The Issue Whether a permit should be granted for an at-grade crossing in the vicinity of Live Oak, Perry and South Georgia Railway Company Mile Post 1688 feet east of Mile Post 40.
Findings Of Fact Proper notice was given the parties and the hearing was delayed for thirty (30) minutes after time of notice in the event that the Respondent desired to make an appearance but was unavoidably detained. State Road 20 was relocated so that the subject crossing is necessary to the straightening and the realignment of the existing road. The average daily traffic is estimated to be 3,600 for the year 1976 and to be 4,800 in ten (10) years. The railroad is a single line trackage and is shown by the inventory to carry four (4) trains per day at 10 m.p.h. The tracks serve a local paper mill in Foley, Florida. An agreement has been worked out between the Department of Transportation and the Respondent railroad. The agreement provides for the protection and signalization at the location of the subject crossing and provides for the funding of the project. The prior or present crossing in this vicinity on State Road 20 will be open and in operation approximately 600 feet from the proposed crossing. Both crossings will have flashing lights and the existing crossing will carry primarily local traffic coming out of the county grade road. The new crossing will bear most of the traffic. The Respondent railroad is in agreement with the opening of the crossing; the Department of Transportation is in agreement that the additional crossing be permitted; the parties agree that the signalization shall be cantilevered flashing lights.
Recommendation Grant the permit to open the crossing. DONE and ORDERED this 12th day of February, 1976. DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Philip S. Bennett, Esquire Office of Legal Operations Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Mr. R. A. Kelso, Chief Engineer Design & Construction Southern Railway Company (Live Oak, Perry and South Georgia Railway Company) 99 Spring Street, South West Atlanta, Georgia 30303
The Issue Whether the Florida Department of Transportation should issue a permit for the installation of a railroad crossing on "Citrus Drive Extension," Marion County, Florida, to intersect the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad at a point located approximately 1720 feet northwest of Seaboard Coast Line Mile Post 730.
Findings Of Fact Having heard the testimony of witnesses for the Petitioner and Respondents and the arguments of the respective counsel on the issues and considering the evidence presented in this cause, it is found as follows: Petitioner, Marion County, is a political subdivision of the State of Florida, duly authorized to establish and maintain county roads within the boundaries of Marion County, Florida. Marion County has heretofore filed a Petition with the Department of Transportation of the State of Florida pursuant to Chapter 338.21, Florida Statutes, for permission to establish a graded railroad crossing for Citrus Drive Extension, a county road, proposed to intersect the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad tracks approximately 1,720 feet N.W. of the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Mile Post 730. Marion County for a number of years prior to these proceedings has contemplated and endeavored to establish a county road herein referred to as Citrus Drive Extension, a proposed main arterial county road running north and south within Marion County, Florida, for the purposes of connecting existing county and state roads and thereby alleviating traffic on other county and state roads within the vicinity. Citrus Drive Extension would serve that portion of the county which said county expects in the near future to experience rapid development and substantial increase in population. Marion County heretofore has acquired all necessary right-of-way for the establishment of Citrus Drive Extension and a portion of that said right-of- way, that portion being approximately 6,234 feet, acquired from GAC Properties, Inc., by means of Right-Of-Way Deed, contains a reversionary clause which provides that if Citrus Drive Extension is not completed by June 18, 1979, that acquired right-of-way from GAC Properties, Inc., will revert back to Grantor. Citrus Drive Extension as it approaches the proposed railroad crossing from the south to the north contains a curve to the south of the said Seaboard Coast Line Railroad tracks which said curve has a centerline radius of 462 feet and has a central angle of curvature 73 degrees 8 feet 56 inches. That railroad traffic on the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad tracks where the proposed road grade crossing is to be located consists of 16 trains per day with a maximum of 79 miles per hour. The Petition heretofore filed by Marion County for the proposed railroad grade crossing does not contain any provisions for railroad warning devices. The alignment of the road south of the crossing is a north-south road. Near the crossing the road goes into a curve and the crossing is located in a reverse curve, the curve from the south being a relatively sharp curve.
The Issue Whether a permit should be granted to open a public at-grade rail highway crossing of the Florida East Coast Railway Company track at West Avenue "A" (Railway Mile Post K-61 + 4361'), in the City of Belle Glade, Florida.
Findings Of Fact The City Commission of the City of Belle Glade, Florida, prior to July 1, 1972, determined that it needed a grade level crossing on West Avenue "A" across the Florida East Coast Railway tracks. Thereafter on April 19, 1977 it submitted an application to the Respondent, Florida Department of Transportation, through its City Manager, Robert R. Sanders for the railroad grade crossing. The type of rail line existing is single track; the number of trains per day from November to May is 11, and from May to November is 2, and the speed of trains is 35 mph. The proposal is for a grade level crossing two- lane road. The cost of signal installation and the cost of annual maintenance is to be charged to the Petitioner. The railroad creates a dividing barrier separating the eastern part of the city from the western part of the city; a canal separates the southern part of the city from the northern part of the city. South of the canal there are three street level crossings across the railroad, of which the northernmost is the canal. The next one to the south lies approximately 600' south at Northwest Avenue "D". The third lies approximately 2800' south of Avenue "D" crossing. The proposed crossing is approximately 1,600' north of the southernmost Avenue "E" crossing and approximately 1,200' south of the Avenue "D" crossing. The area lying immediately west of the Avenue "D" crossing is primarily residential. West Canal Street and Avenue "E" carry the bulk of the traffic from east and west and from west to east lying south of the canal. The proposed crossing would provide an additional access from east to west lying south of the canal. The opening of a West Avenue "A" crossing would take some of the traffic from the crossing at Southwest Avenue The site for the proposed crossing is located along a curve of the railroad track and there are some sight problems because of the curve and because of vegetation. There are two at-grade crossings north of the canal. The police station is located on West Avenue "A" in the center of town east of the proposed crossing site. The fire department is located on Southwest Avenue "E", both of which provide emergency services to the high density area of the city without the use of a railroad crossing. The response time to the high density area is a matter of minutes for both the fire department and police department. Some response time could be saved to the affected area by the installation of the proposed crossing, but the time saving is under four minutes. No evidence was submitted as to the average number of police and fire calls from the affected area and there was no projection as to the average daily traffic across the proposed crossing.
Recommendation Deny the permit. DONE and ENTERED this 28th day of February, 1978, in Tallahassee, Florida. DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 28th day of February, 1978. COPIES FURNISHED: John E. Baker, Esquire City of Belle Glade 257 Southeast Avenue E Belle Glade, Florida 33430 Philip S. Bennett, Esquire Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 John W. Humes, Jr., Esquire Florida East Coast Railway Co. One Malaga Street St. Augustine, Florida 32084
Findings Of Fact The railroad crossing which is the subject of this proceeding is crossing number 272859-B, in the City of Florida City, Florida. Its location at N.W. 14th Street is approximately 700 feet north of an existing crossing located at Lucy Street, and roughly 1900 feet south of a present crossing located at Arthur Vining Davis Parkway. The Railway's rationale for closing the N.W. 14th Street crossing is that these other two nearby crossings offer practical alternate routes to the N.W. 14th Street crossing, and can provide public access and emergency services to the area. The City's opposition is based on its contention that closure of the N.W. 14th Street crossing would affect emergency access to the area. The principal justification for the closure of the N.W. 14th Street crossing is its proximity to the other crossings located at Arthur Vining Davis Parkway and Lucy Street, and the resulting improvement in safety for vehicular traffic and railroad equipment. Removal of the subject crossing would eliminate vehicular accidents on the tracks, and eliminate upkeep and maintenance expenses caused by frequent vandalism at the N.W 14th Street crossing location. In addition, closure would eliminate the need to sound the train whistle at the N.W. 14th Street crossing which is located near a residential housing area. The Railway receives an average of two calls per week to report incidents of vandalism in the area of the N.W. 14th street crossing. This number of calls is above average compared to other crossings in the area. Moreover, closure of the subject crossing would permit the relocation of the signal devices now in use there to one of forty-four other crossings in or near Florida City. The traffic count taken in the vicinity of N.W. 14th Street, which is a local service road providing access to a single neighborhood, showed that about 600 vehicles per day use the crossing. Traffic counts taken at Lucy Street, a through street which provides service beyond any specific residential area, resulted in approximately 5,000 to 6,000 vehicles per day. The Lucy Street and Arthur Vining Davis Parkway crossings have sufficient capability to handle all traffic diverted to them if the 14th Street crossing should be closed. The N.W. 14th Street crossing also allows outside traffic to enter the residential area, contrary to good urban planning. By removal of the crossing, such through traffic would be eliminated. The alternate crossings at Lucy Street and Arthur Vining Davis parkway provide reasonable alternate routes, and removal of the subject crossing will not unduly inhibit access by emergency vehicles into the affected area. Although 75 percent of the calls the Florida City police receive originate from Cuban village, a heavily populated area surrounding N.W. 14th Street, if the subject crossing were closed, Lucy Street and Arthur Vining Davis Parkway could be used to respond to emergency police calls in the Cuban Village. Therefore, alternate routes are available for emergency access to the affected area. In addition, from a pedestrian safety standpoint, there is sufficient space along Lucy Street to allow pedestrians to walk there without being affected by vehicular traffic.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the application of Florida East Coast Railway Company to close the at-grade railroad crossing at N.W. 14th Street in Florida City, Florida, be granted. THIS RECOMMENDED ORDER entered on this 15 day of February, 1982, in Tallahassee, Florida. WILLIAM B. THOMAS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 15 day of February, 1982. COPIES FURNISHED: Charles B. Evans, Esquire One Malaga Street St. Augustine, Florida 32084 Thomas Tomassi, Esquire 137 N.W. 10th Street Homestead, Florida 33030 Charles G. Gardner, Esquire Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301
The Issue Whether there should be an opening of a public at grade rail-highway crossing by new roadway construction at Everglades Boulevard-State Road 710- Section 91000-6604, Okeechobee County Parcel 1 (right of way XSO-8).
Findings Of Fact An application for an opening of a public at-grade rail-highway crossing by new roadway construction was submitted by Okeechobee County through its agent Moseley Collins, P. E., County Engineer. The crossing location is southeast of the city of Okeechobee, Florida. The local popular name of the street is Everglades Boulevard. The proposed crossing is across the tracks of the Seaboard Coastline Railroad at Seaboard Coastline milepost 911.93. The crossing would serve a growing subdivision approximately three (3) miles wide and nine (9) miles long, an area in which approximately 3,000 people live. There is one entrance to the subdivision across Highway 441 South. There is a second grade crossing signalized with crossbucks known as the Hazellieff Road crossing. This crossing does not serve the subject subdivision inasmuch as the road dead-ends after crossing the railroad. There are no current plans to buy up the right of way and extend the road at the Hazellieff crossing. The Seaboard Coastline Railroad would prefer that the Applicant extend the road to serve the subject subdivision. The Hazellieff crossing is approximately one-half mile from the proposed crossing, but the Applicant states that the crossing serves only a few families and the Applicant does not own the right of way across the muck-pitted area and has no plans to extend the road that crosses the railroad at Hazellieff crossing. There is an estimated average daily traffic count of 2,000 cars per day which would use the proposed crossing. There are six passenger train movements every twenty-four hours on the railroad at those crossings. There are six through freights every twenty-four hours and four local freights every twenty- four hours, plus additional extra trains as needed. The speeds range up to 79 miles per hour for passenger trains and 60 miles per hour for freight trains. The passenger trans are the AMTRAK trains. A need has been established for another opening across the railroad because of the long and circuitous route that must be traveled to enter the subdivision. In the event of a storm, there is an additional hazard to the road because of two bridges that must be crossed. The proposed opening would decrease greatly the mileage to be traveled to fire or hospital. The parties agreed that the proper signalization for the proposed crossing would be automatic crossing gates, flashing lights and ringing bells. The Applicant contends that an opening is needed to serve the growing subdivision known as Treasure Island; that the existing crossing is insufficient as far as the safety of the community is concerned and requires a much longer way to be traveled by the residents of the subdivision. The Seaboard Coastline Railroad contends that the existing public opening should be used and right of way bought by the county so that there would not be an additional crossing of the tracks. AMTRAK contends that there should be no new openings across the tracks where the passenger trains attain high speeds unless there is a great need and a study made to see if there cannot be a closing to balance the opening across the tracks. Florida Department of Transportation contends that a need has been established for the crossing and that the parties have agreed that lights, bells and gates are the needed signalization. The Hearing Officer further finds: That a need has been established by the Applicant. That proper signalization includes flashing lights, ringing bells and gates.
Recommendation Grant permit, providing there is a clearance from the Safety Engineer as to the visibility problem pointed out by the Seaboard Coastline Railroad, Respondent. DONE and ENTERED this 15th day of December, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida. COPIES FURNISHED: Philip S. Bennett, Esquire Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Daniel H. Brunner, Esquire 955 L'Enfant Plaza, Southwest Washington, D. C. 20024 W. L. Hendry, Esquire Post Office Drawer 1337 Okeechobee, Florida Jack J. Vereen, Jr. Assistant Division Engineer 2206 N. W. 7th Avenue Miami, Florida 33127 DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings 530 Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 =================================================================
The Issue Whether the Florida Department of Transportation should issue a permit for the installation of a railroad crossing in the vicinity of the S.C.L. Railroad Company Milepost, 775 feet North of Milepost SW-873 on the alignment of 12th Avenue, East, Bradenton, Florida.
Findings Of Fact Having heard the testimony of witnesses for the Petitioner and Respondents and the arguments of those witnesses appearing and of counsel for the Department of Transportation on the issues and considering the evidence presented in this cause, it is found as follows: Petitioner, City of Bradenton, Florida is a political subdivision of the State of Florida, duly authorized to establish and maintain city streets within the boundaries of the City of Bradenton, Florida. The City of Bradenton has heretofore filed an application with the Dept. of Transportation of the State of Florida pursuant to Chapter 338.21 Florida Statutes for permission to establish a graded railroad crossing for 12th Avenue East between 9th and 10th street East, a city street, proposed to intersect the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad tracks approximately 775 feet north of Milepost SW-873 of the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad. 12th Avenue would serve that portion of the city which has experienced rapid development and substantial increase in population. An existing crossing on 13th Avenue was technically closed by the city but in fact both public and private use is made of the crossing. The 13th avenue crossing is hazardous as now used and opening a crossing as proposed on 12th Avenue would take most of the pedestrian and vehicular traffic off 13th Avenue, and reroute it to 12th Avenue where the visibility is not restricted. The nearest public crossing is 9th Avenue between seven hundred and eight hundred feet away from 13th Avenue and a crossing is needed nearby. The parties agree that the 12th Avenue crossing is needed and that the 13th Avenue crossing is hazardous. The 13th Avenue crossing will remain a private crossing. The city and the railroad company agree: That a permit should be granted for the 12th Avenue crossing. That the crossing involves a switching operation of ten slow movements or less a day with no night traffic. That heavy use is involved only at the Tropicana plant work-time when employees are going to work or after work. Employees now use the 13th Avenue crossing. That a cross-buck, together with a flagging operation, is sufficient signalization. That a cross-buck together with a flagging operation will still be use at the 13th Avenue private crossing. That the proposed crossing is desirable and necessary and the proposed signalization is sufficient to protect the general public. The city agrees to bear the expense of installing the signalization and maintaining such crossing. The Hearing Officer further finds: The proposed crossing is necessary and desirable. The signalization is adequate as planned, to protect the public. The Petitioner city needs the crossing. The respondent railway company does not oppose the opening providing signalization and mainte- nance be provided by others. The respondent Department of Transportation safety engineer recommends that the permit be granted to open the crossing conditioned on: (a) the use of a flagman, (b) compliance by the city with the Manual on uniform control Devices 2B-42, 2C-31, 3B-16 (painting the railroad crossing sign on pavement, use of railroad warning disk, providing cross-bucks), (c) minimum sight distance, as agreed on by the railroad and Department of Transportation standards, (d) the crossing being constructed and maintained by other than the Department of Transportation. The city Petitioner has agreed to install cross-bucks and to maintain the crossing in safe and usable conditions.
The Issue Whether a railroad crossing located at Florida East Coast Line Railroad Mile Post 175.49 should be closed.
Findings Of Fact The City of Rockledge, Florida is constructing a road in the incorporated limits of the city, known as Rovac Parkway. The road has not been completed, but when completed, it will consist of two ten foot driving lanes running east and two ten foot driving lanes running west with a twelve foot median strip and fourteen foot shoulders. This road is scheduled to intersect the Florida East Coast Line Railroad at Mile Post 175.57, and would cross the railroad with the same given dimensions as described above. After crossing the railroad, the Rovac Parkway would intersect with U.S. 1, also known as State Road 5. There is pending with the State of Florida, Department of Transportation, an application far driveway permit from the Rovac Parkway into U.S.1 (State Road 5), and a copy of the application for permit is found in the City's Exhibit #4 entered into evidence in this hearing. The area for which the application for at-grade crossing pertains is zoned R-2. In the general area of the proposed crossing it is intended that a industrial plant be built by Rovac, Inc., a firm from Maitland, Florida. The Florida East Coast Line Railroad which runs through the City of Rockledge is a single track line which runs roughly north and south and 66 percent of the population of the City of Rockledge, is located west of the Florida East Coast Line Railroad, with the remaining 34 percent found east of the Florida East Coast Line Railroad. The population in the City of Rockledge at the time of the hearing was 11,467 people. If the subject railroad crossing was open and the Rovac Parkway completed, approximately 35 percent of the 66 percent of the population lying west of the Florida East Coast Line Railroad would be using the at-grade crossing. The nearest at-grade crossing with signalization is found 1/2 mile north of the proposed crossing at Barton Road, and the implementation of an at-grade crossing at the subject location would releave the traffic at Barton Road and promote safe crossing of the Florida East Coast Line Railroad found in the City of Rockledge. Immediately north of the proposed at-grade cressing and identified as Nile Post 175.49 is an unprotected at-grade crossing. This crossing services a roofing company which services the public and also services a number of homes in the immediate vicinity of the existing crossing. If the new at-grade crossing at Mile Post 175.57 were permitted, the people who utilize the crossing at Mile Post 175.49 would be serviced by the new crossing. This service would be affected by an extension of an existing road known as Edwards Drive, from its present location to intersect with Rovac Parkway at right angles immediately west of the intersection of the proposed crossing with the Florida East Coast Line Railroad. The land that is necessary for the extension of Edwards Drive has been deeded to the City of Rockledge but has not been dedicated, A and public hearings have been held on the question of the service of those persons in the vicinity at the present at-grade crossing, in addition to public hearings on the extension of Edwards Drive. The location of the proposed crossing and the existing crossing at Mile Post 175.49, and their relationship to other landmarks in the area can be seen through the City's Exhibit #13, admitted into evidence. At the time of hearing, eight north and south bound freight trains and two local freight trains operated in the vicinity of the present crossing at Mile Post 175.49 and the contemplated crossing at Mile Post 175.57. The time schedule for the northbound freight trains is 3:00 A.M., 4:00 A.M., 5:00 A.M., 9:00 A.M., 2:00 P.M., 3:00 P.M., 4:00 P.M. and 7:00 P.M. The time schedule for the south bound freight trains is 10:45 A.M., 3:45 P.M., 7:00 P.M., 8:00 P.M. 9:00 P.M., 10:45 P.M., 11:45 P.M. and 6:30 A.M. The two local freight trains run at approximately 4:00 A.M. and 12:00 noon. The speed limit in the area of the crossing at Mile Post 175.49 and the proposed crossing at Mile Post 175.57 is 60 WH for the railroad. There is a left curve approximately 1,550 feet south of the proposed crossing. All parties to the hearing feel that it is necessary to have signalization at the proposed at-grade crossing. The witness for the City acknowledged the need for such an arrangement. The spokesman for the Railroad felt that the crossing should be controlled by an automatic system with flashing lights, ringing bells, and gates, which was train activated, and the witness of the Department of Transportation felt that the safety equipment at the proposed at-grade crossing should be a Type IV, with cantilevered flashing lights, ringing bells and gates. The some witnesses stressed that the existing crossing at Mile Post 175.49 was not signalized and therefore was much more dangerous than a signalized crossing, such as the proposed crossing at Mile Post 175.57. Exhibits which were offered in the course of the bearing which address the propriety of opening a crossing at Mile Post 175.57 and closing the crossing at Mile Post 175.49 were as follows: Exhibit #1, by the City, is a map of the City of Rockledge; Exhibit #2, by the City, is a comprehensive land use plan of the City; Exhibit #3, by the City, is a resolution of the City Council, City of Rockledge, proposing the opening of the crossing at Mile Post 175.57; Exhibit #6, by the City, a traffic count at the Barton crossing; Exhibit #11, by the City, a resolution of the Brevard Economic Development Commission concerning the impact of such a development; and Exhibit #12, by the City, a drawing of the extension of Edwards Drive and the construction of the Rovac Parkway, together with the present crossing and the proposed crossing.
Recommendation It is recommended that the application for closing the Florida East Coast Line Railroad crossing at Mile Post 175.49 be granted, contingent upon the opening of a signalized railroad crossing at Florida East Coast Line Railroad Mile Post 175.57. DONE and ENTERED this 2nd day of July, 1976, in Tallahassee, Florida. CHARLES C. ADAMS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Walter C. Sheppard, Esquire City Attorney, for Rockledge 115 Harrison Street Cocoa, Florida 32922 Charles B. Evans, Esquire Florida East Coast Line Railroad One Malaga Street St. Augustine, Florida 32084 Philip Bennett, Esquire Office of Legal Operation Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304
The Issue Whether the Petitioner, CSX Transportation, Inc., is entitled to close an at-grade railroad crossing on Country Lane in Santa Rosa County, Florida?
Findings Of Fact The Parties. CSX Transportation, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "CSX"), operates a railroad which runs essentially east-west through Santa Rosa County, Florida. The Department of Transportation (hereinafter referred to as the "Department"), is charged pursuant to Section 335.141, Florida Statutes, and Rule 14-46.003, Florida Administrative Code, with responsibility for authorizing the closure of public railroad crossings. The Respondents who appeared at the final hearing of these cases live and their addresses in Santa Rosa County are as follows: Clyde L. & Susan S. Godwin 3321 Hudson Bend India B. McLeod 900 North 21st Avenue Earl W. & Zanola R. Gatewood 1361 Tinsley Road Lucille Williams Gatewood 5212 Tinsley Road Mary W. Henderson 3480 Country Lane Clifton D. & Christa Childers 1013 North 16th Avenue Respondents John F. and Katherine H. Edwards live at 2401 Old Military Road, Mobile, Alabama. They own a house on Santa Cruz Boulevard in Santa Rosa County. CSX's Application. On or about April 29, 1993, CSX filed a Railroad Grade Crossing Application (hereinafter referred to as the "Application"), with the Department. DOT Exhibit 1. Pursuant to the Application, CSX sought permission from the Department to close an at-grade railroad crossing (hereinafter referred to as the "Crossing"), located on Country Lane, at railroad mile post SP 664.46 in Santa Rosa County, southwest of Milton, Florida. The Crossing has been designated as "339760G" by the Department. The Crossing runs in a northeast-southwest direction. An "at-grade" railroad crossing is a railroad crossing where the railroad track and a road crossing meet at the same plane or grade. On or about September 24, 1993, the Department issued an Intent to Close Permit approving the Application. DOT Exhibit 2. The Respondents timely filed petitions challenging this proposed agency action. The Crossing. Approximately 8 freight trains use the Crossing daily. Additionally, 2 passenger trains use the Crossing three times a week. The freight trains carry hazardous materials. The evidence, however, failed to prove how often. During a twenty-four hour period, approximately 112 vehicles drove over the Crossing on Country Lane. There are no flashing lights or gates located at the Crossing. There are no plans in the immediate future to add gates or lights at the Crossing. Existing warnings at the Crossing consist of a round, yellow warning sign and a "crossbuck" warning sign just to the north and to the south of the Crossing. These signs, because of trees, are not visible to vehicular traffic on Country Lane until just before reaching the railroad tracks. Traveling to the south on Country Lane, there is little visibility of the tracks due to vegetation. Traveling to the north on Country Lane, there is slightly more visibility. There are sharp drops in elevation on both sides of Country Lane immediately to the north of the railroad tracks. A vehicle could easily become stuck if it were to drive off the road at this location. Passenger trains travel at a maximum speed of 59 miles per hour at the Crossing and freight trains travel at a maximum speed of 49 miles per hour or 25 miles per hour it carrying hazardous material. The Area Surrounding the Crossing. The road that intersects the Crossing is Country Lane: Country Lane runs north-south from County Road 191A in the north to Santa Cruz Boulevard in the south. Country Lane is approximately 1.1 miles long from County Road 191A to Santa Cruz Boulevard. It is approximately .15 mile from County Road 191A to the Crossing. Country Lane is paved from County Road 191A to just south of the Crossing. The rest of Country Lane is a dirt road. Country Lane is approximately 12 to 14 feet wide. There are approximately 14 homes on Country Lane and two short roads that begin and end on County Lane: Hudson Bend Road and Solor Drive. Approximately .20 mile south of 191A, Country Lane intersects with Tinsley Road: Tinsley Road is a poorly paved county road, approximately 12 feet wide. Tinsley Road runs east-west from Country Lane in the east to County Road 281 in the west. There are approximately six houses on Tinsley Road. County Road 191A is a two-lane, paved road that runs northeast- southwest. To the northeast, County Road 191A goes to Milton. To the southwest, County Road 191A intersects with County Road 281. County Road 191A is a two-lane, paved road, approximately 20 to 22 feet wide with 6 feet wide shoulders. County Road 281 runs north-south, from County Road 191A in the north, to the south over a bridge spanning Mulatto Bay, and then runs to the east to County Road 281A. County Road 281 is a two-lane, paved road, approximately 20 to 22 feet wide with 6 feet wide shoulders. County Road 281A runs north-south. In the south, County Road 281A intersects with Interstate 10. In the north, County Road 281A intersects with County Road 191A. It is also connected to County Road 191A, south of its northern intersection with County Road 191A, by County Road 191B. County Road 281A crosses the CSX railroad line that runs to the Crossing. County Road 281A crosses the railroad line by an overpass. Access to Country Lane and the Surrounding Area. Vehicles, including emergency vehicles, coming from the northeast down County Road 191A may access the fourteen houses located on Country Lane, Hudson Bend Road and Solor Drive by using Country Lane and crossing the railroad at the Crossing. If the Crossing is closed, vehicles coming from the northeast down County Road 191A are required to travel to County Road 281, go south on County Road 281 across the railroad to Tinsley Road and then east on Tinsley Road to Country Lane (hereinafter referred to as the "Alternative Route") to access thirteen of the houses on Country Lane, Hudson Bend Road and Solor Drive (the fourteenth house is located to the north of the railroad). It is approximately one fourth of a mile from the intersection of County Road 191A and Country Lane around to Country Lane south of the Crossing via the Alternative Route. Driving the speed limit, it takes just over one minute to drive the Alternative Route. The Alternative Route can accommodate the additional traffic that would result from closure of the Crossing. Country Lane may also be accessed from the south by taking County Road 281A to County Road 281, traveling west and then north to either Santa Cruz Boulevard or Tinsley Road, and then east to Country Lane. There is a fire station located northeast of Country Lane on County Road 191A. The fire station is approximately 1 mile from the junction of County Road 281 and County Road 191A. It takes approximately 1 minute and 36 seconds to drive, at the posted speed, from the fire station to Country Lane. It takes approximately 2 minutes and 30 seconds to drive from the fire station to Country Lane using the Alternative Route. If the railroad crossing at County Road 281 were closed, traffic coming from the northeast may return northeast on County Road 191A, east on County Road 191B, south on County Road 281A, west and then north over Mulatto Bay on County Road 281 to Santa Cruz Boulevard or Tinsley (hereinafter referred to as the "Southern Route). From the fire station to Country Lane via this route is approximately 4.7 miles and takes approximately 6 minutes and 18 seconds to drive at the posted speed. From the north of the railroad crossing on County Road 281 via this route is approximately 6.2 miles. Emergency vehicles would not be restricted to traveling at the posted speed limits. The potential for a vehicle finding access to Country Lane and the surrounding area blocked from the north because of a train halted at the railroad crossing will be increased if the Crossing is closed. Currently, if the Crossing is blocked by a train, vehicles can use the Alternative Route and, if the crossing on County Road 281 is blocked by a train, vehicles can use the Crossing. If the Crossing is closed and the crossing at County Road 281 is blocked, vehicles may be required to use the Southern Route. The evidence failed to prove how often this happens. If the Crossing is not closed and both the Crossing and the crossing on County Road 281 are blocked by a train at the same time, there will be no access from the north and vehicles may still have to use the Southern Route. At least one of the Respondents has witnessed both crossings being blocked at the same time. Although trains may block the crossing at County Road 281 for 10 to 15 minutes, they do so rarely. It is more likely that traffic may be blocked from 5 to 10 minutes while train cars are being dropped off at a plant located on a spur of the railroad located to the west of the Crossing. If the Crossing is closed and both the crossing at County Road 281 and the bridge on County Road 281 are blocked, residents will not be able to evacuate from Country Lane or the surrounding area. The evidence, however, failed to prove the probability of such an event or the probability that residents would have to be evacuated. The evidence failed to prove that, while there may be some inconvenience to the Respondents if the Crossing is closed, the inconvenience will be significant. Two acceptable, alternative routes for access to the area exist and those routes can handle any additional traffic caused by closure of the Crossing. Safety. Railroad crossings are potentially dangerous. If an accident takes place at a railroad crossing, the adverse consequences are, more often than not, extremely severe. The evidence in this case failed to prove that there have actually been accidents at the Crossing. Comments concerning possible accidents at the Crossing were not made during sworn testimony. Because of the conditions at the Crossings (lack of warning devices, excessive vegetation causing lack of visibility, and the poor condition of the road surface), the potential for an accident at the Crossing is high. Cost Required to Improve the Crossing. It would cost in excess of $80,000.00 to add warning lights and gates to the Crossing. It would cost approximately $20,000.00 to improve and widen Country Lane. Emergency Vehicles. Emergency vehicles which may need to access the area south of the Crossings will come from the northeast toward Milton. If the Crossing is closed, emergency vehicles can use the Alternative Route or the Southern Route. The evidence failed to prove that response times will be significantly impacted by closure of the Crossings.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Transportation enter a Final Order dismissing the petitions in this case and approving the application of CSX Transportation, Inc. DONE AND ENTERED this 31st day of May, 1994, in Tallahassee, Florida. LARRY J. SARTIN Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 31st day of May, 1994. APPENDIX Case Numbers 93-6253 through 93-6262 CSX Transportation, Inc. and Mr. Edwards have submitted proposed findings of fact. It has been noted below which proposed findings of fact have been generally accepted and the paragraph number(s) in the Recommended Order where they have been accepted, if any. Those proposed findings of fact which have been rejected and the reason for their rejection have also been noted. Mr. Edwards' Proposed Findings of Fact Accepted in 5 and 9. Accepted in 9. Accepted in 11, 23-25 and 35. 4. Accepted in 10-11, 16, 21, 32, 35-37 and 40-42. 5. Accepted in 38-19 and hereby accepted. The CSX's Proposed Findings of Fact These paragraphs are a correct summary of events at the final hearing. See 17-35. The last sentence of the first paragraph is not supported by the weight of the evidence. The last two sentences of the second paragraph are not supported by the weight of the evidence. See 29. Not supported by the weight of the evidence. COPIES FURNISHED: Ben G. Watts, Secretary Attn: Eleanor F. Turner, M.S. 58 Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 Thornton J. Williams General Counsel 562 Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 Charles G. Gardner, Esquire Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street Haydon Burns Building, M.S. 58 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0458 Stephen H. Shook, Esquire CSX Transportation Law Department 500 Water Street Jacksonville, FL 32202 Clyde L. & Susan S. Godwin, pro se 3321 Hudson Bend Milton, Florida 32583 India B. McLeod, pro se 900 N. 21st Avenue Milton, Florida 32583 Earl W. & Zanola R. Gatewood, pro se 1361 Tinsley Road Milton, Florida 32583 John F. & Katherine H. Edwards, pro se 2401 Old Military Road Mobile, Alabama 36605 Lucille Williams Gatewood, pro se 5212 Tinsley Road Milton, Florida 32583 Mary W. Henderson, pro se 3480 Country Lane Milton, Florida 32583 Clifton D. & Christa Childers, pro se 1013 N. 16th Avenue Milton, Florida 32583 Steve & Laura House 3251 Country Lane Milton, FL 32583 Mark W. & Patti J. Gatewood 3361 Hudson Bend Milton, FL 32583 Ms. Jane McMillan Greenwood 4884 Mulatto Bayou Drive Milton, FL 32583
Findings Of Fact The Notice of Hearing was entered into evidence and said notice was amended to reflect that the distance of an existing crossing north of the proposed crossing was 2,208' + north rather than 1,500' + north. The application was also changed to reflect that the proposed roadway was to extend the limits of a right of way to 120' instead of 100'. The change would place the mile post at a slightly different location. Upon examination of the area and taking testimony from the three attorneys involved in this hearing, it is the findings of this Hearing Officer that the change in location and the change in the proposed roadway is not of sufficient consequence that the hearing should have been postponed and re- noticed. Inasmuch as the parties directly involved were present, the owners of the railroad were represented, the owners of the Petitioner corporation were represented, there were representatives from the County and from the Florida Department of Transportation. A re-notice with the minor changes in location and in the width of the right of way would have been sent to the same representatives. The Notice of Hearing met the requirements of notice of public hearing. Petitioner Suntree Development Corporation is proposing to construct a connector road between Wickham Road and U.S. 1 approximately 2,208' south of an existing two-lane signalized (warning bells, lights, and gates) road crossing on Pineda Avenue in south Brevard County, Florida. The proposed road is to be four-laned with 120 foot right of way including a 20 foot medium strip. The road would be an access between U.S. 1 and the Suntree Community, a new community on approximately 2,800 acres of land which is predicted to have approximately 35,000 to 40,000 people after total development which is estimated to be completed within a 15 year period. The road would be a limited access with acceleration and deacceleration lines on U.S. 1 with an estimated total anticipated average daily traffic of from 23,000 to 60,000 trips per day. The proposed crossing involves a Type IV cantilevered signalization with bells, flashing lights and gates to be activated by trains. Cost of signalization and maintenance is to be borne by the Suntree Development Corporation. Petitioner is the primary owner of all the lands involved, but does not own all of the right of way needed to construct the crossing. Building is presently limited to a country club, sewage treatment plants, about a mile of roadway and two single family homes under construction and plans for the construction of some forty homes within the next few months. The proposed crossing was approved by the Brevard County Commission with the understanding that the crossing at Pineda Avenue would not be closed. The Florida East Coast Railway track in this area is a single track with 18 through freight trains a day which travel about 60 m.p.h. at the proposed crossing location. Two local freights move at unscheduled times across the railroad tracks. The tracks in the vicinity of the proposed crossing is nearly straight. The Florida East Coast Railway Company owns the right of way over the tracks and opposes the opening of another crossing in such close proximity to the crossing at Pineda Avenue, at this time. Storage capacity or storage area is the area in which cars can stand while awaiting clearance to proceed. The proposed road will contain 1,800' of storage area with 850' on the Wickham Road side and 950' on the U.S. 1 side. Using the average daily traffic figure when the community is developed, as calculated by Petitioner, U.S. 1 would be blocked in 3.28 minutes. Using the average daily traffic figures when the community is developed, as calculated by the Florida Department of Transportation, U.S. 1 would be blocked in 1.27 minutes. The Florida Department of Transportation recommends that an overpass be constructed rather than the at-grade crossing. The Hearing Officer further finds: The Pineda Avenue crossing can serve the vehicular traffic demand at present; Petitioner's plans for development, if realized, will demand another railroad cross- ing to serve the community; The proposed at-grade crossing is in such close proximity to U.S. 1 that it would be hazardous to vehicular traffic on U.S. 1 and the proposed Suntree entry road when the community is developed.
Findings Of Fact The railroad crossing which is the subject of this proceeding is crossing number 272642-N, in the City of Miami, Florida. Its location at N.W. 13th Street is approximately 430 feet south of an existing crossing located at N.W. 14th Street, and roughly 850 feet north of another crossing located at N.W. 11th Street. The Railway's rationale for seeking to close the N.W. 13th Street crossing is that these other two nearby crossings offer practical alternate routes to the N.W. 13th Street crossing, and can provide adequate access to the area for the public and emergency services. The City's opposition is based on its contention that closure of the N.W. 13th Street crossing would adversely affect emergency access to the area, and would restrict access to the adjacent area where the City has at least two redevelopment plans pending which contemplate the building of approximately 10,000 new residential housing units. The Department of Transportation supports the closing of the subject crossing, contending that the existing crossings at N.W. 14th Street and N.W. 11th Street can carry the traffic that would be diverted from N.W. 13th Street, and that closing the N.W. 13th Street crossing would eliminate a hazard to the public at that point. The section of the Florida East Coast Railway involved in this proceeding runs from N.E. 79th Street to Biscayne Boulevard, a distance of approximately five miles. There are approximately 30 crossings now in existence over this section of the railroad's track. The principal justification for the closure of the N.W. 13th Street crossing is its proximity to the two crossings located at N.W. 11th Street and at N.W. 14th Street, and the resulting improvement in safety for vehicular traffic and railroad equipment. There is an overpass with large pillars directly above the subject crossing, and a curve in the railroad track at this location which tend to restrict the view of train crews as the crossing is approached. Closure will also eliminate upkeep and maintenance expenses caused by frequent vandalism at the N.W. 13th Street crossing location, and eliminate one sounding of the train whistle between N.W. 14th Street and N.W. 11th Street. The present signal device at the N.W. 13th Street crossing is between 20 and 25 years old, and should require replacement within the next two years at an estimated cost of $41,570, unless the application is granted and the crossing closed. In addition, this signal device has been the subject of vandalism on four different occasions during the months of August, September and October, 1981, which necessitated repairs at the crossing site. The frequency of vandalism at the N.W. 13th Street location exceeds that at most of the other crossings in the Miami area. Northwest 13th Street is not a through street, but is a localized road which is blocked by the embankment for I-95. It is one-way westbound from the general vicinity of Biscayne Boulevard and 2nd Avenue to just beyond the subject crossing where it becomes two-way past the I-95 embankment. Both N.W. 14th Street and N.W. 11th Street are arterial roads which pass beneath I-95 and are not blocked by the embankment. They are the alternate roads in the area with adequate capacity to carry the traffic diverted from N.W. 13th Street if this crossing were closed. The movement of fire, police and other emergency vehicles would not be impeded by closing of the N.W. 13th Street crossing, since the crossings at N.W. 14th Street and N.W. 11th Street are readily available and offer better access to the area than N.W. 13th Street. Police or fire vehicles moving eastward over the N.W. 13th Street crossing must travel over a circuitous route because N.W. 13th Street is not a two-way street east of the crossing. In addition, closure of the subject crossing would remove an existing conflict point (a point where the path of any vehicle is interrupted by another vehicle), which is beneficial from a safety standpoint. Finally, any population growth in the area will have adequate transportation over N.W. 14th Street and N.W. 11th Street and will not require the use of the N.W. 13th Street crossing. Consequently, there will not be any significant impact upon traffic over the crossings at N.W. 14th Street and N.W. 11th Street by closure of the N.W. 13th Street crossing.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the application of Florida East Coast Railway Company to close the at-grade railroad crossing at N.W. 13th Street in Miami, Florida, be granted. THIS RECOMMENDED ORDER entered on this the 17th day of March, 1982, in Tallahassee, Florida. COPIES FURNISHED: Charles B. Evans, Esquire One Malaga Street St. Augustine, Florida 32084 Terry V. Percy, Esquire 174 East Flagler Street Miami, Florida 33131 Charles G. Gardner, Esquire 562 Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 WILLIAM B. THOMAS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 17th day of March, 1982.
