BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas Sealed Corridor Study Wellington, Kansas

FRONT COVER

BNSF Railway July 2019

The purpose of the study was to assess the potential for a sealed corridor along the BNSF corridor within the City of Wellington. The sealed corridor project was conducted with the intent of eliminating all at-grade crossings within the city limits with a focus on grade separation concepts and crossing closures. Factors considered throughout the process included safety, traffic flow, multimodal accommodations, economic development, and quality of life in order to better address overall mobility. The study area encompassed the City of Wellington but also expanded beyond the existing city limits in order to evaluate potential growth areas. Therefore, the study area included 14 highway-rail crossings (7 grade-separated crossings and 7 at-grade crossings).

BNSF Railway Jeremy Wegner, Manager Public Projects - Kansas Lynn Leibfried, Assistant Director Public Projects Paul Cristina, Director Public-Private Partnerships

City of Wellington Shane Shields, City Manager Jeremy Jones, Public Works Director Jason Newberry, Assistant City Manager for Utilities

TranSystems Corporation Jamie Hamm, PE, Client Liaison Deanne Winkelmann, AICP, Project Manager Sara Clark, PE, Senior Engineer Brent Shimanek, PE, Engineer Nathaniel Abeita, EIT, Engineer-in-Training

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page i Table of Contents

Introduction ...... 1 Study Purpose ...... 1 Study Area ...... 1 Study Process ...... 1 Existing Conditions ...... 4 Document Review ...... 4 Crossing Review ...... 4 Community Input ...... 5 Crossing Screening and Concept Development ...... 7 Crossing Screening ...... 7 Concept Development ...... 8 Improvement Alternatives ...... 12 Improvement Scenarios ...... 12 Stakeholder Discussion ...... 12 Conclusion...... 14 Summary ...... 14 Next Steps ...... 15

Appendix A: Crossing Inventory Appendix B: Meeting Summary Appendix C: Crossing Screening Appendix D: Improvement Concepts

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page ii Introduction Since 1993, BNSF Railway (BNSF) has invested in the Southern Transcontinental (Transcon) corridor, which connects the West Coast with major markets such as Dallas/Fort Worth, Kansas City, and Chicago. As one of the most heavily traveled rail lines in the western United States, freight train volume has steadily increased and is expected to continue growing. To address safety and operational needs, BNSF has expressed interest in creating sealed corridors through some communities along the Southern Transcon corridor. A sealed corridor aims to improve or consolidate each highway-rail grade crossing along a rail segment.

Study Purpose The purpose of the study was to assess the potential for a sealed corridor along the BNSF corridor within the City of Wellington. The sealed corridor study was conducted with the intent of eliminating all at-grade crossings within the city limits with a focus on grade separation concepts and crossing closures. Factors considered throughout the process included safety, traffic flow, multimodal accommodations, economic development, and quality of life in order to better address overall mobility.

Study Area The study area encompassed the City of Wellington but also expanded beyond the existing city limits in order to evaluate potential growth areas. As outlined in Exhibit 1, the study area included 14 highway- rail crossings (7 grade-separated crossings and 7 at-grade crossings). The study area map is displayed in Exhibit 2.

Two rail subdivisions converge in the City of Wellington. The east-west Panhandle subdivision and the north-south Emporia subdivision converge at the Wellington Yard. Both subdivisions are segments of the Southern Transcon corridor with nearly 60 trains per day.

Study Process The report is organized into the following sections: . Existing Conditions: This section includes a document review, crossing inventory, and initial discussions with city stakeholders. The information provided a foundation for the study process and identified priorities that may influence improvements at each highway-rail crossing. . Crossing Screening and Concept Development: This section includes an alternatives feasibility analysis to evaluate each highway-rail crossing in the study area for potential improvements. Then, a series of concepts were developed at key locations for consideration. . Improvement Alternatives: This section includes a series of improvement scenarios for consideration by the city. Discussions with BNSF and city stakeholders are documented to determine next steps.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 1 Exhibit 1A: Study Area - Emporia Subdivision U.S. DOT Crossing Warning Roadway ADT Street Name Number Type Device Classification 20th Avenue 009734G At-Grade Gates Rural Local 46

10th Avenue 009735N RR Under RR Over Rural Principal Arterial 4,170

Meridian Road 014169R RR Over RR Over Rural Local 85 Source: U.S. DOT Crossing Inventory, 2018

Exhibit 1B: Study Area - Panhandle Subdivision U.S. DOT Crossing Warning Roadway ADT Street Name Number Type Device Classification Fair Street 014171S RR Over RR Over Urban Local 1,145

Ash Street 014173F RR Over RR Over Urban Local 576

C Street 014174M At-Grade Gates Urban Local 245

Washington Avenue 014175U At-Grade Gates Urban Minor Arterial 575

Jefferson Avenue 014176B At-Grade Gates Urban Local 385

G Street 014180R At-Grade Gates Urban Local 50

H Street 014181X At-Grade Gates Urban Local 57

Highway 81 (US-81) 014184T RR Over RR Over Urban Principal Arterial 5,440

Lynn Burris Drive 014185A RR Over RR Over Urban Local 175

Crestview Road 014186G RR Over RR Over Urban Local 190

Tyler Road 014187N At-Grade Gates Rural Local 38 Source: U.S. DOT Crossing Inventory, 2018

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 2 Exhibit 2: Study Area

Source: TranSystems, 2018

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 3 Existing Conditions In 1871, the City of Wellington was founded as an agricultural market near the Chisholm Trail. Development of the first railroad in 1878 accelerated the city’s growth as the Cowley, Sumner, and Fort Smith Railway Company extension began transporting agricultural goods to the Wichita area. Over the years, additional railroads were constructed as various companies began operation and/or consolidated. Today, BNSF operates the former Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad corridor that generally travels east-west through the city. A railyard is located in the southeast portion of the city. In addition, Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and shortline Blackwell Northern Gateway Railroad also operate within the City of Wellington.

Document Review Relevant reports were reviewed to establish a foundation for the study process and identify concepts that may influence improvements at each highway-rail crossing. In addition to Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and BNSF guidelines, the city documents reviewed included the Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Program. A Quiet Zone Study was also conducted several years ago and was referenced during an initial conference call with city staff.

Comprehensive Plan In 1999, the Comprehensive Community Plan outlined that over 190 acres are dedicated to railroad operations, which is approximately eight percent of the total developable land in the City of Wellington. Throughout the city’s history, development has been occurred to the northeast due to the location of the railroad tracks and facilities in the southern and southeast areas of the community. Topography has also limited development to the west. As a result, the city is generally growing northeast along 10th Avenue towards the Kansas Turnpike (I-35).

A key challenge to overcome will be to develop transportation routes that can cross major barriers, such as railroads and highways, in order to connect neighborhoods. These transportation corridors will also most likely serve as routes for extensions of major utilities. The Plan identifies Washington Avenue, Ash Street, and Meridian Road as three important corridors that should be maintained and/or improved to enable north-south connectivity across the railroad. The Major Street Plan also identifies Meridian Road and 20th Avenue as future arterial and collector roadways, respectively.

Capital Improvement Program The city’s Capital Improvement Program 2019-2023 allocates approximately $1.85 million to Public Works Street Division improvements over five years. The only potentially applicable improvement item to this study is an allocation of $25,000 for an annual curb replacement program and $4,000 for an annual sidewalk program. All other capital improvement projects are located in other areas of the city.

Crossing Review Available USDOT and BNSF reports were accessed to create a database to review each highway-rail crossing in the study area. The database included information such as: warning device, number of tracks, train volume, train speed, roadway functional classification, number of lanes, traffic volume, posted speed limit, truck use, and recent crash history. Aerial photography, field observations, and city documents

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 4 were also referenced to note any discrepancies in the data. A summary of rail network and road network operations is discussed below. The crossing inventory is outlined in Appendix A.

To augment the document review and desktop crossing review, field observations were also conducted at each crossing in September 2018. Relevant photos and field measurements were referenced during concept development.

Rail Network Operations Based on FRA data, the Emporia and Panhandle subdivisions carry nearly 60 trains per day. However, based on conversations with the local trainmaster in October 2018, up to 75 to 95 trains may travel the corridor daily. Train length varies between 4,000 feet to 14,000 feet, but the average train length is approximately 8,000 feet. Maximum speed on both subdivisions is 60 mph or more, although most trains begin accelerating or decelerating near the railyard. Based on a train length of 8,000 feet and 10 mph train speed (assuming some acceleration/deceleration near the railyard), the average gate down time is approximately 9.6 minutes. Assuming some trains may be operating at the same time on different tracks, estimated crossing occupation could be approximately 30 percent to 40 percent per day.

Currently, all train crew changes occur in the railyard. As such, all eastbound trains decrease speed entering the railyard. While train crews attempt to avoid occupying crossings, the gates can be down for extended period of times when train length exceeds the capacity of the railyard. During field observations, this situation was observed with a gate down time of over 17 minutes while occupying crossings at C Street, Washington Avenue, and Jefferson Avenue. According to the trainmaster, resident complaints are received about the constant bell sound when gates are down for an extended period of time. The local trainmaster also indicated that closing C Street should be a priority.

There is currently no active industry service in the study area. The B&G shortline rail, which connects via a wye at the western end of the railyard, has a limited number of cars per week.

Road Network Operations Of the seven at-grade crossings, only three crossings have traffic volumes near or over 250 vehicles per day (vpd): Washington Avenue (575 vpd), Jefferson Avenue (385 vpd), and C Street (245 vpd). All other crossings have approximately 50 vehicles or less per day. Washington Avenue is designated the US-81 Business Route and is the primary corridor through the downtown area. Although not a designated truck route, Jefferson Avenue carries some truck traffic from US-160 to a grain elevator located south of the rail corridor.

Historically, seven crashes have occurred at crossings within the study area with two (2) crashes occurring in the past ten years. In 2011, a crash at Washington Avenue resulted in a fatality when a train on one track cleared the crossing but another oncoming train on a second track struck the pedestrian. In 2008, a crash at Jefferson Avenue resulted in an injury.

Community Input An initial conference call with city staff was conducted in August 2018 to provide an overview of the study process and discuss preliminary priorities for crossing improvements. The main concern from the city’s perspective was the increase of occupied at-grade crossings near downtown due to train

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 5 movements and crew changes associated with the railyard. The existing underpasses at Fair Street, Ash Street, and Highway 81 (US-81) are increasingly being used by both emergency services and vehicles. A detailed meeting summary is included in Appendix B with location-specific concerns summarized below: . 20th Avenue: The city’s growth area is northeast along 10th Avenue, which is a grade-separated crossing. Although 20th Avenue is currently a rural at-grade crossing, this location may be a very long-term candidate for improvement as the community grows. . Washington Avenue: This crossing is the most used at-grade crossing in the city and provides access to the downtown area. In 2010, a Quiet Zone Study recommended that this crossing remain open with medians, but improvements were not implemented due to access concerns. . Jefferson Avenue: This crossing is the second most used at-grade crossing in the city and was also recommended to remain open with medians during the Quite Zone Study. Large trucks use Jefferson Avenue to access a grain elevator located south of the rail corridor. . C Street, G Street, H Street: These three crossings generally have low traffic volumes. Although recommended for closure during the Quiet Zone Study, City Council at the time was resistant to permanent closures. . Highway 81 (US-81): The mainline is grade-separated at Highway 81, but a connecting rail between BNSF and UP provides access to a concrete plant. While the connecting rail has much less use, the concrete plant is anticipated to be a long-term operation requiring rail access. After further analysis, it was determined that the at-grade crossing is the responsibility of UP.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 6 Crossing Screening and Concept Development The alternatives feasibility analysis included the development of a screening methodology to evaluate each highway-rail crossing in the study area for potential improvements. The screening primarily assessed grade separation and closure options, which are the preferred improvements as indicated by BNSF. Then, a series of concepts were developed at key locations for consideration.

Crossing Screening Methodology During this phase of the study, the alternatives feasibility analysis focused upon technical feasibility rather than institutional or financial feasibility. A preliminary screening methodology was developed that incorporated quantitative and qualitative measures to evaluate each highway-rail grade crossing in the study area. From a technical feasibility perspective, factors included: crossing condition, crossing use, rail operations, land use impacts, and local input. The technical feasibility factors helped identify candidate sites for improvements based on crossing characteristics and may help build public support: . Crossing Condition: Roadway Functional Classification, Traffic Volume, Proximity to Traffic Signals . Crossing Use: Truck, Emergency Services, Transit, School Bus, Bicyclists, Pedestrians . Rail Operations: Number of Tracks, Potential for Occupied Crossings, Crash History . Land Use Impacts: Access to Key Destinations, Local Circulation Impacts, Growth Impacts . Local Input: Previous Reports, Programmed Improvements, Local Priority

Other technical feasibility factors to consider include property impacts, roadway impacts, phasing potential, and cost and financing options. These factors were further evaluated during concept development.

Preliminary Screening A summary of the preliminary screening based on the technical feasibility factors is outlined in Exhibit 3. Overall, two (2) at-grade crossings were identified as a high potential candidate for a grade separation concept: Washington Avenue and Jefferson Avenue. These crossings have higher functional classification, higher traffic volume, and provide greater overall connectivity.

Two (2) at-grade crossings were identified as moderate potential candidates for improvements: 20th Avenue and C Street. These crossing have moderate crossing use or represent long-term growth areas for the community. The remaining three (3) at-grade crossings have low potential for improvements and are therefore potential candidates for closure. These crossings are lower volume streets located in residential or rural areas of the community.

The detailed preliminary screening by crossing is included in Appendix C.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 7 Exhibit 3: Preliminary Screening

Criteria Preliminary Crossing Summary Screening for Crossing Crossing Rail Land Use Local Condition Use Operations Impacts Input Improvement 20th Avenue ○ ○ ○ ◐ ◐ ◐ Moderate Potential C Street ○ ○ ● ◐ ○ ◐ Moderate Potential Washington ● ◐ ● ● ● ● High Potential Jefferson ○ ◐ ● ◐ ● ● High Potential G Street ○ ◐ ○ ○ ○ ○ Low Potential H Street ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Low Potential Tyler ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Low Potential

● High Potential for Improvement Candidate

◐ Moderate Potential for Improvement Candidate ○ Low Potential for Improvement Candidate

Concept Development Based on the preliminary screening, which included technical feasibility criteria as well as initial input from city staff, three focus areas were identified in the City of Wellington. These two areas, identified in Exhibit 4, were advanced to the concept development phase to assess potential grade separation concepts and other improvements: . Downtown Area . Long-Term Growth Area

When developing preliminary concepts, overpasses were preferred over underpasses. Based on BNSF guidelines for grade separation projects, underpass structures are discouraged due to safety concerns, possible interruption to railroad operations, drainage concerns, limitation of future replacement and maintenance, and cost. Efforts were made to limit the length of the overpass structure, while maintaining an acceptable profile grade, in order to limit potential impacts to properties and access. Preferred design criteria referenced during concept development are outlined in Exhibit 5. All concept plan sheets and cost estimates are outlined in Appendix D.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 8 Exhibit 4: Concept Development Focus Areas

Source: TranSystems, 2018

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 9 Exhibit 5: Design Criteria Element Design Criteria

Position Overhead structure

Vertical Clearance 23-foot, 6-inch from top of highest rail to lowest obstruction under structure

Lane Width 12-foot travel lanes with curb and gutter, one travel lane in each direction

Pedestrian Facilities 6-foot sidewalk, one side of roadway

Profile Grade Preferred 6 percent maximum

Focus Area A: Downtown Area Within the downtown area, Washington Avenue and Jefferson Avenue were identified as high potential candidates for improvement. Washington Avenue is the primary corridor into the downtown area. Additional consideration was also given to the adjacent crossings of Jefferson Avenue and C Street, which were identified as high potential and moderate potential candidates, respectively. Overall, concepts were explored in the downtown area in the concept development phase in order to determine the most effective option and location to provide connectivity.

Jefferson Avenue The overpass concept at Jefferson Avenue stretches north-south for four city blocks from 3rd Street to Walnut Street. The typical section, which can be contained within existing right-of-way, includes two 12- foot lanes with a 6-foot sidewalk on one side. The concept meets vertical clearance requirements for the railroad and also has a profile grade of 4.9 percent or less. While there is not sufficient vertical clearance for vehicles to pass under at 2nd Street and Maple Street, there appears to be sufficient clearance for pedestrians. This concept would primarily impact access to single-family residential properties. A frontage road concept can be contained within existing right-of-way to provide a vehicle turnaround under the overpass and may be able to provide access to adjacent properties via modified driveways. Alleys are also located behind these residences and could be used to provide vehicle access to the properties. This overpass concept, including the frontage roads, is estimated to cost approximately $9.03 million.

Washington Avenue (BUS-81) The overpass concept at Washington Avenue (BUS-81) stretches north-south for four city blocks from 3rd Street to Walnut Street. The typical section, which can be contained within existing right-of-way, includes two 12-foot lanes with a 6-foot sidewalk on one side. The concept meets vertical clearance requirements for the railroad and has a profile grade of 5.0 percent or less. While there is not sufficient vertical clearance for vehicles to pass under at 2nd Street and Maple Street, there appears to be sufficient clearance for pedestrians. This concept would impact angled on-street parking north of the railroad and single-family residential properties south of the railroad. Access to Wheat Capital Manor would also need to be adjusted. A frontage road or alley access could be explored to provide access to properties. This overpass concept is estimated to cost approximately $8.54 million.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 10 C Street Two overpass concepts were developed for C Street. The first concept is an overpass with a straight alignment that stretches for nearly five city blocks from 4th Street to just past Walnut Street. The typical section, which can be contained within existing right-of-way, includes two 12-foot lanes with a 6- foot sidewalk on one side. The concept meets vertical clearance requirements for the mainline railroad as well as the intersecting Blackwell Northern Gateway Railroad track and has a profile grade of nearly 5.5 percent. There is sufficient clearance for both vehicles and pedestrians to pass under at 2nd Street, but pedestrians may only be able to pass under at Maple Street. Because of rail-owned property near this crossing, this concept would have fewer impacts on the northern side of the railroad but would impact single-family residential properties south of the railroad. Access to Wheat Capital Manor would also need to be adjusted. A frontage road or alley access could be explored to provide access to properties. This overpass concept is estimated to cost approximately $11.11 million

The second concept is an overpass with a curved alignment that begins at the intersection of Washington Avenue and 2nd Street and ends past Walnut Street. The curved alignment was explored to provide enhanced access to the downtown area and take advantage of rail-owned property near the crossing. The typical section, which can be contained within existing right-of-way, includes two 14-foot lanes with a 6-foot sidewalk on one side. The concept meets vertical clearance requirements for the mainline railroad as well as the intersecting Blackwell Northern Gateway Railroad track and has a maximum profile grade of nearly 5.5 percent. Due to the overpass alignment and bridge structure, vehicular access would be restricted at the intersection of C Street / 2nd Street and C Street / Walnut Street. However, there is sufficient clearance for pedestrians to pass under at Maple Street. Because of rail-owned property near this crossing, this concept would have fewer impacts on the northern side of the railroad but would impact single-family residential properties south of the railroad. A frontage road or alley access could be explored to provide access to properties. This overpass concept is estimated to cost approximately $13.77 million.

Focus Area B: Long-Term Growth Area The city is generally growing to the northeast along 10th Avenue towards the Kansas Turnpike (I-35). 10th Avenue is an existing grade-separated crossing. Although currently an unpaved rural street, 20th Avenue to the north represents a potential future grade-separated crossing location as the city continues to grow. Therefore, a right-of-way preservation concept was explored at 20th Avenue in the concept development phase. However, based on historical growth patterns, this improvement is likely a very long-term concept.

20th Avenue The existing 20th Avenue crossing is an undeveloped agricultural area with an existing right-of-way of 50 feet. Although a grade separation at 20th Avenue is likely a very long-term concept based on growth patterns and the lack of direct access to the Kansas Turnpike (I-35), right-of-way preservation could be considered in the future. A grade separation concept at 20th Avenue would likely be similar to the existing overpass at 10th Avenue (US-160). The 10th Avenue overpass includes earthwork that stretches for over 0.6 miles in order to provide a gradual increase in profile and reduce the need for expensive retaining wall structures. To accommodate this earthwork, the right-of-way at the 10th Avenue overpass ranges between 150 to 300 feet. Similar right-of-way would likely need to be preserved at 20th Avenue if a grade separation concept is to be considered in the future.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 11 Improvement Alternatives Based on the crossing screening and concept development, a series of improvement scenarios were developed for the City of Wellington. The improvement scenarios were then reviewed by BNSF and the City of Wellington to determine a preferred improvement scenario and possible next steps for implementation.

Improvement Scenarios The scenarios generally focus on the 0.4-mile rail corridor on the Panhandle subdivision from H Street to C Street. The scenarios are outlined in Exhibit 6.

Exhibit 6: Improvement Scenarios Improvement Scenarios

Scenario H Street G Street Jefferson Washington C Street

A X X X GS X

B X X GS X X

C X X X X GS

EX = Existing Grade Separation O = Open At-Grade Crossing GS = New Grade Separation X = Permanent Closure

Scenario A This scenario includes a grade separation at one location identified as high potential for improvements: Washington Avenue. Washington Avenue is the highest traffic volume at-grade crossing in the city and classified an urban minor arterial. All four (4) remaining at-grade crossings are closed.

Scenario B This scenario includes a grade separation at one location identified as high potential for improvements: Jefferson Avenue. Jefferson Avenue is the second highest traffic volume at-grade crossing in the city and serves minor truck traffic, provides access for school buses, and has existing sidewalk to accommodate pedestrians. All four (4) remaining at-grade crossings are closed.

Scenario C This scenario includes a grade separation at one (1) location identified as moderate potential for improvements: C Street. This innovative grade separation concept generally uses the C Street right-of- way but then curves to align with 2nd Street to provide an access point off of Washington Avenue. All four (4) remaining at-grade crossings are closed.

Stakeholder Discussion Following the development of improvement concepts and scenarios, BNSF and the City of Wellington participated in stakeholder meetings to discuss the options. The first meeting was held in October 2018

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 12 with the City Manager and Public Works staff from the City of Wellington. A detailed meeting summary is contained in Appendix B.

Overall, the city’s goal is a combination of resolving train horn noise issues and delays caused by occupied crossings. While generally open to improvement ideas, city staff discussed concerns with roadway treatments at crossing closures, emergency vehicle circulation, and pedestrian activities from southern neighborhoods to the elementary school north of the rail corridor.

Location-specific concerns discussed during the meeting included: . Washington Avenue: This crossing is a likely option for a grade separation, but the city will need to determine if the priority location is Washington Avenue or Jefferson Avenue. City has 100 feet right-of-way on Washington Avenue (more than most city streets). . Jefferson Avenue: This crossing is a likely option for a grade separation, but the city will need to determine if the priority location is Jefferson Avenue or Washington Avenue. City has 100 feet right-of-way on Jefferson Avenue (more than most city streets). Staff expressed concern about re- routing truck traffic currently using Jefferson Avenue to access the rail elevator south of the railroad. . C Street: This crossing is not preferred for a grade separation as the corridor would require major roadway and drainage upgrades.

Overall, the City of Wellington expressed a favorable opinion towards Scenario A, which included a grade separation Washington Avenue, and Scenario B, which included a grade separation at Jefferson Avenue. Both scenarios are outlined in Exhibit 7. The group requested additional time to determine whether Washington Avenue or Jefferson Avenue should be the priority location for improvements.

Exhibit 7: City Preferred Improvement Scenarios - October 2018 City Preferred Improvement Scenarios

Scenario H Street G Street Jefferson Washington C Street

A X X X GS X

B X X GS X X

EX = Existing Grade Separation O = Open At-Grade Crossing GS = New Grade Separation X = Permanent Closure

During a follow-up meeting in April 2019, City of Wellington staff expressed a preference for a grade separation concept at Jefferson Avenue (Scenario B). Jefferson Avenue accommodates truck traffic and impacts fewer businesses than Washington Avenue. City staff indicated that Jefferson Avenue will also be easier to maintain in the future as there is less on-street parking and curb bulb-outs compared to Washington Avenue. To date, discussions regarding improvement concepts and scenarios have not occurred with elected officials.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 13 Conclusion The study assessed the potential for a sealed corridor along the BNSF corridor within the City of Wellington. The study primarily focused on the technical feasibility of eliminating all at-grade crossings within the city limits. Discussions regarding the political and financial feasibility of the sealed corridor in the City of Wellington are ongoing and may continue beyond the scope of this report.

Summary The Emporia and Panhandle subdivisions in the City of Wellington carry nearly 60 trains per day (up to 95 trains per day according to the local trainmaster). Train length varies between 4,000 feet to 14,000 feet, but the average train length is approximately 8,000 feet. Currently, all train crew changes occur in the railyard. Based on the average train length of 8,000 feet and 10 mph train speed (assuming some acceleration/deceleration near the railyard), the average gate down time at crossings within the downtown area is approximately 9.6 minutes. Assuming some trains may be operating at the same time on different tracks, estimated crossing occupation could be approximately 30 percent to 40 percent per day. Train lengths that exceed the capacity of railyard (approximately 9,000 feet or more) may occupy the crossings for extended periods of time.

To address concerns related to safety, connectivity, delay, and train horn noise, this study focused upon improvements within the downtown area. Overall, grade separation improvement concepts were developed for three crossings: Jefferson Avenue, Washington Avenue, and C Street. Washington Avenue (575 vehicles per day) is designated the US-81 Business Route and is the primary corridor through the downtown area. Although not a designated truck route, Jefferson Avenue (385 vehicles per day) carries some truck traffic from US-160 to a grain elevator located south of the rail corridor. C Street (245 vehicles per day) has lower traffic volume but is the closest crossing to the railyard. Overpass grade separation concepts at each location were determined to be technically feasible.

Based on follow-up discussions in April 2019, City of Wellington staff expressed a preference for a grade separation concept at Jefferson Avenue. Jefferson Avenue accommodates truck traffic and impacts fewer businesses than Washington Avenue. City staff indicated that Jefferson Avenue will also be easier to maintain in the future as there is less on-street parking and curb bulb-outs compared to Washington Avenue. A frontage road concept can be contained within existing right-of-way to provide a vehicle turnaround under the overpass and may be able to provide access to adjacent properties via modified driveways. Alleys are also located behind these residences and could be used to provide vehicle access to the properties.

The overpass grade separation concept at Jefferson Avenue, including the frontage roads, is estimated to cost approximately $9.03 million. Design is estimated to be approximately $740,000 (10 percent of construction cost). Based on this discussed scenario, the remaining four at-grade crossings at H Street, G Street, Washington Avenue, and C Street would be closed.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 14 Next Steps To advance the sealed corridor study and associated improvements in the City of Wellington, BNSF should consider the following next steps: . Continue Engagement with City: To date, discussions regarding improvement concepts and scenarios have only occurred with city staff. BNSF should continue conversations with the City of Wellington and consider engaging the City Council. The City Council consists of the mayor and six at-large members. City staff recommended scheduling a City Council work session to obtain input from the elected officials. . Advance Schematic Concepts to Design: The schematic grade separation concepts developed for this study used publicly-available elevation data, not survey data. Based on the opinion of probable cost for the Jefferson Avenue overpass, design is estimated to be approximately $740,000 (10 percent of construction cost). Cost estimates for design of the other grade separation concepts explored in this study are also included as line items in Appendix D. Advancing the preferred scenario to design would provide greater detail regarding project impacts, benefits, and construction cost. . Pursue Funding Opportunities: BNSF should coordinate with the City of Wellington to explore potential funding opportunities and partnerships to advance the preferred scenario to design and construction. CRISI (Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements) funding is authorized through the FAST Act. CRISI grants are intended to improve the safety, efficiency, and reliability of passenger and freight rail systems. Eligible activities include capital projects and safety initiatives that may include the implementation of positive train control, improved highway-rail grade crossings, congestion mitigation, and intercity rail projects. At least 25 percent of funding is set aside for rural projects such as highway-rail grade crossing improvements. There is no minimum or maximum award amount and funds may cover up to 80 percent of project costs. Approximately $330 million has been set aside for projects in FY2020.

Overall, it was determined a sealed corridor within the City of Wellington along the Panhandle subdivision is technically feasible, but BNSF should continue discussions to advance the political and financial feasibility of the concepts.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Page 15 APPENDIX A

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Appendix U.S. DOT Crossing Warning Constant Number of Number of Total Day Through Switching Maximum Street Name Jurisdiction Milepost Rail Ownership Subdivision Number Type Device Warning Main Tracks Other Tracks Trains Trains Trains Speed

1 20th Avenue 009734G Wellington 235.13 BNSF Emporia At‐Grade LBG CWT 2 0 54 27 0 70

2 10th Avenue (US‐160) 009735N Wellington 236.17 BNSF Emporia Road Over Rail RR Under N/A 2 0 54 27 0 70

3 Meridian Road 014169R Wellington 237.27 BNSF Emporia Road Under Rail RR Over N/A 2 2 58 29 0 60

4 Fair Street 014171S Wellington 238.23 BNSF Panhandle Road Under Rail RR Over N/A 2 8 58 29 0 60

5 Ash Street 014173F Wellington 238.56 BNSF Panhandle Road Under Rail RR Over N/A 2 4 58 29 0 60

6 C Street 014174M Wellington 238.81 BNSF Panhandle At‐Grade LBG w/C CWT 2 2 58 29 0 60

7 Washington Street (US‐81 BUS) 014175U Wellington 238.88 BNSF Panhandle At‐Grade LBG w/C CWT 2 1 58 29 0 60

8 Jefferson Avenue 014176B Wellington 238.95 BNSF Panhandle At‐Grade LBG w/C CWT 2 1 58 29 0 60

9 G Street 014180R Wellington 239.10 BNSF Panhandle At‐Grade LBG w/C CWT 2 1 58 29 0 60

10 H Street 014181X Wellington 239.17 BNSF Panhandle At‐Grade LBG w/C CWT2 1 58 29 0 60

11 Highway 81 (US‐81) 014184T Wellington 239.37 BNSF Panhandle Road Under Rail RR Over N/A 2 0 58 29 0 60

12 Lynn Burris Drive 014185A Wellington 239.60 BNSF Panhandle Road Under Rail RR Over N/A 2 0 58 29 0 60

13 Crestview Road 014186G Wellington 240.15 BNSF Panhandle Road Under Rail RR Over N/A 2 0 58 29 0 60

14 Tyler Road 014187N Wellington 241.20 BNSF Panhandle At‐Grade LBG CWT 2 05829070 Accidents U.S. DOT Number Vehicles Highway Truck School Bus Emergency Total Street Name Functional Classification Paved Year Within Ten KDOT Index Number of Lanes Per Day Speed Limit Percentage Usage Services Route Accidents Years 1 20th Avenue 009734GRural Local No 2 46 2015 45 5% No No 0 0 248.4

2 10th Avenue (US‐160) 009735NRural Principal Arterial Yes 2 4170 2015 65 10% No No 0 0 ‐

3 Meridian Road 014169RRural Local No 2 85 2015 45 0% No No 0 0 ‐

4 Fair Street 014171SUrban Local Yes 2 1145 2015 30 5% No No 0 0 ‐

5 Ash Street 014173FUrban Local Yes 2 576 2015 30 5% No No 0 0 ‐

6 C Street 014174MUrban Local Yes 2 245 2015 30 3% No No 0 0 1,421.0

7 Washington Street (US‐81 BUS) 014175UUrban Minor Arterial Yes 2 575 2015 20 5% No No 1 1 3,335.0

8 Jefferson Avenue 014176BUrban Local Yes 2 385 2015 25 5% No No 1 2 2,233.0

9 G Street 014180RUrban Local Yes 2 50 2015 25 3% No No 0 0 290.0

10 H Street 014181XUrban Local Yes 2 57 2015 25 3% No No 0 4 330.6

11 Highway 81 (US‐81) 014184TUrban Principal Arterial Yes 2 5440 2015 45 15% No No 0 0 ‐

12 Lynn Burris Drive 014185AUrban Local Yes 2 175 2015 20 0% No No 0 0 ‐

13 Crestview Road 014186GUrban Local No 2 190 2015 20 1% No No 0 0 ‐

14 Tyler Road 014187NRural Local No 2 38 2015 45 3% No No 0 0 220.4 APPENDIX B

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Appendix BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study City of Wellington, Kansas

Kick-Off Conference Call Wednesday, August 29, 2018 10:30 AM - 11:30 AM

Conference Call 1-866-951-1151 Room: 967-601-735

AGENDA Purpose: To provide an overview of the BNSF Sealed Corridor Study and discuss preliminary thoughts, priorities, and concerns for crossing improvements

Introduction . Study Team . Study Goals . Project Overview

Preliminary Discussion . Study Area . Initial Crossing Review

Next Steps . Field Observations – Conduct field observations at each crossing on September 4 . Screening Methodology – Utilize existing conditions information, technical feasibility assessment, and city discussions to inform candidate locations for improvements . Stakeholder Meeting – Schedule a follow-up, in-person meeting with city staff and other relevant stakeholders to review the screening process and improvement alternatives for each crossing

Request Files . Comprehensive Plan . Capital Improvement Program . GIS files (right-of-way, parcel, utilities)

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - City of Wellington Kick-Off Conference Call | Page 1

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study City of Wellington, Kansas

Kick-Off Conference Call Wednesday, August 29, 2018 10:30 AM - 11:30 AM

Conference Call 1-866-951-1151 Room: 967-601-735

SUMMARY Purpose: To provide an overview of the BNSF Sealed Corridor Study and discuss preliminary thoughts, priorities, and concerns for crossing improvements

Attendees Shane Shields, City Manager Deanne Winkelmann, TranSystems Jeremy Jones, Public Works Director Sara Clark, TranSystems Jason Newberry, Public Works Assistant Director

Introduction . TranSystems provided an overview of the study process and study goals. – BNSF Railway (Jeremy Wegner) had previously mentioned study to city.

Preliminary Discussion . 10th Avenue, 20th Avenue – The city’s growth area is northeast along US-160 (10th Avenue) towards the turnpike interchange. 10th Avenue is currently grade-separated and no issues were mentioned. Although 20th Avenue is a currently rural at-grade crossing with low traffic volumes, it may be a very long-term candidate for grade separation as the city grows over the next 50+ years. 20th Avenue is approximately one mile north of 10th Avenue. . Fair Street, Ash Street – These existing underpasses are becoming increasingly used as trains block at-grade crossings near downtown. These underpasses, along with US-81, are commonly used by the fire department to travel from the fire station near downtown to the south. . Washington Avenue – This location is the most used at-grade crossing in the city. Although identified as Business US- 81, the roadway is owned and maintained by the city. In 2010, a Quiet Zone Study recommended that this crossing remain open with medians, but improvements were not implemented due to driveway access concerns. The roadway was not constructed to handle heavy truck traffic. On-street parking may also be a concern to review as the study progresses. While alleys are available behind properties, they are not currently used as a primary access point.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - City of Wellington Kick-Off Conference Call | Page 2

. Jefferson Street – This location is the second most used at-grade crossing in the study. In 2010, a Quiet Zone Study recommended that this crossing remain open with medians, but improvements were not implemented due to driveway access concerns. Large trucks use Jefferson Street to access a grain elevator located south of the rail corridor, but the roadway was not constructed to handle heavy truck traffic. . C Street, G Street, H Street – These locations generally have low traffic volumes. In 2010, a Quiet Zone Study recommended these crossings as candidates for closure, but City Council was resistant at the time. Opinions among the current City Council may be different and somewhat less resistant to closures. . US-81 – The mainline is grade-separated at US-81, but a connecting rail between the BNSF Railway and Union Pacific currently provides access to a concrete plant. While the connecting rail has much less use, the concrete plant is anticipated to be a long-term operation requiring rail access. . Lynn Burris Drive, Crestview Road – These locations provide public access to the city’s largest park (Woods Park, Wellington Golf Course). While there are vertical clearance restrictions it is important to keep these existing underpasses open. . Other Concerns – There is some flooding at a creek/draining channel near the rail wye, but the area is mostly built- out.

Next Steps . Request Files – TranSystems will send follow-up email to request files such as Comprehensive Plan, Capital Improvement Program, and GIS files. . Next Steps – TranSystems will be conducting field observations next Tuesday, September 4. City staff was asked to notify the police department and other relevant staff. The project team will also schedule a future in-person meeting with city staff after preliminary concepts are developed.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - City of Wellington Kick-Off Conference Call | Page 3

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study City of Wellington, Kansas

City Meeting Monday, October 22, 2018 2:00 PM - 4:00 PM

Wellington City Hall 317 S. Washington Avenue Wellington, Kansas

AGENDA Purpose: To provide a study update, review improvement concepts, and discuss preliminary improvement scenarios

Introduction . Overview of Planning Process . Preliminary Screening by Crossing

Scenario Discussion . Improvement Concepts – C Street – Washington Avenue – Jefferson Avenue . Preliminary Improvement Scenarios

Next Steps . Refine Improvement Scenarios . Potential Funding and Implementation Schedule

Attendees Shane Shields, City Manager Jeremy Jones, Public Works Director Jason Newberry, Public Works Assistant Director

Jeremy Wegner, BNSF Manager Public Projects - Kansas Lynn Leibfried, BNSF Assistant Director Public Projects Shundrekia Stewart, BNSF Director Public Private Partnerships Jacob Rzewnicki, BNSF Project Engineer

Deanne Winkelmann, TranSystems Sara Clark, TranSystems

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - City of Wellington City Meeting | Page 1 BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study City of Wellington, Kansas

City Meeting Monday, October 22, 2018 2:00 PM - 3:30 PM

Wellington City Hall 317 S. Washington Avenue Wellington, Kansas

SUMMARY Purpose: To provide a study update, review improvement concepts, and discuss preliminary improvement scenarios

Attendees Shane Shields, City Manager Jeremy Jones, Public Works Director Jason Newberry, Public Works Assistant Director

Deanne Winkelmann, TranSystems Sara Clark, TranSystems

Introduction . TranSystems provided an overview of the crossing screening process and general guidelines when developing crossing improvement concepts and scenarios.

Scenario Discussion . Washington Street - This crossing is a likely option for a grade separation, but city will need to determine if the priority location is Washington Street or Jefferson Street. - City has 100 feet right-of-way on Washington Street (more than most city streets). . Jefferson Street - This crossing is a likely option for a grade separation, but city will need to determine if the priority location is Jefferson Street or Washington Street. - City has 100 feet right-of-way on Jefferson Street (more than most city streets). - Staff expressed concern about re-routing truck traffic currently using Jefferson Street to access the rail elevator south of the railroad. A new scale was also constructed at the industry with access via Jefferson Street.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - City of Wellington City Meeting | Page 2 . C Street - This crossing is not the best option for a grade separation as the corridor would require major roadway and drainage upgrades.

Other Concerns . Staff expressed concern about roadway treatment at crossing closures. Emergency vehicle circulation and turning radius would need to be accommodated. Emergency vehicle access to Wheat Capital Manor on 2nd Street was specifically mentioned. . Most alleys throughout the city have only 20 feet of right-of-way and are not well maintained for primary access to properties. . Water infrastructure is located along Jefferson Street. Overhead electric infrastructure is located along 2nd Street. Staff mentioned that rail improvements may provide an opportunity to address associated utility improvements. Drainage issues at Washington Street could be addressed. . Staff inquired if pedestrian access could be provided at Maple Street and 2nd Street even if adequate clearance for vehicular east-west connectivity is not provided. Based on preliminary concepts, it appears that pedestrian access could be considered. . Staff expressed concern about pedestrian activity from southern neighborhoods to Lincoln Elementary School, which is located approximately 0.3 miles north of the railroad (bounded by Harvey Avenue, Lincoln Avenue, F Street, G Street). A pedestrian crossing could be discussed during future conversations. Other treatments such as fencing, restored drainage areas, and landscaping could also be considered to discourage trespassing at closure locations.

Next Steps . City goal is a combination of resolving train horn noise issues and blocked crossings. . City Council meetings occur on the 1st and 3rd Tuesday of each month. Work sessions are provided as needed. - City staff will review meeting materials in order to prepare for a discussion with City Council. The city will consider the scenario alternatives in order to help narrow the study focus. - City staff will contact Jeremy Wegner with additional questions as needed.

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - City of Wellington City Meeting | Page 3 APPENDIX C

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Appendix 20th Avenue Criteria Description Ranking

This crossing is a rural local street with very low traffic volumes under 50 vehicles per day. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate Crossing for improvements. 1

Condition Roadway Classification: Rural Local Low Roadway Traffic Volume: 46 Proximity to Traffic Signal: None

This crossing has minor truck traffic, but is not a route for transit, school buses, or other multimodal users. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate for improvements.

Crossing Emergency Services Route: No 1 Use Truck Route: Yes (5%) Low Transit Route: No School Bus Route: No Bicycle Route: Existing - No, Future - No Pedestrian Route: Existing - No, Future - No

This crossing has two tracks and is a significant distance from the railyard. No crashes occurred at this location in the past ten years. Therefore, this Rail crossing has low potential as a candidate for improvements. 1

Operations Number of Tracks: 2 Low Potential for Occupied Crossings: 2.2 miles to railyard Crash History: 0

This crossing currently provides access to agricultural property. However, the city is generally growing to the northeast and this location could have long-term potential for improvement if needed. Therefore, this crossing has Land Use moderate potential as a candidate for improvements. 2

Impacts Access to Key Destinations: None Moderate Local Circulation Impacts: Provides access to agricultural property Growth Impacts: Long-term growth to northeast towards Kansas Turnpike (I-35) Proximity to Crossings: 1.0 miles north (at-grade), 1.0 miles south (overpass)

This crossing is outside the city limits and has no relevant recommendations from previous reports. However, the city is generally growing to the northeast and this location could have long-term potential for improvement if needed. Therefore, this crossing has moderate potential 2 Local Input as a candidate for improvements. Moderate

Previous Study: None Programmed Improvements: None Local Priority: Long-term grade separation concept if city grows

Preliminary Screening Recommendation: Moderate Potential 7/15

C Street Criteria Description Ranking

This crossing is an urban local street with low traffic volumes under 250 vehicles per day. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate Crossing for improvements. 1

Condition Roadway Classification: Urban Local Low Roadway Traffic Volume: 245 Proximity to Traffic Signal: None

This crossing has very low truck volume and is not a route for transit, school buses, or other multimodal users. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate for improvements.

Crossing Emergency Services Route: No 1 Use Truck Route: No (3%) Low Transit Route: No School Bus Route: No Bicycle Route: Existing - No, Future - No Pedestrian Route: Existing - No, Future - No

This crossing has four tracks and is nearly adjacent to the railyard. No crashes occurred at this location in the past ten years. Therefore, this Rail crossing has high potential as a candidate for improvements. 3

Operations Number of Tracks: 4 High Potential for Occupied Crossings: 0.1 miles to railyard Crash History: 0

This crossing provides secondary access to the downtown district and generally has the same level of connectivity as adjacent crossings. Therefore, this crossing has moderate potential as a candidate for Land Use improvements. 2

Impacts Access to Key Destinations: downtown, Fire Department Moderate Local Circulation Impacts: Provides same level of connectivity as adjacent crossing Growth Impacts: Limited growth impacts due to railyard and drainage area Proximity to Crossings: 0.2 miles east (underpass), 0.1 miles west (at-grade)

This crossing was recommended for permanent closure during a previous Quiet Zone study. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate for improvements. 1 Local Input Previous Study: Closure (not politically accepted by City Council in 2010) Low Programmed Improvements: None Local Priority: None

Preliminary Screening Recommendation: Moderate Potential 8/15

Washington Street Criteria Description Ranking

This crossing is an urban minor arterial with moderate traffic volumes over 500 vehicles per day. Therefore, this crossing has high potential as a Crossing candidate for improvements. 3

Condition Roadway Classification: Urban Minor Arterial High Roadway Traffic Volume: 575 Proximity to Traffic Signal: 0.35 miles

This crossing serves minor truck traffic and has existing sidewalk to accommodate pedestrians. Therefore, this crossing has moderate potential as a candidate for improvements.

Crossing Emergency Services Route: No 2 Use Truck Route: Yes (5%) Moderate Transit Route: No School Bus Route: No Bicycle Route: Existing - No, Future - No Pedestrian Route: Existing - Yes, Future - Yes

This crossing has three tracks and is located near the railyard. One crash occurred at this location in the past ten years. Therefore, this crossing has Rail high potential as a candidate for improvements. 3

Operations Number of Tracks: 3 High Potential for Occupied Crossings: 0.2 miles to railyard Crash History: 1

This crossing provides primary access to the downtown district and generally has the same level of connectivity as adjacent crossings. Therefore, this crossing has high potential as a candidate for improvements. Land Use 3 Impacts Access to Key Destinations: downtown, Fire Department, US-81 BUS corridor High Local Circulation Impacts: Provides same level of connectivity as adjacent crossings Growth Impacts: Minor potential growth of downtown core Proximity to Crossings: 0.1 miles east (at-grade), 0.1 miles west (at-grade)

This crossing was recommended to be improved with medians during a previous Quiet Zone study. City staff indicated Washington Street is the most used at-grade crossing in the city. Therefore, this crossing has high 3 Local Input potential as a candidate for improvements. High Previous Study: Medians Programmed Improvements: None Local Priority: Most used at-grade crossing in the city

Preliminary Screening Recommendation: High Potential 14/15

Jefferson Street Criteria Description Ranking

This crossing is an urban local street with low traffic volumes under 400 vehicles per day. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate Crossing for improvements. 1

Condition Roadway Classification: Urban Local Low Roadway Traffic Volume: 385 Proximity to Traffic Signal: None

This crossing serves minor truck traffic, provides access for school buses, and has existing sidewalk to accommodate pedestrians. Therefore, this crossing has moderate potential as a candidate for improvements.

Crossing Emergency Services Route: No 2 Use Truck Route: Yes (5%) Moderate Transit Route: No School Bus Route: Yes Bicycle Route: Existing - No, Future - No Pedestrian Route: Existing - Yes, Future - Yes

Operations Number of Tracks: 3 High Potential for Occupied Crossings: 0.3 miles to railyard Crash History: 1

Impacts Access to Key Destinations: downtown district, recreation center, library Moderate Local Circulation Impacts: Provides same level of connectivity as adjacent crossings Growth Impacts: No growth potential Proximity to Crossings: 0.1 miles eat (at-grade), 0.15 miles west (at-grade)

This crossing was recommended to be improved with medians during a previous Quiet Zone study. City staff indicated Jefferson Street is the second most used at-grade crossing in the city and carries truck traffic. Therefore, this crossing has high potential as a candidate for improvements. 3 Local Input Previous Study: Medians High Programmed Improvements: None Local Priority: Second most-used at-grade crossing in the city and used by trucks to access the grain elevator south of the railroad tracks

Preliminary Screening Recommendation: High Potential 11/15 G Street Criteria Description Ranking

This crossing is an urban local street with very low traffic volume of approximately 50 vehicles per day. Therefore, this crossing has low Crossing potential as a candidate for improvements. 1

Condition Roadway Classification: Urban Local Low Roadway Traffic Volume: 50 Proximity to Traffic Signal: None

This crossing has very low truck volume, but provides school bus access to an elementary school approximately 0.4 miles north. Therefore, this crossing has moderate potential as a candidate for improvements.

Crossing Emergency Services Route: No 2 Use Truck Route: No (3%) Moderate Transit Route: No School Bus Route: Yes Bicycle Route: Existing - No, Future - No Pedestrian Route: Existing - No, Future - No

This has three tracks and is a moderate distance from the railyard. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate for improvements. Rail 1 Operations Number of Tracks: 3 Low Potential for Occupied Crossings: 0.35 miles to railyard Crash History: 0

This crossing provides access to an elementary school approximately 0.4 miles north but generally has less connectivity compared to adjacent crossings. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate for Land Use improvements. 1

Impacts Access to Key Destinations: Lincoln Elementary School Low Local Circulation Impacts: Less connectivity compared to adjacent crossings Growth Impacts: No growth potential Proximity to Crossings: 0.15 miles east (at-grade), 0.1 miles west (at-grade)

Preliminary Screening Recommendation: Low Potential 6/15

H Street Criteria Description Ranking

This crossing is an urban local street with very low traffic volume of approximately 50 vehicles per day. Therefore, this crossing has low potential Crossing as a candidate for improvements. 1

Condition Roadway Classification: Urban Local Low Roadway Traffic Volume: 57 Proximity to Traffic Signal: None

This crossing has very low truck volume and is not a route for transit, school buses, or other multimodal users. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate for improvements.

Crossing Emergency Services Route: No 1 Use Truck Route: No (3%) Low Transit Route: No School Bus Route: No Bicycle Route: Existing - No, Future - No Pedestrian Route: Existing - No, Future - No

This crossing does not provide access to key destinations and generally has less connectivity compared to adjacent crossings. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate for improvements. Land Use 1 Impacts Access to Key Destinations: None Low Local Circulation Impacts: Less connectivity compared to adjacent crossings Growth Impacts: No growth potential Proximity to Crossings: 0.1 miles east (at-grade), 0.2 miles west (underpass)

Preliminary Screening Recommendation: Low Potential 5/15

Highway 81 Criteria Description Ranking

This crossing is an urban principal arterial with high traffic volumes of nearly 5,000 vehicles per day. Therefore, this crossing has high potential as Crossing a candidate for improvements. 3

Condition Roadway Classification: Urban Principal Arterial High Roadway Traffic Volume: 4,880 Proximity to Traffic Signal: 0.5 miles

This crossing is an emergency services route, major truck route, and school bus route. Therefore, this crossing has moderate potential as a candidate for improvements.

Crossing Emergency Services Route: Yes 2 Use Truck Route: Yes (15%) Moderate Transit Route: No School Bus Route: Yes Bicycle Route: Existing - No, Future - No Pedestrian Route: Existing - No, Future - No

This crossing has one track and is a lower volume connecting rail corridor between the BNSF Railway and Union Pacific Railroad. The mainline track is an existing grade separation. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a Rail candidate for improvements. 1 Operations Low Number of Tracks: 1 Potential for Occupied Crossings: 0.7 miles to railyard, spur track Crash History: 0

This crossing is a major state highway connecting the city with the greater southern Kansas region. Therefore, this crossing has moderate potential as a candidate for improvements. Land Use 2 Impacts Access to Key Destinations: major regional corridor Moderate Local Circulation Impacts: Low volume connecting rail track Growth Impacts: Moderate growth potential to south Proximity to Crossings: spur track with nearby underpass of mainline

This crossing is outside has no relevant recommendations from previous reports. City staff indicated that the crossing is not a concern due to the low volume connecting rail track. The mainline track is an existing grade separation. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate for 1 Local Input improvements. Low

Previous Study: None Programmed Improvements: None Local Priority: Low volume connecting rail track that does not cause concern

Preliminary Screening Recommendation: OWNED BY UNION PACIFIC 9/15 Tyler Road Criteria Description Ranking

This crossing is a rural local street with very low traffic volume under 50 vehicles per day. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate for Crossing improvements. 1

Condition Roadway Classification: Rural Local Low Roadway Traffic Volume: 38 Proximity to Traffic Signal: None

This crossing has very low truck volume and is not a route for transit, school buses, or other multimodal users. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate for improvements.

Crossing Emergency Services Route: No 1 Use Truck Route: No (3%) Low Transit Route: No School Bus Route: No Bicycle Route: Existing - No, Future - No Pedestrian Route: Existing - No, Future - No

Operations Number of Tracks: 2 Low Potential for Occupied Crossings: 2.5 miles to railyard Crash History: 0

This crossing currently provides access to a few rural residences and agricultural property. This area is not considered a growth area for the city. Therefore, this crossing has low potential as a candidate for improvements. Land Use 1 Impacts Access to Key Destinations: None Low Local Circulation Impacts: Provides access to a few rural residences Growth Impacts: Low growth potential Proximity to Crossings: 1.0 miles east (underpass), 1.1 miles west (overpass)

This crossing is outside the city limits and has no relevant recommendations from previous reports. Therefore, this crossing has moderate potential as a candidate for improvements. 1 Local Input Previous Study: None Low Programmed Improvements: None Local Priority: None

Preliminary Screening Recommendation: Low Potential 5/15

APPENDIX D

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Appendix DISCLAIMER:

THE EXACT LOCATION, DESIGN, AND RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE JEFFERSON AVENUE ALIGNMENT CANNOT BE DETERMINED FROM THESE CONCEPTS AND COULD BE DIFFERENT FROM THAT SHOWN. THE DESIGN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND WAS DEVELOPED EXISTING MAIN TRACK 1 TO CONVEY INTENT AS WELL AS IDENTIFY AREAS FOR COORDINATION IN ASSOCIATION EXISTING MAIN TRACK 2 WITH A GRADE SEPARATION OF THE RAILROAD. PRELIMINARY DESIGN WILL NEED TO BE CONDUCTED TO REFINE THE TYPE OF IMPROVEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS. EXISTING INDUSTRY TRACK AT THE TIME OF DESIGN, ALL APPLICABLE GUIDELINES WILL BE UTILIZED AND COULD BE DIFFERENT FROM THAT SHOWN.

0 100 200 300

SCALE FEET 1" = 100'

LEGEND DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED AT 3 HOUSES DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED AT 3 HOUSES REQUIRED AT 3 HOUSES ASPHALT PAVEMENT DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED AT 2 HOUSES EXISTING ROW ACCESS ROAD

CONCRETE STRUCTURE PROJECT BEGINS PROJECT ENDS

RETAINING WALL

JEFFERSON AVE 110+00 105+00 100+00 95+00 JEFFERSON AVE 90+00 PARCEL ROW

> JEFFERSON AVE

SIDEWALK AT-GRADE T S T T S S T T T S S NU LE LL L P D

I A A DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS ND R NOTES: M W M 2 3 REQUIRED AT 1 HOUSE AT THIS CONCEPT LEVEL, THE LOCATION OF ACCESS ROADS DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS AND THEIR CONNECTIONS TO PROPERTIES IS NOT SHOWN. DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED AT 2 HOUSES REQUIRED AT 2 HOUSES REQUIRED AT 4 HOUSES WHILE THE ACCESS TO ADJACENT PARCELS IS TO BE DETERMINED, IT IS ASSUMED THAT ACCESS WILL BE PROVIDED BY EITHER EXISTING ADJACENT STREETS IN CONJUCTION WITH A CONNECTING ROADWAY OR A PROPOSED INTERNAL ROADWAY NETWORK ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL(S). dgn . 101 - W D R - C \ d0653402 50 \ a . 31 it . e 17 b a + j n 249 \ , 1 100 1 w p = = - I . p r V

PROPOSED PROFILE o

1,250 P EL 1,250 BEGIN BRIDGE c % +4 s ex = 0.37' 58 . y STA 104+58.90 . 93 s -4 % n K = 33 a END BRIDGE ex = 0.53' r 02 85 50 50 L=100.00' l\t E STA 95+42.06 K = 23 . .

E . .

C ca

25 MPH C o

L=100.00' l

E 67 67 _

C 247 246

AN 1,240 + + 1,240 w R 20 MPH , ,

R p

A \

AN 1 1

A 99 E s

R = = 100 = C

LE m

A . . 23 23

LE = C e

C t . 47 . 55

C T P AN

LE EL EL . .

P V y R

C s 80 80

' V A 12 07 12 27

3 n

+ +

7 . . . . a

' r 220 223 PROJECT BEGINS .

ex = -1.19' LE

4 , ,

1,230 C 1,230 44 44 :\t

STA 107+15.85 . 106 1 105 1

K = 11 + 221 + 218 PROJECT ENDS c

9 = = = = N , ,

T . C . STA 92+98.83 I L=100.00' 94 1 93 1 P P M = = = = V EL V EL

20 MPH T . C . ' P P 7 % V EL V EL 58 4. . - +4

1,220 25 1,220 .93 .59%

1 23 EXISTING GROUND - 26 % . . +0.67%

30 > MAPLE ST WEST 61 12 + 221 . . , OF JEFFERSON AVE > MAPLE ST EAST

1 > 2ND ST 94 106 = OF JEFFERSON AVE 218 + = .

1,210 , 1,210 I 1 93 V EL ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) = = P 15 70 22 80 38 96 53 95 52 60 67 75 82 31 98 D . 18 01 84 77 01 38 75 12 42 50 60 71 81 19 21 10 98 87 75 23 09 95 82 68 64 88 12 I E ...... V S EL P O NG 213 214 214 214 216 217 218 220 220 219 218 217 216 216 216 216 215 215 215 216 217 217 218 219 220 220 221 I P 220 222 227 231 236 240 245 247 243 238 233 228 223 219 217 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , T O , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S I R ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( ( ( ( ( X E P

105+00 100+00 95+00 M A

35 : 16 : 8 : e m i T DESIGNED BY CONTRACT NO. NJA SM INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL 101180244 ALL PLANS, DRAWINGS SPECIFI- DRAWN BY BNSF SEALED CORRIDOR STUDY CATIONS, AND/OR INFORMATION DRAWING NO. FOR REVIEW FURNISHED HEREWITH SHALL NJA REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF BNSF RAILWAY AND SHALL BE CHECKED BY WELLINGTON, KANSAS C-RDW-101 HELD CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL SJC NOT BE USED FOR ANY PURPOSE REVISION SHEET NO.

NOT PROVIDED FOR IN 2400 Pershing Road 2019 APPROVED BY JEFFERSON AVENUE OVERPASS

/ AGREEMENTS WITH BNSF Suite 400

RAILWAY. 1OF 2 19

Kansas City, MO 64108 / PHONE: (816) 329-8600 PLAN AND PROFILE SCALE 4 DATE :

FAX: (816) 329-8602 e

BY t REV DATE DESCRIPTION APP 4/19/2019 SUB AS SHOWN a D IF THIS DRAWING IS LESS THAN 22" X 34" IT IS A REDUCED SIZE DRAWING EXISTING ROW APPROX. 100'

22' 22' W W O O R R

T T S S I I X X E E

EXISTING JEFFERSON AVE N.T.S.

EXISTING ROW APPROX. 100'

> SHLDR SHLDR 6' 16' 4' 2' 12' 12' 2' 6' 4' 16' 6'

SW SURFACE LANE LANE LANE SW SURFACE LANE SW W W O O R R

T T S S I I X X E E dgn . 501 - P Y T JEFFERSON AVE RETAINING WALL SECTION - C N.T.S. \ d0653402 \ a it e b a j n \ EXISTING ROW APPROX. 100' 1 w p - p r o c s y s n a

> r SHLDR SHLDR l\t

6' 16' 4' 2' 12' 12' 2' 6' 4' 16' 6' ca o l _

SW SURFACE LANE LANE LANE SURFACE LANE SW W

SW w W O p O \ R R s

m T e T t S S s I I y X s X E n E a r :\t c M A

44 : 16 JEFFERSON AVE BRIDGE SECTION : 8

N.T.S. : e m i T DESIGNED BY CONTRACT NO. NJA SM INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL 101180244 ALL PLANS, DRAWINGS SPECIFI- DRAWN BY BNSF SEALED CORRIDOR STUDY CATIONS, AND/OR INFORMATION DRAWING NO. FOR REVIEW FURNISHED HEREWITH SHALL NJA REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF BNSF RAILWAY AND SHALL BE CHECKED BY WELLINGTON, KANSAS C-TYP-501 HELD CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL SJC NOT BE USED FOR ANY PURPOSE REVISION SHEET NO.

NOT PROVIDED FOR IN 2400 Pershing Road 2019 APPROVED BY JEFFERSON AVENUE OVERPASS

/ AGREEMENTS WITH BNSF Suite 400

RAILWAY. 2 OF 2 19

Kansas City, MO 64108 / PHONE: (816) 329-8600 TYPICAL SECTIONS SCALE 4 DATE :

FAX: (816) 329-8602 e

BY t REV DATE DESCRIPTION APP 4/19/2019 SUB AS SHOWN a D IF THIS DRAWING IS LESS THAN 22" X 34" IT IS A REDUCED SIZE DRAWING DISCLAIMER:

THE EXACT LOCATION, DESIGN, AND RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE WASHINGTON AVENUE ALIGNMENT CANNOT BE DETERMINED FROM THESE CONCEPTS AND COULD BE DIFFERENT FROM THAT SHOWN. THE DESIGN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND WAS DEVELOPED EXISTING MAIN TRACK 1 TO CONVEY INTENT AS WELL AS IDENTIFY AREAS FOR COORDINATION IN ASSOCIATION EXISTING MAIN TRACK 2 JEFFERSON AVE WITH A GRADE SEPARATION OF THE RAILROAD. PRELIMINARY DESIGN WILL NEED TO BE CONDUCTED TO REFINE THE TYPE OF IMPROVEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS. EXISTING INDUSTRY TRACK AT THE TIME OF DESIGN, ALL APPLICABLE GUIDELINES WILL BE UTILIZED AND COULD BE DIFFERENT FROM THAT SHOWN.

0 100 200 300

SCALE FEET 1" = 100' EXISTING ROW

PROJECT BEGINS PROJECT ENDS LEGEND

110+00 105+00 100+00 95+00 90+00 RETAINING WALL

WASHINGTON AVE WASHINGTON AVE APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF BRIDGE PARCEL ROW

# NOTES:

C S AT THIS CONCEPT LEVEL, THE LOCATION OF ACCESS ROADS AND THEIR CONNECTIONS TO PROPERTIES IS NOT SHOWN.

WHILE THE ACCESS TO ADJACENT PARCELS IS TO BE DETERMINED, IT IS ASSUMED THAT ACCESS WILL BE PROVIDED BY EITHER

T EXISTING ADJACENT STREETS IN CONJUCTION WITH A CONNECTING

S T ROADWAY OR A PROPOSED INTERNAL ROADWAY NETWORK ASSOCIATED T S

S T T T WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL(S). S S NU LE LL L P D I A A ND R M W M 2 3

C STREET C STREET dgn . 103 - W D R - C \ EXISTING APPROX. 100'

> d0653402 W \ W O 14' 14' 6' a O R 50 it R e

. 67 b

LANE

LANE SW T . a T j S 17 n I S + \ I X 1 247 X w E , p E - 100 1 p = = r o 1,250 I . 1,250 c V

PROPOSED PROFILE s P EL y

BEGIN BRIDGE + s

% n ex = 0.42' 4. 78 95 a STA 104+50.30 4. r K = 29 - % END BRIDGE WASHINGTON AVE N.T.S. l\t 28 50 50 20 L=100.00' STA 95+59.47 ex = 0.59' ca o . . . . l

25 MPH K = 21 _

1,240 C 1,240 w 67 67

C p 245 + + 245 L=100.00' \

AN , , s

R 1 99 1

20 MPH m

A e 08 08 = E 100 = = t

A . 01 . 10 . C = C . s

LE y . . T P s

C 52 52 EL AN P V EL n

a + + R V 75 16 75 55 r

' 219 222 A . . . .

1,230 8 1,230 , , ex = -1.22'

PROJECT BEGINS :\t

. 106 1 105 1 c LE 21 21

8 = = = = STA 107+03.45 K = 10 C + 218 + 215

9 T . C . PROJECT ENDS , , P P L=100.00' N 94 1 93 1 V EL V EL I STA 93+01.77 = = = =

20 MPH M T . C .

P P

% ' V EL V EL 1,220 EXISTING GROUND .78 9 1,220 -4 . + % 25 -1.39 4 .95 % 08 70 +0.26% . . > MAPLE ST > 2ND ST 68 75 02 . . + 1,210 219 1,210 , 71 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1 215 + 106 = 34 19 59 37 16 94 72 29 85 90 94 99 04 19 D 26 88 71 60 81 02 97 34 57 47 38 35 45 87 32 77 16 05 93 10 30 50 24 10 20 63 06 , = . E ...... 1 93 I S = = V EL O NG . I 217 217 218 218 217 217 216 218 218 217 216 215 214 213 214 214 215 215 214 215 215 215 216 217 218 219 221 P I P 218 220 224 229 234 238 243 246 241 236 231 226 222 217 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , T V O , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S I EL P R ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( ( ( ( ( ( X E P M

105+00 100+00 95+00 A

53 : 26 : 11 : e m i T DESIGNED BY CONTRACT NO. NJA SM INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL 101180244 ALL PLANS, DRAWINGS SPECIFI- DRAWN BY BNSF SEALED CORRIDOR STUDY CATIONS, AND/OR INFORMATION DRAWING NO. FOR REVIEW FURNISHED HEREWITH SHALL NJA REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF BNSF RAILWAY AND SHALL BE CHECKED BY WELLINGTON, KANSAS C-RDW-103 HELD CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL SJC NOT BE USED FOR ANY PURPOSE REVISION SHEET NO. NOT PROVIDED FOR IN 2400 Pershing Road 2018 APPROVED BY WASHINGTON AVENUE OVERPASS / AGREEMENTS WITH BNSF Suite 400 RAILWAY. 3 OF 7 18 Kansas City, MO 64108 / PHONE: (816) 329-8600 SCALE 10 DATE :

FAX: (816) 329-8602 e

BY t REV DATE DESCRIPTION APP 10/18/2018 SUB AS SHOWN a D IF THIS DRAWING IS LESS THAN 22" X 34" IT IS A REDUCED SIZE DRAWING DISCLAIMER:

THE EXACT LOCATION, DESIGN, AND RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE C STREET ALIGNMENT CANNOT BE DETERMINED FROM THESE CONCEPTS AND COULD BE DIFFERENT FROM THAT SHOWN. THE DESIGN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND WAS DEVELOPED EXISTING MAIN TRACK 1 TO CONVEY INTENT AS WELL AS IDENTIFY AREAS FOR COORDINATION IN ASSOCIATION EXISTING MAIN TRACK 2 WITH A GRADE SEPARATION OF THE RAILROAD. PRELIMINARY DESIGN WILL NEED TO WASHINGTON AVE BE CONDUCTED TO REFINE THE TYPE OF IMPROVEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS. EXISTING INDUSTRY TRACK AT THE TIME OF DESIGN, ALL APPLICABLE GUIDELINES WILL BE UTILIZED AND COULD BE DIFFERENT FROM THAT SHOWN.

# 9

S T

T S S S T T T S S NU LE LL L P D I A A ND R M W M 2 3

0 100 200 300

SCALE FEET 1" = 100'

EXISTING ROW PROJECT BEGINS LEGEND

110+00 105+00 100+00 95+00 90+00 RETAINING WALL C STREET C STREET PARCEL ROW APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF BRIDGE PROJECT ENDS NOTES:

AT THIS CONCEPT LEVEL, THE LOCATION OF ACCESS ROADS AND THEIR CONNECTIONS TO PROPERTIES IS NOT SHOWN.

WHILE THE ACCESS TO ADJACENT PARCELS IS TO BE DETERMINED,

#10 0

1 IT IS ASSUMED THAT ACCESS WILL BE PROVIDED BY EITHER # EXISTING ADJACENT STREETS IN CONJUCTION WITH A CONNECTING ROADWAY OR A PROPOSED INTERNAL ROADWAY NETWORK ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL(S). dgn . 105 - W D R - C \

40 18 EXISTING APPROX. 60' . .

49 > + 255 d0653402 W , \ W O a

99 1 14' 14' 6' O R it = = R e

I . b

LANE

LANE SW T a V T j S n P EL I S \ I X

+ 1 % 5 X w . E 41 1 p . 6 E

5 % PROPOSED PROFILE - - p r

1,250 1,250 o c

BEGIN BRIDGE s y s

STA 104+87.47 n a C STREET r

E END BRIDGE N.T.S. l\t

C ex = 0.73' ex = 0.64' ca o STA 93+42.98 l

AN K = 17 _ 1,240 R K = 19 1,240 w p

L=100.00' L=100.00' \ s

20 MPH m

C 94 20 MPH 40 40 70 e t

. . . . s

' y s

3 49 49 E n

. 238 + + 239 C a r , , 76 76

12 1 96 1 1,230 AN 1,230 51 58 51 00 . 20 . 71 :\t

C = 102 = = R ...... c . = C . A 41 41

AN T P 20 20 PROJECT BEGINS + +

R EL P V EL LE PROJECT ENDS + 217 + 215 215 217

A V C , ,

STA 108+06.37 , , STA 90+17.07

92 1 91 1 107 1 106 1 ex = -7.93'

LE N ======

C I T . C . T . C . K = 57

M P P P P

1,220 1,220 V EL V EL V EL V EL L=600.00'

4 EXISTING GROUND '

. 9 % 40 MPH + . 5 . 41 20 1 . 6 5 % - 27 > WALNUT ST +0.40% +0.00% > 2ND ST 76 00 > MAPLE ST 51 00 . . > 3RD ST . 1,210 . 1,210 91 70 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) + 215 + 215 , 43 54 97 38 79 20 40 06 96 10 47 09 16 00 84 68 63 00 D 16 88 60 26 61 01 42 82 63 15 04 92 81 50 52 01 50 99 48 46 74 03 32 61 26 78 30 , E 1 ...... 91 1 S 106 = = = = O . NG I 216 216 217 217 216 216 215 214 216 216 215 213 212 211 211 212 212 212 213 213 213 214 214 214 215 216 218 I . I P 215 215 219 225 230 236 241 245 246 247 245 242 237 232 226 221 216 215 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , T V V EL O , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S I P EL P R ( ( ( ( ( ( ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( ( ( X E P M

110+00 105+00 100+00 95+00 90+00 A

08 : 27 : 11 : e m i T DESIGNED BY CONTRACT NO. NJA SM INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL 101180244 ALL PLANS, DRAWINGS SPECIFI- DRAWN BY BNSF SEALED CORRIDOR STUDY CATIONS, AND/OR INFORMATION DRAWING NO. FOR REVIEW FURNISHED HEREWITH SHALL NJA REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF BNSF RAILWAY AND SHALL BE CHECKED BY WELLINGTON, KANSAS C-RDW-105 HELD CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL SJC NOT BE USED FOR ANY PURPOSE REVISION SHEET NO. NOT PROVIDED FOR IN 2400 Pershing Road 2018 APPROVED BY C STREET OVERPASS / AGREEMENTS WITH BNSF Suite 400 RAILWAY. 5 OF 7 18 Kansas City, MO 64108 / PHONE: (816) 329-8600 SCALE 10 DATE :

FAX: (816) 329-8602 e

BY t REV DATE DESCRIPTION APP 10/18/2018 SUB AS SHOWN a D IF THIS DRAWING IS LESS THAN 22" X 34" IT IS A REDUCED SIZE DRAWING DISCLAIMER: T

THE EXACT LOCATION, DESIGN, AND RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE C STREET S

ALIGNMENT CANNOT BE DETERMINED FROM THESE CONCEPTS AND COULD BE DIFFERENT ND

FROM THAT SHOWN. THE DESIGN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND WAS DEVELOPED EXISTING MAIN TRACK 1 2 TO CONVEY INTENT AS WELL AS IDENTIFY AREAS FOR COORDINATION IN ASSOCIATION EXISTING MAIN TRACK 2 PROJECT ENDS WITH A GRADE SEPARATION OF THE RAILROAD. PRELIMINARY DESIGN WILL NEED TO WASHINGTON AVE BE CONDUCTED TO REFINE THE TYPE OF IMPROVEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS. EXISTING INDUSTRY TRACK AT THE TIME OF DESIGN, ALL APPLICABLE GUIDELINES WILL BE UTILIZED AND COULD BE DIFFERENT FROM THAT SHOWN.

T #9

S T

T S S S T T S NU LE LL L P D I A A R

M W M 3 PC 94+78.16 PC

+ 0 100 200 300

8 SCALE FEET 0

. 1" = 100'

+ 3

PROJECT BEGINS 0

1 2 5 LEGEND

. 1 T 36

. 8 P 07

+ 70 90 .

110+00 105+00 + . 102 1

74 C STREET RETAINING WALL 46 C 10 +

P +

C STREET T 9

P 00 9

1 PARCEL ROW

P P 100+00 NOTES: EXISTING ROW

APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF BRIDGE AT THIS CONCEPT LEVEL, THE LOCATION OF ACCESS ROADS AND THEIR CONNECTIONS TO PROPERTIES IS NOT SHOWN.

WHILE THE ACCESS TO ADJACENT PARCELS IS TO BE DETERMINED,

#10 0

> d0653402 W \ W 85 O 16' 16' 6' a O . 84 R it R e .

LANE 80 LANE SW T a T j + S n I S 248 \ I X 1 , X w E 100 1 p E = = - p I . r V 1,250 1,250 o c P EL s

% + y 5 BEGIN BRIDGE .71 . s -3 46 PROPOSED PROFILE n % a STA 107+27.76 r C STREET N.T.S. l\t ex = 0.51' END BRIDGE

ex = 0.65' ca o K = 25 STA 96+23.94 l 1,240 K = 19 1,240 _ w

L=100.00' L=100.00' p \

E s

20 MPH C

20 MPH m e t 42 92 85 85

AN s . . . . y

R E s

A C n 80 80 a r 83 06 83 21 241 237 + +

LE 98 98 AN . . . .

E , ,

1,230 C 1,230 . 66 . 34 R :\t

C 1 1 98

. . c PROJECT BEGINS A 16 16 = = 102 =

' 02 02 + 218 + 215

AN . . = C

9 + + STA 110+74.45 LE , ,

R T P

216 218 PROJECT ENDS C 95 1 94 1

A EL EL P V

8 , ,

= = = = STA 93+14.61 V 110 1 109 1 N T . C .

LE = = = = I ex = -4.58' P P

C T . C . M V EL V EL

P P EXISTING GROUND K = 44

1,220 ' 1,220 V EL V EL '

1 2 L=400.00'

. + % > MAPLE ST . 5 71 . 3. 35 MPH > EXISTING 4 - 17 6 +0.36% 26 %

98 49 C STREET +0.25% . . 83 33 . .

52 > WALNUT ST + 216 1,210 66 1,210 , + 215 1 , ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 109 = 94 1 66 45 16 87 58 29 00 71 67 38 80 93 51 06 60 22 17 D 32 04 75 07 48 88 29 69 02 91 79 68 71 58 00 55 49 80 05 57 78 98 19 40 60 = . = = E ...... I I . S V EL V O NG P 216 217 217 217 216 215 215 214 217 215 214 213 212 211 210 210 211 212 214 214 214 214 215 215 215 P EL I P 216 218 222 225 229 233 237 240 243 244 242 238 233 228 222 217 215 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , T O , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S I R ( ( ( ( ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( 1 ( ( ( ( X E P M

110+00 105+00 100+00 95+00 A

29 : 27 : 11 : e m i T DESIGNED BY CONTRACT NO. NJA SM INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL 101180244 ALL PLANS, DRAWINGS SPECIFI- DRAWN BY BNSF SEALED CORRIDOR STUDY CATIONS, AND/OR INFORMATION DRAWING NO. FOR REVIEW FURNISHED HEREWITH SHALL NJA REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF BNSF RAILWAY AND SHALL BE CHECKED BY WELLINGTON, KANSAS C-RDW-107 HELD CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL SJC NOT BE USED FOR ANY PURPOSE REVISION SHEET NO. NOT PROVIDED FOR IN 2400 Pershing Road 2018 APPROVED BY C STREET OVERPASS ALTERNATE / AGREEMENTS WITH BNSF Suite 400 RAILWAY. 7 OF 7 18 Kansas City, MO 64108 / PHONE: (816) 329-8600 SCALE 10 DATE :

FAX: (816) 329-8602 e

BY t REV DATE DESCRIPTION APP 10/18/2018 SUB AS SHOWN a D IF THIS DRAWING IS LESS THAN 22" X 34" IT IS A REDUCED SIZE DRAWING AS REQUIRED @ 6' SPACING

MUTCD OM4-1 LOCATED 3' BEHIND GUARDRAIL

KDOT STANDARD W-BEAM GUARDRAIL WITH TYPE II END TERMINAL 4 '

EXISTING ROADWAY 3 '

MUTCD OM4-1 OBJECT MARKER

RAILROAD ROW dgn . 502 - P Y T - C \ d0653402 \ a it e b a j n \ 1 w p - p r o c s y s n a r l\t ca o l _ w p \ s m e t s

REMOVE PAVEMENT AND y s n

PAVEMENT MARKINGS (TYP.) a r :\t c

KDOT STANDARD W-BEAM GUARDRAIL M A

45 : 16 : 8 : e m i T DESIGNED BY CONTRACT NO. NJA SM INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL 101180244 ALL PLANS, DRAWINGS SPECIFI- DRAWN BY BNSF SEALED CORRIDOR STUDY CATIONS, AND/OR INFORMATION DRAWING NO. FOR REVIEW FURNISHED HEREWITH SHALL NJA REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF BNSF RAILWAY AND SHALL BE CHECKED BY WELLINGTON, KANSAS C-TYP-502 HELD CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL SJC NOT BE USED FOR ANY PURPOSE REVISION SHEET NO.

NOT PROVIDED FOR IN 2400 Pershing Road 2019 APPROVED BY ROAD CLOSURE DETAILS

/ AGREEMENTS WITH BNSF Suite 400

RAILWAY. 1OF 1 19

Kansas City, MO 64108 / PHONE: (816) 329-8600 SCALE 4 DATE :

FAX: (816) 329-8602 e

BY t REV DATE DESCRIPTION APP 4/19/2019 SUB AS SHOWN a D IF THIS DRAWING IS LESS THAN 22" X 34" IT IS A REDUCED SIZE DRAWING BNSF Sealed Corridor Jefferson Avenue Overpass Opinion of Probable Construction Cost

TranSystems 4/17/2019 ITEM UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION UNITS No. PRICE AMOUNT Estimate 1a Structural Roadway Bridge Structure Concrete slab/ PreStressed Conc Girder/Support System/Sidewalk 31,175 SF $ 105.00 $ 3,273,375.00 Concrete slab/ Steel Girder/Support System/Sidewalk - SF $ 125.00 $ - Railing 1,542 LF $ 60.00 $ 92,520.00

Retaining Wall Retaining Wall 3,730 SF $ 65.00 $ 242,450.00

1b Rail Structural Railway Bridge Structure 3-60' BR BD IBM on Conc. - LF $ 16,000.00 $ -

Sub-Total $ 3,608,345.00 Contingency (25%) $ 902,000.00

Structural Sub-Total $ 4,510,000.00 2a Roadways

Concrete Paving Concrete 10" / Base 8" / Lime 8" - SY$ 100.00 $ - 4" Sidewalk 2,056 SY$ 40.00 $ 82,240.00

Asphalt Paving HMA 8" / Flex Base 8" 9,946 SY$ 45.00 $ 447,570.00

Intersection Modification Improvement on cross street 2 LS$ 150,000.00 $ 300,000.00

Other Raised Median - SF$ - $ - Removal 7,870 SY$ 6.00 $ 47,220.00 Prep ROW 0.27 MI$ 140,000.00 $ 37,580.00

2b Earthwork Embankment 2,350 CY$ 30.00 $ 70,500.00 Excavation - CY$ 20.00 $ -

Sub-Total $ 985,110.00 Contingency (25%)$ 246,000.00

Site Sub-Total $ 1,230,000.00 3 Utilities Drainage 0.27 MI$ 750,000.00 $ 201,280.00 Utilities adjustments (medium) 1 LS$ 200,000.00 $ 200,000.00 Pump Station (underpass only) - LS$ 1,800,000.00 $ -

4 General Railroad Flagger 1 LS$ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Railroad Insurance 1 LS$ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 Mobilization 1 LS$ 600,000.00 $ 600,000.00 Traffic Control Plan 1 LS$ 110,000.00 $ 110,000.00 Signing & Pavement Marking 0.27 MI$ 50,000.00 $ 13,420.00 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan 0.27 MI$ 50,000.00 $ 13,420.00 Lighting 0.27 MI$ 150,000.00 $ 40,260.00

Sub-Total $ 1,328,380.00 Contingency (25%)$ 332,000.00

Sub-Total $ 1,660,000.00

5 Design 10%$ 740,000.00 6 Construction Inspection 8% $ 590,000.00 7 Contingency 4% $ 300,000.00

Total $ 9,030,000.00 BNSF Sealed Corridor Washington Avenue Overpass Opinion of Probable Construction Cost

TranSystems 10/21/2018 ITEM UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION UNITS No. PRICE AMOUNT Estimate 1a Structural Roadway Bridge Structure Concrete slab/ PreStressed Conc Girder/Support System/Sidewalk 33,460 SF $ 105.00 $ 3,513,300.00 Concrete slab/ Steel Girder/Support System/Sidewalk - SF $ 125.00 $ - Railing 1,180 LF $ 60.00 $ 70,800.00

Retaining Wall Retaining Wall 3,770 SF $ 65.00 $ 245,050.00

1b Rail Structural Railway Bridge Structure 3-60' BR BD IBM on Conc. - LF $ 16,000.00 $ -

Sub-Total $ 3,829,150.00 Contingency (25%) $ 957,000.00

Structural Sub-Total $ 4,790,000.00 2a Roadways

Concrete Paving Concrete 10" / Base 8" / Lime 8" - SY$ 100.00 $ - 4" Sidewalk 370 SY $ 40.00 $ 14,800.00

Asphalt Paving HMA 8" / Flex Base 8" 1,700 SY$ 45.00 $ 76,500.00

Intersection Modification Improvement on cross street 2 LS$ 150,000.00 $ 300,000.00

Other Raised Median - SF$ - Removal 7,790 SY$ 6.00 $ 46,740.00 Prep ROW 0.27 MI$ 140,000.00 $ 37,180.00

2b Earthwork Embankment 2,370 CY$ 30.00 $ 71,100.00 Excavation - CY$ 20.00 $ -

Sub-Total $ 546,320.00 Contingency (25%)$ 137,000.00

Site Sub-Total $ 680,000.00 3 Utilities Drainage 0.27 MI$ 750,000.00 $ 199,150.00 Utilities adjustments (medium) 1 LS$ 200,000.00 $ 200,000.00 Pump Station (underpass only) - LS$ 1,800,000.00 $ -

4 General Railroad Flagger 1 LS$ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Railroad Insurance 1 LS$ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 Mobilization 1 LS$ 500,000.00 $ 500,000.00 Traffic Control Plan 1 LS$ 110,000.00 $ 110,000.00 Signing & Pavement Marking 0.27 MI$ 50,000.00 $ 13,280.00 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan 0.27 MI$ 50,000.00 $ 13,280.00 Lighting 0.27 MI$ 150,000.00 $ 39,830.00

Sub-Total $ 1,225,540.00 Contingency (25%)$ 306,000.00

Sub-Total $ 1,530,000.00

5 Design 10%$ 700,000.00 6 Construction Inspection 8% $ 560,000.00 7 Contingency 4% $ 280,000.00

Total $ 8,540,000.00 BNSF Sealed Corridor C Street Overpass Opinion of Probable Construction Cost

TranSystems 10/21/2018 ITEM UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION UNITS No. PRICE AMOUNT Estimate 1a Structural Roadway Bridge Structure Concrete slab/ PreStressed Conc Girder/Support System/Sidewalk 42,260 SF $ 105.00 $ 4,437,300.00 Concrete slab/ Steel Girder/Support System/Sidewalk - SF $ 125.00 $ - Railing 1,440 LF $ 60.00 $ 86,400.00

Retaining Wall Retaining Wall 3,930 SF $ 65.00 $ 255,450.00

1b Rail Structural Railway Bridge Structure 3-60' BR BD IBM on Conc. - LF $ 16,000.00 $ -

Sub-Total $ 4,779,150.00 Contingency (25%) $ 1,195,000.00

Structural Sub-Total $ 5,970,000.00 2a Roadways

Concrete Paving Concrete 10" / Base 8" / Lime 8" - SY $ 100.00 $ - 4" Sidewalk 460 SY $ 40.00 $ 18,400.00

Asphalt Paving HMA 8" / Flex Base 8" 2,150 SY$ 45.00 $ 96,750.00

Intersection Modification Improvement on cross street 4 LS$ 150,000.00 $ 600,000.00

Other Raised Median - SF$ - Removal 6,960 SY$ 6.00 $ 41,760.00 Prep ROW 0.34 MI$ 140,000.00 $ 47,470.00

2b Earthwork Embankment 2,470 CY$ 30.00 $ 74,100.00 Excavation - CY$ 20.00 $ -

Sub-Total $ 878,480.00 Contingency (25%)$ 220,000.00

Site Sub-Total $ 1,100,000.00 3 Utilities Drainage 0.34 MI$ 750,000.00 $ 254,270.00 Utilities adjustments (medium) 1 LS$ 300,000.00 $ 300,000.00 Pump Station (underpass only) - LS$ 1,800,000.00 $ -

4 General Railroad Flagger 1 LS$ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Railroad Insurance 1 LS$ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 Mobilization 1 LS$ 700,000.00 $ 700,000.00 Traffic Control Plan 1 LS$ 140,000.00 $ 140,000.00 Signing & Pavement Marking 0.34 MI$ 50,000.00 $ 16,960.00 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan 0.34 MI$ 50,000.00 $ 16,960.00 Lighting 0.34 MI$ 150,000.00 $ 50,860.00

Sub-Total $ 1,629,050.00 Contingency (25%)$ 407,000.00

Sub-Total $ 2,040,000.00

5 Design 10%$ 910,000.00 6 Construction Inspection 8% $ 730,000.00 7 Contingency 4% $ 360,000.00

Total $ 11,110,000.00 BNSF Sealed Corridor C Street Overpass Alternate Opinion of Probable Construction Cost

TranSystems 10/21/2018 ITEM UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION UNITS No. PRICE AMOUNT Estimate 1a Structural Roadway Bridge Structure Concrete slab/ PreStressed Conc Girder/Support System/Sidewalk - SF$ 105.00 $ - Concrete slab/ Steel Girder/Support System/Sidewalk 40,320 SF $ 150.00 $ 6,048,000.00 Railing 1,390 LF $ 60.00 $ 83,400.00

Retaining Wall Retaining Wall 4,180 SF $ 65.00 $ 271,700.00

1b Rail Structural Railway Bridge Structure 3-60' BR BD IBM on Conc. - LF $ 16,000.00 $ -

Sub-Total $ 6,403,100.00 Contingency (25%) $ 1,601,000.00

Structural Sub-Total $ 8,000,000.00 2a Roadways

Concrete Paving Concrete 10" / Base 8" / Lime 8" - SY $ 100.00 $ - 4" Sidewalk 460 SY $ 40.00 $ 18,400.00

Asphalt Paving HMA 8" / Flex Base 8" 2,140 SY$ 45.00 $ 96,300.00

Intersection Modification Improvement on cross street 3 LS$ 150,000.00 $ 450,000.00

Other Raised Median - SF$ - Removal 5,830 SY$ 6.00 $ 34,980.00 Prep ROW 0.28 MI$ 140,000.00 $ 39,780.00

2b Earthwork Embankment 2,630 CY$ 30.00 $ 78,900.00 Excavation - CY$ 20.00 $ -

Sub-Total $ 718,360.00 Contingency (25%)$ 180,000.00

Site Sub-Total $ 900,000.00 3 Utilities Drainage 0.28 MI$ 750,000.00 $ 213,070.00 Utilities adjustments (medium) 1 LS$ 400,000.00 $ 400,000.00 Pump Station (underpass only) - LS$ 1,800,000.00 $ -

4 General Railroad Flagger 1 LS$ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Railroad Insurance 1 LS$ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 Mobilization 1 LS$ 900,000.00 $ 900,000.00 Traffic Control Plan 1 LS$ 180,000.00 $ 180,000.00 Signing & Pavement Marking 0.28 MI$ 50,000.00 $ 14,210.00 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan 0.28 MI$ 50,000.00 $ 14,210.00 Lighting 0.28 MI$ 150,000.00 $ 42,620.00

Sub-Total $ 1,914,110.00 Contingency (25%)$ 479,000.00

Sub-Total $ 2,390,000.00

5 Design 10%$ 1,130,000.00 6 Construction Inspection 8% $ 900,000.00 7 Contingency 4% $ 450,000.00

Total $ 13,770,000.00 BACK COVER

BNSF Railway Sealed Corridor Study - Wellington, Kansas | Back Cover