Lock Haven council denies Norfolk Southern request to vacate five railroad crossings amid emergency-response concerns
Loading...
Summary
After extensive public comment from fire, EMS and law-enforcement officials warning that vacating five crossings would slow emergency response and reduce property access, the Lock Haven City Council voted to deny Norfolk Southern's request to close the crossings and asked staff to track any railroad recourse.
Lock Haven City Council on Monday rejected Norfolk Southern's proposal to vacate five railroad crossings in the city after public safety officials and residents warned the move would hinder emergency response and fragment neighborhood access.
Fire Chief Tom Wooding told the council that even a "minute or two" delay in response can mean the difference "between life or death" in fires and other emergencies. Chief Banfield of Lock Haven EMS said the crossings at Liberty Street and other north-south routes are heavily used by ambulances and that removing crossings would "be a detriment" to EMS response across the city.
Several residents and business owners echoed those concerns, citing recent federally and state-funded upgrades to crossing gates and signals and arguing the city's crash history did not justify further closures. A written comment from Richard Morris Cash urged the council to hold a well-advertised public hearing before any decision, noting potential property-access restrictions, new cul-de-sacs and incremental increases in snow-removal costs for property owners.
Sheriff Stover, communicating via the meeting chat, wrote that "delays are unacceptable to any emergency providers" and warned that one or two minutes could mean the difference in life-threatening incidents.
Council discussion followed public comment; a council member moved to deny Norfolk Southern's request, the motion was seconded, and the council announced it had denied the proposal. Council members noted they were unsure of the railroad's recourse and that staff had limited time to research the request before the meeting.
The request had also prompted questions about whether PennDOT or the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission must be involved and why the crossings were targeted after recent state- and federal-funded safety upgrades. The council called for transparency and public input in any future proposals affecting crossing access.
The council did not indicate that it had received a formal compensatory offer from Norfolk Southern on the record; members said they expected to learn whether the railroad seeks appeal or formal recourse following the denial.
The council moved on to other agenda items after recording the vote; no timeline was set at the meeting for any subsequent hearing on the crossings.
