Safety hazard? Anyone know?

Robby Peartree · **Joined:** Wed Aug 25, 2004 11:16 am **Posts:** 767

The Mutcd does not require the stop bars but it is interesting looking at the general situation at the items that deviate. Simular signage was set up on the NN without a stop bar. This is a case where I was just trying to document how it was set up.

Robby Peartree

Alan Walker · **Posted:** Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:04 pm

My understanding of the railroad rules regarding placement of cars near crossings was that they were created primarily to address liability concerns where multiple tracks were concerned. As this is a single track, the liability issues are somewhat limited. I have read of cases where visibility of trains on parallel tracks was an issue in grade crossing cases. In one case on the Southern Railway at Spring City, Tennessee (1955), a school bus was hit by a freight train. In that case, there were standing freight cars that might have obstructed the driver's view of the approaching train.

In the case of the Spring City case, the standing freight cars were determined not to be a factor based on statements of surviving bus passengers. The passengers reported seeing the approaching train and raising their concerns with the driver. The driver replied that he knew of the train's approach and that he intended to beat it to the crossing. Eleven students lost their lives in the resulting collision.

Ron Travis · **Joined:** Sun May 15, 2005 2:22 pm **Posts:** 1543

That boxcar in close proximity to the pavement constitutes what is called a Roadway Departure Hazard. Traffic regulators and engineers do not dismiss the danger of a vehicle hitting such an obstacle simply because the driver is responsible for not hitting it. Instead, they expect drivers to make mistakes and they regard the elimination of nearby obstacles as worthwhile in preventing the errant drivers from being killed should they stray out of their lane.

Kelly Anderson · **Joined:** Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:52 am **Posts:** 2477

Dougvv · **Joined:** Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:52 pm **Posts:** 914

Hi,

Quote:

This car in the attached photo is at the end of a string of storage cars. To me, it looks like a safety hazard to drivers down this country road, especially at night. Two questions:

Is it a safety hazzard? Yes, it is called a:

Quote:

a Roadway Departure Hazard.

Quote:

1. Is there some type of FRA or STB (or other federal) rule

I do not know.

Quote:

2. If there is, is there a fine for such an occurrence, and what would that fine be?

I do not know but suspect it is zero.

We strive for

Quote:

a Roadway Departure Hazard.

but it is not mandatory. You can grandfather in things. If the railroad was there first, the railroad can do what it wants - only the easement agreement with the DOT governs.

Is it NICE to have the car set back 25-50 feet from the grade crossing? Yes.

If I was on a jury and the owner or survivors of the owner of the car that hit the box car tried to sue the railroad. It would be hard for me not to see the blame for the accident as being the driver.

Doug vV

Chris Webster · **Joined:** Sat Aug 25, 2007 12:45 am **Posts:** 1087

Dennis Storzek wrote:

But... considering there are STOP signs on the crossbucks, it is unlikely anyone will hit the car at speed.

The "Stop" sign is (probably) unwarranted and should be removed. Page 8B-6 in Chapter 8 of the Indiana Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) has this guidance:

Quote:

Section 8B.08 STOP (R1-1) or YIELD (R1-2) Signs at Highway-Rail Grade Crossings
Option: At the discretion of the responsible State or local highway agency, STOP (R1-1) or YIELD (R1-2) signs (see Figure 2 B-1) may be used at highway-rail grade crossings that have two or more trains per day, or where sight distance is restricted, and are without automatic traffic control devices.

Support: Two or more trains per day means an average of two or more trains per day operating over the highway-rail grade crossing for a 12-month period prior to the installation of the STOP or YIELD control sign.

As the rail line is being used to store cars, the crossing is not averaging two or more trains per day. Therefore, the "Stop" signs should be removed since the "may be used" requirement is unmet (and there does not appear to be any sight distance restrictions in the photo Les posted.)

Some states would place a R15-3 "Exempt" sign at an unused crossing. That sign is not used in Indiana, per pages 8B-2 and 8B-5 of Indiana's MUTCD.

Les, you might also find Section 8B.09 TRACKS OUT OF SERVICE Sign (R8-9) and TRAIN TRAFFIC RESUMED - TRACKS IN SERVICE Sign (W10-Y12a) to be of interest.

Les Beckman · **Joined:** Tue Aug 02, 2005 1:25 pm **Posts:** 6482

Chris -

Thanks for your input. As for STOP signs on crossing bucks, it seems to be whatever the policy is of the particular county involved. On this particular line, Starke County does not put the STOP signs on, but both La Porte and Porter counties do.

As for the line being used to store cars, that is what the current freight operator has been doing. And yes, HVRM would like to use the line for its passenger trains as it had been doing since the line was saved from being scrapped, but beginning last year, the current freight operator prevented us from doing that. That policy, unfortunately, continues.

Les