Findings Of Fact Polk County proposes to relocate Hunt Brothers Road where it crosses the Seaboard Coastline Railroad near Highland Park some 350 feet to the north and to remove the existing roadway approach to the crossing. Hunt Brothers Road is a two lane highway 24 feet wide. The existing road has no signalling devices or warning lights installed other than a railroad crossing sign. Polk County proposes to put back-to-back flashing lights on each side of the road at the relocated crossing. However, the county has no objection to installing whatever signal devices are required at this crossing. The approach to the proposed crossing provides greater safety than exists at the old crossing. The new road exits a curve to the right 250 feet from the tracks. No other obstruction exists at this crossing, however, a second parallel track exists on which cars could be parked within 200 feet of the road. From the evidence adduced this appears to be a relatively short siding and not a track on which trains move. One northbound and one southbound train moves over this track daily. No evidence was presented that stanchions for flashing lights could not be located within 12 feet of the edge of the roadway. There is no record of any accident at the existing crossing and the safety factor of the crossing was not computed and presented at the hearing. The additional initial cost of installing cantilevered flashing lights and gates over the cost of installing roadside flashing lights is some $50,000. No cost benefit ratio or study showing the benefits to be obtained with use of the more expensive system was presented. The principal reason for the District Safety Engineer's recommendation for cantilevered flashing lights and gates was that as the driver of a car negotiated the curve approaching the track his eyes would of necessity be focused on the center line of the road and would better see lights located over the center of the road. He acknowledged however that if lights were on both sides of the road the field of vision of a driver looking straight ahead as he exited the curve would include a light on the left-hand side of the road before one in the middle of the road.
Findings Of Fact An application for an opening of a public at-grade rail/highway crossing by new roadway construction was submitted by Bay County, Florida, through its agent R. M. Myers, Administrative Assistant. The proposed crossing is across the tracks of the U.S. Air Force (C/O Warner Robins Air Force Base) presently leased to the Atlanta & St. Andrews Bay Railroad Co., railroad mile post N M.P. 2.34. The local popular name of the street as extended is Palo Alto Avenue. Traffic on the railroad as it now exist is two trains per day carrying fuel. The speed of the train is 15 miles per hour. The cost of installation is to be charged to the City of Lynn Haven, Florida and the cost of annual maintenance is to be charged to the City of Lynn Haven, Florida. The opening of the proposed crossing would serve a growing subdivision which at present has only one means of egress and ingress. If a permit is granted and the proposed crossing constructed, the route would carry some 16 school buses and would divert much of the existing northbound traffic on route 77 between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. A need for the proposed crossing has been established. There is a growing subdivision which would use the crossing as a second exit and entrance; when the proposed roadway crosses the track, school buses will have a more direct access to the school and will use the proposed route; traffic from route 77 will use the proposed road as a convenience; the representatives of both the City of Lynn Haven and the county of Bay state that the area is a fast growing area and that the proposed crossing is needed. The parties at the hearing, which included the City, the County and the Railroad Company, reached an agreement as to the proper signalization of the crossing, the proper road devices necessary to insure safety before the crossing was reached and an assurance that property would be available so that there would be no sight blockage through the growth of vegetation in the future. Plans for the proposed crossing were submitted to the Hearing Officer and marked "A". An easement for visibility purposes at the proposed crossing was submitted to the Hearing Officer and marked "B". These exhibits were approved by the City, the County and the Florida Department of Transportation.
Recommendation Grant the permit. DONE AND ORDERED this 1st day of February, 1978, in Tallahassee, Florida. 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 Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Les W. Burke, Esquire Post Office Box 2260 Panama City, Florida J. W. Cunningham, Vice President Atlanta & St. Andrews Bay Railway Co. Post Office Box 669 Panama City, Florida 32401 Mr. Robert Miller Tyndall Air Force Base Panama City, Florida William V. Kinsaul, City Manager Lynn Haven, Florida Mr. G. S. Burleson, Sr., P.E. Assistant State Utility Engineer Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304
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
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.
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.
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
Findings Of Fact The City is an incorporated city within the State of Florida. The subject railroad crossing on South Caledonia Street is located within the city limits of Marianna. The DOT is the agency of state government which is charged with the regulation of railroad crossings, to include the determination of whether a crossing should be opened or closed. The CSX is the railroad company which owns the railroad and railroad crossing in question and which may have to pay a portion of the costs of any improvements to the crossing. South Caledonia Street is constructed along a section line and runs due south through Marianna connecting US 90, a major east-west arterial highway, with the southern portion of Marianna and its rural environs as it becomes Highway 73 at its intersection with Jefferson Street. See Railroad's Exhibit 1. South Caledonia Street, one of ten north-south streets which crosses the railroad within the limits of Marianna, is the only one which runs straight south over the tracks to Interstate 10. South Caledonia Street is one of the four streets which provides transit over the tracks in the eastern portion of Marianna. In order from east to west, Jefferson Street, Green Street, Caledonia or South Caledonia Street (the one in question), and West Caledonia Street run north and south and provide the principal links between US 90 and South Street, in the eastern portion of the City. South Street is a major east-west street in the southern part of the City. The other east-west roads south of US 90 are Jackson Street north of the railroad; Pearl Street running west from South Caledonia between the railroad and South Street; and unpaved Franklin Street running eastward immediately north of the railroad between Caledonia and Green Streets and running westward south of the railroad between Caledonia and West Caledonia Streets. South Caledonia and West Caledonia Streets are principally residential from South Street to one block south of the railroad tracks, and commercial north of the railroad tracks. DOT's Exhibit 1 is an annotated aerial photograph of this portion of the City showing the major roads named above and the daily traffic counts on them. In recent years, the railroad crossings on West Caledonia, Green, and Jefferson Streets have been upgraded to current standards. The crossing on Caledonia Street is not improved, and the street is in very poor condition between Jackson and Pearl Streets; however, planned resurfacing of the street has been delayed while this case is litigated because upgrading the crossing will require recontouring of Caledonia Street. The poor condition of Caledonia Street has reduced traffic on the street over the railroad and has caused the existing traffic to go slower. There has never been a train-car accident at the South Caledonia Street crossing. Recontouring Caledonia Street at the railroad crossing will eliminate or reduce access to A.B. Williams Concrete and Block Company from Caledonia Street; however, there is access to the company from Green Street. The owner supports keeping the crossing open even if it restricts access to his business. Recontouring Caledonia Street would make it feasible for heavy trucks to move over the crossing on South Caledonia Street which is Highway 73 south of its intersection with Jefferson Street. Currently, the majority of the heavy truck traffic is using West Caledonia to move south and turning left on South Street to come back to Caledonia Street and out Highway 73. The intersection of West Caledonia and South Street is not well suited for such traffic. It will cost at least $250,000 to upgrade the existing crossing. It costs $612 each year to maintain the upgraded crossing. Letting the crossing remain open will have no effect on the operations of the railroad. There was no evidence presented on the costs of paving Franklin Street or the unpaved portions of the railroad right-of-way to enable traffic stopped at the railroad to move east and west north of the tracks or westward south of the tracks. There is no available route eastward south of the tracks. No evidence on the traffic count over the crossing was presented. The DOT did not take a traffic count over the crossing. If the closure of the South Caledonia Street crossing increases the traffic on Jefferson Street, currently 4,000 vehicles per day, to 5,000 vehicles per day, the Jefferson Street crossing will have to be upgraded to have bells, lights and gates. A significant increase in traffic count on Jefferson Street is possible given the current use rate of Caledonia Street north and south of the railroad, which is known. No evidence was presented on the cost of upgrading the Jefferson Street crossing. Caledonia Street is not used by emergency vehicles or school buses, and there are viable alternatives for emergency vehicles to cross the railroad tracks if this crossing were eliminated. However, closing this crossing will create a cul-de-sac north and south of the existing crossing on Caledonia Street because of the absence of paved east-west through streets. As indicated above, it will be very inconvenient and costly to create east-west links to eliminate these cul-de-sacs. In spite of the poor condition of the crossing and the road surface and the availability of alternatives, Caledonia Street carries more traffic than does Green Street which has had its crossing upgraded. Caledonia Street, upon which the subject crossing is located, is the only straight north-south route from US 90 to Highway 73. The preservation of this route for the future must be considered.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is, therefore, RECOMMENDED that CSX, Inc.'s Petition to close the public vehicular crossing on Caledonia Street in Marianna, Florida, be denied, and said crossing be kept open. DONE AND ORDERED this 14th day of November, 1989, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN 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 14th day of November, 1989. COPIES FURNISHED: Mr. Ben C. Watts Interim Secretary Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450 Thomas H. Bateman, III, Esquire General Counsel Department of Transportation 562 Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450 Michael D. Mee, Esquire Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street, MS 58 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0458 Stephen H. Shook, Esquire 500 Water Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Herman D. Laramore, Esquire Post Office Box 793 Marianna, Florida 32446 ================================================================= AGENCY REMAND ================================================================= STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., Petitioners, vs. DOAH CASE NO. 89-3557 CITY OF MARIANNA, Respondent. / ORDER REMANDING CAUSE FOR RECONSIDERATION The Recommended Order was issued in this cause on November 14, 1989. On December 4, 1989, the Department of Transportation filed Agency's Exceptions to Recommended Order, copy of which is attached. A review of the complete record has been made. The Department of Transportation remands the instant cause to Stephen F. Dean, Hearing Officer, Division of Administrative Hearings, for reconsideration based on the following: The Recommended Order states in Finding of Fact Number 9 that the closure or the South Caledonia Street crossing would increase the traffic on Jefferson Street resulting in one upgrading of the Jefferson Street crossing by the addition of bells, lights and gates. The finding is not supported by competent substantial evidence in the record. At the hearing below, testimony was adduced that the Jefferson Street crossing has already been upgraded with bells, lights and gates. (Transcript pages 99 - 100) Since the Hearing Officer relied, in part, upon this incorrect factual determination, the case is remanded to the Hearing Officer for reconsideration pursuant to the facts as corrected. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the instant cause is remanded, for twenty days following receipt of this Order, to Stephen F. Dean, Hearing Officer, Division of Administrative Hearings for reconsideration. DONE AND ORDERED, this 21st day of December, 1989. BEN G. WATTS, Secretary Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450 COPIES FURNISHED: Stephen H. Shook, Esquire 500 Water Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Herman D. Laramore, Esquire Post Office Box 793 Marianna Florida 32446 Michael D. Mee Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0458 ================================================================= ORDER ON REMAND =================================================================
The Issue Granting or denial of a permit to open a public at-grade railroad crossing as provided by Section 338.21, Florida Statutes.
Findings Of Fact The Petitioners desired to be granted a permit for the opening of a public at-grade railroad crossing in connection with the construction of a new four-lane vehicular facility. The alignment of the facility was determined after several alternate studies had been made. Its purpose is to provide a means to move traffic from the Pensacola Bay Bridge through the historical district of Pensacola and on to the west side of the City near Barrancas Avenue. To utilize this alignment, it is necessary to cross a spur track of the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company. Safety studies conducted on the basis of accepted safety criterion reveal that the installation and maintenance of automatically-operated cantilevered flashing lights and gates in addition to standard pavement markings, crossbucks and discs would be necessary to protect the safety of both rail and vehicular traffic. The Petitioners agreed to bear the expenses of the installation of such signalization. The permit should be granted.
Recommendation The permit shall be granted for the opening of the subject crossing conditioned upon the installation and maintenance of signalization as set forth in the facts. 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 Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 G. S. Burleson, Sr. Asst. State Utility Engr. (RRs) Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 M. H. Smith, Esquire Attorney for Louisville-Nashville Railroad Company P. O. Box 1198 Louisville, Ky. 40201 County Attorney Escambia County County Courthouse Pensacola, Florida
The Issue Whether the at-grade crossing in the vicinity of Lincoln Avenue and Florida East Coast Railway Company Mile Post 104 + 172' in Ormond Beach, Florida should be closed.
Findings Of Fact By application the Florida East Coast Railway Company seeks a permit to close an existing at-grade public railroad crossing located in Volusia County, Florida, at Florida East Coast Railway Company Mile Post 104 + 172' in the vicinity of Lincoln Avenue. There exists a standard cross buck sign or fixed sign at the subject crossing and there is a vehicular stop sign on each side of the crossing. There is a total of sixteen freight rail movements and a total of two local freight rail movements crossing each day. In addition to these scheduled moves there are a few unscheduled movements such as work trains. The speed limit for this area is 35 m.p.h. A 24-hour traffic survey was set up on Lincoln Avenue just west of the railroad-tracks where the number of vehicles counted was 567. The 24-hour period started at 11:00 a.m. on November 18, 1975, and continued until 11:00 a.m. on November 19, 1975. There is no sight problem from south to north but from north to south there is a curve that bears to the right coming into Lincoln Avenue which gives a railroad sight problem. For vehicles there is a sight problem going from west to east, but no sight problem going from east to west. There have been four documented accidents at the crossing: one in 1962, one in 1965, and two in 1973. There has been expansion of the city to the areas particularly west of the railroad tracks and north of the crossing at State Road Lincoln Avenue is the only crossing between State Road 40 and State Road 5A. It is approximately 1.5 miles. There is a need for a railroad crossing in the area as an alternate to the crossing on State Road 40. The railroad suggests bells, flashing lights and gates, in the event this application to close is not permitted. The Department of Transportation recommends flashing lights and bells, suggesting that gates would be better, but such signalization adequate. The City did not recommend a type of signalization but did recommend that the permit to close be denied. The Hearing Officer further finds: The permit should be denied inasmuch as there is a need for the crossing; The crossing should be signalized to make it less hazardess; Signalization without gates is adequate.
The Issue Whether Respondent Department of Transportation (DOT) may lawfully issue a permit authorizing Florida East Coast Railway (FEC) to close the railroad-highway grade crossing (the Crossing) located at Landon Avenue in Jacksonville, Florida.
Findings Of Fact On July 14, 2002, McLaughlin filed an application with DOT for closure of the Crossing located in Jacksonville. Subsequently, on November 13, 2004, DOT issued a Notice of Intent to Issue a Permit (Notice) to authorize the closure of the Crossing. On December 8, 2004, Jacksonville timely filed a petition challenging the proposed granting of the permit and these proceedings ensued. DOT’s closure program conducts studies on over 3700 public highway-rail grade crossings and creates an inventory to determine crossings that could use improvement for safety reasons and for determining crossing closure. Florida Administrative Code Rule 14-57.012 outlines the standards for opening and closing of railroad-highway grade crossings. Florida Administrative Code Rule 14-57.012(2) states that: [T]he Department will accept applications for the opening and closing of public railroad-highway grade crossing from the governmental entity that has jurisdiction over the public street or highway, any railroad operating trains through the crossing . . . The Department, on behalf of the State of Florida, will also open or close public railroad-highway grade crossings in accordance with the criteria set forth herein. Closure applications will also be accepted from individual citizens or groups, such as neighborhood associations. Opening or closure of public railroad- highway grade crossings shall be based upon Notices of Intent issued by the Department, administrative hearings conducted pursuant to Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, or upon a Stipulation of the Parties executed by any applicant, governmental entity, the appropriate railroad, and the Department . . . If the applicant chooses to pursue the opening or closure of the public railroad- highway crossing, the railroad and governmental entity having jurisdiction at the location are notified and provided a copy of the application. The governmental entity should provide a public forum for community involvement and contact affected individuals or groups to obtain input on impacts to the community . . . . The criteria for closing include safety, necessity for rail and vehicle traffic, alternative routes, effect on rail operations and expenses, excessive restriction to emergency type vehicles resulting from closure, design of the grade crossing and road approaches, and the presence of multiple tracks and their effect upon railroad and highway operations. The criteria for opening are the same except for the excessive restriction to emergency type vehicles. Through an initiative from the Federal Railway Administration (FRA), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to decrease the number of at-grade railroad crossings by 25 percent, DOT has made a conserted effort to close or consolidate, redundant, unsafe, and unnecessary crossings. Crossing closure presents substantial benefit, inclusive of a decrease in the funding and liability for the city and railroad, which in turn can reroute the funding to improve other transportation routes in the area, and most of all increase the safety to the traveling public because there are fewer intersections where cars and trains can collide. Janice Bordelon, DOT’s Rail Specialist oversees the openings and closings of all public highway-rail grade crossings throughout the State of Florida. Bordelon received McLaughlin’s application for closure on July 14, 2002. On August 14, 2002, she sent a copy of the application to Chief Ray Alfred, Jacksonville Fire Department; Mr. Lynn Westbrook, Jacksonville Public Works Department; Mr. Fred Kyle, Chief of Jacksonville Traffic Engineering Division; Mr. Charles A. Stone, Director of Engineering services for Florida East Coast Railway; and Principal Carole Benson, Landon Middle School. In addition, she visited the site on at least nine occasions where she met with the community, with Jacksonville’s officials, with the school and school board, and participated in meetings of Jacksonville’s safety, transportation and finance committees. Bordelon requested input from Jacksonville officials and gathered information from a variety of sources and eventually moved forward in working with Landon Avenue Residents and the professionals from Jacksonville to get to a Stipulation of Parties that would result in closure of the Crossing. In this process, Bordelon compiled a Closure Application Analysis applying all the Rule criteria to the Crossing. Once the analysis was complied, she provided it to Jacksonville officials, the district Jacksonville councilman, the applicant, and the School Board. The Stipulation of Parties was eventually withdrawn and Bordelon issued a Notice of Intent substantially adopting the closure analysis she had done earlier. The Notice of Intent concluded through findings of fact and conclusions of law that the application to close the crossing at Landon Avenue met the requirements of the Florida Administrative Code criteria. In summary, Bordelon found that the Crossing was located on a blind curve, was an elevated crossing with low traffic volume, close to alternatives routes, and was unsafe, unnecessary, and redundant. The closure of the Crossing effectuates DOT’s policy of promoting improved safety at railroad crossings by eliminating chances where a train and car can collide. Landon Avenue is located in the northeast part of the San Marco neighborhood across the St. Johns River from Jacksonville’s downtown in the core of the original city area. Jacksonville’s public works department maintains Landon Avenue. On both sides of the Crossing, Landon Avenue is a two-lane road with no sidewalks and would not meet Jacksonville’s construction standards if it were built today. Landon Avenue is a narrow (20 feet wide) city street that begins at Kings Avenue and runs west past the north-south streets of Faragut Place, Dewey Place and Perry Place, all of which have direct access to Atlantic Boulevard. Landon Avenue makes a southwesterly turn and then crosses two railroad tracks. On the western side of the railroad tracks Landon Avenue passes Arcadia Place, Minerva Avenue (a one-way south street), Thacker Avenue (a one-way north street) all with access to and from Atlantic Boulevard. Landon Avenue continues west and runs through Hendricks Avenue and ends at River Road. G. Rex Nicholson, qualified as an expert witness in forensic engineering, rail safety and design, as well as highway safety and design, agreed with DOT’s rail specialist Jan Bordelon and opined that the Crossing is unsafe, unnecessary and redundant because it is located on a residential street, has low traffic volume, is a non-necessity for travel, and is relatively close to alternatives routes. He indicated that the first step in the analysis of a crossing closure is whether a grade separation (bridge for either automobiles or trains) is feasible. In this instance, such an alternative is not available. Additionally, active safety measures of four- quadrant gates could not be installed at Landon Avenue due to the need for the installation of a non-mountable median and the lack of right-of-way. The expert testimony of Nicholson that grade separation is not feasible, and that only way to improve safety at the Crossing is to proceed with closure, is un- rebutted. Nicholson’s testimony further establishes that Landon Avenue is also a safety risk because street parking narrows the 20-foot wide Landon Avenue. After safety, the second applicable criterion is the need for traffic. Testimony and data indicates that the necessity for vehicle traffic on Landon Avenue is minimal. There is an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 1473 vehicles a day that use the crossing. Another study by DOT approximates the Average Daily Traffic to be 1841. These are both considered low traffic counts. It is rare for residents of Landon Avenue to have a destination on the immediate other side of the crossing. The main travel use for Landon Avenue is as a “cut through” by non- residents to more distant areas and to beat train traffic. The third applicable criterion to Landon Avenue is whether the closing constitutes an excessive restriction to the transportation of emergency type vehicles. Nicholson and Bordelon found that closing Landon Avenue would not create an excessive restriction to emergency type vehicles. Landon Avenue is a tree-lined, residential street only 20 feet wide with a blind turn as the street approaches the track from the East. It is not a main road. Residents park in the street, and Jacksonville has proposed traffic-calming devices on the street. Landon Avenue is not a road that is conducive to emergency type vehicles. For the same reasons the road is unsafe for speeding impatient motorists, it is unsafe for an emergency vehicle cut-through. As the majority of the Petitioner’s case against closure revolved around the restriction to emergency vehicles, that issue is further addressed below. The next applicable criterion for closure is the approach of the road to the Crossing. The design of the road approach of Landon Avenue creates a safety hazard. As Landon Avenue approaches the track heading west, from Kings Road, the road turns to the southwest immediately before the Crossing to create a blind corner where vehicles are unable to see an approaching train. As Landon Avenue approaches the crossing heading east, from Hendricks Avenue, the view of the tracks to the north is obstructed by a building and plants. These obstructions make it very difficult for a speeding motorist to see an approaching train. The Crossing at Landon Avenue meets DOT and FRA initiatives for closure. It is not an arterial road, is used by high risk motorists, and is a safety risk for train-car collisions. Closure of the Crossing will effectuate the policy of improved safety at railroad crossings by eliminating the chance for train and car collisions. The Crossing is a public at-grade railroad crossing, designated by DOT as Crossing No. 271815X. It consists of two mainline tracks, a northbound mainline and southbound mainline that transport approximately 26 trains a day through the Crossing. In addition to FEC, Norfolk Southern Railway and CSX, also both class one railroads, operate trains over the Crossing. Present signalization at the Crossing consists of cantilevered flashing lights and gates; and reflective cross bucks. Safety is the first criterion in closure analysis. The Crossing is located at Railroad Mile Post 1.45, just south of a banked curve in the double tracks that makes it a “blind turn” for the conductor and engineer of a southbound train. Jerry Hall, Sr., FEC’s director of claims, narrated a video in evidence in this proceeding that further corroborates the train operators’ vantage point and demonstrates how the combination of double tracks and lack of site distance in the super-elevated banked curve create a safety hazard at the Crossing. One accident occurred at the Crossing when a train collided with a car, even though the standard cross bucks, lights and bells were operating. The train’s headlight was working and on, the train’s bell was working and the proper whistle signals were blown at the time of the accident; however, the train could not stop in time. The curve in the tracks delays the time a train operator has to avoid a collision with a car at the Crossing. Over 50 percent of train-car collisions result from cars avoiding passive devices and crossing tracks regardless. Accidents at railroad crossings often occur because the road hump over the track serves as a launching ramp for thrill seekers traveling through such intersections with trains at a high speed. This specifically occurs because a speeding automobile’s front wheels lift off the ground and the vehicle continues in the direction it was last going. When motorists sue over accidents in these situations, it is the municipalities or governmental entities with jurisdiction over the road that are usually held responsible. The Crossing is a perfect candidate for this type of accident. Further, the Crossing is a present safety concern for residents of Landon Avenue because it is used by cars and motorcycles as a ramp to “get air” in conjunction with such motorists speeding through the neighborhood to avoid traffic from other Jacksonville streets caused frequently by trains at other nearby intersections. In this regard, Residents saw a filming crew documenting motorcycles jumping the Crossing. They also have witnessed some individuals turn their bikes and vehicles around and repeatedly jump the Crossing. In addition to the accident noted above, Landon Avenue residents testified that there have been several near-miss incidents at the Crossing, including an unreported accident in which a speeding car hit a Landon Avenue girl. The next criterion in the closure analysis is whether there are alternative routes available. The Crossing is located in a residential area near six crossings within one mile of track. The next crossing to the north is located at 1/4 of a mile at four-lane Hendricks Avenue and the next crossing to the south is 1/5th of a mile or 900 feet at four-lane Atlantic Boulevard. These main artery roads, along with Kings Road, allow for easy access to both sides of the Crossing. Closure of the Crossing would disperse traffic onto three different roads: Atlantic Boulevard, Hendricks Avenue and Kings Road. Regardless of the index ratings for these roads, DOT’s goal of eliminating the interaction of vehicular traffic with rail traffic would be accomplished. Hendricks Avenue and Atlantic Boulevard are both four-lane main artery roads. These are safer roads, with non-elevated crossings, that have good sight distance for both train operators and motorists. Motorists do not go around the gates at a four-lane road as often as they do on a two-lane residential street. It would enhance safety to have traffic crossing the railroad tracks at Hendricks Avenue and Atlantic Boulevard rather than at Landon. Additionally, traffic safety would be enhanced by diversion of traffic to Hendricks Avenue and Atlantic Boulevard, thus eliminating one place where a vehicle and a train can try to occupy the same space at the same time and lessening the probability of a collision; logic shared, incidentally, with the United States Federal Government program named “Gradec,” that supports traffic safety enhancement through closure of rail crossings. The next criterion in the closure analysis examines how the closure would affect rail operations and expenses. The closure of the Crossing would decrease operating expenses for FEC and Jacksonville. The cost of maintaining the signal equipment and proper maintenance of the crossing would be avoided. The substantial savings realized by Jacksonville would include savings of $70,000.00 due to rehabilitation of the Crossing that is necessary every six or seven years. Further, FEC and Jacksonville liability and the associated litigation costs exposure would diminish. A criterion in the closure analysis examines the design of the crossing and the road approach. As previously noted, the design of the Crossing and road approach creates an unsafe condition because of the super-elevated nature of the tracks, and the Crossing. There are gouge marks in the pavement at the point of street and rail intersection at the Crossing where the undercarriages of vehicles have scraped against the pavement due to the elevation from the grade of Landon Avenue to the elevated area of the track location. To eliminate the elevated nature of the Crossing, the road approach would have to be raised to the level of the Crossing. Since the rail tracks are banked at a “super-elevated curve” this would be a difficult task. The next criterion examines the presence of multiple tracks and its effect on operations. The presence of multiple tracks and their effect on the railroad and highway operations increase the safety risk at the Crossing. Testimony of Landon Avenue residents and the FEC Claims Director establish that motorists go around the gates at the Crossing. Motorists expect that when one train passes the gates will immediately lift up and allow their vehicles to cross. When two tracks are involved, impatient motorists often misunderstand that there can be two trains coming from different directions at almost the same time. This is especially true where there is a blind corner and two quadrant gates. An impatient driver, unaware of the double track, may easily go around the gate and be caught off guard by the second train. Double tracks also increase the risk of accidents because the train operator of a several ton train doing 25 miles per hour on the southbound mainline has only 457 to 522 feet to avoid a collision with an impatient driver at the Crossing. This is not enough time to stop a locomotive engine, or a train. Closing the Crossing would save the railroad and Jacksonville operating expenses of maintaining the railroad while enhancing safety and achieving DOT’s goal of reducing the probability of a train-automobile collision. In 2000, McLaughlin inquired with DOT about closing the Crossing. He then consulted with Jacksonville. Jacksonville set up a formal meeting with the Lorin Mock, Jacksonville Fire Department; Jim Suber, Jacksonville Police Department; and the Jacksonville councilman who was the district representative at that time. At that meeting, the Jacksonville professional representatives acknowledged that there were no major problems with the closure of the crossing. The councilman at the time did not follow up on sending out letters to request community input. In July 2002, after a period of inactivity regarding the Crossing’s closure and after discovering DOT had authority to close the Crossing, McLaughlin filed an application with DOT for closure. City officials had no problem with closure of the Crossing, and the School Board Chairperson had no difficulty with such closure. A Stipulation of Parties for the closure of the Crossing was drafted and introduced to the City Council by Councilman Art Shad. The proposal was discussed at length before the City Council’s Transportation Committee, which Bordelon attended on behalf of DOT. The legislation to close the Crossing was then submitted to the City Council, but before a vote could be obtained the legislation was withdrawn and Jacksonville decided to oppose the closure. As established by testimony of the Director of Public Works, the withdrawal of the Stipulation of Parties was based on politics, not on any factual findings or meaningful opposition from any Jacksonville professional employee. Considering that a school bus is not an “emergency response type vehicle” the closure analysis regarding the bus goes to the criteria of safety, alternative routes, and effect on operations. There are 14 buses in the morning that come to Landon Middle School, and 16 buses in the afternoon that come to the school. These buses could use Arcadia Place or Hendricks Avenue or some other combination to cross the tracks and exit and enter the school. Additionally, buses stack up on Landon Avenue while waiting for the children which could possibly result in a train-school bus collision which, as established by testimony of David Solomon, an employee of the Duval County School, would be “the worst nightmare an organization can have.” The Duval County School Board had previously addressed the closure of the Crossing and indicated approval prior to Jacksonville’s reversal and decision to oppose that action. Kris Barnes, the Duval County School Board Chair, wrote an October 27, 2003, letter to Ms. Bordelon stating on behalf of the School Board that, after having spoken with the Landon Middle School principal and the Duval County School Board Safety Department, there would be no problem with the closing of the Crossing. There are easily accessible alternative routes that would not disrupt the school or school bus operations and would result in a significant enhancement in safety. Nicholson’s un-rebutted expert testimony concluded that if Jacksonville were applying to install a new crossing at Landon Avenue it would not meet the criteria for an opening, which contains six of the seven criteria for closure. The seventh criterion is whether the closure would cause an excessive restriction to emergency type vehicles. Jacksonville presented testimony, but no data, regarding the fire and rescue vehicles using the crossing. DOT applies the word “excessive restriction” in its rule to mean an excessive restriction for travel. Bordelon’s analysis concluded that the ambulances and other vehicles could easily use the alternative non elevated crossings at Hendricks and Atlantic without being excessively restricted from traveling to an emergency. In processing McLaughlin’s application for closure, Bordelon conducted an independent review of the distance and first response times by fire and emergency vehicles to the Crossing. Bordelon found that fire station 12 and fire station 13 were very close to the Crossing and could easily be reached within the time limit goal of four to six minutes. Since the Landon Avenue/ San Marco area is close to downtown Jacksonville, there is overlapping fire and rescue coverage from fire stations 12 and 13. Using the Atlantic Boulevard railroad crossing, fire station 13 is approximately 0.6 miles from the 1700 block of Landon Avenue. Using the Atlantic Boulevard railroad crossing, fire station 12 is approximately 1.5 miles from the 1500 block of Landon Avenue. The alternative routes that a fire/rescue response from station 13 would have to take to avoid the Crossing are minimal, or approximately an additional fourteenth (.14) of a mile. The alternative routes that a fire/rescue response from station 12 would have to take to avoid the Crossing are minimal, or approximately an additional tenth (.10) of a mile. Jacksonville’s Fire Chief Lorin Mock testified that the there “would be no issue at all in the crossing closure” if it were involved with fire responses using the Atlantic Avenue crossing instead of the Crossing. The average response time from either of these stations to the Crossing is 3.9 minutes. The goal average response time by the Jacksonville Fire Department is six minutes. The response time is calculated from the time a call is made to the time the emergency vehicle arrives on the scene and includes the 911 call and response. Chief Mock and the Jacksonville Fire Department oppose any closure of a railroad crossing, regardless of the safety need for the closure. In the words of Chief Mock, rail crossings are a “string of pearls” that the fire department uses to cross the railroad tracks and the more opportunities to cross the better. He acknowledged that he was looking at the definition from an emergency response standpoint. Per Nicholson’s un-rebutted expert testimony, there is no appreciable difference in response times and distances and no excessive restriction to the transportation of emergency vehicles. Chief Mock’s acknowledgement that the residents of Landon Avenue have “pretty good” overlapping fire coverage because the spacing of fire stations are closer in the core city area, and fire hydrants are available on both sides of the track serves to corroborate this determination. The closure would not result in excessive restriction to the transportation of emergency vehicles.
Recommendation Upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered approving the requested permit for closure of Department of Transportation Crossing No. 271815X in Jacksonville, Florida. DONE AND ENTERED this 5th day of August, 2005, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S DON W. DAVIS Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 5th day of August, 2005. 1/ John F. Kennedy
