Falls County, Tx Mad At Union Pacific

Trains Magazine General Discussion
1

Falls County is calling a railroad company arrogant and highhanded for planning to cut-off access for some residents to their homes. Union Pacific says it wants to close some private roads to protect people’s safety.

In this resolution passed by the Falls County Commissioners they say that Union Pacific is trying to blackmail residents into “signing ridiculously worded releases.”

”My blood pressure goes up just to think about it or talk about it. I don’t like that at all. I don’t think that’s fair to the landowners at all, “ says Falls County’s County Judge Tom Sehon.

Residents wouldn’t have access to their homes because Union Pacific railroad has posted notices they are going to close some private roads that cross their tracks. They say fewer cars crossing their tracks mean fewer chances for accidents.

But a UP spokesperson says it is working with residents to make sure they aren’t stranded. “If they have an option to enter and cross property through a different crossing great, but if they don’t we want to work with them to make sure the appropriate procedures are followed."

Those procedures would mean a property owner would have to accept liability for any accidents that might occur on their roads, crossing the tracks. But Sehon tells us he doesn’t like what he’s hearing. “We won’t close you’re crossing at all just sign this paper that relieves us of any and all liability- I would consider that basically a form of extortion."

Union pacific says it’s a matter of making sure all fine details are taken care of. And the railroad says they will not be responsible for accidents happening at private crossings.

This resolution Falls County Commissioners passed holds no legal bearing and the county judge told me it has not been given to Union Pacific. It’s unclear when UP will actually close those tagged private roads - but it could be months. The railroad says their effort to cut-back on the number of roads crossing tracks

2

and?

3

Closing crossings = good
Cutting off access = bad

There’s gotta be a better way to do this, or there’s more to the story that isn’t being told. If it’s a matter of one lone driveway way out in the middle of nowhere with no way to connect it to another driveway or road, then most likely it shouldn’t be closed, period. How many potential accidents could one driveway have? Not that many, methinks.

If, on the other hand, there are several driveways that can be consolidated down to one crossing, or are near enough to a road with a crossing, then the railroad should be happy to at the very least assist with relocation of the driveways to a safer location.

4

Keep in mind a lot of the “private” crossing were designed(if you can call it that) and installed by the landowner, not a contractor…which means a lot of them are loacted in the middle of curves, or have trees and brush planted around them…I have seen one in west Texas where the land owner planted oaks on both sides of the crossing, and on the left and right, because it was “pretty” that way when you drove up his drive…but a train crew had no way of seeing if anything was in the crossing till the last second, because the sill thing was in a small valley/dip in the land, and a blind spot for the train crew.

Most(all) of these will have no warning devices, except a homemade cross buck or a stop sign…and the grade crossing itself will be made out of crushed shell, old ties, dirt or crushed limestone, with no regard for sight lines and approach distance.
Most of them are there without the railroads consent, the land owners just built them.
And almost all of these places do have access from other points, it is just easier for the land owner to cross the tracks there instead.
Most, if not all, are acidents waiting to happen, and they do happen more frequently than you know, if no death occures, most dont even make it into the NTSB reports…

Ed

5

Maybe the residents should consider building a overpass over the tracks[?]

[quote]
Originally posted by Scoobie9669

6

Falls County, TX - "We Ain’t Responsible For Nuttin’ Bubba! "[:(!][:(!][:(!]

The railroad wants accountability and I do not blame them. Shame on a judge for legislating from the bench. Ed speaks the truth! (and this issue is hardly new, but the railroads are getting more aggressive about reducing risk).

Fuzz: Most states (TX included) have statutes that keep land from being land-locked during the subdivision process (as well as during Bargain & Sale)…UP is tring to eliminate bad crossings and minimize risk -NOTHING wrong with that.

Most of those private crossings have no easement to go with them. Most have a a license or contract agreement for use of the crossing that outlines responsibilities such as who owns, operates, maintains and pays for repairs/ mtce. Along comes a “dumber than a stone real estate agent” (lots of them - as bad or worse than used car salesmen) that neglect to tell buyer or seller that the contract for the crossing is void (does not run with the land) the minute the property changes hands. You have breach of contract and the railroad CAN LEGALLY REMOVE the crossing. The railroads get made out to be the bad guy when it is in reality the private crossing user failing to own-up to his responsibility. It sounds like UP tried to facilitate a solution and the Joe-Bobs are too cheap to own up to their responsibility.

SPBED- Before they build the bridge, they should start looking for the common sense that got lost out of the family gene pool several generations back (inbreeding?)

[banghead][banghead][banghead]

7

[quote]
QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed

Maybe the residents should consider building a overpass over the tracks[?]

What, if anything, do you people know about Falls County, Texas? Ever been there? And I’m sure you’ve All read the “ridiculously worded statement” that Scoobie mentioned, so you can make an educated judgement on the situation. And who is to pay for this overpass, spbed? There aren’t enough people in the county to tax to build an over pass, and most of those don’t make squat for money. And what about if it was in YOUR county and they cut off YOUR road to work? And your already too high taxes went up to support the equivalent of Alaska’s bridge to nowhere? How would you feel then? Sometimes you know-it alls are amazing.

You can answer and argue with this post all you want. I won’t see it , I’m outa here.

m

8

Sounds like another bonehead move by Union Pacific. Reducing the risk of accidents is good, but, shall we say, “forcing” someone into closing their access to the outside world is dumb.

I have to agree, although, not as angrily. [:D] I can relate, having lived in a small community setting myself.

…I quote him, and he’s gone…[:0][%-)]

Ahh, that explains it.

9

What? He actually left? Why???
I really don’t have much to say here, I’m not sure who to side with…

10

Sounds like someone got a little bent over this.[8D]

11

Maybe instead of building an overpass the residents should think about driving across people’s lawns and stuff like the people do down in Louisville, on Virginia Ave. When they get stuck at a crossing they run up on people’s lawns to go the opposite direction on the street or to go on the tracks and get over them. -------------------- I’m just kidding by the way but, they do do that in Louisville.

I’m a litte bit confused as to how Union Pacific can step in and asume control over government owned roads, that UP says we are taking control of them and closeing them down? That doesn’t seem right to me. If this does take place I guess the residents will be stranded when the snow comes around since they won’t have their streets plowed or anything because, they are closed. So, imagine that. I also wonder what will happen in the event of an emergancy and the police, fire dept, or ambulace has to arive on the sceen. I can picture it now.

Caller to 911: help me were on some road by the UP tracks. 911: Mam or Sir your going to have to be more specific. Caller: I don’t know were I am ther are no street signs and from the looks of it, it seems as if the road is abandond. Oh wait I found a street sign it’s Bylisses Way. 911: Sorry we don’t have a street listed on any of outr maps by that name in your area. Interesting…

12

Hehe…[:D]

13

Normally I don’t get involved in threads like this, but I’ll make an exception this time. Maybe I’m just real old fashioned, but it seems pretty straight forward to me. The railroad is going to allow them to continue to use the private crossings over the railroad r-o-w (assuming they have no other access) and all they have to do is sign a release saying, in effect, “I will stop, look and listen before crossing. If I’m stupid and fail to do this and a train hits me it’s my fault.” Maybe I’m missing some thing but I’d sign. That sounds like what I was taught to do before crossing tracks. Is that not still the standard operating practice? Extortion???

Regards

Ed

14

Well if you ask me every driver should sign a waiver something like this before they are allowed to cross over RR tracks.[;)]

15

Sarah,
These are private drives and roads, not public.

And you can bet there is another way into or out of these properties, like a county or FM road across the back…the land owners just don’t want to have to drive the long way around.
As Mr. Murphy points out, UP isn’t closing the crossings, just making sure that the liability of use and maintenance is not a legal issue…it aint their crossing, they didn’t build it, don’t have to maintain it, and if you get hit on it, that’s your fault.
If you ever drive down IH10, around Columbus, Katy, and most other small towns, you can see hundreds of these crossings, where, when IH10 was built, the land owners made their own driveways and private roads off of the highway feeder or access road…and almost everyone of them crosses the UP(former SP) .
Behind all of these properties are state highways, like Hwy90, or county roads that all offer legal and safe access to the places.

Some of these private RR crossings are built in very imaginative and dangerous ways, one runs parallel to the tracks and climbs the raised ROW, then crosses the tracks and keeps going at a 3 or 4 degree angle, driving into the place, you cant see a train at all because of the grade you are driving up, leaving the place is just as bad because of the same problem, you are driving up a steep hill running the same direction as the tracks, and cant even see the crossing until you are in it…

Read the fifth paragraph in Scoobies post…
UP isn’t “cutting off” access, they want to work with the landowners…

Ed

[quote]
QUOTE: Originally posted by CSXrules4eva

Maybe instead of building an overpass the residents should think about driving across people’s lawns and stuff like the people do down in Louisville, on Virginia Ave. When they get stuck at a crossing they run up on people’s lawns to go the opposite direction on the street or to go on the tracks and get over them. --------------------

16

Any railroad worth its salt will require a crossing license before a private crossing is installed. On one section of line where we will be converting to light rail service there are 91 grade crossings in 5 miles. All of these have crossing licenses that state we can close it on 24 hour up to 60 days notice. Yes, we have the absolute right to close these crossings, but think about being a good corporate citizen. I do not want to go to a city council meeting and hear all of the people scream about being put out of work, stranded, etc. Not a way to be a good citizen. We are working with the crossing licensees to see if a different egress can be established. Most people are agreeable with this.

Public crossings owned by the state, county, or city are a different story. Most of the public road crossings are covered by crossing licenses, however, if you close one does the governmental entity have a superior right of eminant domain? I do not know. Major road crossings we are grade separating. This must be done as the frequency of light rail trains would seriously conject the crossing. We do studies to determine if we will grade separate. The study input consists of traffic density, location of schools, fire stations, room for traffic queing, etc. If a crossing does not meet our warrants for grade separation (at our cost) we work with the entity to share the costs. Hopefully we will get the vast majority of grade crossings eliminated.

Look at Europe vs the USA. Europe has very few grade crossings while we have many. Part of the concern is that third rail power is used which makes the ambulance chasing lawyers drool. Of course, Europe has been in to massive rail passenger service for years and this requires fast trains that are not impeded by slowing for crossings.

17

what a surprise…more people mad at UP

18

[quote]
QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed

Maybe the residents should consider building a overpass over the tracks[?]

No because it costs alot of Money. And surly the City or Town won’t fork it up.
Allan.

19

That’s because the Union Pacific thinks with their A$$ and not their Brain. Allan.

20

were the tracks there before they built on the land? its not like UP laid tracks through their property…