Transportation Committee — Fayetteville, AR
Date: 2025-04-29
Time: 17:30

City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
 113 West Mountain Street
 Fayetteville, AR 72701
 (479) 575-8323




 Transportation Committee Agenda
 Tuesday, April 29, 2025
 5:30 PM

 City Hall Annex
 Rock Street Meeting Room


 Council Members
 Council Members:
 Ms. Sarah Bunch
 Mr. Robert Stafford
 Ms. Sarah Moore - Committee Chair
 Min. Monique Jones

 City Staff:
 Chris Brown, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Terry Gulley, Asst. PW Director for Operations/Transportation Services Director
Transportation Committee Agenda April 29, 2025
Meeting




New Business

Reports and Presentations

1. Safe Streets For All Project Update
 Safe Streets For All Project Update -

2. Traffic Calming Policy
 Discussion of the Traffic Calming Policy and when measures are considered. -

Informational Items

1. Flintco, LLC Change Order #1 Maple Street
 Change Order #1 to RFP# 24-15 contract with Flintco, LLC for the Maple Street
 Improvements Project -

2. Arkansas And Missouri Railroad Agreement Amendment
 An amendment to Resolution 232-22, which authorized an agreement with the
 Arkansas and Missouri Railroad (AMRR) for the modifications required for the Razorback Rd.
 Intersection Project
 -

Adjourn

Zoom Information:


1. HTTPS://US06WEB.ZOOM.US/WEBINAR/REGISTER/WN_2EZLCORLQTOGUBVKAN1QJW#/R




City of Fayetteville, Arkansas page 2

City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
 113 West Mountain Street
 Fayetteville, AR 72701
 (479) 575-8323




 Transportation Committee Agenda
 Tuesday, April 29, 2025
 5:30 PM

 City Hall Annex
 Rock Street Meeting Room


 Council Members
 Council Members:
 Ms. Sarah Bunch
 Mr. Robert Stafford
 Ms. Sarah Moore - Committee Chair
 Min. Monique Jones

 City Staff:
 Chris Brown, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Terry Gulley, Asst. PW Director for Operations/Transportation Services Director
Transportation Committee Agenda April 29, 2025
Meeting




New Business

Reports and Presentations

1. Safe Streets For All Project Update
 Safe Streets For All Project Update -

2. Traffic Calming Policy
 Discussion of the Traffic Calming Policy and when measures are considered. -

Informational Items

1. Flintco, LLC Change Order #1 Maple Street
 Change Order #1 to RFP# 24-15 contract with Flintco, LLC for the Maple Street
 Improvements Project -

2. Arkansas And Missouri Railroad Agreement Amendment
 An amendment to Resolution 232-22, which authorized an agreement with the
 Arkansas and Missouri Railroad (AMRR) for the modifications required for the Razorback Rd.
 Intersection Project
 -

Adjourn

Zoom Information:


1. HTTPS://US06WEB.ZOOM.US/WEBINAR/REGISTER/WN_2EZLCORLQTOGUBVKAN1QJW#/R




City of Fayetteville, Arkansas page 2
 Public Works Department
 Policy & Procedures

 Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
 for Traffic Calming Requests
EFFECTIVE DATE
March 17, 2021 – Following the approval of the Traffic Calming Policy on March 16, 2021 by the
City Council, all traffic calming requests are subject to the procedures set forth in this SOP.

PURPOSE
Create a process to be used by the Engineering and Transportation Divisions’ within the Public
Works Department, the Police Department, and Fire Marshal’s Office when requests for traffic
calming are received.

POLICY
It is the policy of the Public Works Department that staff follow standard operating procedures
summarized below for requests, review, and approval of traffic calming internally, as well as
prioritizing requests approved for implementation by the Transportation Committee. The Traffic
Calming Policy is attached and is to be used in conjunction with this SOP.

BACKGROUND
Prior to adoption of this policy, traffic calming requests would be received by multiple divisions
and departments throughout the City. Depending on the division or department contacted, traffic
speed and volume data would be collected, or speed enforcement would occur in the subject
area, but no long-term solutions were implemented. There was also minimal communication
between divisions and departments on these requests. The procedure outlined below is an effort
to combine the process to follow when a request is received and how traffic calming projects will
be implemented.

PROCEDURE
 1. All requests for traffic calming received are to be sent to the Engineering Division
 (engineering@fayetteville-ar.gov) to be addressed by the appropriate staff member.
 a. In instances where the Police Department conducts enforcement after receiving a
 request, the Police Department should notify the Engineering Division that it will
 be conducting enforcement and of the findings at the end of the enforcement
 period.
 2. Following receipt of a traffic calming request, the designated Engineering staff member
 will conduct an initial review of the request to determine if it falls into Tier 1 or 2 of the
 Traffic Calming Policy for further consideration. Requests falling into Tier 3 will generally
 not be considered for traffic calming.
 a. For requests falling into Tier 1 or 2, Engineering staff will reach out to the citizen(s)
 requesting traffic calming to define the area included in the request for staff to
 determine the extent of the study area.
 b. Once the area has been defined, Engineering staff will advise the citizen of the
 need for neighborhood consensus of 70% of residents/property owners in the
 study area in order for a traffic study to be conducted.
3. Traffic calming requests receiving affirmative response by 70% of residents/property
 owners in the study area will be put in the queue for Engineering or Transportation staff to
 collect traffic speed and volume data.
 a. Data is to be collected for a minimum of two consecutive weekdays at a minimum
 of one location within the study area.
 i. Staff should coordinate to determine the appropriate duration and
 location(s) for each request to obtain the most accurate representation of
 traffic speed and volume within the study area.
4. Once data has been collected, Engineering staff will score the street(s) based on the point
 metric set forth in the Traffic Calming Policy.
 a. Any street(s) not meeting the minimum total points or speed required for traffic
 calming implementation will generally not receive further consideration.
5. When traffic data supports the implementation of traffic calming, staff will present traffic
 calming options for the study area to be considered by the affected property owners. The
 Engineering and Transportation Divisions’, Police Department, and Fire Marshal will work
 together to verify that the options presented will not create adverse impacts.
 a. When less than 60% of property owners approve of the proposed traffic calming
 measures, no further action will be taken unless other circumstances warrant this
 requirement be waived.
6. Traffic calming measures receiving 60% affected property owner approval will be
 prioritized by City staff based on the rating system defined in the Traffic Calming Policy.
7. The City Engineer will present prioritized traffic calming projects to the Transportation
 Committee for approval to be implemented, up to the approved City Council budget.
 a. When the budget does not allow for implementation of all requests meeting the
 requirements of the policy, locations not selected will remain in consideration for
 up to three years.
8. Following Transportation Committee approval, selected traffic calming projects will be
 added to the Transportation Division’s work plan to be constructed.
9. Where traffic calming has been implemented, staff may conduct a follow-up study six
 months after installation to determine if the traffic calming features have achieved the initial
 purpose of the project.
 a. Corrective measures may be taken when unacceptable impacts are identified.
 b. After the evaluation period, traffic calming may be removed for reasons as outlined
 in the policy.
 TRAFFIC CALMING POLICY
 EFFECTIVE MARCH 17, 2021
INTRODUCTION

Excessive traffic speeds in neighborhood areas is an issue of concern to citizens in Fayetteville.
This policy addresses a procedure through which neighborhoods can be considered for traffic
calming measures. Traffic calming is the management of traffic through the use of roadway design
features. Traffic management through traffic calming is most effective if the features are both
warranted and properly designed.

Traffic calming solutions may be warranted where there is a demonstrated need for traffic calming,
and where solutions can be identified that may address the need. Not only must the needs be
perceived by the neighborhood, but they must also be documented to be substantive. In order for
traffic calming strategies to be effective, traffic data collection and analysis must validate that
calming needs are legitimate. These traffic studies may include:

 1. Speed studies
 2. Vehicle and pedestrian counts
 3. Through-traffic surveys
 4. Accident records

Effective solutions for valid needs also require that the selected traffic calming strategy be
appropriate for the need. Once an effective strategy for traffic calming has been selected, it should
be properly designed in accordance with the relevant design parameters. These should include
consideration of:

 1. Traffic volume
 2. Design speed
 3. Design vehicle characteristics
 4. Emergency services

Although warranted and properly designed traffic calming strategies can have the desired benefits
of managing traffic, they also can create disadvantages to adjacent streets and neighborhoods
and to the traveling public at large. Traffic calming can have the potential of shifting an existing
traffic problem to another street or neighborhood. Traffic calming may also increase delay for
emergency response vehicles and can increase long term maintenance costs for the City.
Because of the controversy and potential disadvantages, traffic calming should be implemented
only with the majority consent of those directly impacted.

This policy therefore provides guidelines for the following traffic calming activities:

 1. Requests for traffic calming consideration
 2. Prioritization of requests
 3. Identification and approval of traffic calming strategies
 4. Programming of traffic calming improvements
 5. Design of traffic calming projects
 6. Evaluation of traffic calming projects

REQUESTS FOR TRAFFIC CALMING CONSIDERATION

Requests for traffic calming received will be catalogued, and will be assigned to one of three tiers:

 Tier 1: Proximity to Schools (1/2-mile walkshed) or other significant points of interest
 Tier 2: Obvious cut-through opportunities (based on engineering best judgement, could
 be supplemented with traffic count study)
 Tier 3: Dead-end or disconnected areas of the transportation network

If a citizen requests police patrol enforcement, the request will be forwarded to the Police
Department for possible enforcement action.

Requests from multiple streets may be grouped together and/or staff may add streets that may
be impacted by traffic calming to requests. If such grouping occurs, the requirements of the next
section will apply to the grouped streets.

PRIORITIZATION OF TRAFFIC CALMING REQUESTS

Locations assigned to Tier 1 or Tier 2 will be scheduled for further study upon receipt by the City
Engineer of a petition or other affirmative response by at least one member of seventy percent
(70%) of the property ownerships facing the street(s) on which the traffic calming study is
requested.

A block shall consist of every developed property having frontage on the street to be studied
between successive intersecting streets. A typical traffic calming petition shall include, at a
minimum, a description of the street or streets which are to be included in the calming study and
the signature or other written evidence of approval of at least 70% of the property owners on those
street(s). Where more than one person is listed as owner for each property, only one person shall
be entitled to vote or sign a petition. Likewise, if multiple properties are owned by the same person
or persons, the owner(s) will only be entitled to one vote or signature on the petition. This definition
of property owner shall apply throughout this policy document.

The City staff assigned to administer traffic calming studies will review the request for validity and
will assess whether other streets may be impacted by implementation of traffic calming strategies.

City staff will define the area of potential impact resulting from the traffic calming implementation
on a case by case basis.

Relevant data to be collected for the study includes:

 1. Speed and volume counts
 2. Accident experience
 3. Distance to schools and other pedestrian generators
 4. Pedestrian facilities

This data will be used to assign a point value to each Tier 1 and Tier 2 location, as follows:

 Per 5pts for each MPH > 5MPH above 25 mph, or the
 Speed
 Calc. posted speed if above 25 mph
 Per
 Volume ADT/100
 Calc.
 Sidewalks 0-5 5pts if no continuous sidewalk, 2.5pts if one side
 Accidents 0-5 1pt for each accident/year at one location
 10pts within quarter-mile radius, 7.5pts if between
 School
 0-10 quarter- and half-mile radius, 5pts within half-mile
 Walkshed
 radius, 2.5pts if partially in half-mile radius

Locations receiving a minimum of 35 points, or that have 85th percentile speeds above 35 mph
will receive further consideration for traffic calming under this program. Locations with 85 th
percentile speeds not exceeding 5 mph over the speed limit or below 25 mph will not receive
further consideration regardless of score.

Streets that do not meet these minimum criteria, and dead-end or disconnected streets that are
placed in Tier 3 generally will not be considered for structural traffic calming, but may be
considered for enforcement and are eligible for consideration of tactical urbanism permits.

IDENTIFICATION OF TRAFFIC CALMING STRATEGIES

City staff shall present to the residents living within the area of potential impact the results of the
traffic calming study and rating. Where traffic calming may be appropriate, staff will present
options for traffic calming in the affected area. Sixty percent (60%) or more of the property owners
in the area of potential impact must support the proposed strategy option(s) before the City will
give further consideration to traffic calming implementation.

In certain circumstances, the 60% requirement may be waived. These circumstances may
include locations that have disinterested owners (e.g. locations with a large percentage of rental
properties or locations adjacent to a single multifamily apartment complex) or other situations that
are deemed necessary for public safety by the City.

PROGRAMMING OF TRAFFIC CALMING IMPROVEMENTS

Periodically, but not less than once each year, City staff will prioritize those traffic calming
strategies within the City that have been approved within their area of impact. Prioritization will be
based on the rating system. The City Council Transportation Committee will approve projects to
be implemented, up to the yearly budget as determined by City Council. Those traffic calming
improvement locations not selected, will remain in consideration for up to three years.
City ward boundaries should be considered so that projects affecting each ward can be
implemented.

DESIGN OF TRAFFIC CALMING PROJECTS

The design of traffic calming devices must meet the following criteria:

 1. Only residential links or urban center streets are eligible.
 2. The street shall have an ADT of less than 4,000.
 3. Limited to streets having only one lane of through traffic in each direction.
 4. Streets must not be primary emergency routes, as determine by the Police and Fire
 Departments.
 5. At the discretion of the City Engineer, certain traffic calming measures may not be
 used if they would create an unsafe condition for motorists driving at normal speeds
 under average driving conditions.
 6. Streets must not be through truck routes unless an acceptable alternative route is
 identified and approved. Design of traffic calming features shall accommodate a single
 unit truck.

EVALUATION OF TRAFFIC CALMING PROJECTS

Six months following the completion of the traffic calming improvements, City staff may undertake
a follow-up study to determine if the traffic calming features have achieved the initial purpose of
the project. If unacceptable impacts are identified, corrective measures may be taken. Traffic
calming measures may be removed after the evaluation period for any of the following reasons:

 1. Emergency response is significantly impacted.
 2. The problem for which the traffic calming was implemented has been transferred to
 another street.
 3. At least sixty percent (60%) of the property owners in the defined area of impact sign
 a petition to remove the traffic calming measures. This option will result in complete
 removal of all measures. Where traffic calming measures are removed by petition, a
 period of at least 3 years must pass before future petitions for traffic calming measures
 will be considered on the same street(s).
 CITY COUNCIL MEMO
 2025-474


MEETING OF APRIL 29, 2025
TO: Mayor Rawn and City Council
THRU: Chris Brown, Public Works Director
 Keith Macedo, Interim Chief of Staff
FROM: Matt Mihalevich, Active Transportation Manager
SUBJECT: FLINTCO, LLC. (CHANGE ORDER #1):


RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Change Order #1 to RFP# 24-15 contract with Flintco, LLC for the Maple Street
Improvements Project in the amount of ($xx,xxx,xxx), approval of a project contingency of $xxx,xxx and
approval of a budget adjustment.

BACKGROUND:
The City of Fayetteville and the University of Arkansas have been working together over the past seven years
toward a common goal of improving the section of Maple Street from the Razorback Greenway west to
Garland Avenue. The goal is to create a multi-modal street with a focus on the safety of all users.

On March 31, 2020, the Transportation Committee reviewed the Maple Street project and forwarded a
recommendation to the City Council to apply for grant funding and to authorize the allocation of 2019 bond
funds as matching funds for the project. Committee members expressed support for the vegetation buffer and
recommended wider crosswalk striping.

On December 4, 2024, Resolution 301-24 was approved to accept federal aid funding in the amount of
$25,000,000 from the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration through the Safe
Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) program. This funding will support five construction projects with a focus on
safety. The Maple Street Improvements will be the first of the five projects to begin construction, with the goal
of starting work when University of Arkansas students are out for the summer in 2025.

A Request for Proposals (RFP #24-15) was advertised in late 2024, and qualifications were received from four
construction management companies. On February 24, 2025, a selection committee composed of City of
Fayetteville staff and non-voting members from the University of Arkansas selected Flintco, LLC, for
construction management of the Maple Street Improvements.

In March 2025, the City Council approved Resolution 76-25 for a contract with Flintco, LLC, through RFP #24-
15 to provide construction manager-at-risk pre-bidding services for the Maple Street project. These services
have included working closely with Olsson on phasing plans, traffic control, evaluating optimal construction
methods, and bidding the project to establish the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) for construction.

DISCUSSION:
The proposed improvements to Maple Street include 2,475 linear feet of new roadway surface, upgraded traffic
Mailing address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
signals, storm drainage, 8-foot-wide "senior walk" sidewalks on both the north and south sides, and a
separated two-way cycle track along the south side extending from the Razorback Greenway to Garland
Avenue.

Maple Street has been identified as a catalyst project in the Northwest Arkansas Regional Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan. Currently, bicycle access to the University of Arkansas campus core and surrounding
neighborhoods is limited. The addition of the Maple Street connection will greatly improve trail system
accessibility for faculty, staff, students, and visitors.
Safety upgrades will include a low vegetation buffer between the cycle track and the roadway. Additionally,
enhanced mid-block crosswalks are proposed, featuring decorative pavement markings and passive detection
bollards for beacon activation.

This change order will initiate the construction phase of the Maple Street Improvements. Flintco, LLC, has
provided a Guaranteed Maximum Price of ($xx,xxx,xxx) for the ten bid packages required to complete the
project. Construction is expected to take 16 months. With approval of this contract, construction is scheduled to
begin May 12—following the end of the Spring 2025 semester—and continue through the summer of 2026,
with minimal closures during the Fall 2025 and Spring 2026 semesters.

BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT:
The City has been awarded federal funding for this project through the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A)
program, as approved by Resolution 301-24. With this change order, the total contract amount will be
($xx,xxx,xxx). The required 25% match will be shared between the University of Arkansas and the City.
 $x,xxx,xxx has been budgeted through the 2019 Transportation Street Bond for the city's portion of this
match. . The University of Arkansas will contribute the remaining $x,xxx,xxx in matching funds toward the
Maple Street Project.

ATTACHMENTS: SRF (#3) , BA (#4), 76-25 Resolution (#5), 301-24 Resolution (#6)




Mailing address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street
 Fayetteville, AR 72701
 (479) 575-8323
 Legislation Text


File #: 2025-474

FLINTCO, LLC. (CHANGE ORDER #1):

A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO THE CONTRACT WITH FLINTCO,
LLC IN THE AMOUNT OF $___________.00 FOR THE MAPLE STREET IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT, TO APPROVE A PROJECT CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $____________.00,
AND TO APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT

WHEREAS, on December 4, 2024 City Council approved Resolution 301-24 accepting federal aid
funding in the amount of $25,000,000.00 from the Safe Streets and Roads for All program; and

WHEREAS, on March 18, 2025, city Council approved Resolution 76-25 for a contract with Flintco,
LLC to provide construction manager-at-risk pre-bidding services for the Maple Street project; and

WHEREAS, Change Order No. 1 will initiate the construction phase of the Maple Street Improvements.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:

Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves Change Order
No. 1 with Flintco, LLC in the amount of $_________.00 for the Maple Street Improvements project,
and further approves a project contingency in the amount of $_______.00.

Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves a budget
adjustment, a copy of which is attached to this Resolution.




 Page 1
 City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form

 2025-474
 Item ID
 5/6/2025
 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only
 N/A for Non-Agenda Item

 Matt Mihalevich 4/16/2025 ENGINEERING (621)
 Submitted By Submitted Date Division / Department
 Action Recommendation:
 Staff recommends approval of Change Order #1 to RFP# 24-15 contract with Flintco, LLC for the Maple Street
 Improvements Project in the amount of (Cost to be provided April 29th), approval of a project contingency of
 $300,000.00 and approval of a budget adjustment.




 Budget Impact:
 2235.900.9223-5814.05 Safe Streets and Roads Grant

 Account Number Fund

 32401.9223 Safe Streets and Roads Grant - W Maple St

 Project Number Project Title

 Budgeted Item? Yes Total Amended Budget $ 26,250,000.00
 Expenses (Actual+Encum) $ -
 Available Budget $ 26,250,000.00
 Does item have a direct cost? Yes Item Cost $ -
 Is a Budget Adjustment attached? Yes Budget Adjustment $ -
 $247.00 Remaining Budget $ 26,250,000.00


 V20221130
Purchase Order Number: 2025-432 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # 301-24 & 76-25

Change Order Number: 1 Approval Date: 3/18/2025

Original Contract Number: 2025-18

Comments:
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas - Budget Adjustment (Agenda)
 Budget Year Division Adjustment Number
 ENGINEERING (621)
 /Org2
 2025
 Requestor: Matt Mihalevich
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION:
 Staff recommends approval of Change Order #1 to RFP# 24-15 contract with Flintco, LLC for the Maple Street Improvements
 Project in the amount of (Cost to be provided April 29th), approval of a project contingency of $300,000.00 and approval of
 a budget adjustment.




 COUNCIL DATE: 5/6/2025
 ITEM ID#: 2025-474




 Budget Division Date

 D - (City Council)
 TYPE:
 JOURNAL #:


 GLDATE:
 RESOLUTION/ORDINANCE CHKD/POSTED: /
 - - v.2025311
 TOTAL
 Increase / (Decrease) Project.Sub#
 Account Number Expense Revenue Project Sub.Detl AT Account Name
 GLACCOUNT EXPENSE REVENUE PROJECT SUB AT DESCRIPTION X
2235.900.9223-5814.05 - - 32401 9223 EX Improvements - Trails
2235.900.9223-5911.00 300,000 - 32401 9223 EX Contingency - Savings Other
2235.900.9220-5899.00 (300,000) - 32401 9220 EX Unallocated - Budget
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -

 1 of 1
 CITY COUNCIL MEMO
 2025-526


MEETING OF APRIL 29, 2025
TO: Mayor Rawn and City Council
THRU: Keith Macedo, Interim Chief of Staff
 Chris Brown, Public Works Director
FROM: Matt Casey, Engineering Design Manager
SUBJECT: ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI RAILROAD (AGREEMENT AMENDMENT):


RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of an amendment to Resolution 232-22, which authorized an agreement with the
Arkansas and Missouri Railroad (AMRR) for the modifications required for the Razorback Rd. and 15th St.
Intersection Project, 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 was 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.

With the proposed road widening and sidewalk installation, some modifications were required for the railroad
crossing. The improvements included widening of the crossing as well as new crossing gates and lights that
were interconnected with the new traffic signal. In October of 2022, the City of Fayetteville City Council
approved an agreement (Resolution 232-22) with AMRR for the design work and the construction necessary
for the improvements and widening of the railroad crossing in the amount of $839,774.60. The construction of
this project was completed in 2024.

DISCUSSION:
The approved agreement with AMRR was based on an estimated cost of $839,774.60, but states that the City
is responsible for actual costs associated with the design and construction. The City council also approved an
additional $80,000 in project contingency to cover cost overruns. The cost estimate for these improvements
was prepared in 2022. Unfortunately, the work did not take place until 2024. During this time, AMRR was
faced with higher costs than previously estimated. AMRR has submitted a final invoice for the work which is a
total of $934,912.66. This is an increase of $95,138.06, which is $15,138.06 above the contingency amount
previously approved by council. This request is to approve payment of the actual cost and approve a budget

Mailing address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
adjustment to cover the additional construction costs associated with this work.

BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT:
The cost for this request will be paid for with the funds from the 2019 Transportation Bond Fund.

ATTACHMENTS: SRF (#3) , BA (#4), Invoice - 0136959 (#5), 232-22 Resolution (#6)




Mailing address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street
 Fayetteville, AR 72701
 (479) 575-8323
 Legislation Text


File #: 2025-526

ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI RAILROAD (AGREEMENT AMENDMENT):

A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION 232.22 AND AUTHORIZE
THE PAYMENT OF AN ADDITIONAL $15,138.06 TO THE ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI
RAILROAD FOR RAILROAD CROSSING MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED FOR THE
RAZORBACK ROAD AND 15TH STREET INTERSECTION PROJECT, AND TO APPROVE A
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT - 2019 STREET IMPROVEMENT BOND PROJECT

WHEREAS, Razorback Road and 15th Street intersection improvements were identified as a priority in
the 2019 Street Improvement Bond Program; and

WHEREAS, on October 4, 2022, City Council approved Resolution 232-22 that authorized an
agreement for the design work and construction necessary for the improvements and widening of the
railroad crossing in the estimated amount of $839,774.60 with an additional $80,000.00 in project
contingency to cover cost overruns; and

WHEREAS, the cost estimate for the project was prepared in 2022, but the work did not take place until
2024 and the actual costs exceeded the original estimate and contingency by $15,138.06.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:

Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby amends Resolution 232.22
and approves the payment of the additional amount of $15,138.06 to the Arkansas and Missouri
Railroad for railroad crossing modifications required for the Razorback Road and 15th Street
Intersection Project.

Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves a budget
adjustment, a copy of which is attached to this Resolution.




 Page 1
 City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form

 2025-526
 Item ID
 5/6/2025
 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only
 N/A for Non-Agenda Item

 Matt Casey 4/15/2025 ENGINEERING (621)
 Submitted By Submitted Date Division / Department
 Action Recommendation:
 Amendment to the approval of the agreement with the Arkansas and Missouri Railroad (AMRR) for the
 modifications required for the Razorback Rd. and 15th St. Intersection Project and approval of a budget adjustment




 Budget Impact:
 4702.860.7222-5809.00 Streets Project (2022 Bonds)

 Account Number Fund

 46020.7222 15th St. / Razorback Rd. Intersection

 Project Number Project Title

 Budgeted Item? Yes Total Amended Budget $ 397,760.00
 Expenses (Actual+Encum) $ 113,367.08
 Available Budget $ 284,392.92
 Does item have a direct cost? Yes Item Cost $ 95,138.06
 Is a Budget Adjustment attached? Yes Budget Adjustment $ -
 Remaining Budget $ 189,254.86


 V20221130
Purchase Order Number: 2022-00000819 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # 232-22

Change Order Number: 1 Approval Date:

Original Contract Number: 2022-00000061

Comments:
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas - Budget Adjustment (Agenda)
 Budget Year Division Adjustment Number
 ENGINEERING (621)
 /Org2
 2025 Requestor: Matt Casey
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION:
  Amendment to the approval of the agreement with the Arkansas and Missouri Railroad (AMRR) for the modifications
  required for the Razorback Rd. and 15th St. Intersection Project and approval of a budget adjustment




 COUNCIL DATE: 5/6/2025
 ITEM ID#: 2025-526
 Holly Black
 4/15/2025 10:52 AM
 Budget Division Date

 TYPE:
 D - (City Council)
 JOURNAL #:

 GLDATE:
 RESOLUTION/ORDINANCE CHKD/POSTED: /
 TOTAL - - v.2025411

 Increase / (Decrease) Project.Sub#
 Account Number Expense Revenue Project Sub.Detl AT Account Name
 GLACCOUNT EXPENSE REVENUE PROJECT SUB AT DESCRIPTION X
4702.860.7222-5809.00 80,000 - 46020 7222 EX Improvements - Street
4702.860.7222-5911.99 (80,000) - 46020 7222 EX Contingency - Capital Project
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -
 - -




 G:\Divs\Engineering\Engineering Design Services\Projects\BOND PROGRAM\2019 Bond Program\Razorback and 15th\Council and
 Committee Actions\RR Agreement\Change Order\2025-526 BA AMRR Revision 1 of 1
 Page: 1

 INVOICE
 Invoice Number: 0136959-IN
 Invoice Date: 2/13/2025

Arkansas & Missouri Railroad
306 East Emma
Springdale, AR 72764
Questions? Call: (479) 751-8600
 Customer Number: 00-CTYFAY
Bill To:
 Customer P.O.:
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
ATTN: CHRIS BROWN
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
113 W. MOUNTAIN ST.
FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72701 Terms: NET 30 DAYS

Item Code Description UM Quantity Price Amount
Hwy 16 (Razorback Rd/15th St) - Progress Billing #4 Final Invoice

OTH EACH 1.000 934,912.66 934,912.66
Labor & Services




 Subtotal 934,912.66
If you receive a request to change banking or Grand Total 934,912.66
remit to address, contact us immediately via phone Paid 726407.52
 Due: $208,505.14
 113 West Mountain Street

 Fayetteville, AR 72701

 479) 575- 8323


 Resolution: 232- 22



File Number: 2022- 0884




RAILROAD CROSSING UPGRADE COST AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT:



A RESOLUTION TO WAIVE COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND AUTHORIZE A RAILROAD

CROSSING UPGRADE COST AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE

ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI RAILROAD IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 839, 774. 60 FOR

MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED FOR THE RAZORBACK ROAD AND 15TH STREET

INTERSECTION PROJECT, TO APPROVE A PROJECT CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT

OF $ 80, 000. 00, AND TO APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT - 2019 STREET

IMPROVEMENT BOND PROJECT




WHEREAS, Razorback Road and 15th Street intersection improvements were identified as a priority
in the 2019 Transportation Bond Program; and



WHEREAS, the Engineering Division has completed the design and is in the process of permitting this
project through ArDOT and the railroad; and


WHEREAS, Arkansas and Missouri Railroad ( AMRR) presented an agreement to the City for the
design work and construction necessary for improvements to and widening of the railroad crossing;
and



WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Railroad Crossing Upgrade Cost and Maintenance
Agreement, the City will reimburse the AMRR for the full cost of labor and materials for installation of
the crossing signal, panels, and appurtenances necessary for a fully operational crossing, which is
estimated to be $ 839, 774. 60; and the City and AMRR agree to equally share the cost of repairs or
major maintenance; and




WHEREAS, it is not feasible or practical to competitively bid such a project because the land over


 Page 1 Printed on 1015122
Resolution: 232- 22

File Number.' 2022- 0884



which the crossing is proposed is owned and controlled by the Arkansas and Missouri Railroad, which
has the sole power to authorize and construct new crossings; and

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:




Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby determines an
exceptional situation exists in which competitive bidding is deemed not feasible or practical and
therefore waives the requirements of formal competitive bidding and authorizes Mayor Jordan to sign
the Railroad Crossing Upgrade Cost and Maintenance Agreement with Arkansas and Missouri
Railroad for modifications required for the Razorback Road and 15th Street Intersection Project, and

further approves a project contingency in the amount of $80, 000. 00 for a total estimated project cost
of $919, 775. 00.



Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves a budget
adjustment, a copy of which is attached to this Resolution.


PASSED and APPROVED on 10/ 4/ 2022


ll1 Attest:




 ioneld Jor Mayor Kara Paxton, City Clerk Treasurer

 01A
 04,

 Y 0' +:.0


 FAYETTEVILLE




 Page 2 Printed on 1015122
 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street

 Fayetteville, AR 72701

 479) 575- 8323



 Text File

 File Number: 2022- 0884


Agenda Date: 10/ 4/ 2022 Version: 1 Status: Passed



In Control: City Council Meetinq File Type: Resolution


Agenda Number: A. 15




RAILROAD CROSSING UPGRADE COST AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT:



A RESOLUTION TO WAIVE COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND AUTHORIZE A RAILROAD

CROSSING UPGRADE COST AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE ARKANSAS AND

MISSOURI RAILROAD IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 839, 774. 60 FOR MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED

FOR THE RAZORBACK ROAD AND 15TH STREET INTERSECTION PROJECT, TO APPROVE A

PROJECT CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 80, 000. 00, AND TO APPROVE A BUDGET

ADJUSTMENT - 2019 STREET IMPROVEMENT BOND PROJECT




WHEREAS, Razorback Road and 15th Street intersection improvements were identified as a priority in the
2019 Transportation Bond Program; and



WHEREAS, the Engineering Division has completed the design and is in the process of permitting this project
through ArDOT and the railroad; and



WHEREAS, Arkansas and Missouri Railroad (AMRR) presented an agreement to the City for the design
work and construction necessary for improvements to and widening of the railroad crossing; and


WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Railroad Crossing Upgrade Cost and Maintenance Agreement, the
City will reimburse the AMRR for the full cost of labor and materials for installation of the crossing signal,
panels, and appurtenances necessary for a fully operational crossing, which is estimated to be $ 839, 774. 60;
and the City and AMRR agree to equally share the cost of repairs or major maintenance; and


WHEREAS, it is not feasible or practical to competitively bid such a project because the land over which the
crossing is proposed is owned and controlled by the Arkansas and Missouri Railroad, which has the sole
power to authorize and construct new crossings; and


NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:



Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby determines an exceptional
situation exists in which competitive bidding is deemed not feasible or practical and therefore waives the
requirements of formal competitive bidding and authorizes Mayor Jordan to sign the Railroad Crossing
Upgrade Cost and Maintenance Agreement with Arkansas and Missouri Railroad for modifications required for



City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 1 Printed on 101512022
File Number: 2022- 0884




the Razorback Road and 15th Street Intersection Project, and further approves a project contingency in the
amount of $80, 000. 00 for a total estimated project cost of $919, 775. 00.


Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves a budget adjustment, a
copy of which is attached to this Resolution.




City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 2 Printed on 101512022
 City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form


 2022- 0884

 Legistar File ID


 10/ 4/ 2022

 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only
 N/ A for Non -Agenda Item



 Matt Casey 9/ 15/ 2022 ENGINEERING ( 621)


 Submitted By Submitted Date Division / Department


 Action 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.




 Budget Impact:

 4702. 860. 7222- 5809. 00 Streets Project ( 2019 Bonds)


 Account Number Fund


 46020. 7222 15th St. / Razorback Rd. Intersection


 Project Number Project Title



 Budgeted Item? Yes Current Budget 21, 218, 438. 00


 Funds Obligated 18, 159, 282. 70

 Current Balance 3, 059, 155. 30

 Does item have a cost? Yes Item Cost 919, 774. 60


 Budget Adjustment Attached? Yes Budget Adjustment 919, 775. 00


 Remaining Budget 3, 059, 155. 70



 V20210527

Purchase Order Number: Previous Ordinance or Resolution #



Change Order Number: Approval Date:



Original Contract Number:



Comments:
 CITY OF

 FAYETTEVILLE CITY COUNCIL MEMO
 ARKANSAS




 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 151" 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.




Mailing Address:
113 W. Mountain Street www. fayetteville- ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
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 4th day of October, 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 15' 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 3' 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.

 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 V-  day of
 2022.




 THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
 CITY OF FAYE ARKANSAS



 Approved




 Print Name


 644& 0
 Title




 ACKNOWLEDGMENT


STATE OF ARKANSAS }
 H
COUNTY OF )



 On this q4' 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,
 j_VxeU 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 Yapacity 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.




M Commission Expires, <<`
 tNotaryPublic titrrrrr
 0 O i




 LLI —
 M

 cc

 ice 0 to Q' •= rr
 ARKANSAS & MISSO RAILROAD COMPANY



 s" 1 ----
 Approved by:
 Signature


 CAREN L. KRASKA
 Print Name


 President
 Title




STATE OF

COUNTYO I ) J) 1i/` r ; )


 i
 On this I day of ` c hl? P i 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 here t m hand and seal the ay and stated above.


 r.


 Notary Public
My Commission Expires:


 b '; j I to I a a l OFFICIAL SEAL.
 R HE
 TARY PUBLIC,
 A
 SMISSONXC P. 0y1y2029
 Exhibit 1




 A/ TKAN.SA. S' 6M/.S'. S'OU/T/
 HA/L/ lOAO
Arkansaas & Missouri Railroad Date: August 23, 2022

306 E. Emma Ave

Springdale, AR 72764



To: City of Fayetteville
 Attn: Matt Blanchard - Matt Casey


Job: 15th ( HWY 16) and Razorback Rd. New crossing warning system ( interconnected), new road crossing, 2 turnouts.


Prepared by: Jeromy Houchin
 Material

  Item # Qty Description Unit Unit Price Line Total

 1 2 RH 1 15# # 9 Turnouts RBM Insulated EA 85, 025. 00 170, 050. 00

 2 12. 000 1 15# New to 1 / 4" Worn - Transition Rail EA 1, 100. 00 13, 200. 00

 3 150. 000 4 Mainline Railroad Ballast TN 25. 00 3, 750. 00

 4 8. 000 1115# Bars - Pair EA 85. 00 680. 00

 5 1. 000 Bolts KG 290. 00 290. 00

 6 50. 000 Lock Washers EA 0. 38 19. 00

 7 26. 000 1 15# Welding Kits EA 135. 00 3, 510. 00

 8 56. 875 Concrete Crossing Panels FT 215. 00 12, 228. 13

 9 3. 1 1115# Rail TN 1, 500. 00 4, 650. 00

 10 50 Pre - Plated Ties EA 224. 50 11, 225. 00

 11 225 Pandrol Clips EA 3. 90 877. 50

 12 4 Transition Rails EA 2, 450. 00 9, 800. 00

 13 8 Welding Kits EA 200. 00 1, 600. 00

 14 150 Ballast TN 19. 00 2, 850. 00

 15 20 Asphalt TN 100. 00 2, 000. 00



 236, 729. 63

 Tax 23, 081. 14

 Shipping 7, 500. 00

 Subtotal ( material) 267, 310. 76

 Labor & Services

  Item # Qty Description Unit Unit Price Line Total

 1 1 Engineering Design LS 5, 000. 00 5, 000. 00

 2 2 Construct, Install and Surface # 9 Turnout EA 25, 000. 00 50, 000. 00

 3 1 CWS - Riotech ( Engineering, Material and Labor) LS 291, 001. 40 291, 001. 40

 4 15 Flagging DY 1, 250. 00 18, 750. 00

 5 5 4 Person Crew DY 3, 950. 00 19, 750. 00

 6 2 2 Person Surfacing Crew DY 3, 500. 00 7, 000. 00

 7 5 Operator DY 1, 500. 00 7, 500. 00

 8 1 Oversized Load Permit Fees LS 1, 000. 00 1, 000. 00

 9 1 Asphalt Contractor LS 25, 000. 00 25, 000. 00

 10 1 Road Closure LS 7, 500. 00 7, 500. 00



 Subtotal ( Labor) 432, 501. 40

 Contingency 139, 962. 43

 Total 839, 774. 60
 I




 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.
benesch This document is governed by 23 U. S. C. § 409.
Highway - Rail Grade Crossing


DOT# 667203Y


West 15t" 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.




 AR AN AS



 f EN& R— " r4 --
 C', No. 16265 SQtoi
 i
 1
 Leii +

Nicole L. Jackson, PE, PTOE

Arkansas License No. 16265




 2021 17 U. S. C.; 23 U. S. C. § 409 Document
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

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




A-W.,
9 benesch City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 12
 2021 17 U. S. C.; 23 U. S. C. § 409 Document
I 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 15t" 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 15T" ST ( SH 16) @ RAZORBACK RD ( 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.




A—
 W.,
9 benesch City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 13
 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) & 15t" 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:

TABLE 1- CONTACT INFORMATION




 City of Fayetteville
 Matt Blanchard, PE mblanchard@fayetteville- ar. gov
 Agency: 125 West Mountain Street
 Staff Engineer 479- 575- 8205
 Fayetteville, AR 72701



 Arkansas Department of
 paulette. rice@ardot. gov
 Paulette Rice, PMP Transportation
 ARDOT: 501- 569- 2557
 Railroad Coordinator PO Box 2261

 Little Rock, AR 72203


 Arkansas & Missouri Railroad
 Jeromy Houchin jeromyh@amrailroad. com
 Railroad: 306 East Emma Avenue
 Chief Engineer 479- 790- 0647
 Springdale, AR 72764




 p`

0-benesch City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 14
 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 control' 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 distance ( CSD) is 166 feet.

 The minimum track clearance distance' ( MTCD) is 38 feet.

 The design vehicle' is a 75- foot tractor trailer.




 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).
 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).

 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.).




 benesch _ -
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 15
 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 times ( RWTT) for APT is as follows:

TABLE 2 - RIGHT OF WAY TRANSFER TIME


 Traffic Signal

 Preemption

 Timing Values
 Preempt Delay Time 0. 0

 Controller Response Time to Preempt 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


 IMaximum RWTT




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).
 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).




 benesch
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 6
 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:

TABLE 3- RAILROAD PREEMPTION VALUES


 Preemption



 Minimum Time ( MT)' 20


 Clearance Time ( CT)'* 1

 21
 Prescribed Warning Time' O ( MT + CT)
 Buffer Time ( BT) 11* 5

 Advance Preemption Time ( APT) 24

 Programmed System Design Time ( SDT) 12 minus Equipment Response Time ( ERT) 13*
 50
 SDT — ERT] ( Subject to AREMA 50- second limitation)

 Equipment Response Time ( ERT)* 5


 Total Approach Time or System Design Time ( SDT) 55
 I
 To Be Confirmed by Railroad during Approach Design I

The Agency requests 24 seconds of APT ( see Appendix D for more information on the preemption values).




a 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.)

11 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.).




AN,
 benesch _
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 7

 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.




 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."




5. 1 Design Recommendations


 The Agency has requested the following interconnection circuitry 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'

 Supervised Circuitc

 Crossing Active Circuit'
 Gate Down CircuitE
 Traffic Signal Health Circuit F


 NOTE: Descriptions for each interconnection circuits and configuration along with some example
 interface methods' 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" 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.


All
 benesch _---
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 8

 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 time14 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' ( 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" ( 118- 8) sign downstream of the grade crossing
 MUTCD 2009 Second Edition). These signs should be installed when the potential for vehicles to stop




  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).




 benesch
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 19
 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 program'. 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



 benesch
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 10

 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.




 benesch
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 11

 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 5- 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).




 benesch
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 12

 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.



a Advance Preemotion 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




 benesch _
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 13

 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

 RAILROAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL
 PREEMPTION PREEMPTION
 CIRCUITS INTERFACE PANEL

 APR




 SUPERVISED




 ENERGY BX+




 benesch _—
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 14

 2021 17 U. S. C.; 23 U. S. C. § 409 Document
 Advance Preemption Circuit Supervised Double -Break

 RAILROAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL
 PREEMPTION PREEMPTION
 CIRCUITS INTERFACE PANEL

 APR
 4DVANCE PREEMP



 4NCE PREEMP


 SUPERVISED


 SUPERVISED




 ENERGY BX+


 ENERGY NX-




 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.




0'
0"benesch _- City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 115
 2021 17 U. S. C.; 23 U. S. C. § 409 Document
 Advance Preemption Circuit Supervised Single -Break with Crossing Active Circuit
 RAILROAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL
 PREEMPTION PREEMPTION
 CIRCUITS INTERFACE PANEL

 APR
 rr, ry r rrt uv r




 SUPERVISED




 ROSSING ACTT'




 ENERGY BX+




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:

 RAILROAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL
 PREEMPTION PREEMPTION
 CIRCUITS INTERFACE PANEL




 GATE DOWN

 ENERGY FROM APR
 BACK CONTAC




Obenesch City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 1 16
 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 do 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:

 RAILROAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL
 PREEMPTION PREEMPTION
 CIRCUITS INTERFACE PANEL
 TSH RELAY O O

 R TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEALTH + 12V"



 R TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEALTH — 12Vdc




 O O




 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




 benesch _
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 1 17
 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.

 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.

 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.



 benesch
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 18

 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.)




 benesch _—
 City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 19

 2021 17 U. S. C.; 23 U. S. C. § 409 Document
APPENDIX C - PREEMPTION CALCULATION FORM




AN,
0 benesch City of Fayetteville I DOT# 667203Y 120
 2021 17 U. S. C.; 23 U. S. C. § 409 Document
 Form 0
 03/
 3/ 09)
 Page 1of2
 GUIDE FOR DETERMINING TIME REQUIREMENTS FOR

 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PREEMPTION AT HIGHWAY RAIL GRADE CROSSINGS


 AR, Fayetteville
 City Date 06/ 17/ 2022

 County Washington Completed by Benesch - Ft Worth
 District 4 District Approval



 Crossing Stree Parallel Street Name


 4
 Show North Arrow Traffic Signal 10 Parallel Street
 Razorback Rd



 Crossing Street Name
 I Track
 Railroad ........... ........
 F_ u Phase
 SH 16 ( W 15th St)



 g Warning Device

 Railroad A& M Railroad Railroad Contact Jeromy Houchin
 667203Y
Crossing DOT# Phone ( 479) 790- 0647


SECTION 1: RIGHT- OF- WAY TRANSFER TIME CALCULATION


Preempt verification and response time Remarks

 1. 0. 0 McCain ATC eX2, Omni eX
  1. Preempt delay time seconds

 2. 0 0 Controller type:
  2. Controller response time to preempt ( seconds).......................................


  3. Preempt verification and response time ( seconds): add lines 1 and 2........................................ 3. 0. 0



Worst - case conflicting vehicle time

  4. Worst -case conflicting vehicle phase number ......................... 4.
 F1 Remarks

 5. 5. 0
  5. Minimum green time during right- of-way transfer seconds
 6. 0. 0
  6. Other green time during right- of- way transfer seconds

  7. Yellow change time seconds 7. 4. 0


  8. Red clearance time ( seconds) 8, 4. 3



 9. 13. 3
  9. Worst -case conflicting vehicle time ( seconds): add lines 5 through 8 .........................


Worst -case conflicting pedestrian time

 10. Worst - case conflicting pedestrian phase number.................... 10. F1 Remarks

 11. 0. 0
 11. Minimum walk time during right- of- way transfer seconds

 12. 0. 0 Pedestrians omitted per
 12. Pedestrian clearance time during right- of-way transfer seconds
 13. 0. 0 conference call with City on
 13. Vehicle yellow change time, if not included on line 12 seconds
 14. Vehicle red clearance time, if not included on line 12 ( seconds) ................. 14. 0. 0 3/ 10/ 2021



 15. 0. 0
 15. Worst -case conflicting pedestrian time ( seconds): add lines 11 through 14 ................

Worst -case conflicting vehicle or pedestrian time

 16. 13. 3
 16. Worst -case conflicting vehicle or pedestrian time ( seconds): maximum of lines 9 and 15................


 17. 13. 3
 17. Right-of-way transfer time ( seconds): add lines 3 and 16.................................................................
SECTION 2: QUEUE CLEARANCE TIME CALCULATION Form2304
 03/ 09)
 DVCD
 D( Page 2 of 2
 L

 a CSD DVL


 r30
 0 Design vehicle

 am0
 m CSD = Clear storage distance
 m
 n
 MTCD = Minimum track clearance distance
 U

 N
 1
 U
 DVL = Design vehicle length
 0 6



 a
 w L = Queue start- up distance, also stop -line distance
 DVCD = Design vehicle clearance distance




 Remarks

 18. Clear storage distance ( CSD, feet) .............................. 18. 166


 19. Minimum track clearance distance ( MTCD, feet) ............. 19. 38


 20. Design vehicle length ( DVL, feet) ................................ 20. 75 Design vehicle type: Tractor -trailer



 21. 204
 21. Queue start- up distance, L ( feet): add lines 18 and 19
 Remarks

 22. 12. 2 Line 24- Grade < 1. 5%
 22. Time required for design vehicle to start moving ( seconds): calculate as 2+( L+ 20) ......


 23. Design vehicle clearance distance, DVCD ( feet): add lines 19 and 20 ........ 23. F 113



 14. 8 Read from Figure 2 in Instructions.
 24. Time for design vehicle to accelerate through the DVCD seconds 24.



 25. Queue clearance time ( seconds): add lines 22 and 24..................................................... 25. 27. 0




SECTION 3: MAXIMUM PREEMPTION TIME CALCULATION Remarks

 26. 13. 3
 26. Right- of-way transfer time ( seconds): line 17......................................
 27. Queue clearance time ( seconds): line 25........................................... 27. 27. 0


 28. Desired minimum separation time ( seconds) ...................................... 28. 4. 0



 29. 44. 3
 29. Maximum preemption time ( seconds): add lines 26 through 28


SECTION 4: SUFFICIENT WARNING TIME CHECK Remarks

 30. 20
 30. Required minimum time, MT ( seconds): per regulations ...........

 31. 1
 31. Clearance time, CT ( seconds): get from railroad .....................

 32. 21 Excludes buffer time ( BT)
 32. Minimum warning time, MWT ( seconds): add lines..................................

 33. 0
 33. Advance preemption time, APT, if provided ( seconds): get from railroad .....


 34. 21
 34. Warning time provided by the railroad ( seconds): add lines 32 and 33


 35. Additional warning time required from railroad ( seconds): subtract line 34 from line 29,
 35. 24
 round up to nearest full second, enter 0 if less than 0................................................


 f the additional warning time required ( line 35) is greater than zero, additional warning time has to be requested from the railroad.
 k1ternatively, the maximum preemption time ( line 29) may be decreased after performing an engineering study to investigate the
 ossibility of reducing the values on lines 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13 and 14.


Remarks:
 Exhibit 3
 6 ` SURVEYED BY:

 I I/
 F I DID

 o \\ DRAWN BY:
 o as o

 ME

 DESIGNED BY:

INN Mc


 l I
 I_ II
 I REMOVE
 WARNING
 4 STOP AHEAD \
 SIGNS ( W3- 1) \
 o
 I W/ SUPPORTS AND RETURN \ s r
 I v
 TO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
 I
 ee
 x II / o\
 II
 I I
 zi 60 0 60
 F-:
 Z




 I= Lo
 W d
 Scale: 1'= 60' —

 I II
 I I
 w \\
 06 Q Q
 I
 vvv
 0
 1
 I II I

 cn
 j a REMOVE EX.
 Z «S W
 II I\
 1\ REMOVE EX. R3- 7 " RIGHT LANE MUST TURN RIGHT" O Ur J
 IIyy
 M5- 1 ( RIGHT ARROW) =
 H Z
 NI I I M4- 5( TO)

 7 M1- 5 ( AR 71 ROUTE SIGN)
 R3- 5fP ( RIGHT LANE) V Y Q
 r - MS 1 L& R ( R& L ARROW)
 x
 M1- 5 ( AR 16 ROUTE SIGN) Q W W
 AND CENTER IN GREENSPACE
 0
 M3- 3 ( SOUTH)
 a \
 Q
 WITH NEW SUPPORTS
 I a M3- 3 ( NORTH) v
 W
 I AND CENTER IN H

 N I I
 WITH
 GREENSPACErill,
 NEW SUPPORTS \
 Q Z
 W
 II
 RELOCATE EX. PINNACLE .

 c
 FOODS SIGN, MIN. 2' FROM W
 I
 REMOVE AND REINSTALL WAYFINDING / BACK OF SIDEWALK I
 N
 r \ SIGN, CENTER IN GREENSPACE REMOVEANDREINSTALL Q
 EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION SIGN / / . \ STA. 5+ 52 REMOVE 2 STOP AHEAD =
 SEE SHEET DTL- 2
 I- 13) WITH NEW SUPPORT, REMOVE AND REINSTALL PRIVATE W10- 1 I. WARNING SIGN
 o/ \ REMOVE RR CROSSING
 CENTER IN GREENSPACE PEDESTRIAN WARNING SIGN _ \ 36" DIAMTER - -
 I\\ S- B W/ SUPPORTS AND RETURN
 WARNING SIGN ( W10- 1)
 W11- 2 WITH NEW SUPPORT --- _ II
 1246 $ ) _ - F & I RR CROSSING
 I TO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE W/ SUPPORTS & RETURN TO _

 1250 WARNING SIGNW10-1 II THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
 W/ SUPPORT II REVISED
 OHE HE OHE OHE ` i / /
 I
 167. 50'_ I 7 / II
 I- Av _ v \ ' I
 T /////
 1
 va-- _\_
 E ___-- _ bH
 A ((
 I/ o I I / ---- —--- —_—_ / I l 1 1260 —
 I( \ —_ ARDOTRIW A DOT ARDOT RAN
 o




 F& I12" WHITE
 THERMOPLASTIC
 I
 0 1+ 00 c
 o PAVEMENT MARKING 2
 30' TYP_
 11' TyP113'
 3+ 00 +
 /

 58— 5+ 00 I
 6+ i7

 55' A\ \\ F& 124" SOLID WHITE
 i / / 48. 50' v
 I I t
 0\ THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT
  i \ F & 16" WHITE ' - — i I I No. 4
 MARKING TYP.)
 TYP. I I
 THERMOPLASTIC _ _ _ _ -- _- -- - - 1(
 PAVEMENT MARKING ( TYP.) _ ° - - - - -`
 p _ tw D
 HE OH€ _ \ _ \ \
 W- 12
 VV- - _ —
 ii
 W- 12 W- 12 W- 12 W- 12 W- 12



 p i o ------ - F& I24" WHITE_---
 THERMOPLASTIC _ - '•.., 1E— urT- _
 F& I WHITE" ONLY" a
 PAVEMENT MARKING - OHE
 X OHE
 W 1 I THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT - — OHE - OHE
 1yT i— TYP. 12 y
 OHE
 ONE
 MARKING ( TYP.) — X
 x_
 ARDorwW X
 x
 F& I RR CROSSING X—
 X
 DO NOT ARDDTaW
 WARNING SIGN R8- 8


 I 7
 Eo uE i / iya' W/ SUPPORT STOP
 F& I THERMOPLASTIC WHITE
 ARDDTRNy L1J N F a
 ON J w
 W- 1 \\ F & 16" DOUBLE YELLOW RR CROSSING PAVEMENT
 12 ¢ I EX. SPEED LIMIT SIGN ( R2- 1) J
 1 i I
 I I I
 F& I WHITE " ARROWS" TRACKS THERMOPLASTIC CENTERLINE MARKINGS SEE SHEET RRS- 1 wof
 35 MPH" TO REMAIN
 R R" C) F-
 REMOVE
 WARNING
 1 STOP
 SIGN ( W3- 1) \
 AHEAD \ \
 I III I I THERMOPLASTIC
 MARKING ( TYP.)
 PAVEMENT `,
 SEE SHEET SDPM- 1
 LL wc/J
 Q
 I 1 0c/-) W V
 W/ SUPPORTS AND RETURN \\ \ \ 1 1 REMOVE AND REINSTALL
 TO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE I III
 I I I I if
 j/J STA. 2+ 65'
 W10- 1 (
 EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION SIGN
 NOTE:
 ALL PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE THERMOPLASTIC
 Qz Z
 Q Y
 I\ I- 13) WITH NEW SUPPORT
 S I I I I
 ONCE THE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
 36" DI/ TER
 z UL LQ
 ARE INSTALLED &
 REMOVE STOP
 OPERATIONAL
 SIGNS ( R1- 1)
 CENTER IN GREENSPACE
 PAVEMENT MARKINGS & SIGNS O Li

 F& I RR CROSSING
 WISUPPORTS & RETURN TO THE WARNING SIGN W10- 1 REMOVE AND REINSTALL EX. ITEM CITY. UNIT
 Li
 1 1 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ( TYP) W/ SUPPORT M3- 2 ROUTE SIGN " EAST" 225 LF
 24" WHITE THERMO PM Z
 I 1 I I I GUIDE SIGN M1- 5 ( ARK. HWY. 16 ROUTE SIGN)
 12" WHITE THERMO PM 275 LF
 WITH NEW SUPPORT, CENTER IN GREENSPACE
 IIII11 6" WHITE THERMO PM 950 LF

 6" DOUBLE YELLOW THERMO PM 1000 LF

 II DAIL
 RT ARROW SYM. WHITE THERMO 2 EA

 A REMOVE 2 STOP AHEAD LT ARROW SYM. WHITE THERMO 4 EA

 V

 I I
 I
 I WARNING
 W/ SUPPORTS
 SIGNS ( W3- 1)
 AND RETURN
 THRU ARROW SYM. WHITE THERMO 2 EA
 Nov

 ONLY SYM. WHITE THERMO 6 EA 08, 2021 SHEET:
 I I dd F TO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
 RR CROSSING SYM. WHITE THERMO 4 EA PM-
 III
 I\ 11111 RR CROSSING WARN. SIGN ( W10- 1) 2 EA



 a
 Y`
 i-1 I IIII
 I IIIIII
 X- WALK PB SIGN ( R10- 3e)

 LEFT TURN YIELD ON FLASHING
 9 EA
 1 DRAWING:
 4 EA
 YELLOW ARROW SIGN ( R10- 12M)
 PmrCrcq h ISdI Imlfe Sgd Pmpmel B.Yop
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas - Budget Adjustment Form ( Legistar)

 Budget Year Division Adjustment Number
 ENGINEERING ( 621)
 Org2
 2022
 Requestor: Matt Casey
 BUDGET ADJUSTMENT DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION:

 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.




 COUNCIL DATE: 10/ 4/ 2022
 LEGISTAR FILE ID#: 2022- 0884



 911512022 1: 35 PM

 Budget Director Date



 D-( City Council)
 TYPE:

 JOURNAL #:


 10/ 4/ 2022
 GLDATE:
 RESOLUTION/ ORDINANCE
 CHKD/ POSTED:

 v. 20220818
 TOTAL


 Increase / ( Decrease) Proiect. Sub#
 Account Number Expense Revenue Project Sub. Detl AT Account Name


4702. 860. 7222- 5809. 00 839, 775 - 46020 7222 EX Improvements - Street

4702. 860. 7222- 5911. 99 80, 000 - 46020 7222 EX Contingency - Capital Project
4702. 860. 7999- 5899. 00 919, 775) - 46020 7999 EX Unallocated - Budget




  H:\ Budget Adjustments\ 2022_ Budget\ CITY COUNCIL\ 10- 04- 22\ 2022- 0884 BA RR Agreement 1 of 1