Residents press Gulfport council to keep John Clark, 3rd Street railroad crossings open; vote postponed

Dozens of Gulfport residents told the City Council on Tuesday that proposed closures of two railroad crossings would harm daily life, local businesses and emergency access, prompting the council to delay a decision.

The council opened a public hearing after a presentation from administration staff that described a rail safety review identifying multiple crossings that do not meet current grade or gate-arm standards on the CPKC line. City staff said two crossings — 3rd Street (south of Highway 53) and the John Clark crossing (north of Old Highway 49) — were under consideration for closure as part of a broader safety and compliance effort.

Residents used the three-minute public-comment slots to press the council to keep the crossings open. Jim Dyer, a former city employee, said the John Clark crossing was the only reliable route off Lyman after Katrina and that it remains vital for school traffic, delivery trucks and everyday travel. "Most of us know to stop and look," Dyer said, urging the council "to keep it open." Teresa Davis, whose family has owned property in the area for decades, told the council she has never seen an accident at that crossing and worried that closures would create more U-turns and crashes on alternate routes.

Business owners and employees described immediate financial impacts. Catherine Scruggs said Vogel's restaurant on John Clark Road has operated at that location for more than 50 years and that closing the crossing would "affect our business tremendously." Dylan Maples, representing Maples Gas, and other speakers warned of traffic congestion on nearby Highway 49 and the new O'Neil intersection, saying backups already occur and would worsen.

Several speakers raised emergency-access concerns: Zach Kuns said police and fire vehicles regularly use John Clark and warned that cutting routes could slow emergency response. Dwight Hollingsworth and others described how new traffic signals and construction have increased local congestion, and said closing the crossing would force residents and service vehicles onto less-safe alternatives.

Councilmembers debated how to proceed after the public comment period. Some members said they lacked critical background documents and that many residents had not received earlier notice. Councilwoman Ella Holmes Hines said her phone "has been ringing off the hook" from seniors confused by robocalls and texts about related programs and asked staff to return with a fuller explanation. Other councilmembers argued the safety review and railroad input established the basis for action.

Faced with divergent views and strong turnout from the neighborhood, the council voted to postpone any final action so the administration could address community concerns, solicit railroad representation and return with additional information. The council did not adopt permanent closures at the meeting.

The public hearing and the residents' reaction also factored into the council’s later executive session agenda, which included strategy related to prospective litigation involving the railroad and crossings; council reported no official action after that closed discussion.

What's next: The council directed staff to gather the requested background material and to return on a future agenda with options and railroad responses. No closure of the crossings was authorized at Tuesday’s meeting.