Laserfiche WebLink
local road , Flashing Lhoht Signals and Warning Bells be <br /> installed at all grad ossings with exposure factors of <br /> 3000 and all mainlines . ing the traffic counts from the <br /> reference letter o 00 cle crossings on a typical day <br /> and 340 vehicle crossings o a peak day, the exposure <br /> factors calculate to 2400 and 4080 respectively. These <br /> figures are obviously in the vicinity of 3000 . <br /> Also , vehicular traffic counts assume an average <br /> mix of automobiles , trucks , buses and motorcycles . By <br /> vehicle miles traveled , trucks account for approximately 20% <br /> of all traffic in the United States . Yet accident <br /> statistics indicate that in proportion to vehicle mileage, <br /> while trucks are involved in only 13% of accidents in <br /> general , they are involved in 32% of accidents involving <br /> train at grade crossings . The explanation for. this high <br /> rate is length of trucks , slow acceleration and braking <br /> performance . The exposure time per vehicle is much higher <br /> for trucks than cars . Traffic mix at this crossing is <br /> projected to be approximately 90% trucks as opposed to 20% <br /> generally, which means higher exposure times for a given <br /> quantity of traffic , thus increasing the safety hazard . <br /> More importantly, the NTPS table recommends that <br /> Flashing Light Signals , Warning Bells and Gates be installed <br /> at all multiple track crossings where sight distance may be <br /> impaire ue to the possi i ty of trains on more than one <br /> track . The crossing used by Nottingham crosses two tracks , <br /> a mainline and a passing siding. Trains may occupy either <br /> or both tracks at any time, which could seriously restrict <br /> sight distance . In a letter dated November 6 , 1979 , from <br /> Jack Baier , Transportation Engineer at the Public Utilities <br /> Commission , which has responsibility for all public <br /> crossings , to Susie Vaughn of the Eagle County Planning <br /> Office , he states that were it a public crossing, the PUC <br /> would require FLSwB and Gates to be installed . In recent <br /> conversations between myself and Mr . Baier , Mr . Baier has <br /> stated that the proposed increase in traffic is all the more <br /> reason to install automatic protection at this crossing . <br /> Mr . Baier 's letter of November 6 , 1979, was a direct <br /> response to an inquiry from the County . <br /> Under similar circumstances , the Railroad has <br /> required installation of automatic signal protection at <br /> other private crossings . <br /> THEREFORE, we feel that the Railroad ' s position <br /> requiring Flashing Light Signals , Warning Bells and Gates is <br /> entirely reasonable and we ask the Mined Land Reclamation <br /> -2- <br />