Loading...
Cotton Belt-CS040223 MEMORANDUM FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING To: Bob Hager, City Attorney From: Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E., Dir. of Engineering/Public Works Date: February 23, 2004 RE: Royal Lane at Railroad Track The City of Coppell has received complaints about the railroad crossing on Royal Lane near the Bulk Postal Facility. Upon investigation, it was noted that the crossing itself is in disrepair. On July 10, 1987, the City of Coppell entered into an agreement with St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company for the construction of this crossing. Subsequent to that agreement, DART acquired the assets of St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company. The railroad crossing in question is commonly referred to as the Cotton Belt. I contacted Jan Seidner with DART concerning the maintenance of the railroad track. Ms. Seidner emphatically stated that DART has no responsibility to maintain the railroad track because the crossing has failed to the point that it cannot be maintained and therefore it needs to be completely removed and rebuilt. Also, Ms. Seidner, has stated that DART will not pay to maintain the crossing because without the road the crossing would not be necessary. She stated that this is the policy they follow with other cities along the Cotton Belt railroad track. DART’s contractor, Trac-Work, Inc., has presented the City an estimate of $34,372.96 to remove and replace the existing crossing on Royal Lane. I am somewhat confused. The easement from 1987 clearly states in paragraph 7: “After construction or reconstruction of said highway has been completed, Railroad shall maintain the surface of that portion of said highway between lines two (2) feet outside the rails of each track located thereon.” I have attached photographs taken on February 23, 2004 which clearly show that all needed repairs are between the rails and within two feet outside the rails. Again, paragraph 7 of the easement between Coppell and the St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company clearly states this is a railroad responsibility to maintain. I need some legal guidance. Ms. Seidner states that DART will not maintain because the crossing needs to be removed and replaced, i.e. upgraded; and this is not maintenance. Therefore, the City should pay the entire cost  of $34,000 . My response to Ms. Seidner was that they should have maintained the track so it did not fail. Therefore, they should now make the track driveable per the agreement executed in 1987. This is a hazardous situation and as such I need a legal opinion on what position the City should take.  If in fact we are legally obligated to replace this crossing, then I need to secure funds in the amount of $34,000 to authorize the removal and replacement of this crossing. If in fact the prior agreement with the St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company controls and DART should maintain the crossing, then I need to know what legal procedures I need to pursue to require DART to maintain/repair the crossing. I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience on this issue. cc: Jim Witt, City Manager Clay Phillips, Deputy City Manager "CITY OF COPPELL ENGINEERING - EXCELLENCE BY DESIGN"