if there is sufficient CSD. If a four-quadrant gate system is present, this time shall be long enough to permit the exit gate arm to lower after the design vehicle is clear of the MTCD (MUTCD 2009 Second Edition, Chapter 1A, Section 1A. 13). City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 10 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document on the grade crossing is significant. The signs provide warning to the drivers that they must not stop on the grade crossing and remind them that it is prohibited to do so.  Evaluate placement of the detectable warning surfaces at the pedestrian flashing-light signals with automatic gates. In the plans provided, the detectable warning surfaces are planned to be placed 12 feet from the near rail. Ensure the placement of the detectable warning surfaces at each pedestrian flashing-light signal with automatic gates is placed 2 feet in advance of the automatic gate. (ATBCB, 2013)  Consider installation of a warning label for the traffic signal cabinet to notify personnel that the traffic signal is interconnected with the grade crossing warning system (US DOT TWG 1997).  Develop and follow a preemption operation and maintenance programJ. The railroad preemption system should be tested on an annual basis. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Safety Advisory 2010-02, details recommendations for annual joint testing of interconnected Railroad and Traffic Signal Systems. MUTCD 4D.02 also provides operation and maintenance guidance. The Railroad will work with the Agency to ensure that the interconnected traffic signal continues to operate as design and requests that any future changes are discussed and jointly approved in a collaborative manner. The Agency should develop a special preemption operation program in the event of operational failure of traffic signals or other events that may affect the operation of the interconnected highway by causing extended queues across the tracks. The events that could require use of this plan are emergency or planned construction and special events. The plan should include notifying the railroad and proceeding forward with a traffic management plan to mitigate the possible traffic queues across the tracks. 5.2 Implementation Recommendations The Agency and Railroad should perform thorough joint testing upon implementation of the preemption timing and operation to confirm that the traffic signal controller hardware and firmware is operating according to the design. Some of the testing that should be conducted are outlined below.  Thoroughly test the programming of the traffic signal controller during advance preemption to ensure the total right-of-way transfer time does not exceed 13.3 seconds (see preemption calculation form in appendix D). If the Agency elects to make timing adjustments to the programmed minimum green time, yellow change time or red clearance time, the combined sum must not exceed the maximum right-of- way transfer time established on the preemption calculation form. If it is determined that additional right-of-way transfer time is needed, the Agency must request an increase in APT from the Railroad.  Thoroughly test the programming of the traffic signal controller during railroad preemption to ensure the preemption clearance interval minimum time is in accordance with the design plans. The preemption clearance interval is the programmed minimum time and phases in the preemption plan settings of the traffic signal controller that are displayed for highway users which may be stopped in the MTCD and CSD. While normally displayed as green indications and frequently referred to as track City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 11 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document clearance green, the preemption clearance interval may be displayed as all-red indications, or some combination of flashing and steady indications based on site specific needs.  Confirm traffic signal controller can respond in a train restart. A train has the potential of stopping and restarting within the grade crossing circuitry approach. In addition, nearby switching operations are characteristics of this location and may result in multiple preemption and warning system activations within a short period of time. After receiving the preemption call from the first train event, the traffic signal controller must be able to return to the track clearance interval and provide an opportunity to clear a design vehicle from the MTCD during any subsequent train event. Additional logic may be required depending on the traffic signal controller hardware and firmware.  Thoroughly test all interconnection circuits to ensure the circuitry involving both the traffic signal and railroad are fully operational at the time of implementation. Testing should be conducted to evaluate communications between the traffic signal and railroad circuitry and ensure the requested circuits operate as designed. 6 CONCLUSION Benesch is providing this report as recommendations for improvements to the traffic signal and railroad operations at this grade crossing location in regard to railroad preemption. Further discussion and collaboration should take place between the Agency and Railroad in order to address the concerns discussed in this report. Future changes in design outside the scope of this report or upgrades after implementation of the recommendations put forth in this report will require further collaborative work and review by the Agency and Railroad. The Railroad respectfully requests that the Agency continue to consult and partner with them in this process. The Railroad requests that the Agency provide the traffic signal timing and wiring information with the construction schedule at least two months prior to the traffic signal controller bench testing (if required) and four months prior to the proposed cutover with the Railroad. City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 12 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document APPENDIX A – REFERENCES  23 C.F.R. 646, Subpart B, Railroad-Highway Projects. Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.)  49 C.F.R. 392.10, Railroad Grade crossings; Stopping Required. Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.)  17 U.S.C., Copyright. United States Code (U.S.C.)  23 U.S.C. 409, Discovery and admission as evidence of certain reports and surveys. United States Code (U.S.C.)  AREMA (2019). Manual for Communications and Signals, Volume 1, Section 3 (C&S Manual). Landover, MD: American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA).  ATBCB (2013). Public Rights-of-Way, Accessibility Guidelines. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (ATBCB).  FHWA (May 2012). 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) - Revision 2. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).  FHWA (2019). Highway-Rail Crossing Handbook – 3rd Edition. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).  FRA (July 25, 2012). Technical Bulletin S-12-01, Guidance Regarding the Appropriate Processes for the Inspection of Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Warning System Pre-emption Interconnections with Highway Traffic Signals. Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).  FRA (October 1, 2010). Federal Register Volume 75, Issue 190 - Safety Advisory 2010-02, Signal Recording Devices for Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Active Warning Systems that are Interconnected with Highway Traffic Signal Systems. Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).  ITE (April 2019). Preemption of Traffic Signals Near Railroad Crossings. Washington, DC. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).  NTSB (2003). Collision Between Metrolink Train 210 and Ford Crew Cab, Stake Bed Truck at Highway-Rail Grade Crossing in Burbank, California, on January 6, 2003, Highway Accident Report NTSB/HAR-03/04. Washington, DC: National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).  TRB (2015). National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), Report 812, Signal Timing Manual, Section 6.1.3.2 - Minimum Green Based on Driver Expectancy. Transportation Research Board (TRB)  TRB (2003). National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), Report 493, Evaluation of Traffic Signal Displays for Protected/Permissive Left-Turn Control. Transportation Research Board (TRB).  TRB (2017). National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), Synthesis 507, Traffic Signal Operations near Highway-Rail Grade Crossings. Transportation Research Board (TRB).  TTI (March 2002). Report 1752-9, The Preempt Trap: How to Make Sure You Do Not Have One. Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI).  TXDOT (March 2009). Form 2304 Instructions, Instructions for the Guide for Determining Time Requirements for Traffic Signal Preemption at Highway Grade Crossings. Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT).  TXDOT (March 2009). Form 2304, Guide for Determining Time Requirements for Traffic Signal Preemption at Highway Grade Crossings. Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT).  USDOT–TWG (June 1, 1997). Implementation Report of the USDOT Grade Crossing Safety Task Force. Department of Transportation – Technical Work Group (DOT-TWG). City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 13 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document APPENDIX B – END NOTES A Interconnection Circuits: The interconnection is the means by which information is shared between a grade crossing warning system and a traffic control device. While the most frequent use of an interconnection is for preemption of a traffic signal controller, other uses involve train activated advance warning beacons, illumination of blank-out signs, remote notification of a crossing occupied by a train or activation of a wayside horn. Interconnection circuits are most commonly found as a combination of various individual control functions necessary to implement the desired preemption operation. They typically use one or more conductors in a cable to deliver the required function. However, some agencies utilize safety-critical data circuits to provide the interconnection. In some cases, these data circuits contain the vehicle and pedestrian signal status as a part of the message. This type of circuit is more commonly found where advanced monitoring or automated testing of the preemption operation is desired. Excluding the data circuits, discrete interconnection circuits require a source of power from the traffic signal controller to operate. The power for the interconnection circuits should meet the following criteria: • Applied energy should not exceed 28 Vac or Vdc. While many interconnection circuits have historically used 120 Vac, this presents a potential safety hazard to maintenance personnel in the railroad warning system enclosure. • Applied energy should be from an isolated (non-grounded) source. • Applied energy should be over-current protected, especially if a potential greater than 28 V is used. The use of a simple 120 Vac to 24 Vac transformer or a DC power supply that incorporates a step-down transformer will satisfy the first two bullet points listed above. The following is a listing of the most commonly encountered interconnection circuits in use. Because each grade crossing has preemption needs based on site-specific conditions, not all the circuits are used at every location. It is also possible that based on a specific need, an interconnection circuit other than those identified here may be implemented. Regardless, every circuit should be evaluated for necessity and where a special circuit is implemented, a hazard analysis should be performed to assess the failure modes and effects. In reviewing the advance preemption circuits, three circuit types are identified, APP, AVP and AP. The actual usage is typically AP alone or AVP and APP together. Generally, the time provided by the grade crossing warning system where an AP circuit is used equals the sum of the time where an APP and AVP circuit are used. In many cases, where the preemption operation necessitates that additional time be provided for pedestrian change interval, separating the APP from AVP provides a means to maintain the AVP preemption time under the AREMA 50 second time limit for SDT – ERT. B Advance Preemption Circuit: The Advance Preemption (AP) circuit provides an input to the traffic signal controller to initiate preemption operation a calculated amount of time before activation of the grade crossing warning devices. The time between when the preempt call is made to the traffic signal controller and when the warning devices become City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 14 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document active is known as Advance Preemption Time (APT). The AP circuit is used to terminate any active non- Preemption Clearance Intervals and transition to the programmed Preemption Clearance Interval. C Supervised Circuit: The supervised circuit is used to safeguard the reliability of railroad preemption activations by monitoring the integrity of the interconnection cable between the grade crossing warning system and the traffic signal system. While any interconnection circuit can include a Supervised Circuit, it is typically only implemented with the highest priority preemption interconnection circuit. The supervised circuit does not provide any operational control functions in the normal preemption sequence or timing. During railroad preemption activations, the Advance Preemption (AP) circuit or Advance Vehicle Preemption (AVP) circuit (advance preemption operation to Preemption Clearance Interval) or the crossing active circuit (simultaneous preemption operation to Preemption Clearance Interval) opens upon notification of a train approaching the crossing, while the corresponding supervised circuit closes. Under normal conditions, the supervised circuit is out-of-correspondence with its associated preemption circuit. In other words, one circuit is closed and the other is open. In the event of a failure of the interconnection cable or system, the supervised circuit will be in-correspondence with the associated preemption circuit, where both circuits are either open or both circuits are closed. The in- correspondence condition indicates that an interconnection fault has occurred to the traffic signal controller. These types of system failures can be caused by a number of differing conditions, including but not limited to, underground excavation work exposing the cable and cutting the railroad interconnect cable, loose connections in either the traffic signal cabinet interconnection system or the railroad cabinet, and potential shorted or open circuits between conductors in the interconnection cable. When a failure is indicated by the supervised circuit, the traffic signal controller must be capable of acknowledging the fault and the Agency must program the necessary response in the traffic signal controller. The programming should provide for appropriate preemption operations while also considering the need for a system inspection with the information provided by the supervised circuit. For example, with an interconnection fault indicated by the Supervised Circuit, consider serving the programmed Preemption Clearance Interval and then proceeding to an all-red flashing condition. This setting will provide a gradual transition by allowing vehicle movements to clear the tracks prior to proceeding to a state in which the Agency can be notified of a malfunction that must be addressed and repaired before the traffic signal can be restored to normal operation. The supervised circuit maybe used in both single- break and double-break configurations. Advance Preemption Circuit Supervised Single-Break City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 15 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document Advance Preemption Circuit Supervised Double-Break D Crossing Active Circuit: The crossing active circuit, commonly referred to as the “XR” or “XC” circuit, will notify the traffic signal controller at the start of the railroad active warning system operation. The crossing active circuit is used to initiate preemption where simultaneous preemption is used. In advance preemption operation, the crossing active circuit is used to address conditions where the railroad, by nature of its operations, provides less than the calculated preemption time. Various train moves in the vicinity of the crossing may require a different preemption plan in the traffic signal controller that demands a truncated or eliminated minimum green, walk and/or pedestrian clearance time where the preemption time is shortened. The crossing active circuit can be beneficial in accommodating a train restart move or second train event if the crossing has more than one track. For example, if an approaching train stops before reaching the crossing where motion sensing circuits are in place and the train has remained stopped for approximately 20 seconds, the active warning system will recover as long as the train stops short of the island circuit. When this occurs, the gates will ascend, and the preemption call ceases in the traffic signal controller. Once the train resumes movement towards the crossing, the APT can be reduced or even eliminated since the train has already entered the approach and the warning devices will reactivate. In this situation, the traffic signal should attempt to reach the Preemption Clearance Interval in a safe but also prompt manner. Under these circumstances, the railroad operating rules regulate train movements through the crossing which commonly involves the train crew procedure of guaranteeing that the crossing is clear of vehicles and the gates are fully descended before proceeding over the crossing. The crossing active circuit is also commonly used to active blank-out signs used to restrict turns toward the grade crossing. City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 16 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document Advance Preemption Circuit Supervised Single-Break with Crossing Active Circuit E Gate Down Circuit: The Gate Down (GD) circuit allows the traffic signal controller to know when the automatic gates are within approximately five (5) degrees of horizontal. This will keep the Preemption Clearance Interval from terminating prior to activation of the warning system and lowering of the automatic gates. The GD circuit plays a vital role in preventing a preempt trap, which may occur following the advance preemption operations due to warning time variabilities that ultimately result in drivers queued onto the tracks (see TTI Report 1752-9). Implementing a GD circuit not only improves grade crossing safety, it also removes the need for excessive Preemption Clearance Interval and furthermore reduces delays for the non-conflicting directions of traffic. Without a GD circuit, the Preemption Clearance Interval time can be significantly longer to account for varying conditions. This could result in the Preemption Clearance Interval holding longer than expected after the gates are horizontal, frustrating drivers on all approaches to the traffic intersection. Gate Down Circuit: City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 17 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document F Traffic Signal Health Circuit: A Traffic Signal Health (TSH) circuit notifies the railroad equipment of a failure in the traffic signal control equipment. This is a 12 V dc circuit which is normally energized and fused for 500 mA. In the event the traffic signal enters a flashing state, or the signals are dark (commercial power failure, signals off manually, backup battery system depleted, etc.), this will de-energize the TSH circuit. Traffic Signal Health Circuit: G Interface Methods: When using railroad preemption interconnect circuits, additional equipment is normally required in the traffic signal cabinets. Most traffic signal cabinet manufacturers, equipment manufacturers, and/or dealers can deliver different interconnection methods dependent on the traffic signal cabinet type, controller type/brand, and requested circuits. These methods include relay panels, solid state systems, or isolator cards. The Agency should seek guidance on the types of interconnection systems and components that are available if they are not familiar with current technology. H Preemption Clearance Interval Minimum Time: The Preemption Clearance Interval (PCI) is the programmed minimum time and phase(s) in the preempt plan settings of the traffic signal controller that are displayed for highway users which may be stopped in the Minimum Track Clearance Distance (MTCD) and the Clear Storage Distance (CSD). While normally displayed as green indications and frequently referred to as track clearance green, the PCI may be displayed as all-red indications, or some combination of flashing and steady indications based on site specific needs. Based on the preemption system design, the minimum time required for the PCI must be adequate for the Design Vehicle (DV) of maximum length to start in motion and clear the Minimum Track Clearance Distance (MTCD). This period of time is known as the Queue Clearance Time (QCT). In addition, the PCI time must include any Separation Time (ST) required. ST Is additional time added to the QCT to permit the DV to travel beyond the MTCD before an approaching train enters the roadway. Two different methods are used to determine the PCI based on the interconnect circuits that are installed: Method 1 – The PCI is the calculated period of time required for the Design Vehicle of maximum length to start in motion and move clear of the Minimum Track Clearance Distance (QCT). The QCT is added to the ST and the sum of the two is the minimum PCI time. When used with Advance Preemption, a Gate Down circuit must be City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 18 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document provided to overcome timing variability resulting from decelerating train moves approaching the grade crossing or Right-of-Way Transfer Time variability known as a preempt trap. This is the most efficient method of implementing the PCI minimum time. Method 2 - The PCI is based on a combination of fixed time events. This method is also known as Timing Correction. To determine the amount of time necessary, use the GREATER of two options: the QCT which is the calculated time for the design vehicle to start in motion and clear the MTCD OR the APT plus an additional 15 seconds (APT + 15). Any desired Separation Time should be added to the result. Timing Correction requires the use of a not-to-exceed advance preempt timer in the railroad warning system control circuits. A Gate Down circuit is not required with Timing Correction. Using Method 2, the APT plus an additional 15 seconds (APT + 15), is approximated based on the operation of the railroad warning system during a train movement. During advance preemption operations, the completion of APT is immediately followed by the activation of the railroad warning devices. From the initiation of the active warning system, it takes approximately 15 seconds from the start of the flashing-lights to the complete descent of the automatic gate arms to a horizontal position. Timing Correction shall not be used if the railroad circuitry does not include a not-to-exceed timer and the RWTT time is not considered to be the maximum value. Timing Correction is only used with Advance Preemption operation. When advance preemption operation is utilized, the recommended best practice method is to use gate down circuitry to terminate the track clearance green interval, since the APT+15 or the queue clearance time methods do not account for variations in the APT because of decelerating or accelerating trains. I Maximum Preemption Timer: The maximum preemption timer operates by timing out a preemption call if in excess to the expected or calculated time and allows the traffic signal controller to exit the preemption plan. Since railroad active warning systems are designed to "fail-safe", this timer can help improve traffic signal operations under these conditions. For example, if a railroad warning system fails, the flashing light signals will stay active and the gates will remain lowered indicating to the highway users that it is not safe to use the crossing. In addition, the traffic signal continues to stay in the railroad preemption plan. By implementing a maximum preemption timer, this allows the traffic signal to exit the existing preemption plan and proceed to an all-red flash mode allowing non- conflicting traffic to move thru the intersection. It should be noted that not all traffic signal controllers have the capability to transition to an all-red flashing mode at the expiration of the built-in maximum preemption timer. Various traffic signal controllers will release the preemption call and return to normal operation which is not recommended. Some controllers are limited to a maximum preemption timer value of 255 seconds which could be short of the needed value. Internal controller logic or an external device will be needed to permit these controllers to exit to a “fail-safe” mode. Engineering judgment should be exercised when deciding the appropriate time for the maximum preemption timer. If the timer is programmed too short, the traffic signal could exit preemption to all-red flash while the train is occupying the crossing. It is recommended that the maximum preemption timer be programmed to a value greater than to two times the longest average train movement, including any switching movements. J Preemption Operation and Maintenance Program: To conform with the FRA Safety Advisory 2010-02, the Agency and the Railroad should establish a joint program to annually perform an operational test of the preemption system. City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 19 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document At a minimum the program should: 1. Ensure that no changes have been made to the traffic signal, grade crossing, active warning system, or roadway that would alter operations of the highway grade crossing system or traffic signal from the approved and agreed upon design. 2. Review any recorder logs (where available) to ensue correct operation. 3. Perform a test of the of the system when undergoing the maximum right-of-way transfer time. 4. Representatives from the both the traffic agency and railroad should be accounted for at the joint inspection and test. During traffic signal failure, the Agency should establish a plan of interim procedures until system issues can be addressed: 1. If the traffic signal is dark due to power loss/manual operation or in a flashing mode, notify the Railroad and provide flagger and/or law enforcement to monitor the grade crossing and ensure that highway users safely travel over the tracks. 2. The Agency should inform the Railroad when the traffic signal has been returned to normal operation. Contact the Railroad when any changes are made to the traffic signal, roadway geometry, or preemption system. (See MUTCD 2009 Second Edition, Section 8A.02 Paragraph 6) The Railroad must be notified by the Agency if a joint test will be conducted on the railroad preemption system. If traffic density changes occur downstream of the crossing due to a lane closure or a high traffic volume event which could cause queueing onto the crossing, the railroad should be contacted, and the Agency should provide flagging or a temporary traffic control plan. (See MUTCD 2009 Second Edition, Section 8A.08 for additional Information.) City of Fayetteville | DOT# 667203Y | 20 ©2021 17 U.S.C.; 23 U.S.C. § 409 Document APPENDIX C – PREEMPTION CALCULATION FORM Parallel Street Name Crossing Street Name SECTION 1: RIGHT-OF-WAY TRANSFER TIME CALCULATION Preempt verification and response time Remarks 1.Preempt delay time (seconds) ………………………………………...…………..1. 2.Controller response time to preempt (seconds) …………………………………2.Controller type: 3.Preempt verification and response time (seconds): add lines 1 and 2 ……………………….…………3. Worst-case conflicting vehicle time 4.Worst-case conflicting vehicle phase number ……………….……4. Remarks 5.Minimum green time during right-of-way transfer (seconds) ………………..…5. 6.Other green time during right-of-way transfer (seconds) ……………………….6. 7.Yellow change time (seconds) …………………………………………………….7. 8.Red clearance time (seconds) ……………………………………………….……8. 9.Worst-case conflicting vehicle time (seconds): add lines 5 through 8 ………….…………9. Worst-case conflicting pedestrian time 10.Worst-case conflicting pedestrian phase number………………..10. Remarks 11.Minimum walk time during right-of-way transfer (seconds) ……………………11. 12.Pedestrian clearance time during right-of-way transfer (seconds) ……………12. 13.Vehicle yellow change time, if not included on line 12 (seconds) ………….…13. 14.Vehicle red clearance time, if not included on line 12 (seconds) ……….…….14. 15.Worst-case conflicting pedestrian time (seconds): add lines 11 through 14 ……….……15. Worst-case conflicting vehicle or pedestrian time 16.Worst-case conflicting vehicle or pedestrian time (seconds): maximum of lines 9 and 15................16. 17. Right-of-way transfer time (seconds): add lines 3 and 16 ……………………………………………..…………17. Crossing Street Traffic Signal Railroad GUIDE FOR DETERMINING TIME REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL PREEMPTION AT HIGHWAY RAIL GRADE CROSSINGS District City County Date Completed by District Approval Railroad Contact Warning Device Parallel Street Phone Show North Arrow Railroad Crossing DOT# Track Phase Form 2304 (03/09) Page 1 of 2 AR, Fayetteville Washington 4 06/17/2022 Benesch - Ft Worth Î Razorback Rd SH 16 (W 15th St) A&M Railroad 667203Y Jeromy Houchin (479) 790-0647 0.0 0.0 McCain ATC eX2, Omni eX 0.0 5.0 0.0 4.0 4.3 13.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrians omitted per conference call with City on 3/10/2021 0.0 13.3 13.3 SECTION 2: QUEUE CLEARANCE TIME CALCULATION CSD MTCD DVL CSD = Clear storage distance MTCD = Minimum track clearance distance DVL = Design vehicle length L = Queue start-up distance, also stop-line distance Design vehicle clearance distance Remarks 18.Clear storage distance (CSD, feet) ………………………........….18. 19.Minimum track clearance distance (MTCD, feet) …….............…19. 20.Design vehicle length (DVL, feet) …………………………...........20.Design vehicle type: 21.Queue start-up distance, L (feet): add lines 18 and 19 ………………………. 21. Remarks 22.Time required for design vehicle to start moving (seconds): calculate as 2+(L÷20) ……22. 23.Design vehicle clearance distance, DVCD (feet): add lines 19 and 20 ……..23. 24.Time for design vehicle to accelerate through the DVCD (seconds) ………………….... 24. Read from Figure 2 in Instructions. 25. Queue clearance time (seconds): add lines 22 and 24 …………………………………………….. 25. SECTION 3: MAXIMUM PREEMPTION TIME CALCULATION Remarks 26.Right-of-way transfer time (seconds): line 17 …………………………………26. 27.Queue clearance time (seconds): line 25 ………………………………………27. 28.Desired minimum separation time (seconds) …………………………………28. 29. Maximum preemption time (seconds): add lines 26 through 28 …………………..………………29. SECTION 4: SUFFICIENT WARNING TIME CHECK Remarks 30.Required minimum time, MT (seconds): per regulations ……..…30. 31.Clearance time, CT (seconds): get from railroad …………...……31. 32.Minimum warning time, MWT (seconds): add lines …………………………....32.Excludes buffer time (BT) 33.Advance preemption time, APT, if provided (seconds): get from railroad …..33. 34.Warning time provided by the railroad (seconds): add lines 32 and 33 ………………………….……34. round up to nearest full second, enter 0 if less than 0 ………………………………………..………………………… Remarks: 35. If the additional warning time required (line 35) is greater than zero, additional warning time has to be requested from the railroad. Alternatively, the maximum preemption time (line 29) may be decreased after performing an engineering study to investigate the possibility of reducing the values on lines 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13 and 14. Additional warning time required from railroad (seconds): subtract line 34 from line 29, 35. Ed g e o f p a r a l l e l r o a d o r s h o u l d e r L Design vehicle DVCD DVCD = Tr a c k Form 2304 (03/09) Page 2 of 2 166 38 75 Tractor-trailer 204 12.2 Line 24-Grade <1.5% 113 14.8 27.0 13.3 27.0 4.0 44.3 20 1 21 0 21 24 3+ 0 0 4+ 0 0 5+ 0 0 6+ 0 0 7+ 0 0 8+ 0 0 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 6+57 TCE TCE TCE TCE TCE TCE TCE PROP.R/W PROP.R/W W- 8 W - 8 W- 8 W- 8 W- 8 W- 8 W-12 W-12 UGT UGT UGT PP PP PP PP PP OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE X X X X X X X X X X W-12 W - 1 2 W-12 W-12 W-12 W-1 2 X X X X X PP OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE L P U F O U F O U G T U G T PP PP PP W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 W- 1 2 W- 1 2 W- 1 2 W- 1 2 OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE PPOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHE S-24 X X X X X X X X OH E OH E OH E OH E OH E OH E OH E OH E M EP TR BM BM BM BM UFO UFO UFO UF O UFO A R D O T R / W AR D O T R / W AR D O T R / W AR D O T R / W AR D O T R / W AR D O T R / W ARD O T R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W AR D O T R / W AR D O T R / W AR D O T R / W AR D O T R / W AR D O T R / W AR D O T R / W AR D O T R / W AR D O T R / W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W AR D O T R / W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W ARDOT R/W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W GA S GA S GAS X X X X X X X X UGT UGT UGT UGT UGT UGT W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 W-12 PP GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S OH E OH E U G E UG EWS WS WS WS PP UG E UG E UG E WS WS S-8 S-8 S-8 S-8 S-8 S-8 WS WS WS X M W- 1 0 W- 1 0 W- 1 0 W- 1 0 W- 1 0 W- 1 0 W- 1 0 W- 1 0 W- 1 0 W- 1 0 W-1 0 W-1 0 X X X X X X X X X PP OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE S- 2 4 S- 2 4 S- 2 4 S- 2 4 S- 2 4 S- 2 4 S- 2 4 S- 2 4 TR S-15 S-15 S- 1 5 S- 1 5 S-8 S-8 S - 8 S - 8 S - 8 RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W RR R / W 12 4 4 12 4 8 12 5 0 1246 1250 1260125 2 1245 MC MB K: \ E n g i n e e r i n g D e s i g n S e r v i c e s \ P r o j e c t s \ R a z o r b a c k a n d 1 5 t h I n t e r s e c t i o n \ D W G \ R a z o r b a c k & 1 5 t h T r a f f i c S i g n a l P r o p o s e d B a s e M a p . d w g M A TTHEW D . C A S EYNo. 10424 S T A T E O F Nov 08, 2021 RA Z O R B A C K R D . ( H W Y 1 1 2 ) & 1 5 T H S T . (H W Y 1 6 ) I N T E R S E C T I O N I M P R O V E M E N T S DD CI T Y O F AR K A N S A S FA Y E T T E V I L L E PM-1 PA V E M E N T M A R K I N G & S I G N A G E P L A N EA S T L E G Scale: 1" = 60' 60 0 60 REMOVE RR CROSSING WARNING SIGN (W10-1) W/SUPPORTS & RETURN TO THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE REMOVE 2 STOP AHEAD WARNING SIGN (W3-1) W/SUPPORTS AND RETURN TO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLEF & I RR CROSSING WARNING SIGN W10-1 W/SUPPORT STA. 5+52 W10-1 36" DIAMETER REMOVE EX. R3-7 "RIGHT LANE MUST TURN RIGHT" M5-1 (RIGHT ARROW) R3-5fP (RIGHT LANE) M1-5 (AR 16 ROUTE SIGN) AND CENTER IN GREENSPACE WITH NEW SUPPORTS REMOVE AND REINSTALL PRIVATE PEDESTRIAN WARNING SIGN (W11-2) WITH NEW SUPPORT RELOCATE EX. PINNACLE FOODS SIGN, MIN. 2' FROM BACK OF SIDEWALK REMOVE AND REINSTALL EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION SIGN (I-13) WITH NEW SUPPORT, CENTER IN GREENSPACE REMOVE AND REINSTALL EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION SIGN (I-13) WITH NEW SUPPORT, CENTER IN GREENSPACE REMOVE AND REINSTALL EX. M3-2 ROUTE SIGN "EAST" GUIDE SIGN M1-5 (ARK. HWY. 16 ROUTE SIGN) WITH NEW SUPPORT, CENTER IN GREENSPACE ONCE THE TRAFFIC SIGNALS ARE INSTALLED & OPERATIONAL REMOVE STOP SIGNS (R1-1) W/SUPPORTS & RETURN TO THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE (TYP) F & I RR CROSSING WARNING SIGN W10-1 W/SUPPORT STA. 2+65 W10-1 36" DIAMETER 8' 8' 55' 113' 48.50' 171.50' 167.50' 4' 58' 11' TYP 5' TYP 30' TYP F & I THERMOPLASTIC WHITE RR CROSSING PAVEMENT MARKINGS SEE SHEET RRS-1 EX. SPEED LIMIT SIGN (R2-1) "35 MPH" TO REMAIN NOTE: ALL PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKINGS & SIGNS ITEM QTY.UNIT 24" WHITE THERMO PM 225 LF 12" WHITE THERMO PM 275 LF 6" WHITE THERMO PM 950 LF 6" DOUBLE YELLOW THERMO PM 1000 LF RT ARROW SYM. WHITE THERMO 2 EA LT ARROW SYM. WHITE THERMO 4 EA THRU ARROW SYM. WHITE THERMO 2 EA ONLY SYM. WHITE THERMO 6 EA RR CROSSING SYM. WHITE THERMO 4 EA RR CROSSING WARN. SIGN (W10-1)2 EA X-WALK PB SIGN (R10-3e)9 EA LEFT TURN YIELD ON FLASHING YELLOW ARROW SIGN (R10-12M)4 EA REMOVE EX. M4-5 (TO) M1-5 (AR 71 ROUTE SIGN) M5-1L&R (R&L ARROW) M3-3 (SOUTH) M3-3 (NORTH) AND CENTER IN GREENSPACE WITH NEW SUPPORTS REMOVE AND REINSTALL WAYFINDING SIGN, CENTER IN GREENSPACE SEE SHEET DTL-2 REMOVE 4 STOP AHEAD WARNING SIGNS (W3-1) W/SUPPORTS AND RETURN TO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE REMOVE 2 STOP AHEAD WARNING SIGNS (W3-1) W/SUPPORTS AND RETURN TO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE REMOVE 1 STOP AHEAD WARNING SIGN (W3-1) W/SUPPORTS AND RETURN TO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE F & I 6" DOUBLE YELLOW THERMOPLASTIC CENTERLINE SEE SHEET SDPM-1 F & I 24" SOLID WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKING (TYP.) F & I 24" WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKING (TYP.) F & I 12" WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKING F & I 6" WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKING (TYP.) F & I WHITE "ONLY" THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKING (TYP.) F & I WHITE "ARROWS" THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKING (TYP.) F & I RR CROSSING WARNING SIGN R8-8 W/SUPPORT Exhibit 3 9/14/2022 Submitted Date No -$ -$ Must Attach Completed Budget Adjustment! V20210527 Budgeted Item? Does item have a cost? Budget Adjustment Attached? Current Budget Funds Obligated Current Balance Item Cost Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget -$ -$ No No -$ -$ Project Number Budget Impact: FundAccount Number Project Title City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2022-0874 Legistar File ID 10/4/2022 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only A Resolution expressing the willingness of the City of Fayetteville to apply for and utilize Carbon Reduction Program (CRP) funding for street lighting improvement projects at major intersections and other city owned facilities and streets. N/A for Non-Agenda Item Action Recommendation: Submitted By Paul Libertini ENGINEERING (621) Division / Department Comments: Purchase Order Number: Change Order Number: Previous Ordinance or Resolution # Approval Date: Original Contract Number: MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2022 TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Susan Norton, Chief of Staff Chris Brown, Public Works Director/City Engineer FROM: Paul Libertini, Staff Engineer DATE: September 14, 2022 SUBJECT: A Resolution expressing the willingness of the City of Fayetteville to apply for and utilize Federal-aid funding for lighting improvement projects RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests approval of a resolution expressing the willingness of the City to apply for and utilize Carbon Reduction Program (CRP) funding for street lighting improvement projects at major intersections and other city owned facilities and streets. BACKGROUND: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), enacted as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Pub. L. 117-58 (Nov.15,2021) provides federal apportioned suballocated Carbon Reduction Program (CRP) funding to the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers AR-MO Urbanized area. The purpose of the CRP Program is to implement projects to reduce transportation emissions. Transportation Emissions means carbon dioxide emissions form on-road highway sources of those emissions within a State (23 U.S.C. 175(a)(2)). Availability of FFY 2023 and subsequent years CRP funds are subject to Congressional action. The NWARPC (Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission) anticipates approximately $2,000,000 of funding over the two-year period (FFY 2022-2023). The Regional Policy Committee of the NWARPC voted to have the focus areas of the program to be eligible under 5 areas which includes replacing street lighting and traffic control devices with energy-efficient alternatives. The CRP program is a federally funded at 80% with a City match of 20%. The City is required to pay 100% up front and then apply for the 80% federal reimbursement of eligible expenditures. The City has approximately 125 street lights at major intersections that could be replaced with energy efficient LED lights. Staff would also look at upgrading parking lot lights and other street lights beyond intersections. It is estimated that the project cost could range from $100,000 to $500,000. 2 DISCUSSION: Staff would like authorization to apply for CRP funds to be used for the replacement of existing street lights with energy efficient LED’s lights with a commitment to provide the 20% match with City funds. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: N/A Attachment: Carbon Reduction Program (CRP) Application Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission (NWARPC) FFY 2022-2023 Carbon Reduction Program (CRP) Application Section 1. Policy and Project Information Section 2. Project Requirements, Local Commitment and Funding Section 3. Project Development, Section 4. Project Background, Overview, Benefits, and Planning Process Section 1. Policy and Project Information CRP Funding Background: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), enacted as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Pub. L. 117-58 (Nov. 15, 2021) provides federal apportioned suballocated Carbon Reduction Program (CRP) funding to the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers AR-MO Urbanized area. The purpose of the CRP Program is to implement projects to reduce transportation emissions. Transportation Emissions means carbon dioxide emissions from on-road highway sources of those emissions within a State (23 U.S.C. 175(a)(2)). Availability of FFY 2023 and subsequent years CRP funds are subject to Congressional action. NWARPC anticipates approximately $2,000,000 of funding over the two-year period (FFY 2022-2023). Additional information on CRP program and funding can be found at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/sustainability/energy/policy/ crp_guidance.pdf. The RPC/Policy Committee voted to have the focus areas of the program to be eligible activities under A, C, D, E and F further described as: A.a project described in 23 U.S.C. 149(b)(4) to establish or operate a traffic monitoring, management, and control facility or program, including advanced truck stop electrification systems; C. a transportation alternatives project as described in 23 U.S.C. 101(a)(29) as in effect prior to the enactment of the FAST Act,3 including the construction, planning, and design of on-road and off-road trail facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other nonmotorized forms of transportation; D. a project described in section 23 U.S.C. 503(c)(4)(E) for advanced transportation and congestion management technologies; E. a project for the deployment of infrastructure-based intelligent transportation systems capital improvements and the installation of vehicle-to-infrastructure communications equipment, including retrofitting dedicated short-range communications (DSRC) technology deployed as part of an existing pilot program to cellular vehicle-to everything (C-V2X) technology; and F. a project to replace street lighting and traffic control devices with energy-efficient alternatives; The CR program is a federally funded, 80% Federal/20% local, reimbursable program and projects must meet and follow the ARDOT Local Public Agency (LPA) federal-aid process for reimbursement. Funds must be used for eligible projects that are submitted by eligible entities and chosen through a competitive process. The LPA Manual can be found at: https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/FINAL_LPA-Manual_v26-14-21.pdf. A local sponsor must provide at least 20% of the eligible project costs in cash. Federal funds from other sources cannot be used to match these funds. The LPA is responsible for maintaining and providing records and obtaining all required ARDOT approvals/authrizations for CRP project expenses prior to expenditure of funds and/or work. Please Note: A resolution from the Applicant's governing body is required to be submitted with the application. DEADLINE for this application is Monday, October 17, 2022 at 4:00pm (CDT). Applications must be received by the NWAPRC office at 1311 Clayton St, Springdale, AR prior to this deadline, either as a hard copy or via email to ebowen@nwarpc.org. Questions may be addressed to Elizabeth Bowen at ebowen@nwarpc.org or via phone at (479) 751-7125x104. Page 1 of 12 1.8 Criteria for Project Selection. Projects will be evaluated and scored based on the following categories: •In existing adopted NWAPRC Plan •Connectivity •Prioritize Safety •Barriers to mobility/usability •Complete Streets 1.9 CRP Project Application Timeline: Call for Projects Project Application Deadline Project Sponsor Presentation to TAC Committee August 28, 2022 October 17, 2022, at 4 p.m. October 20, 2022 80% Federal Share CRP $100,000 Local Match $ 25,000 Total Project $125,000 20% Local Match 100% AR 72762 or submit electronic applications to ebowen@nwarpc.org. For program or questions related to the application process, please contact Elizabeth Bowen, Project Manager, (479)751-7125x104, or visit www.nwarpc.org/public-notifications/. Page 2 of 12 more information on this Bowen, Project 1.10 Federal-Aid Project Requirements. Projects are required to be designed to AASHTO and Federal Standards/Guidelines. 1.11Application Submittal. Remit paper applications to NWARPC, 1311 Clayton St., Springdale, Guidelines: The following guidelines will be used to select projects for funding that are consistent with the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan, 2014 NWA Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, 2022 Congestion Management Process, 2007 Intelligent Transportation System, NWA Connect, Transportation Improvement Program, NWA Heritage Trail Plan, NWA Open Space Plan, and the FHWA Carbon Reduction Program Implementation Guidance. 1.1 Project Selection and Scoring. All projects will be scored utilizing the same criteria. Project selection will be based on the overall number of projects submitted, availability of funding, demonstrated need and approved focus areas. Scores and ranking of applications will be determined by a committee. 1.2 Minimum Project Size. The proposed project shall be a minimum of $125,000. 1.3 Maximum Amount Per Project Sponsor. A goal is to allocate no more than 50% of the CRP funds to a project sponsor in one year. There is the understanding that funding should be equitably distributed within the Urbanized Area. 1.4 Funding Projects. CRP funds will be awarded for eligible activities. Up to $50,000 may be utilized for MPO CRP strategy development purposes. 1.5 Northwest Arkansas Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Projects. Project sponsors should focus on regional projects that will provide on-road and off-road trail facilities that connect to the existing and proposed trail networks as described in the 2045 Plan, NWA Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, and NWA Heritage Trail Plan and reduce transportation emissions. 1.6 Application and Deadline Requirement. All project sponsors must submit an application for funding and meet the required deadline. 1.7 Obligation of Funds. All projects awarded must meet the obligation deadline of September 30, 2023. (Note: The project will need to be through the ARDOT process and submitted to FHWA by the end of August to obligate funds.) •ADA •Equity •Climate Change and Sustainability (Transportation Emissions) •Labor and workforce •Eligible activity focus areas A, C, D, E, and F Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission FFY 2023 Carbon Reduction Program General Information Project Name:___________________________________________________________________ Sponsor Jurisdiction:______________________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ________________________________________________________________ Primary Contact:_________________________________________________________________ Phone: _________________________ email:________________________________________ Partners: Yes No (If yes, please list) _____________________________________________________________________________ Project Priority (if submitting multiple projects): ___________________________________ Project Overview General Project Overview and Description (500 character limit) Page 3 of 12 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.4 2.5 2.6 Section 2. Project Requirements (10 Points) Eligible Activity: Is the project a focus area of RPC/Policy Committee eligible activities A, C, D, E or F? Is the project an eligible activity as listed under Section G3 Eligible Activities of the FHWA Guidelines? These can be found at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/sustainability/energy/policy/crp_guidance.pdf Please answer the questions below. Select "Yes" for the best category for your project. (Up to 10 points) 2.7 A.Is this project to establish or operate a traffic monitoring, management, and control facility or program to reduce transportation emissions? Yes No C.Is this a transportation alternatives project including the construction, planning, and design of on-road and off-road trail facilities for pedestrians, bicycles, and other non-motorized forms of transportation to reduce transporation emissions? Yes No D.Is this project for advanced transportation and congestion management technologies to reduce transportation emissions?Yes No E.Is this project for the deployment of infrastructure-based intelligent transportation systems capital improvements and the installation of vehicle-to-infrastructure communications equipment, including retrofitting dedicated short-range communications (DSRC) technology deployed as part of an existing pilot program to cellular vehicle-to everything (C-V2X) technology to reduce transportation emissions? Yes No F.Is this project to replace street lighting and traffic control devices with energy-efficient alternatives to reduce transportation emissions? Yes No Is this project another lettered eligible activity? If yes, provide letter A-M and description of eligible activity. _____________ Yes No Is this project another transportation emissions reducing project not listed but is eligible for CRP funding? Yes No Describe how the project is consistent with the CRP's goal of reducing transportation emissions and the RPC focus areas of A, C, D, E or F? Page 4 of 12 Page 5 of 12 Section 3. Local Commitment and Project Funding (10 Points) 3.1 Required Match/Local Support. Project sponsors must provide a minimum of 20% local funding match for all projects. (Note: This a reimbursable program through ARDOT.) Requested Project Funding Percentage __________% __________% (20% - No in-kind) CRP Funds $____________ Local Match $____________ Project Cost $___________ __________% 3.2 Approval date: ________________ 3.3 Yes No Public Access. The project must be open for public access. 2.3.1. Is the property currently owned by the local Jurisdiction? 2.3.2 Is the project located on public right-of-way? Yes No 2.3.3 Is the project located in an easement that allows for public access? Yes No 3.4 Maintenance. What governmental entity will be responsible for the short- and long-term project operation and maintenance? Resolution number: _____________________ Attach copy of required resolution authorizing the project. What source of funds will be used by the local sponsor to match the federal funds?____________________________________________________________________ Is local funding currently available/budgeted? Yes No Planning. 2.2.1 List a local or regional plan in which the project is included: Page 6 of 12 3.5. Link to Surface Transportation. All street and active transportation projects must link to the surface transportation system. A project must have a strong link to surface transportation and reduce transporation emissions. Is it a complete streets project? Describe how this project links to the surface transportation system. 3.6 Federal-Aid Project Requirements. Has the project been designed to Federal-aid Guidelines? Yes No Yes No Yes No PE/Environmental Engineering/Design ROW Utility Relocation Yes No 3.7 Project Site Plan, Vicinity Map, Location Map and Cross-section. Provide legible map(s) of the project location. The map(s) should be good enough to be easily-reproducible and should include the following: •Project path. The map should clearly show where the project will be located. •North arrow. •Pertinent landmarks. •If appropriate, a Legend identifying any other items on the map (i.e. existing paths or sidewalks, previous phases of the project, etc.) 3.8 Safety. Describe how this project will improve the safety of the transportation system. Please cite any studies that show a reduction in emissions, crash rates and/or reduction in serious and fatal injuries based on the type of project proposed. Please describe how safety will be improved for all users of the facility. Previous Federal Funding If this project (or phase of this project) has previously received Federal TAP or STBG funding (ARDOT or NWARPC), please describe the status of the project(s). (500 character max) 3.9 Item of Work Quantity Units Unit Cost Item Cost 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 3.10 Project Cost Estimate This form is limited to 20 items. If you have more items contact NWARPC for additional form. Total Estimated Project Cost Requested CRP Funds (up to 80% of construction cost) Local Sponsor Match (at least 20% of construction cost) Source of Estimate/Estimator: ____________________________________________________ Page 7 of 12 Final Plans (90%-100%) Yes No (Please attach drawings) Preliminary (10%) Partially Complete (30%-60%) Engineer __________________________ Under Contract? Rights-of-Way (ROW) Already within public ROW New ROW Required Yes No Property Owners Identified? Donation Expected? Yes No Number of Project Owners _________ Purchase Options/Agreements? Yes No Section 4. Project Development (10 Possible Points) Current Design Plans Level Utilities Conflicts Does the project have utilities that must be relocated prior to construction? Yes No List any utilities with conflicts:____________________________________________________________ Utility coordination initiated (utilities with conflicts notified of project) Yes No Environmental Agency Letters Requested? YesYes Potential environmental impacts (list):______________________________________________________ Project Timeline Provide detailed timeline or complete table below. 2022 2023 Jan - Mar Apr - Jun July - Sep Oct - Dec Jan - Mar Apr - Jun July - Sep Oct - Dec Design Environmental Utilities Right-of-way Start Construction Please describe any additional preliminary work that has been done to facilitate this project. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 8 of 12 Page 9 of 12 Ordinance #: _______________ in a local Plan? Yes No Name: ____________________________________ Adoption Date:_________________ 4.2 Connectivity. Does the project provide a future or planned extension and/or connection to the regional trail system? Does the project connect to other transportation modes and/ or transportation facilities? 4.2.1 Connection to/from a neighborhood. Yes No Name: _____________________Distance: ______ 4.2.2 NoConnection to/from employment retail center. Yes Name:_____________________ Distance ______ 4.2.3 Connection to/from a school. Yes No Name:_____________________ Distance ______ 4.2.4 Connection to/from a community, regional, state, and/or national park. Yes No Name:_____________________ Distance ______ 4.2.5 Trailhead Construction and facilities Yes No Name:_____________________________ 3.1 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan.Does the project provide a future or plannedextension and/or connection to the regional trail system? 3.1.1 Northwest Arkansas Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan(NWARBPMP) 4.1 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan. Is the project a part of the 2045 MTP? Yes No Yes No Yes No 4.1.1 Is the project in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan(NWARBPMP) Is the project shown in the NWARBPM Plan? Is the project show in the Heritage Trail Plan? Is the project a Catalyst project in the NWARBPM Plan? Yes No 4.1.2 Local Master Trail Plan or Local Comprehensive Plan. Is the project listed 4.3 Project Length/Width Project length in linear feet (if applicable): _________ Project width in feet (if applicable): ___________ 4.4 If the project is a non-infrastructure project, describe the development state it is in. Section 5. Project Background, Overview, Benefits, and Planning Process (60 Possible Points*) 5.1.Provide a detailed project overview. What improvements are proposed? What steps are being taken to ensure the project promotes transportation emissions reduction, complete streets, safety, multi- modal transportation and design aspirations consistent with the regional plan? Include project limits, street facility names, and project cross-sections. (3000 character limit) – 20 points Page 10 of 12 5.2.Describe the purpose of the project and how it will benefit the affected communities. What user groups will be positively affected? If the project has a larger regional benefit, please describe this connection. Does the project align with BIL to prioritize safety, connectivity, barriers to mobility/ usability, complete streets, ADA, equity, climate change and sustainability, labor and workforce.? (3000 character limit) –20 points Page 11 of 12 NORTHWEST ARKANSAS REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF NONDISCRIMINATION NWARPC DISCLAIMER: This notice is in accordance with the NWARPC 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan, the Federal Transportation Act (FAST Act) in cooperation with local agencies, the Arkansas Department of Transportation, the Missouri Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration. Documents are funded in part through grant(s) from the FHWA, FTA, and/or the U.S. Department of Transportation. The views and opinions of the NWARPC expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Department of Transportation. TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS FOR PROGRAM OF PROJECTS (POP): The public participation procedures outlined in the NWARPC Public Participation Plan (PPP) with respect to TIP development serve as the public participation process required for the development of transit projects as per FTA Circular 9030.1E. Specifically, the public participation procedures outlined in the PPP will serve to satisfy the POP requirements of the Section 5307, Urbanized Area Formula Grant Program for the University of Arkansas/Razorback Transit and Ozark Regional Transit. The NARTS and any and all public transit operators will address the POP requirements as per FTA Circular 9030.1E. Additionally, any and all public transit operator’s capital projects and operational costs are included in the NARTS TIP which is developed through a cooperative and collaborative process with interested parties and other private and public transportation providers. NWARPC NOTICE OF NONDISCRIMINATION POLICY: The NWARPC complies with all civil rights provisions of federal statutes and related authorities that prohibit discrimination in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance. Therefore, the NWARPC does not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, color, age, national origin, religion or disability, in the admission, access to and treatment in NWARPC’s programs and activities, as well as the NWARPC’s hiring or employment practices. Complaints of alleged discrimination and inquiries regarding the NWARPC’s nondiscrimination policies may be directed to Nicole Gibbs, AICP, Regional Planner – EEO/DBE (ADA/504/Title VI Coordinator), 1311 Clayton, Springdale, AR 72762, (479) 751-7125, (Voice/TTY 7-1-1 or 1-800-285-1131); Para llamadas en espanol, marques el 866-656-1842; papr llamadas en ingles, marque el 711 o directamente al 800-285-1131 or the following email address: ngibbs@nwarpc.org. This notice is available from the ADA/504/Title VI Coordinator in large print, on audiotape and in Braille. If information is needed in another language, contact Nicole Gibbs. Si necesita informacion en otro idioma, comuniqese Nicole Gibbs, 479-751-7125, cuando menos 48 horas antes de la junta. Page 12 of 12 Sponsor Authorization and Certification To be completed by the chief executive officer (Mayor, City Manger, County Judge, etc.) By Checking the box below, I attest that the information contained in this application is truthful and correct to the best of my knowledge and that the provision of false or misleading information can lead to the withdrawal of Carbon Reduction Program funding. I do hereby certify that I will comply with all federal, state, and ARDOT regulations for submittal of plans and specifications and follow ADOT Local Public Agency Manual. Additionally, I certify that local matching funds are available for the project. I agree a resolution has been adopted for this project. I AGREEAuthorized Signatory: Name:________________________________ Phone:_________________________________________ Title:_________________________________ Email: _________________________________________ 5.3.Describe any planning or public input process used in development of this project. If the proposed project is in an existing bicycle/pedestrian plan, street plan, master plan, or other long-range plan, please identify this as well. (1000 character limit) – 20 points *10 additional discretionary points may be awarded by evaluators according to project quality and costs vs. benefits considerations. September 22nd, 2022 Transportation Committee Memo Re: I-49 & MLK Interchange Tunnel Cost Discussion BACKGROUND: The Arkansas Department of Transportation (ARDOT) is in the design phase for improving the interchange of I-49 and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd (MLK) (Hwy 62/180). The Fayetteville Active Transportation Master Plan identifies the Shiloh Trail along the west side of the interchange and the Tsa La Gi Trail along the south side of MLK. The Northwest Arkansas Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan identifies this intersection as a catalyst project. The City and ARDOT have been working together to incorporate these important active transportation connections into the construction of the new interchange. On August 23rd, 2023 ARDOT provided correspondence agreeing to include the Tsa La Gi trail as a 10-foot-wide side path with 6 feet of green space along the south side of MLK for the extent of the project at no additional cost to the City. The Shiloh Trail will run north-south along the west side of I-49 and must cross MLK west of the Shiloh access road. If the trail were to cross at-grade at the signal, users would have to cross 11 lanes of busy traffic. To avoid this at-grade crossing, the City requested that ARDOT evaluate a grade separated tunnel crossing below the MLK at this location. ARDOT has evaluated incorporating the tunnel but has asked that the City agree to be responsible the full construction cost of the tunnel, ramps and all associated items. DISCUSSION: To understand what the City’s commitment would be for the tunnel, Garver was hired to develop the tunnel plan. The cost will be significant so we are continuing to evaluate other options and will negotiate with ARDOT to develop the best plan for this important connection. We will report back to the Transportation Committee as the plan develops. F OF BUILDING. AINING WALL AND ROW. EXISTING FLOW PATH PROP. DBL. 9' X 5' R.C. BOX CULVERTS W/ JUNCTION BOXES TO REDIRECT WATER. 12' X 9' X 258' R.C. BOX CULVERT 12' OFFSET BETWEEN ROW AND BACK OF WALL 12' OFFSET BETWEEN ROW AND BACK OF WALL BRIDGE BENT AND U-TURN ROADWAY WILL NEED TO BE MOVED 2' FURTHER SOUTH TO ACCOMODATE FUTURE 3RD EB TRAVEL LANE ON HWY. 62 (AS ORIGINALLY INTENDED) AND SUBSEQUENTLY RELOCATED PATH. BRIDGES WILL THEORETICALLY NEED TO BE 2' LONGER AS A RESULT. PROPOSED DOUBLE 9'X5' R.C.B. PROPOSED 14'x9' TUNNEL PROPOSED 30" R.C.P. PROPOSED 30" R.C.P. PROPOSED CONCRETE BARRIER WALL WITH MOMENT SLAB PROPOSED CONCRETE BARRIER WALL WITH MOMENT SLAB PROPOSED MODULAR BLOCK WALL PROPOSED MODULAR BLOCK WALL CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE TRANSPORTATION BOND PROGRAM PROGRESS REPORT – SEPTEMBER 2022 The Transportation Bond Program consists of projects that will be designed, contracted, and administered by City Staff or consultants/contractors working for the City. Funding for the Bond Program includes $36 million in bonds for the first phase of the program. UPCOMING CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PROJECT NAME BID DATE ESTIMATED CONST. COST Razorback/15th Intersection TBD $2,250,000 Prairie and West TBD $3,000,000 CURRENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PROJECT NAME ESTIMATED COMPLETION CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Zion Rd. (Vantage to Crossover) November 2022 $4,395,109.35 Sain St. Extension November 2022 *$607,900.29 Midtown Corridor – Porter and Deane at PD Site January 2023 $4,169,565.00 Center/Harmon Intersection February 2023 $1,752,736.50 Archibald Yell Blvd. Safety Improvements May 2023 *$2,678,711.32 *Transportation Bond Program portion of the contract. 2 COMPLETED PROJECTS PROJECT NAME COMPLETION YEAR ORIGINAL BUDGET FINAL PROJECT COST Rupple Road 2021 $3,000,000 $3,532,722.51 Steamboat Dr./Dorothy Jeanne 2021 $670,000 $410,979.35 Centennial Park Entrance Drive 2021 $1,000,000 $834,721.75 Shiloh Fulbright Intersection 2022 2022 860,000 $1,809,332.85 For details regarding each of the Transportation Bond Projects, use the links provided below for each project. 1) RUPPLE ROAD (TANYARD DR. TO WEIR RD.) https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3597/Rupple-Road-Extension 2) ZION ROAD PHASE II (VANTAGE DR TO CROSSOVER RD) https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3586/Zion-Road-Improvements 3) STEAMBOAT / DOROTHY JEANNE CONNECTION https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3596/SteamboatDorothy-Jeanne-St-Connection 4) SHILOH DR. / FULBRIGHT EXPRESSWAY INTERSECTION https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3594/Shiloh-DrFulbright-Expressway-Intersecti 5) CENTER / HARMON INTERSECTION https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3595/CenterHarmon-Intersection 6) MIDTOWN CORRIDOR https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3877/Midtown-Corridor-Project 7) SAIN STREET EXTENSION (FRONT ST. TO JOYCE BLVD.) https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3598/Sain-Street-Extension 8) MAPLE ST. CYCLE TRACK https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3581/Maple-Street-Cycle-Track 9) 15th ST. / RAZORBACK RD. INTERSECTION 3 https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3592/15thRazorback-Intersection 10) HIGHWAY 71 B CORRIDOR https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3588/Highway-71B-Corridor 11) APPLEBY / PLAINVIEW / ROLLING HILLS CONNECTION https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3771/ApplebyPlainviewRolling-Hills-Connection 12) ARCHIBALD YELL BLVD. SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3584/Archibald-Yell-Blvd-Safety-Improvements 13) ROLLING HILLS IMPROVEMENTS (COLLEGE TO OLD MISSOURI) https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3585/Rolling-Hills-Improvements 14) JOYCE BLVD. SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3732/Joyce-Blvd-Safety-Improvements 15) NORTH ST. / MISSION BLVD. CORRIDOR https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3589/North-Street-Corridor 16) OLD WIRE RD. CYCLE TRACK (EXTENSION) https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3583/Old-Wire-Road-Cycle-Track 17) PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE / OVERLAYS https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3600/Pavement-MaintenanceOverlays • 9.41 Miles of overlays have been completed in 2022 • $2,640,311.11of the $2,700,000 has been spent or encumbered as of August 2022. 18) TRAFFIC SIGNAL HARDWARE / UPGRADES https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/3599/Signal-HardwareSoftware-Upgrades • 103 of 110 signal controllers and 56 of 66 Video Detectors have been upgraded as of August of 2022. • $1,381,700.30 of the $1,400,000 has been spent or encumbered as of August 2022.