Trains, trains, go away

The train tracks that cross U.S. 60 near Morehouse, Mo., don't see much use -- only one or two trains cross there on a weekly basis.

Most people who use the route would say that's a good thing, considering about 12,000 vehicles cross over the tracks every day, traveling at a speed of 65 mph on the four-lane divided highway.

Improvements all along the stretch of U.S. 60 in Missouri (the highway cuts east to west across the state's southern portion) are turning the highway into an even more important artery for travel than it already is.

But if Union Pacific Railroad's proposed track swap with Burlington Northern Santa Fe goes through, traffic crossing the tracks on U.S. 60 could be slowed down significantly by anywhere from 12 to 18 trains a day.

The prospect is one reason government officials on the local and county level are pushing for an alternative to the proposed swap -- one that would have far less impact on highway safety.

Elected officials are pushing for Union Pacific to ditch the swap and go another route, one they've termed the "northern option." All three of the area's federal legislators, as well as MoDOT, are asking the federal Surface Transportation Board to look at the alternative of double-tracking the existing Rockview to Dexter route.

Unlike the proposed swap, the "northern option" would take trains largely through rural areas and towns like Delta, where residents are used to high volumes of train traffic. But if the swap goes through, traffic through those areas would decrease by around 50 percent.

UP hasn't done a cost analysis of the "northern option," but assumes a cost of at least $1 million for every mile of track laid down. There are about 25 miles of track between Rockview and Dexter. James Barnes, a spokesman for UP, said the track is all single track.

Even though UP won't release a cost analysis of double tracking to the media, its filing with the STB says the swap will allow directional running "at a lower cost than double tracking UPRR's existing Rockview-Dexter line."

But with MoDOT's proposals, the cost of the swap is rising.

MoDOT has submitted a proposal to the STB, the regulatory agency tasked with deciding whether the swap will happen. The proposal calls for more than $24 million in railroad crossing safety improvement if the swap goes through.

The proposed improvements, most of them agreed upon by MoDOT and UP, would put overpasses at three locations affected by the swap -- U.S. 60, Route Y in Sikeston (Salcedo Road) and Route A in Chaffee (Yoakum Street).

The cost would be shared roughly 50/50 by the state and the railroad. But local leaders aren't happy with MoDOT's recommendations.

"We want MoDOT to take a neutral stand on this thing," said Sikeston Mayor Mike Marshall. Marshall and the Sikeston city government have been some of the most outspoken opponents of the swap.

"We don't want them in bed with UP; we want them to be neutral," Marshall said. "We're against this if there's an alternative route they could take."

Cheryl Ball, assistant engineer for MoDOT's southeast district, said the agency is taking a neutral stance on the issue. Ball said MoDOT has no authority to issue an opinion on whether the swap will occur and has no say in the outcome. Instead, the agency is trying to plan for needed safety improvements in case the swap goes through.

"I can't tell UP they can't do it, but I'm sure going to react when they do," Ball said.

Marshall, Oran Mayor Tom Urhahn and the Scott County Commission are just some of the local government officials unequivocally opposed to the swap. They all cite safety concerns -- derailments, trains blocking tracks, accidents at crossings -- as reasons for their fiery opposition. All have asked federal representatives to take action to stop the swap.

Like Marshall, Scott County Presiding Commissioner Martin Priggel says the MoDOT proposal is woefully inadequate. His chief concerns are 11 county roads, some without gates, where the trains will pass through. Most of those roads only appear on MoDOT's proposal under the label "22 various crossings," with no details.

U.S. Rep. Jo Ann Emerson has already written to the Surface Transportation Board, not opposing the swap completely, but expressing the need for the safety improvements MoDOT has asked for, especially the $12 million, two-year overpass project on U.S. 60.

"There's a tremendous amount of traffic," said Emerson chief of staff Lloyd Smith. "If this thing comes through that way, that overpass has to be built. There's so much traffic it would be an accident waiting to happen."

Once the swap is approved, it would be two years before the overpass would be completed, with traffic and trains meeting several times daily on U.S. 60. The overpass is the only one of the three that MoDOT and UP have agreed is needed. Details on cost sharing haven't been worked out on the U.S. 60 project.

The money for those improvements would come from state highway funds. Ball said if federal funds were used, then UP could only be forced to pay up to 10 percent of the cost. Reaching a voluntary agreement with the railroad that would use state funds could eventually save taxpayers millions, she said.

Local officials say whatever money is used, state or federal, amounts to local taxpayers paying for something that will only hurt them. The swap will bring no economic benefit to the area, since the trains are just passing through.

That leaves only hassle and danger, said Marshall.

Jerry Pullen, owner of Pullen Brothers Trucking in Sikeston, is also steadfast in his opposition to the swap. Not only does he worry about the safety of his truckers on U.S. 60 and other routes if train traffic increases, he worries about his home near the tracks. The rails cut through a large residential area in Sikeston.

He points out that schools, hospitals and nursing homes would be cut off from emergency services if for some reason the tracks were blocked.

"I see no benefit at all," Pullen said.

At least one mayor in a town affected by the swap isn't concerned.

Chaffee Mayor Bill Cannon said his town has a long history with railroads and residents are used to the traffic. As long as trains don't block the Yoakum Street intersection, which would effectively cut off 10 to 15 percent of the population from the town's main area, there won't be a problem, Cannon said.

"By and large we don't anticipate any change that would be unacceptable," Cannon said.

Marshall has a different view.

"We're not going to let them turn Sikeston into a railroad town," Marshall said.

Marshall will accept nothing less than the "northern option." Federal legislators have tempered their language significantly more than Marshall, but they do want STB to consider the alternative to the swap.

"We would like to see a comparative analysis of the double-track option and the cost-benefit analysis in financial and human terms of both," said Smith.

On Wednesday, U.S. Sens. Jim Talent and Kit Bond sent a joint letter to UP urging consideration of the "northern option." Like Emerson has in the past, the senators made sure to note they're friendly to a business expanding operations, but that there are safety concerns which need to be looked at.

The STB takes all correspondence into consideration, including the proposals from MoDOT, said an agency representative. The same representative said the STB will also have to consider the "no-action alternative" of double tracking.

Now MoDOT is working on its own analysis of improvements that would be needed for double tracking, an analysis that is expected to be completed by mid-April.

Marshall and his allies will wait to see that analysis, hoping it will give them more ammunition in their fight against the swap. Regardless of the results, they say they won't stop fighting.

"We're going to do everything we can to slow down this procedure," said Pullen, who also sits on Sikeston's city council. "We're going to fight until we see the trains coming through our town. That's what's going to happen."

msanders@semissourian.com

335-6611, extension 182

---

The background- Reasons behind the railroad swap

Union Pacific's swap proposal has been a contentious issue since UP first filed for approval with the Surface Transportation Board in March of last year, with local officials railing against the idea nearly from day one.

The railroad wants rights to use a 23.7-mile stretch of track from Rockview to Sikeston currently controlled by Burlington Northern Santa Fe. In exchange, UP would let BNSF have rights to a stretch of track in Colorado.

UP wants the track to more efficiently run trains on a north-south route using the track it currently controls from Rockview to Dexter and the track the company is now trying to acquire. The result would be a large jump in traffic -- at least 10 extra trains a day -- through Sikeston and other areas that now see anywhere from one train per week to five to seven per day.

Towns along the Rockview-to-Dexter line, like Delta, would see an equivalent decrease in traffic. According to the railroad's filing with the STB, the same number of trains would run through the area. About half the traffic would run north on the Dexter-to-Rockview line. The other half would run south on the Rockview-to-Sikeston line.

While traffic amounts will remain the same, UP spokesman James Barnes said the swap will allow the railroad more efficiency in running cars and reduce time lost in case of train delays. The swap would also balance out use between the two lines, taking traffic off the over-burdened Rockview-to-Dexter line.

The track swap appears to be part of a national trend toward railroad expansion. Railroads currently are seeking a 25 percent federal tax credit on investments to expand railway capacity, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal published March 15.

The construction of a curve in the Sikeston area would be required to route trains from Sikeston to Dexter, a route that would take them across U.S. 60.

Reports have varied as to the number of trains that will run on the tracks, though. According to Sikeston Mayor Mike Marshall, UP Government Affairs head Chris Peterson has said in public meetings even more trains could come through the area.

Currently the environmental review process ordered by the STB hasn't begun. It could be at least a year before a ruling is issued. However, the STB is taking public comment on the proposal.

-- Southeast Missourian