STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

In Re: Application of Deltona ) Corporation to Open ) Public At-Grade Railroad )

Crossings Stations ) CASE NO. 78-1566 01000-6605 and 01000-66 ) CASE NO. 78-1567

State Road (Rotonda )

Boulevard East and )

Ingram Boulevard) )

Charlotte County, )

SCL RR MP: SVC-919 )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, K. N. Ayers, held a consolidated hearing in the above styled cases on 5 October 1978 at Bartow, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner Austin White, Esquire Deltona 3250 Southwest Third Avenue Corporation: Miami, Florida 33129

For Respondent John Rimes, Esquire DOT: Haydon Burns Building

Tallahassee, Florida 32304

At the commencement of the hearing it was revealed that Respondent's expert witness had been hospitalized the previous evening and would not be available to testify as scheduled. The parties then agreed that the hearing proceed and the testimony of the expert witness be submitted by deposition after he was well enough to return to work. One witness was then called by Petitioner and four exhibits were admitted into evidence. The deposition of Wallace H. Holmes was taken on 24 October 1978 and submitted as part of the record in accordance with the agreement. Exhibit 5 was admitted with this deposition.

Thereafter by joint stipulation signed by Respondent on October 26 and by petitioner on October 31, 1978 the parties requested the Recommended Order be stayed for a period of 90 days or until the parties contact the Hearing Officer to advise whether the case had been settled or to request issuance of a recommended order. By letter dated December 12, 1978 Petitioner requested the recommended order be issued.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Petitioner, the Deltona Corporation, is managing a development known as Rotonda owned by Cape Cave Corporation and desires to open two at-grade railroad crossings from this development to SR 771, the major road providing access to and from the development.

2. Both of these crossings were previously approved by the railroad and the county agreed to maintain the crossings once installed. However Petitioner desires to relocate the crossing previously existing at Rotonda Boulevard 50 feet to the north and change Ingram Boulevard crossing to a four lane road. The proposed crossing at Ingram Boulevard is some 2300 feet north of Rotonda Boulevard.

   
   

3. The hurricane evacuation route for the people in the area to SR 771 is over Rotonda Boulevard.

   
   

4. Most of the lots in the Rotonda development have been sold and the developer is not in the process of installing the streets. It is Petitioner's position that the additional crossing at Ingram Boulevard is needed to provide egress for the Rotonda residents when the other crossings congested with hurricane evacuation traffic.

   
   

5. Neither of the roads involved approach the railroad at a right angle. Proceeding northeast Rotonda Boulevard parallels the railroad until just before reaching the point of crossing when Rotonda Boulevard turns 60 degrees to 70 degrees to the right. The track is then crossed at an angle of some 30 degrees from normal. The approach at Ingram Boulevard turns about 30 degrees to the right when proceeding eastward and the road then crosses the track nearly normal thereto.

   
   

6. Additionally Antilla Drive joins Rotonda Boulevard at the point Rotonda turns right to cross the track thus creating a Y intersection immediately before the crossing.

   
   

7. The view of the crossing at Rotonda Boulevard East is obstructed to some extent by vegetation and the angle of the crossing further impedes the safety features of this crossing.

   
   

8. The approach to the Ingram boulevard crossing from SR 771 is nearly normal and from the development the angle is about 30 degrees. Accordingly the Ingram crossing, assuring proper signaling devices are installed, would provide the safer crossing.

   
   

9. The SAL track here involved is infrequently used, with only one or two trains per day and the train speed is restricted to slow.

   
   

10. Respondent, in regulating the crossings, prefers to have adjacent crossings of a track separated by considerably greater distances than one-half mile.

    
    

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

    
    

11. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of these proceedings.

    
    

12. Section 338.21, Florida Statutes provides the Department of Transportation shall have regulatory authority over public railroad crossings and authority to issue regulations respecting same. Pursuant to this authority Rule 14-46.03(a), Florida Administrative Code provides in pertinent part:

    
    

    The foremost criteria in the opening of grade crossings is the necessity, convenience and safety of railroad vehicle traffic.

13. The proposed Rotonda Boulevard East crossing is an inherently unsafe crossing by virtue of the approach angle to the railroad, the confluence of Antilla Drive and the sharp turn right at the crossing. No evidence was submitted that traffic volume requires two crossings at present although evidence was presented that if the homesites in the Rotonda development are occupied by families there will be a substantial amount of traffic and two crossings may be needed.

    
    

14. On the other hand the track to be crossed has infrequent trains proceeding at slow speeds thus reducing the danger inherent in any rail-highway at-grade crossing.

    
    

15. From the foregoing it is concluded that the Rotonda Boulevard East at- grade crossing as proposed by Petitioner would constitute a hazardous crossing, need for such Crossing was not shown to presently exist and a permit for the crossing should not be granted. The proposed crossing at Ingram Boulevard constitutes a relatively safe crossing and is needed for egress from Rotonda development to SR 771. Accordingly a permit for this at-grade crossing should be issued with the permit specifying the installation of signaling equipment as specified in the U.S. DOT manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. It is therefore

RECOMMENDED that the permit for an at-grade crossing over the SAL tracks at Ingram Boulevard be granted and the permit for an at-grade crossing at Rotonda Boulevard East be denied.

DONE and ENTERED this 22nd day of December, 1978, in Tallahassee, Florida.

K. N. AYERS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 101, Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301

(904) 488-9675

Docket for Case No: 78-001566

Orders for Case No: 78-001566