The Issue Whether a permit should be granted by the Florida Department of Transportation for a public-at-grade crossing in the vicinity of Section 55000- 6607, State Road (Laurel Oak Drive) Leon County, Parcel 1 (XS0-H) SCL Railroad MP SPA-809.
Findings Of Fact A railroad grade crossing application was submitted by Henry G. Hanson, County Engineer, Leon County, Florida, for a public-at-grade rail highway opening by new roadway construction. The crossing location is in the unincorporated municipality of Woodville, Florida. The local popular name of the street is Laurel Oak Drive. The railroad company is Seaboard Coastline Railroad and the mile post distance and direction is 1,5534 ft. south of SPA- 809. The application stated that "Prior to construction the Board of County Commissioners will adopt the necessary resolutions for the maintenance of the crossing." The cost estimate as indicated on the application was $20,000.00. The application arose as a result of a proposed low cost or rent subsidy type housing development which is proposed to be constructed in the Woodville area in southern Leon County, Florida. The proposed subdivision is to be called "Woodlands" an area which lies west of the street called Tallahassee Street. Between Tallahasse and the proposed subdivision runs the Seaboard Coastline railroad. The subject land is presently owned by a group of people for whom Mr. John Butler is a representative. The proposed subdivision is a cooperative effort by the landowners represented by Mr. Butler, the Tallahassee Housing Authority represented by Mr. Calvin 0gburn and the Department of Community Affairs, State of Florida. Leon County is involved inasmuch as the subdivision as proposed would be dedicated to Leon County, Florida, whereby Leon County would take over maintenance and ownership of the roadways including that portion of the roadway crossing the railroad. The application for the subject crossing was made by Leon County as the ultimate owner of the crossing. At the date of this hearing there is no subdivision but plans for a subdivision have been submitted. The plans are for a low cost housing which was described as houses that would cost between 20 and 23 thousand dollars ($20,000-$23,000) including the cost of the lot and would be approximately 900 to 1000 square feet. The proposal is for 53 lots each within an approximate 75 foot frontage. The Department of Community Affairs administers the rural land fund which is a 2.5 million dollar fund to provide lost cost lots. This department lends money to local governments, housing authorities or small communities and rural areas to buy land and to cause it to be developed as in the subject cause. The position of the Department of Community Affairs is to approve or deny a loan to the Tallahassee Housing Authority. A plat of the proposed subdivision was submitted to the Department of Community Affairs as part of their application for $199,000.00 which would be used to buy the land and developed it. There is no access to the land on which the proposed subdivision would be built except at the proposed site for the subject crossing. The 75 foot lots would cost approximately $3,760.00 each. There are two trains per day on unscheduled runs using the subject railroad tracks. The estimation is that there would be between 300 to 350 vehicles per day using the crossing. The speed of the train is approximately 25 miles per hour. The two lane rural road with 6 foot shoulders as proposed would cross the railroad track. The recommendations of the District Safety Engineer for the Third District employed by the Respondent, Florida Department of Transportation, is that a type 3 installation is required. The installation is roadside flashing lights with bells. A representative of the railroad read the following statement from Mr. Tom Hutchinson, Vice President of Maintenance of Seaboard Coastline Railroad, "It will be the railroad's position in this application that there arc no objection to what is proposed with the provision that automatic warning devices are installed and maintained at the expense of the applicant and with further conditions that any changes or alterations or improvements of the cost will be borne by the applicant." The Hearing Officer further finds: That if the proposed subdivision is in fact built and homes sold there would be a need for the proposed railroad crossing. That there would be a need for the proposed railroad crossing prior to the completion of the subdivision inasmuch as there would be a large amount of traffic during the construction of this subdivision. Leon County would maintain the crossing. The safety devices as recommended by the Florida Department of Transportation which is flashing lights and ringing bells is necessary for the safety of those traveling to and from the proposed subdivision. A simple cross buck would be inadequate for the safety of those living or working in the proposed subdivision.
Recommendation Grant the permit upon approval of the project. DONE and ORDERED this 5th day of October, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida. DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Carlton Building Room 530 Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Philip S. Bennett, Esquire Florida Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Earl O. Black, Esquire County Engineer's Office Leon County Courthouse Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Henry G. Hanson, County Engineer Leon County Courthouse Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Mr. G. S. Burleson, Sr,, P.E. Assistant State Utility Engineer (RRs) Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Eugene R. Buzard, Esquire Seaboard Coastline Railroad 500 Water Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202
The Issue Whether there should be an opening of a public at-grade rail/highway crossing and new rail line construction on Jones Road and Georgia Southern and Florida Railroad - MP 243.
Findings Of Fact The following stipulation was agreed upon and written by the parties: "1. As to the necessity of the opening of the said crossing. Westlake is a develop- ment where in excess of $25,000,000 has been spent in a project of the Georgia Southern & Florida Railway, of which $15,000,000 has al- ready been spent to date. Such project has been reviewed and approved by the Jacksonville Planning Board and the public need has been recognized and determined for this residential and light industrial development. As to the facility. The track will be an extension of existing lead track that was originally considered and approved by the De- partment of Transportation crossing Garden Street and is an extension south to the Appli- cant's property lime. Said extension is to serve the need of said development and must be extended across Jones Road to facilitate the services of light industrial purposes. Said track is an extension being two miles in length. Safety and signalization. To meet the required safety standards of the State of Florida, Applicant agrees to install cantalevered flashing lights and bells, side mounted, which are referred to as Type 2 installation. Applicant also agrees to provide sign and pavement markings as specified in MUTCD. The parties agree that said construction of signal device will provide the required public safety. The present anticipated need of such crossing of the Applicant are for one train per day rail traffic in and out. Jones Road is a two-lane rural road with posted speed limits of 45 miles an hour. As to the construction. Said plans have been presented and approved by the City Engineer, Jacksonville, Florida. Applicant agrees to pay for the installation and maintenance of signalization. Approximately $35,000 for the installation and $3,000 per year maintenance. Applicant agrees that it is a quasi-public corporation existing in perpetuity. Applicant agrees to abide by the rules and regulations of the Department of Transportation and laws of the State of Florida, as well as the ordinance code of the City of Jacksonville." The facts as outlined in the stipulation of the parties are the Findings of Fact of the Hearing Officer.
Recommendation Issue the required permit. DONE and ORDERED this 25th day of July, 1977, 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 Julie H. Kuntz, Esquire American Heritage Life Building Jacksonville, Florida
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 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
The Issue The issue is whether the Department of Transportation ("Department") may issue a permit authorizing CSX Transportation, Inc. ("CSXT") to close public-railroad highway- grade crossing 627445-K (the "Crossing") located at SE 222nd Street in Hawthorne, Florida.
Findings Of Fact The Department has authority over public railroad- highway grade crossings in Florida, including the authority to issue permits for the opening and closing of crossings. § 335.141(1)(a), Fla. Stat.2/ The Federal Railroad Administration ("FRA") has an "Action Plan" to improve grade-crossing safety. A key element of that plan is the consolidation of redundant and unnecessary highway-rail grade crossings. The FRA's goal is for each state to reduce railroad crossings by 25 percent. The Department's criteria for closing railroad-highway grade crossings are set forth in Florida Administrative Code Rule 14-57.012(2)(c), as follows: Closure of Public Railroad-Highway Grade Crossings. In considering an application to close a public railroad-highway grade crossing, the following criteria will apply: Safety. Necessity for rail and vehicle traffic. Alternate routes. Effect on rail operations and expenses. Excessive restriction to emergency type vehicles resulting from closure. Design of the grade crossing and road approaches. Presence of multiple tracks and their effect upon railroad and highway operations. On June 30, 2010, CSXT submitted a Railroad Grade Crossing Application seeking closure of the Crossing, based on the redundancy of the Crossing in relation to other available crossings. The Crossing is located at SE 222nd Street in Hawthorne. 222nd Street is a two-lane urban local road running north and south, beginning at 69th Avenue and ending at 75th Avenue. The street crosses CSXT railroad tracks between SE 73rd Avenue and 74th Lane in a north-south direction. The surrounding area consists of residences, a veterinary hospital, a city-owned park, and some small commercial uses. The railroad right-of-way at the Crossing is operated by CSXT. The Crossing includes a timber and asphalt surface over a single mainline track. It has no sidewalk and is designed for automobile use only. The rail speed limit at the Crossing is 20 to 25 miles per hour. Petitioner, Dr. Shane Henry, is the owner of the veterinary hospital near the Crossing and was the only testifying witness familiar with the actual movement of the trains at the Crossing. Dr. Henry credibly testified that their actual speed at the Crossing is no greater than 5 miles per hour. Two local trains pass through the Crossing three times per week. A Department traffic study showed that 53 vehicles crossed the track at the Crossing in a 24-hour weekday period. No school buses use the Crossing. The posted speed limit for vehicles at the Crossing is 10 miles per hour. There are no active warning signals such as flashing lights or crossbars at the Crossing. Reflective crossbuck signs have been installed at the Crossing to alert drivers that they are approaching a railroad track. Train crews are required to sound their horns in warning as they approach the Crossing. Approximately 264 feet to the east of the Crossing is another railroad crossing at U.S. 301, which is the main north- south thoroughfare in Hawthorne. U.S. 301 is a four-lane highway that is heavily traveled in comparison to SE 222nd Street. Approximately 475 feet to the west of the Crossing is another railroad crossing at SE 221st Street. Southeast 221st Street is a two-lane north-south connector for Hawthorne's business district. The railroad crossings at U.S. 301 and SE 221st Street have active signals with crossbars lowering and lights flashing when trains pass. The Department sent a diagnostic team to examine and evaluate the Crossing. The team recommended that the Crossing be closed as redundant to the safer crossings nearby. The Department presented the proposed closure to the Hawthorne City Commission at a public meeting on July 20, 2010. Dr. Henry attended the meeting and voiced his opposition to the closure. Dr. Henry's Lake Area Animal Hospital is located at the corner of U.S. 301 and 74th Lane. The animal hospital is open on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. A small city park is located across the Crossing from the animal hospital. Dr. Henry testified that he tells his clients to walk their pets to the park to calm them down. Clients needing stool or urine samples are also advised to walk their pets to the park while waiting. Dr. Henry testified that closing the Crossing would limit his clients' access to the park and force them onto U.S. 301, which is heavily traveled by vehicles. However, there are alternative places to walk animals near the hospital that would not force the clients directly onto U.S. 301, including a side yard of the hospital premises. Dr. Henry may consider these less calming for the animals than the park, but they do not appear to endanger the animals. In deciding whether to authorize the closure of the Crossing, the Department considered the seven criteria listed in rule 14-57.012(2)(c): safety; necessity for rail and vehicle traffic; alternate routes; effect on rail operations and expenses; excessive restrictions to emergency vehicles resulting from closure; design of the grade crossing and road approaches; and presence of multiple tracks and their effect on railroad and highway operations. These criteria were considered in light of the overall objective "to reduce the accident/incident frequency and severity at public railroad-highway grade crossings, and improve rail and motor vehicle operating efficiency." Fla. Admin. Code R. 14-57.012(1). As to the "safety" criterion, the Department's first consideration was the potential for collisions of vehicles and trains at the Crossing. The Department made the following credible findings concerning safety at the Crossing: The SE 222nd Street crossing is signalized with crossbucks only (i.e., passive signalization) without any active warning devices (i.e., lights and gates). Cautious drivers would stop at the subject crossing and look both ways along the track to determine whether a train is approaching and to estimate its speed. In the event that following vehicles do not anticipate such stops and/or fail to maintain safe-stopping distance, collisions may result. In addition, the presence of the crossing itself may cause non-train collisions. Exemplified by a driver stopping suddenly to avoid collision with an oncoming train, the driver may lose control of the vehicle and collide with a roadside object. These types of potential collisions would be avoided with the elimination of the crossing. Currently there are no recorded accidents at the crossing; however, the opportunity exists for collisions, train and non-train, when a crossing exists. Although accident history is taken into account, it is not the sole determining factor, in as much as the prospective crossing closure has relatively low vehicular use and, thereby, fewer accidents. An accident does not have to occur before considering a crossing closure. Janice Bordelon, a Department rail specialist, was a member of the Department's diagnostic team. At the final hearing, Ms. Bordelon testified that the timber and asphalt surface of the Crossing was in poor condition and could cause a driver to focus his attention on finding a smooth pathway rather than looking for oncoming trains. As to the "necessity for rail and vehicle traffic" and "alternate route" criteria, the Department concluded that the Crossing is not a necessity for rail or vehicular traffic because of the ready availability of alternate routes. The Department determined that there were alternate routes and parallel roads on each side of the Crossing, and residents, schools, emergency response, and businesses would not be negatively affected by the closure of the Crossing. Closure of the Crossing to vehicular traffic would have no effect on rail traffic. Florida guidelines for public crossing closures provide that closure should be considered where there are fewer than 3,000 vehicles per day using the crossing and where there are crossings located closer than one-half mile apart. As noted above, only 53 vehicles were recorded at the Crossing over a 24- hour weekday period. The Department determined that rerouting such a low volume of vehicles to other roads would not have a significant impact on the level of service of the alternate routes. The Department specifically considered Dr. Henry's objections and concluded as follows: A veterinarian clinic at the corner of 74th Lane and N. Main Street (US 301/SR 200) has stated that closure would require their clients to be rerouted onto N. Main Street (US 301/SR 200), a more hazardous route. However, a timing study of the location shows that clients visiting the clinic have a safe alternate by traveling one block south on SE 222nd Street to 75th Avenue and proceeding north on SE 221st Street or south on Johnson Street. This route takes less than two minutes and does not require traveling onto N. Main Street (US 301/SR 200). Ms. Bordelon testified that she performed the referenced timing study and confirmed the findings thereof. She stated that alternative routes are simple to find in Hawthorne because the city's streets are laid out in grid fashion. There are parallel roads on either side of the Crossing, and the closing of the Crossing would not leave any property landlocked. Ms. Bordelon's timing study established that there are at least two alternate routes for vehicles, each of which would add a driving time of less than two minutes. As noted above, the 221st Street crossing is about 475 feet from the Crossing and the U.S. 301 crossing is about 264 feet from the Crossing, providing nearby alternatives to the Crossing after its closure. As to the "effect on rail operations and expenses" criterion, the Department made the following findings: The elimination of the rail crossing at SE 222nd Street would benefit the Railroad and the City in the reduction of liability and maintenance expenses. The removal of the crossing would eliminate the cost of upgrading and maintaining the crossing. The Department's Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 130 funds are annually distributed and utilized on crossings within each District based on a diagnostic team's evaluation of the prioritized crossings' need for safety enhancement.3 Hawthorne has been the recipient of a major safety project with the construction of the $42 million grade separation project at SR 20/Hawthorne Road and US 301/SR 200. The Department has also scheduled a $375,000 crossing surface project at US 301/SR 200 to be installed in the coming fiscal year. The US DOT Action Plan specifically states: when improving one crossing (i.e., grade separation or crossing improvements) consider the elimination of the adjacent crossing. The closure of SE 222nd Street reflects the guidance of the Federal Railroad Administration's crossing consolidation plan. The elimination of the SE 222nd Street crossing would positively impact rail operations in the reduction of horn blowing and the elimination of trains blocking the roadway. The elimination of both of these factors at this site would reduce complaints received from motorists and nearby homeowners. Cliff Stayton, director of community affairs and safety for CSX, testified that at any public crossing, federal regulations require the operating railroad to sound the horn at least 15 seconds but no more than 20 seconds before the train enters the crossing.4/ Mr. Stayton pointed out that here there are three crossings within a half-mile of each other, each of which requires the sounding of the horn. Eliminating the Crossing would reduce the nuisance factor of the horn to the nearby residents. As to the "excessive restrictions to emergency vehicles resulting from closure" criterion, the Department found that the closure of the Crossing would have no effect on emergency vehicle access. Alachua County provides EMS service to Hawthorne, and the vehicles come from a county fire and rescue station eight miles west on S.R. 20. The vehicles could access any residence on SE 222nd Street by taking S.R. 20 to U.S. 301. The hospitals serving Hawthorne are all located in the Gainesville area. Ms. Bordelon testified that emergency vehicles use main arterial roads such as U.S. 301 rather than urban local roads such as SE 222nd Street, and the closure of the Crossing would have no adverse impact to the provision of emergency services on either side of the Crossing. As to the "design of the grade crossing and road approaches" criterion, the Department found that the Crossing's timber and asphalt surface provides a rough transition from the road surface, with noticeable dipping and bouncing. The approaches to the Crossing are cracked and patched, adding to the rough transition. As noted above, the uneven surface may cause a driver to pay more attention to choosing a smooth path over the Crossing rather than determining whether a train is approaching. Though there are no recorded accidents at the Crossing, its design and state of repair lead to the finding that closing the Crossing would offer at least some incremental safety enhancement to motorists. As to the "presence of multiple tracks and their effect on railroad and highway operations" criterion, Ms. Bordelon testified that it did not apply in this case because the Crossing has only a single track. In addition to his argument that his practice will be inconvenienced by having access to the park cut off, Dr. Henry alleged that disabled persons may have difficulty accessing his clinic via wheelchair if they are forced to cross at U.S. 301 rather than at the Crossing. Dr. Henry alleges that this constitutes a failure to offer a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act. No direct evidence was presented to support this speculative claim. In summary, the Department's findings leading to the recommendation that the Crossing be closed are supported by competent substantial evidence. Mr. Henry's concerns regarding the impact of closure on his business were sincere and well expressed at the hearing, but were insufficient to rebut the Department's prima facie showing that the criteria set forth in rule 14-57.012(2)(c) have been satisfied and the Crossing should be closed.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Transportation enter a final order approving the requested permit for closure of public railroad-highway grade crossing 627445-K located at SE 222nd Street in Hawthorne, Florida. DONE AND ENTERED this 26th day of October, 2012, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S LAWRENCE P. STEVENSON 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 26th day of October, 2012.
Findings Of Fact Transportation plans for Broward County made as long ago as 1965 provide for roads crossing the SCL tracks at N. W. 48th Street in Broward County and at S. W. 10th Street in Deerfield Beach. Both of these routes are now planned as principal E-W arteries providing four lanes of traffic. Rights of way for these routes both east and west of the SCL tracks have been acquired by the City of Deerfield Beach and by Broward County. Approaches for both of these arteries over the recently completed I-95 running just east of the railroad tracks have also been completed. Two crossings presently provide access from east of the tracks to the area here involved west of the tracks, one at SR 810 to the north and the other at Sample Road some 3 1/2 miles to the south. S. W. 10th Street in Deerfield Beach is just under one mile south of SR 810 also in Deerfield Beach, and N. W. 48th Street is outside the incorporated area of Deerfield Beach one mile south of S. W. 10th Street. The population of Deerfield Beach is approximately 31,000 and some 6,000 persons reside west of the SCL tracks. The largest development in Deerfield Beach west of the tracks is Century Village located south of and adjacent to SR 810. The only entry to and access from Century Village is via SR 810. In the event the crossing at SR 810 is blocked emergency access to Century Village and other areas west of the SCL tracks is via Sample Road or via the next crossing to the north in Palm Beach County some five miles north of SR 810. Fire protection for the unincorporated area of Broward County in the vicinity of N. W. 48th Street west of the SCL tracks is provided from the fire station approximately one mile east of the SCL tracks near SR 810 and US 1 in Deerfield Beach. To reach that area it is necessary to cross the tracks at SR 810, proceed west to Powerline Road, south to Sample Road, east to N. W. 9th Avenue, and north to the area. A similar route would have to be followed by other emergency vehicles either police or medical. Substantial growth of the area immediately west of the SCL tracks between SR 810 and Sample Road has occurred and developments are currently underway to provide numerous homesites, principally trailer park facilities, in this area. Sample Road has been widened to 6 lanes and is estimated to be 300 percent overcapacity if all land use plans predicated for the area are developed. Additional E-W arterial transportation routes are needed. SCL presently has a passing track or siding at the proposed S. W. 10th Street crossing. This siding is 5700 feet long and can accommodate 96 cars. Three-fourths of this track lies north of S. W. 10th Street and approximately 71 cars could be accommodated, on the portion of the siding north of S. W. 10th Street. This 5700 foot section of track is adjacent and parallel to the main track which presently carries 6 passenger and 6 freight trains per day plus approximately 2 switch trains per day. It is used to drop off cars for later pickup, for allowing north and southbound trains to pass, or for a passenger train to pass a freight train. Exhibit 16 was stipulated into evidence to show typical activity at this 5700 foot Deerfield Beach siding. During the period February 22, 1976 to April 13, 1976 the largest number of cars held on this siding at any one time was 68. Similar sidings (generally with greater capacity) exist at various places alongside SCL tracks. The cost of providing a grade separation crossing at the SCL tracks at either N. W. 48th Street or S. W. 10th Street is approximately one million dollars. While such a crossing would obviously be safer than a grade crossing, the cost to benefit ratio for the grade crossing over the grade separation crossing is 4.52 at 48th Street and more than 3 at S. W. 10th Street. The safety index for both of the proposed grade crossings with active safety warning devices is in the range of acceptability - each showing an accident probability of one every 11 years. Annual cost of the signals and warning devices to be installed on the grade crossing is some $21,000 a year while the cost of a grade separation structure is some $63,000 a year. Providing grade separation at S. W. 10th Street would necessitate the approach on the east of the track starting at about the same place the approach on the west side of I-95 starts, thereby effectively blocking any N-S access to S. W. 10th Street between I-95 and the SCL tracks. Although Exhibit 17 was not admitted into evidence one witness testified that the figures thereon, showing the cost of relocating the 5700 feet of siding at Deerfield Beach, were on the conservative side and would probably cost more. However, no evidence was presented that an at-grade crossing would render this siding useless for the purposes intended nor was any evidence offered to show that the value of this siding to SCL would be materially reduced by an at-grade crossing at S. W. 10th Street.
Findings Of Fact Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, K. N. Ayers, held a public hearing in the above styled case at Trenton, Florida on July 8, 1980.
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 After receiving evidence, hearing testimony and personally visiting the site of the subject railroad crossing and the area the crossing serves, I find: The subject of this hearing is a railroad crossing located 2,423 North of Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company Mile Post SPA-803 in an area designated Four Points Way on the west side of South Adams Street, Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. Petitioner, Florida Department of Transportation, contends that the crossing is now a public crossing and should be closed or appropriate safety equipment should be installed. The safety engineer for Petitioner recommends flashing lights and gates. Respondent contends that the present signalization is adequate and the crossing should not be closed; that the railroad should maintain the current safety signalization at the existing crossing and that appropriate markings should be made at the highway and street approach to the crossing. Public use has increased from a few crossings per day to a 24-hour count of 1,186 vehicles on an average day in July, 1978. The increase in traffic has been generated by the number of business establishments in the industrial area and increased business. A large business catering to home owners has generated a large amount of business in recent years. The railroad crossings and streets make a complicated and congested traffic pattern: The subject crossing is located West of South Adams Street (State Road 363) on a paved but privately owned paved and curbed street which serves the industrial area. There is a short street connecting South Adams Street and South Monroe Street (State Road 61) directly across South Adams Street from the subject crossing. The area intersection has two major highways, South Adams and South Monroe, crossing each other with several exits and entrances. There have been many reported traffic accidents. The Panhandle Concrete Industry, Inc., is a concrete plant which has an entrance intersecting with the private paved road in the industrial park area West of the railroad. It uses the subject railroad crossing. Directly to the East and South of the subject crossing is a public generated unimproved road intersecting with South Adams Street, a short distance from the crossing. Approximately 600 feet North of the subject crossing is a paved but non-signalized crossing that is used by the general public doing business with Carpet City, The Canoe Shop, Home of Fibercell Manufacturing, Inc., Signs by Matlock, and a Department of Education warehouse. It appears that said crossing is subject to regulation by petitioner under Section 338.21(3), Florida Statutes. Approximately 1,000 feet North of the subject crossing is a public crossing on Bragg Drive. This crossing is marked by railroad cross bucks. There is an entrance to Bragg Drive from the Department of Education warehouse and also from the foregoing named businesses primarily served by the paved but non-signalized crossing. Respondent, Albritton-Williams, requested a permit for the opening of an at-grade public crossing on October 22, 1973. Thereafter, at a public hearing on July 15, 1974, it moved to amend the application so it could pave the subject crossing and contended that the crossing was in fact a private crossing. On November 6, 1974, the Recommended Order, which was adopted as the Petitioner's Final Order, concluded that the crossing was a private crossing and that the Florida Department of Transportation had no jurisdiction. Thereafter, the owners of the industrial area paved the street to serve the private business interests of the industrial park. Subsequent to the issuance of the Recommended Order, and subsequent to the paving of the street, the Petitioner, Florida Department of Transportation, determined that the formerly designated private crossing is in fact a public crossing and that the Petitioner has and should exert regulatory authority over the crossing as required by Section 338.21, Florida Statutes. It petitioned for subject hearing. There are a number of owners and lessees of the area including: Panhandle Concrete Industries, Inc.; Scottie's; Eli-Witt Company; Four Points Industrial Park and Albritton-Williams, Inc. These owners and lessees are all businesses which invite the public to their doors and presently require the crossing of subject railroad both to and from the businesses. There is no other improved exit or entrance to the industrial and business area. The roadways within the park have not been dedicated to the City, County or State. The Seaboard Coastline Railroad uses the three tracks enroute Lo St. Marks, Florida, three days a week, twice each day, travelling between ten and twenty miles per hour. The three to eight car train runs in the afternoons between 3:00 o'clock and 4:00 o'clock to St. Marks and returns. The tracks run North and South and the road runs East and West. The testimony elicited stated that the train takes about five minutes per crossing, six times each week, twice each day on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. The rail highway grade crossing index introduced into evidence placed the crossing at 2,848 on a priority rating the highest being 8 and the lowest being 5,639 for corrective action at public railroad crossings in the State of Florida. The accident potential of subject crossing is 06 on a scale of 40.19. There have been no reported accidents at the subject crossing. The vehicular traffic at the crossing can back up on South Adams Street at the time of the crossing of the train for the reason that the area between the closest railroad track and the outer edge of the travel lane going South on Adams Street is approximately 90 to 95 feet with storage for about three vehicles. Highway and street approach markings although helpful would not solve the problem of congested traffic. The property that the existing crossing serves is within the cite limits of Tallahassee, Florida. The proposed order of the Respondent has been examined and each proposed fact has been treated in this Order. The Hearing Officer further finds: The subject crossing is a public crossing and there has been a crossing in said general area which had been used by the public in excess of twenty years. There is a need for a railroad crossing to serve the industrial area that stretches from the privately paved road of Respondent North to Bragg Street and South of the concrete plant. A crossing in the area is required for the convenience of the business interest in the area. The subject crossing creates a hazard because of its location directly West of South Adams Street and across from the short cross-connection between South Adams Street and South Monroe Street. This hazard is increased by other cross-connections between these major streets and by a public railroad crossing on State Road 61, South Monroe Street approximately 400 feet South of the subject crossing. The hazard is caused by the location of the crossing rather than the crossing itself.
Recommendation Close the crossing in not less than 90 days or more than 100 days from date hereof. Upon petition by the respondent or other interested parties, open a crossing to serve the needs and convenience of the owners and lessees at the closing of the subject crossing at a location that will not cause a traffic hazard and will meet standards required by the Petitioner, Department of Transportation. Consideration should be given to directing all traffic crossing the railroad to one crossing serving the entire commercial area which includes interests in addition to respondents. The non-signalized crossing should be scrutinized. DONE and ENTERED this 6th day of November, 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: Frank King, Esquire Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Roy T. Rhodes, Esquire Post Office Drawer 1140 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Jesse F. Warren, Jr., Esquire Post Office Box 612 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 E. Eugene Buzard Seaboard Coast Line Railroad 500 Water Street Jacksonville, Florida Rhett Miller, City Engineer City Hall Tallahassee, Florida 32304 ================================================================= AGENCY FINAL ORDER ================================================================= STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IN RE: Petition of State of Florida, Department of Transportation for closing of, or in the alternative, installation of appropriate safety equipment at, CASE NO. 77-1751 a public at-grade railroad crossing 2,423 feet north of Seaboard Coastline Railroad Company Mile Post SPA-803 and a proposed street at Four Points Industrial Park in Tallahassee, Florida. /
The Issue The issue is whether the application submitted by Manatee County to the Florida Department of Transportation to open a railroad-highway grade crossing in Bradenton, Florida, meets the criteria set forth in Florida Administrative Code Rule 14- 57.012(2)(a)1-6.
Findings Of Fact Respondent, Manatee County, filed an application with FDOT for the opening of a public highway-rail grade crossing between railroad mile posts SW 912.27 and SW 911.87, to cross over the CSX Transportation rail line (the "Crossing"). The Crossing is proposed in connection with the expansion of a portion of 44th Avenue East, from 15th Street East extending eastward to 19th Street Court East. The extension of 44th Avenue is part of an east-west corridor within Manatee County that the County plans to extend east to U.S. 301, and is an extension of Cortez Road which terminates at the beaches of Manatee County to the west. The Department's public railroad-highway grade crossing program conducts studies on the more than 3700 public highway- rail grade crossings in Florida and creates an inventory to determine crossings that might be improved for safety reasons and for closure. Florida Administrative Code Rule 14-57.012 establishes the standards for opening and closing public railroad-highway grade crossings. The Department has endeavored to close or consolidate redundant, unsafe, and unnecessary crossings through an initiative from the Federal Railway Administration and the Federal Highway Administration to decrease the number of at- grade railroad crossings by 25 percent. The goal has not yet been met. Petitioner's policies dictate that before it agrees to a new crossing of one of its tracks, three existing crossings should be closed in connection with the opening. The County agrees that it is good policy to close as many existing crossings as possible when opening a new crossing. The closings help to decrease the potential for motor vehicle and train collisions, bicycle and train collisions, and pedestrian collisions with a train or flying debris from a train. Janice Bordelon, the Department's Rail Specialist, oversees the opening and closing of all public highway-rail grade crossings throughout the State of Florida. When she received the County's application for opening on November 21, 2002, she sent a copy of the application to Petitioner. Ms. Bordelon visited the proposed opening site and the surrounding area on at least three occasions. The Department sought input from both the County and Petitioner when considering the application for the Crossing. The land in the vicinity of the Crossing is varied to the north and is designated as light manufacturing. The area to the south is designated as warehousing and vacant industrial. The area to the east of the terminus of the Crossing is agricultural land. Much of the property in the area north and south of the Crossing is vacant, but scheduled for future use as an operations center. The railroad track in the vicinity of the Crossing is owned and operated by Petitioner. CSX Transportation, Inc., is the largest railroad in the eastern United States with approximately 22,000 route miles. Petitioner operates in 23 states, the District of Columbia, and two Canadian provinces. It is headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida. Petitioner's operations in the vicinity of the Crossing currently involve the interchange of cars with the Seminole Gulf Railroad, just south of the Crossing. The purpose of the interchange is to exchange cars between two railroad companies. Current operations involve approximately eight train movements per week, consisting of 20 rail cars in each movement. Trains using this track travel at a speed of 20 miles per hour currently. The speed could change with the approval of the Crossing. The potential exits for Petitioner to increase its utilization of the track in the area of the Crossing. This would occur as a result of increased utilization of rail as a result of growth in both Manatee County and Florida. Based upon the character of the area near the Crossing, the possibility exists for location of a manufacturing facility or distribution center that could result in increased rail traffic. The Department reviewed and analyzed the safety of the proposed 44th Avenue Crossing, including the volume of rail and vehicle traffic, the proximity of existing crossings, the angle of proposed crossing, and surrounding land uses. The Department proposed solutions for mitigation of the identified safety issues through traffic synchronization and other design features such as curbs and signalization. The Intent to Permit issued by the Department recommends that the County pursue the consolidation of unnecessary rail crossings, especially those with light traffic and within a quarter mile of an existing crossing. The County's expert identified two such crossings for potential closure. Mr. G. Rex Nichelson, an expert in railroad crossing openings and closings, testified that the Crossing would ultimately be designed by the joint efforts of Petitioner and the County, resulting in the safest feasible design for the Crossing. He noted that there would be no possibility of a hump at the Crossing and that the design would utilize either an attenuator known as Kwik Curb or a nine-inch, non-mountable median to minimize the opportunity for drivers to circumvent the crossing gates and place themselves in harm's way. Petitioner would also be involved in the final design of the Crossing. The design features would enhance the safety of the Crossing. A flyover crossing, one that would divert traffic from direct contact with the rails at the Crossing, is prohibitively expensive and not justified in this case. The tracks are visible upon approach of the Crossing. The Department considered pedestrian and bicycle traffic at the Crossing, and determined it would not be significant. Trespass can occur in the area of railroad tracks, regardless of whether the Crossing were opened. The Department and the County collaborated to identify possible closures to offset the Crossing, and several were identified as a result. The Department determined the Crossing is necessary to alleviate existing vehicular traffic and serve planned industrial land uses in the area of the Crossing. The Crossing will draw a considerable amount of traffic from the existing roadway system onto a new roadway better designed to accommodate the traffic volume. Currently, traffic in the area of the proposed crossing is heavy, especially at peak times. Alternative routes for east-west vehicular traffic were examined and considered, but the 44th Avenue extension appears to be the safest, most direct way for the County to complete an east-west corridor in the area of the Crossing. The County considered alternative alignments for the Crossing, but none of these were preferable to the one selected due to sharp, unsafe crossing angles and increased right-of-way costs. The Crossing will affect rail operations and expenses due to increased liability and some maintenance costs. The County would also bear increased liability and would bear most, if not all, of the costs of maintenance, operation, and construction. The effect on rail operations would occur primarily during the construction phase of the Crossing. The effects on operations of the rail would be limited since no switching movements of trains in the area of the Crossing will occur, and based upon the fact that only a single track exists in the area of the Crossing. The parties did not attempt to quantify the extent of the effect on Petitioner's operations other than to anecdotally state that delays could occur, affecting crew overtime and the scheduling of cars, which could result in missed connections. Safety hazards exist associated with a crossing during switching operations. When a train is stopped during switching operations, some motorists become impatient and attempt to pull around the train. Some pedestrians even attempt to crawl over or under the train. The locomotive and train engineer could be 20 to 30-car lengths away when this occurs, and not see the pedestrians or motorists when restarting the train. However, current rail switching north and south of the Crossing would not block the Crossing, and no evidence was produced to demonstrate that Petitioner planned to establish additional switching movements in the area. Vehicles carrying hazardous materials or wastes present a concern since they could cause harm if the chemicals or waste were released. Additionally, these vehicles are required to stop at railroad crossings, which could lead to rear-end collisions. School buses approaching the railway must also stop before crossing, which can also lead to rear-end collisions by motorists. The Department considered the design of the grade crossing and road approaches. The Department considered the angle of crossing and made recommendations to minimize any dangers associated with the Crossing. If necessary, modifications would be made to the crossing gates in order to sufficiently protect motorist, bicyclists and pedestrians from crossing the railway when a train approaches. The plans submitted by the County might require modification during the design phase of the project. The project meets or exceeds the Department's engineering and design criteria. The angle of skew of the Crossing is reasonable. The grade in the area of the Crossing is flat and the Crossing itself will be flat.
Recommendation Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered approving the requested permit for opening a public railroad-highway grade crossing at 44th Avenue East, between mile posts SW 912.27 and SW 911.87, in Manatee County, Florida. DONE AND ENTERED this 16th day of November, 2006, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S ROBERT S. COHEN 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 16th day of November, 2006. COPIES FURNISHED: Bruce R. Conroy, Esquire Chief, Administrative Law & Real Property Division Department of Transportation Hayden Burns Building, Mail Station 58 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0458 Lawrence N. Curtin, Esquire Holland & Knight, LLP 315 South Calhoun Street, Suite 600 Post Office Box 810 Tallahassee, Florida 32302-0810 Rodney C. Wade, Esquire Robert Michael Eschenfelder, Esquire Manatee County Attorney's Office Post Office Box 1000 Bradenton, Florida 34206-1000 James C. Myers, Clerk of Agency Proceedings Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street, Mail Station 58 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450 Pamela Leslie, General Counsel Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street, Mail Station 58 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450 Denver Stutler, Secretary Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street, Mail Station 58 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450
