Findings Of Fact The railroad crossing which is the subject of this proceeding is crossing number 272859-B, in the City of Florida City, Florida. Its location at N.W. 14th Street is approximately 700 feet north of an existing crossing located at Lucy Street, and roughly 1900 feet south of a present crossing located at Arthur Vining Davis Parkway. The Railway's rationale for closing the N.W. 14th Street crossing is that these other two nearby crossings offer practical alternate routes to the N.W. 14th Street crossing, and can provide public access and emergency services to the area. The City's opposition is based on its contention that closure of the N.W. 14th Street crossing would affect emergency access to the area. The principal justification for the closure of the N.W. 14th Street crossing is its proximity to the other crossings located at Arthur Vining Davis Parkway and Lucy Street, and the resulting improvement in safety for vehicular traffic and railroad equipment. Removal of the subject crossing would eliminate vehicular accidents on the tracks, and eliminate upkeep and maintenance expenses caused by frequent vandalism at the N.W 14th Street crossing location. In addition, closure would eliminate the need to sound the train whistle at the N.W. 14th Street crossing which is located near a residential housing area. The Railway receives an average of two calls per week to report incidents of vandalism in the area of the N.W. 14th street crossing. This number of calls is above average compared to other crossings in the area. Moreover, closure of the subject crossing would permit the relocation of the signal devices now in use there to one of forty-four other crossings in or near Florida City. The traffic count taken in the vicinity of N.W. 14th Street, which is a local service road providing access to a single neighborhood, showed that about 600 vehicles per day use the crossing. Traffic counts taken at Lucy Street, a through street which provides service beyond any specific residential area, resulted in approximately 5,000 to 6,000 vehicles per day. The Lucy Street and Arthur Vining Davis Parkway crossings have sufficient capability to handle all traffic diverted to them if the 14th Street crossing should be closed. The N.W. 14th Street crossing also allows outside traffic to enter the residential area, contrary to good urban planning. By removal of the crossing, such through traffic would be eliminated. The alternate crossings at Lucy Street and Arthur Vining Davis parkway provide reasonable alternate routes, and removal of the subject crossing will not unduly inhibit access by emergency vehicles into the affected area. Although 75 percent of the calls the Florida City police receive originate from Cuban village, a heavily populated area surrounding N.W. 14th Street, if the subject crossing were closed, Lucy Street and Arthur Vining Davis Parkway could be used to respond to emergency police calls in the Cuban Village. Therefore, alternate routes are available for emergency access to the affected area. In addition, from a pedestrian safety standpoint, there is sufficient space along Lucy Street to allow pedestrians to walk there without being affected by vehicular traffic.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the application of Florida East Coast Railway Company to close the at-grade railroad crossing at N.W. 14th Street in Florida City, Florida, be granted. THIS RECOMMENDED ORDER entered on this 15 day of February, 1982, in Tallahassee, Florida. WILLIAM B. THOMAS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 15 day of February, 1982. COPIES FURNISHED: Charles B. Evans, Esquire One Malaga Street St. Augustine, Florida 32084 Thomas Tomassi, Esquire 137 N.W. 10th Street Homestead, Florida 33030 Charles G. Gardner, Esquire Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301
The Issue The issue is whether Respondent CSX Transportation, Inc.'s railroad crossing located on Old Kings Road in Jacksonville, Florida, meets the criteria for closure as set forth in Rule 14-46.003(2)(b), Florida Administrative Code.
Findings Of Fact History and Current Status of Crossing Old Kings Road has been in existence at least since 1837. The road was located in its approximate location in COJ's city limits prior to the arrival of the railroad. COJ owns and maintains Old Kings Road. The subject of this proceeding is a public at-grade railroad crossing ("the Crossing"), designated by FDOT as Crossing No. 621191C. The Crossing is located in the northwestern part of COJ in Duval County, Florida. The Crossing intersects with Old Kings Road, which has always been an important means of ingress and egress to downtown COJ for residents located west of the Crossing. A neighborhood association, the Grand Park Civic Club, requested that COJ build an overpass over the Crossing due to train blockages in the 1930's. The Crossing originally consisted of five tracks. Later it was increased to seven tracks. In 1995, CSXT requested COJ to consider closing the Crossing. COJ refused this request. In April 1997, CSXT filed an application with FDOT to close the Crossing. Neither CSXT nor FDOT gave COJ immediate notice that FDOT was considering the application. However, as early as January 15, 1998, CSXT was aware that COJ opposed the closing. In July 1998, CSXT closed the Crossing for repairs with COJ's acquiescence. COJ understood originally that the repairs would last from two to four weeks. Some months later, COJ learned that the Crossing might not reopen until December 1998. COJ learned about CSXT's application to close the Crossing sometime during the fall of 1998. At that time, FDOT verbally conveyed the information about the pending application for closure of the Crossing to COJ. In October 1998, COJ wrote a letter requesting FDOT's assistance in opening the Crossing because FDOT had not issued a permit to close it. Then in February 1999, CSXT advised FDOT by letter that CSXT and COJ were engaged in negotiations regarding closure of the Crossing. In August 1999, FDOT suspended consideration of the application pending the on-going negotiations between COJ and CSXT. In a February 2000 letter, COJ again requested FDOT to reopen the Crossing until such time as formal hearings were held and/or the parties could enter into a stipulation. FDOT's consideration of the application remained suspended at that time. In October 2000, CSXT requested that FDOT reopen the file on its application. By letter November 1, 2000, FDOT advised CSXT that the file would be reopened. On January 31, 2001, FDOT issued a Notice of Intent to Issue a Permit to close the Crossing. The Crossing remained closed at the time of the formal hearing. The Crossing CSXT conducts freight rail operations on railroad tracks that run in a northwest - southeast direction across Old Kings Road in Jacksonville, Florida. The Crossing is located within the yard limits of CSXT’s Moncrief Yard, a large classification yard for CSXT trains. CSXT removed the two westernmost tracks and the roadbed at the Crossing after closing it in July 1998. Currently, the Crossing has a total of five parallel railroad tracks that cross the road at a skewed angle of approximately 20 degrees. The distance across the existing tracks is 276 feet. On both sides of the Crossing, Old Kings Road is a two-lane highway with no sidewalks. The Crossing has more railroad tracks than any other railroad crossing in Jacksonville, Florida. The Crossing has automatic crossing gates and flashing signal lights. CSXT disconnected these traffic control devices when CSXT closed the Crossing in July 1998. FDOT has no plans to upgrade the traffic control devices regardless of whether the Crossing is reopened or remains closed. The Crossing is located in an urban area. The next crossing point over the CSXT rail lines is located at the Edgewood Avenue Bridge, 1.35 miles to the north as measured along the rails. Going south, again measuring along the rails, the next CSXT crossing is 1.7 miles away at McQuade Street. The McQuade Street crossing is located at the southern end of Moncrief Yard. The easternmost track at the Crossing is the CSXT mainline track. The mainline track is the primary track for Amtrak passenger trains and CSXT freight trains that do not require switching or maintenance in the Moncrief Yard. The speed limit for trains using the mainline track is 40 miles per hour. The remaining four tracks at the Crossing are yard tracks, which CSXT uses for the assembly of trains on the north end of the Moncrief Yard, as well as inbound and outbound freight train arrivals and departures. The four yard tracks have a speed limit of 10 miles per hour. Train Movements at Old Kings Road Crossing There are approximately 100 train movements, including switching movements across the Crossing on a daily basis. Switching movements in the Moncrief Yard involve the assembly and disassembly of trains through the movement of freight cars into designated yard tracks. Switching movements take place in the Moncrief Yard 24 hours per day, seven days per week, except for Christmas, Thanksgiving and select holidays. Switching movements are carried out primarily at the north end of Moncrief Yard near the Crossing because the track layout at that end is best suited for such operations. Other parts of the yard do not lend themselves to efficient switching operations. In order to be switched, a cut of railroad cars must be moved back and forth repeatedly, with pauses between movements. Once switching is complete, federal law requires the train's brakes to be checked. The train then must wait for the track to be clear of other train traffic before departing. Often a cut of railroad cars will pull close enough to the Crossing to activate the warning lights and gates without actually blocking the roadway. When that happens, a motorist will see an open roadway and a stopped train that is the apparent cause of the activation of the warning devices. This circumstance creates a uniquely hazardous situation for motorists and pedestrians. CSXT operates between 11 and 22 intermodal trains daily through Moncrief Yard, which is an unusually extensive operation. Approximately 40 locomotives per day are serviced in the yard. Amtrak operates daily approximately nine scheduled movements over the mainline track throughout the day and night. Due to its proximity to the Moncrief Yard, Old Kings Road is regularly blocked by trains engaged in switching movements that travel back and forth across the Crossing, in addition to other train traffic. There is no practical method of operating the Moncrief Yard without blocking Old Kings Road for extended periods of time. This is the only CSXT railroad crossing in the State of Florida that is regularly blocked by switching movements for extended periods of time. On November 29 and 30, 2000, CSXT studied the amount of time that the Crossing was blocked by train movements. The study demonstrated that train traffic blocked the Crossing for a total of 12 hours and six minutes during a 24-hour period of time. Such blockage has consistently existed at the Crossing for 30 years or more. On July 31 through August 2, 2001, COJ studied the amount of time that the Crossing was blocked by train movements. The results of the COJ study were consistent with the CSXT study of train blockages at the Crossing. The surveys performed by CSXT and COJ to determine the time that trains blocked the Crossing measured only the amount of time that one or more trains actually blocked Old Kings Road. If the Crossing were open to traffic, Old Kings Road would be blocked for even longer periods of time because the flashing lights and gates would activate before the trains arrived at the Crossing. Motor Vehicle Traffic at the Crossing From 1991 to 1997, the average daily traffic volume in the vicinity of the Old Kings Road crossing was less than 2,000 vehicles per day. The motor vehicle traffic volume at Old Kings Road is considered a low traffic count by FDOT standards. The traffic volume at the Crossing is far too low to justify expending the funds and other resources necessary to construct an overpass. Safety Effects upon Rail and Vehicle Traffic Some of the facts necessary to determine safety effects upon rail and vehicle traffic are discussed in paragraph 20. Due to the height and length of slow-moving or stopped trains involved in switching operations on some or all of the four railroad tracks to the west of the CSXT main line, motorists approaching the crossing from the west cannot see fast-moving trains, including Amtrak passenger trains, approaching the Crossing on the CSXT mainline. Likewise, the 20-degree skew of the intersection makes it difficult for westbound motorists on the east side of the Crossing to look to their left to determine whether a northbound train is approaching. Motorists frustrated by the long wait times at the Crossing regularly drive around the crossing gates. They take this risk often under the mistaken belief that stopped or slow moving trains have activated the signal lights and gates. At times vehicles fall off the roadway as drivers attempt to go around trains partially blocking the roadway. Drivers also become distracted by the beveled and rough roadway surface between the numerous tracts. These circumstances, together with the regular and extended blockages, give motorists a high probability of interacting with train traffic while simultaneously almost inviting them to run the gates. COJ’s neighborhood witnesses testified that they either personally drove around the lowered crossing gates at the Crossing or observed other motorists driving around the gates in order to avoid extended train delays. COJ witnesses, Rebecca Jenkins and Talmadge Ford, have observed two to four vehicles driving around the crossing gates at the same time. Motor vehicles have also been stranded on the railroad tracks on several occasions when motorists drove around the lowered gates and left the paved road area at the Crossing. The safety hazards present are unique to the Crossing based upon the presence of a substantial number of train- switching movements over the crossing, multiple tracks with trains of varying speeds, motorist frustration over train delays, obstructions to visibility and a general misapprehension by the motoring public of the nature of yard switching movements. Unlike the Crossing, the majority of railroad crossings do not contain multiple railroad tracks within yard limits with trains performing different operations at different rates of speed. Due to the skewed angle of the Crossing, the presence of five railroad tracks, and the location of the crossing gates, the distance that a motor vehicle or pedestrian must travel to traverse the Crossing is 397 feet. Even if the signal lights were relocated closer to the railroad tracks, the distance across Old Kings Road would be approximately 276 feet, the actual distance across the tracks. The substantial length and the skewed angle of the Crossing reduce visibility for motorists and increase the probability of a crossing accident. The use of commercial trucks over the Crossing on a regular basis would substantially increase the danger of an accident due to the distance that a truck must travel over the Crossing under normal operating conditions. Because of their length, large commercial trucks take longer to clear a crossing than a car traveling at the same speed. There were at least 12 railroad-crossing accidents at the Crossing from 1975 until 1998. Most of these accidents occurred on account of violation of law by drivers or pedestrians. One of these, a motor vehicle accident, resulted in a fatality. Six of the eight accidents involving a motorist resulted in no personal injury. Even so, the Crossing had the highest number of grade-crossing accidents in Jacksonville, Florida, from 1975 until 1998. In January 2001, COJ commissioned a Jacksonville engineering firm, Waitz and Moye, to perform a study of 10 railroad crossings in the northwest quadrant of Jacksonville, Florida. This study included the Crossing, which had the highest number of accidents of the 10 railroad crossings. There were twice as many accidents at the Crossing than the crossing with the second highest number of accidents, despite the fact that the Crossing had one of the lowest traffic volumes. In addition to accidents, there have been numerous near-miss incidents at the Crossing, where motorists driving around the crossing gates narrowly avoided injuries. Due to obstructions to visibility, an Amtrak train traveling 40 miles per hour on the CSXT main line does not have sufficient time to avoid a collision at the Crossing. Mr. Darryl Murray, the Service Manager for Amtrak, testified that he regularly operated trains over the Crossing from 1974 until 1986 with the Seaboard Coastline Railroad, and from 1986 until 1991 with Amtrak. Since 1991, Mr. Murray has directly supervised Amtrak train crews that operate over the Crossing. Mr. Murray testified there are other crossings that are just as busy as the Crossing. He admitted that the Crossing would be safer in the future because the two western-most tracks have been removed. However, according to Mr. Murray, the Crossing is one of the most dangerous railroad crossings that he has encountered during his railroad career. According to Mr. Murray, a crossing accident involving an Amtrak passenger train traveling 40 miles per hour at Old Kings Road could result in serious personal injury or death to the motor vehicle occupants and train crew; derailment of the train; and injuries to Amtrak passengers due to the emergency braking application of the train. In the early to mid 1990's, Mr. Murray personally investigated an accident involving an Amtrak train and a passenger vehicle at the Crossing, which resulted in serious personal injuries to the motorist. Mr. Kevin Carter, a manager for Resource Logistics International ("RLI"), testified that if the Crossing were re-opened, RLI trucks carrying 80,000 pounds of aluminum would use it during transport. Mr. Carter has seen one or two of his truck drivers go around the gates at the Crossing and was aware of other trucks going around the lowered gates. Mr. Carter has disciplined at least one of his drivers for driving around railroad crossing gates in the down position. CSXT also presented the testimony of experienced railroad employees who have worked in the Moncrief Yard at the Crossing on a daily basis for many years. CSXT employees testified that, due to its location in the middle of an active switching yard, the Crossing is the most dangerous railroad crossing in Jacksonville, Florida. In addition to motor vehicle accidents at the Crossing, the evidence established a serious safety hazard involving pedestrians. Prior to its closing in 1998, pedestrians regularly climbed between freight cars stopped at the Crossing in order to avoid extended train blockages. Additionally, pedestrians regularly placed their bicycles over or under the coupling mechanism that connects railroad cars while attempting to climb between railroad cars. Several of the accidents at the Crossing involved serious injuries to pedestrians who were trapped between freight cars when the train suddenly moved. The number of pedestrians at the Crossing has decreased since its closure. There have been no accidents at the Old Kings Road crossing since its closure in 1998. If the Crossing were closed, protective measures could be taken to more effectively discourage trespasser access, including cul-de-sacs, road barriers, fencing and signage. COJ has determined there is sufficient land to build cul-de-sacs at the Crossing. On the other hand, it is impossible to completely block pedestrians from using the Crossing if they are intent on doing so. In an effort to assess safety hazards at the Crossing, COJ presented evidence about the FDOT Safety Index. FDOT uses the safety index to determine the prioritization of upgrades for crossings that do not have automatic gates and signal lights. FDOT does not utilize the safety index for its closure analysis. The FDOT safety index for prioritizing crossing-warning device upgrades does not determine the dangerousness of a railroad crossing. The federal government requires FDOT to create the safety index annually. From among the top 800 crossings, FDOT determines which crossings receive funding for improvement of warning devices. The maximum protection that FDOT currently permits is flashing lights and automatic gates. Crossings that rank in the top 800 on the safety index and that already have lights and gates do not receive funding because no further improvement is available. In effect, the safety index report serves only to identify problematic crossings. With annual funding of only approximately $5 million, FDOT improves about 30 crossings per year. Although the Crossing had automatic gates and flashing signal lights before they were disconnected in July 1998, the current FDOT Safety Index indicates that the Crossing has a safety index rank of 561 out of 4500 railroad crossings in the state. This does not mean that FDOT considers 560 other crossings to have greater priority for upgrades than the Crossing. Because the safety index report continues to assign a high rank to the Crossing, which already has lights and gates, the only way FDOT can make the Crossing safer is to close it. Even so, using the FDOT safety index ranking and correct factual assumptions, the safety index number for the Crossing is approximately 50, which is less than the marginal safety level index number of 60 set by FDOT. FDOT guidelines indicate that a crossing should be considered for improvements at a safety level index of 60. FDOT uses a separate program to consider overpass construction for crossings. As stated above, the low traffic count and the availability of the Edgewood Avenue overpass less than two miles away means that the Crossing does not warrant the expenditures required for construction of an overpass. The automatic gates at the Crossing are part of a two-quadrant gate system. Petitioners have proposed that four-quadrant gates and a median be constructed in order to deter motorists from going around the gates. The appeal of a four-quadrant gate system is that it blocks both lanes of travel on both sides of a crossing. A four-quadrant system discourages more people from running the gates than does a two-quadrant gate system. However, people at times run four-quadrant gates and would be likely to do so at the Crossing. An activated four-quadrant gate system could block a vehicle attempting to get out of the Crossing. FDOT uses two-quadrant gate systems because they leave the exit from a crossing unobstructed. An exit for vehicles at the Crossing is especially important because of the unusual width and the constant activation of the gates by switching trains. A four-quadrant gate system would neither redress the extremely dangerous conditions at the crossing nor change the incentives for people to run the gates. FDOT does not currently permit four-quadrant gates at crossings like the one at issue here. Additionally, the Federal Highway Administration has not authorized installation of four- quadrant gates as a standard recommended practice. Other states do use four-quadrant gates on an experimental basis. Finally, installing a four-quadrant gate system at the crossing would cost between $500,000 and $1,500,000. Necessity, Convenience and Utilization of Remaining Routes Where Practical In the area of the Crossing, Old Kings Road connects New Kings Road and Edgewood Avenue. The intersection of Old Kings Road and New Kings Road is located at a distance of approximately 100 yards to the east of the Crossing. New Kings Road is a four-lane highway that curves at its intersection with Old Kings Road, going east through the neighborhood of Grand Park and becoming Kings Road and US 23. Kings Road is a thoroughfare to downtown COJ in this direction. In the other direction, New Kings Road runs north, paralleling the CSXT mainline track, which is to the west for some distance. In this area, New Kings Road forms the western end of the Grand Park neighborhood. As New Kings Road runs north, it becomes U.S. 1/23 about one-half mile from the Old Kings Road intersection. New Kings Road is also a heavily traveled four-lane highway. On the west side of the Crossing, 20th Street West and St. Clair Street, both of which are two-lane streets, dead end into Old Kings Road, with 20th Street West running west and St. Clair Street running south. Further to the west, Old Kings Road intersects with Edgewood Avenue, a four-lane state highway running north and south. The neighborhood directly to the west and south of Old Kings Road is known as the Paxon community. Running north from the intersection with Old Kings Road, Edgewood Avenue intersects New Kings Road (US 1/23). Just before this intersection, Edgewood Avenue separates from grade and becomes a viaduct (overpass) that crosses the CSXT mainline tracks. Traveling this route and then turning south on New Kings Road, a vehicle would reach the intersection of New Kings Road and Old Kings Road. If one is located on the west side of the Crossing, and the Crossing is closed, this route is the shortest distance to the east side of the Crossing. The distance going around the Crossing from west to east (clockwise), starting at the intersection of Old Kings Road and St. Clair Street and finishing at the intersection of Old Kings Road and New Kings Road is approximately 3.26 miles. Going in the opposite direction (counterclockwise) the distance is approximately 3.28 miles. These distances were calculated as averages after making six vehicle travel runs in a clockwise direction (west to east) and five vehicle travel runs in a counterclockwise direction (east to west) respectively. Traveling around the Crossing in a southern direction, either from west to east or east to west would require going all the way to the McQuade Street crossing, or to the Beaver Street viaduct, just south of McQuade Street. The southern route involves distances substantially in excess of those along the Edgewood Avenue - New Kings Road route to the north. All of the major interstates in Jacksonville can be conveniently reached via New Kings Road or Edgewood Avenue. Motorists traveling west on Old Kings Road over the Crossing would have to cross several other railroad crossings in order to reach Edgewood Avenue. In addition to the significant train blockages at the Crossing, significant train blockages exist at Norfolk Southern’s Old Kings Road crossing due to the proximity of the crossing to Norfolk Southern’s Simpson Yard. A little over one-half mile to the west of the Crossing, and to the north and south thereof, the Norfolk Southern mainline tracks run parallel to the CSXT tracks and also cross Old Kings Road. The Norfolk Southern tracks cross St. Clair Street, 20th Street West and Old Kings Road, going south to north. Immediately north of Old Kings Road those tracks comprise the southern end of Norfolk Southern's Simpson Yard, a switching yard like Moncrief Yard. Norfolk Southern trains at times block St. Clair Street, 20th Street West, and Old Kings Road all at the same time. When this occurs, with the Crossing closed, the area inside the triangle formed by Old Kings Road, the Norfolk Southern tracks, and St. Clair Street becomes landlocked, making ingress and egress to the area impossible. Norfolk Southern trains block the Norfolk Southern crossing across Old Kings Road approximately six out of 24 hours a day. CSXT trains block the Crossing on an average of at least nine or more hours a day and as much as 12 hours a day. Trains block Old Kings Road, 20th Street West, and St. Clair Street all three simultaneously approximately nine times a day, for periods ranging between 1.29 minutes and 15 minutes, with an average blockage time of 6.5 minutes. On the high side, the triangle area might be completely blocked for as much as 2.25 hours per day total. On some occasions since the Crossing was closed, people within the triangle may have been unable to enter or leave the triangle for as much as 30 minutes or more at a time. This might have been the case one or more times a day. It is also true that the total blockage would be somewhat decreased with the Crossing open because it would provide an additional entrance or exit. However, even with the Crossing open, trains will still block the triangle area for approximately 40 percent of the time out of a 24-hour day. Motorists using the alternate route over New Kings Road and Edgewood Avenue would encounter one railroad crossing on New Kings Road. Trains block the New Kings Road crossing for up to 30 minutes at a time, less than one hour of total blockage during an average 12-hour period from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Approximately 2000 to 3000 people live in the Grand Park community on the east side of the Crossing. The same number of people live in the Paxon community on the west side of the Crossing. These residents oppose the closing of the Crossing for many reasons, including the following: (a) People from Grand Park on the east side of the Crossing participate in community activities such as Little League Baseball at the Joe Hammond Center near the west side of the Crossing; (b) Children in Grand Park go to school at Paxon Middle School and Paxon High School; and (c) Grocery stores, stores such as Home Depot, and other shopping facilities are located on the west side of the Crossing. If the Crossing remains closed, these people will suffer some inconvenience in having to travel the alternate route over New Kings Road and Edgewood Avenue. However, the Edgewood Avenue overpass on the alternate route provides the Paxon and Grand Park residents access to either side of the Crossing without crossing any of railroad tracks along Old Kings Road. If a motorist traveled a loop from the east side to the west side of the Crossing using the alternate route over New Kings Road and Edgewood Avenue, the total amount of travel time would be between five and 10 minutes depending on the time of day and the amount of traffic. In order to calculate the additional burden on motorists using the alternate route, a reduction would have to be taken for the amount of time that a motorist would have to travel 6,746 feet from the Crossing to Edgewood Avenue. FDOT grades levels of road service from "A" to "F", with "A" being the highest level of service. Roads with an "A" level of service have the ability to handle considerably more vehicle traffic without causing delays in traffic movement. The level of service for New Kings Road and Edgewood Avenue is an "A" level of service. Therefore, the alternate route is in good condition and able to accommodate the additional traffic volume that results from the closure of the Crossing. Due to the significant train blockages at the CSXT and Norfolk Southern Old Kings Road crossings, the alternate route over New Kings Road and Edgewood Avenue is a more reliable route for motorists. The alternate route over New Kings Road and Edgewood Avenue takes significantly less travel time for motorists than Old Kings Road if the CSXT or Norfolk Southern crossings on Old Kings Road are blocked by train traffic. It is undisputed that a substantial volume of rail traffic utilizes the CSXT tracts at Old Kings Road. However, the trains in the Moncrief Yard are no longer than they were in the 1960s. In fact, there are probably 500 less train cars in the yard and traveling across the Crossing than there were back then. CSXT's business operation will not changed or be affected regardless of whether the Crossing is open or closed. CSXT has no business necessity to have the Crossing closed, apart from its dangerousness. It is true that the closing of the Crossing will result in some inconvenience to three residential homes and two businesses, Tremron and RLI, located within the triangle formed by the Norfolk Southern mainline, Old Kings Road and St. Claire Street. However, the triangle existed before these homes were constructed and before the businesses were established. Anyone locating a home or business in the triangle area between two railroad yards and two railroad tracks knew or should have known that train blockages were going to be a problem. Prior to the closing of the Crossing, the homeowners in the triangle used St. Clair Street as their primary access route. They used the Crossing mainly when the St. Clair Street crossing was blocked. Tremron purchased its St. Clair Street business premises in June 2000, after the Crossing had been closed for almost two years. Prior to the purchase of the business premises, Tremron represented to the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission that it had performed an initial feasibility study and concluded that the current roadways and public utilities were adequate to meet the demands for the new facility. Tremron, which manufactures cement pavers, has 10 to 40 trucks entering and leaving the company's premises in a day. If the Crossing were open and not blocked by trains, the best access to I-95 for Tremron's trucks would be through the Crossing. Additionally, because the Crossing is closed, Tremron's employees have problems with access to and from work when the triangle is sealed. Tremron performed surveys of train traffic at the Norfolk Southern St. Clair Street and 20th Street West crossings in October and November 2000, and the Crossing in July 2001. The surveys measured the maximum amount of time the St. Clair Street crossing was blocked by train traffic and not actual vehicle delays at the crossing. A COJ study recorded actual vehicle delays using a proper methodology at ten crossings in the area of Old Kings Road. However, this study did not include a survey of vehicle delays at the Norfolk Southern St. Clair Street crossing. CSXT studied train blockages at the Norfolk Southern St. Clair Street crossing on June 13 and 14, 2001. The results of the CSXT surveys provide persuasive evidence that no significant train delays exist at St. Claire Street. After the date of the Tremron train delay studies at the St. Clair Street crossing, Tremron’s President, Hugh Caron, reached a cooperative arrangement with Norfolk Southern whereby the railroad agreed to reduce train blockages at St. Clair Street. Mr. Caron and local triangle residents, Thomas Miller, Milton Holland and Rebecca Jenkins, testified that the cooperative arrangement was working in a satisfactory manner at the time of the final hearing. If the Crossing was open, Tremron and RLI trucks might be able to look down Old Kings Road to see if a train was blocking the Crossing before heading in that direction. But if a train blocks the tracks as the trucks approach the Crossing, they cannot turn around. In the event of a train blockage, RLI's trucks can use an alternate route through the Norfolk Southern Simpson Yard to circumvent the blocked crossing on an emergency basis. Additionally, Milton Holland, one of the three homeowners who reside in the triangle area, also uses the alternate route through the Norfolk Southern Simpson Yard to circumvent the Crossing when it is blocked. RLI is a trucking business that transports building material. It ships and receives material such as steel coils and plywood to and from the Norfolk Southern boxcars. It also transports metal containers to and from the two major Jacksonville seaports. RLI's facility on Old Kings Road serves as a warehouse for these shipments. RLI's tractor-trailers make 16 to 20 round trips a day from the warehouse to the seaports. Prior to July 1998, the tractor-trailers regularly used the Crossing when it was not blocked by train traffic. Even so, the RLI trucks and personnel were trapped within the triangle every now and then. With the closing of the Crossing, RLI's employees and trucks are trapped within the triangle on a more regular basis. RLI has not missed any shipments since the closure of the Crossing. Mr. Carter testified that, at this point in time, it did not make a difference to him whether the Old Kings Road Crossing remained closed. Centurion’s President, Harold Shafer, testified that none of his four automobile transport businesses, including Centurion, were impacted by the closure of the Crossing. According to Mr. Shafer, he owns a business in the triangle area known as Vehicle Transport, Inc., which builds racking systems for transporting automobiles in containers. Vehicle Transport, Inc., was not operating and had no employees at the time of the final hearing. Mr. Shafer is planning to reopen Vehicle Transport, Inc., contingent upon the business being a successful bidder on several contracts. In that event, Vehicle Transport, Inc., would employ 25 to 30 employees at the St. Clair facility. If Vehicle Transport, Inc., were to reopen for business on St. Claire Street with the Crossing closed, the company would suffer a loss in labor efficiency. However, Mr. Shafer's primary concern would be the occasional unavailability of emergency fire and rescue service, not access for his business resulting from the closing of the Crossing. Petitioners' expert witness, Geoff Pappas, presented evidence of an economic impacts study, concluding that the businesses located within the triangle had suffered economic losses due to the Crossing's closure. Rather than examining the business records of these companies, Mr. Pappas based his analysis on estimated projected losses due to the cost of additional motor fuel consumed by commercial trucks accessing the businesses via the alternate route and due to the cost of paying employees for lost time spent waiting at one of the Norfolk Southern crossings. Mr. Pappas opined that RLI's fuel expense has increased by $3,000 per year since the closing of the Crossing. He concluded that the company has experienced over $55,200 per year in lost labor because of the time the employees spend waiting on trains to clear the tracks. According to Mr. Papas, other trucking companies making deliveries to RLI's facility have also incurred significant financial losses. As to Tremron, Mr. Pappas testified that the company loses approximately $42,000 per year in labor efficiency because the employees spend so much time waiting for the tracks to clear within the triangle. Tremron pays outside truck drivers to deliver its products by the truckload; therefore, Mr. Pappas asserted that firms delivering to Tremron have incurred approximately $13,450 in additional fuel expenditures per year because the Crossing is closed. Mr. Pappas calculated these economic losses for Tremron beginning in 1998 even though Tremron did not open its business facility until 2000. In support for his projected fuel consumption cost analysis, Mr. Pappas assumed that each and every truck would have accessed the triangle area via the Crossing if it had been open. Mr. Pappas also assumed that each and every truck used the alternate route because of the Crossing's closure. On cross-examination, Mr. Pappas had to concede the following: (a) Any truck going to or coming from Interstate 10, Interstate 295, or going to northbound Interstate 95 would access the triangle area using a crossing other than the one at issue here; (b) An origin and destination study needs to be conducted to accurately determine the percentage of commercial traffic actually utilizing the alternate route; (c) If an origin and destination study had been conducted, it would have shown that the trucks would have used the Norfolk Southern crossing at least some of the time; and (d) The analysis did not consider the impact of regular blockages at the Crossing. Mr. Pappas admitted that his analysis was "a last minute review" that could have been "much more accurate." In support of his lost wages cost analysis, Mr. Papas estimated that every employee of each business would make four trips into or out of the triangle area every working day of the year. He estimated that each and every trip would incur a 15-minute delay due to train blockages on the Norfolk Southern line. Thus, Mr. Pappas concluded that each and every employee was estimated to lose one hour every working day. By multiplying the estimated number of employees of each business by the estimated average hourly wage paid by that business, then doubling that amount to account for "indirect wage losses," Mr. Pappas estimated the dollar amount of wages lost daily by each business. By multiplying that product by the number of working days in a year, Mr. Pappas estimated the annual loss to each business. Mr. Pappas's lost wages cost analysis assumed that each and every trip into or out of the triangle area would have been made via the Crossing had it been open. He further assumed that each business paid their employees for the time they spent waiting at a rail crossing coming to or leaving work. On cross-examination, Mr. Pappas conceded the following: (a) Employees would not be paid for time spent waiting at a crossing after leaving work; (b) Employees might not leave work for lunch; and (c) Such trips would have to be deducted from the analysis. There is no doubt that RLI and Tremron have incurred an adverse financial impact due to the closure of the Crossing. However, for the reasons set forth above, Mr. Pappas's cost analysis studies and his testimony in support thereof, cannot be relied upon to accurately reflect that impact. Pedestrian Convenience It is undisputed that the Crossing was not designed for pedestrian or bicycle use. Nevertheless, persuasive evidence indicates that pedestrians and bicyclists used the Crossing before it was closed. They have continued to cross the tracks since CSXT removed the crossing roadway in July 1998. One survey indicates that as many as six pedestrians used the Crossing during a 24-hour period in 2001. Other evidence indicates that at least 15 pedestrians used the Crossing during an eight-hour period in 2001. These pedestrians include a lot of Grand Park community residents who do not own motor vehicles and therefore need to walk or rely on other means of transportation. It would take over an hour for a brisk walker to walk the proposed alternate route around the Crossing, a distance of 3.26 miles. The alternate route is also dangerous for pedestrians because both Edgewood Avenue and New Kings Road (U.S. 1/23) are four-lane highways with no sidewalks. Additionally, the overpass on Edgewood Avenue has cement barriers that block off and reduce the size of the sidewalks so that they are impassible. Thus a pedestrian must walk right next to the auto lanes on the viaduct. Public bus service provided by the Jacksonville Transportation Authority (JTA) connects the neighborhoods on both sides of the Crossing. Some time shortly before the final hearing, a CSXT witness followed two buses that connect the Paxon community and the Grand Park community on the eastern side of the Edgewood Avenue overpass. Additionally, CSXT and COJ provided exhibits which clearly show that pedestrians on both sides of the Crossing have reasonable access to bus transportation over the alternate route, on weekdays and weekends, without having to walk an unreasonable distance. The pedestrian safety hazards at the Crossing substantially outweigh any limited pedestrian inconvenience that would result from the closing of the Crossing. Excessive Restriction to Emergency Type Vehicles Resulting from Closing The Jacksonville Fire and Rescue Department naturally has some concerns that it will be unable to provide timely emergency services in the triangle area when it is sealed. This is more likely to happen with the Crossing closed. Old Kings Road has always been an area of limited access for fire and rescue crews due to the amount of train blockages at the Crossing. The response time of fire and rescue services could be reduced by one minute if the Crossing were open and not blocked by a train. One minute can mean the difference between life and death in an emergency situation. Prior to its closing, emergency vehicles were dispatched from the east side of the Crossing (from fire and rescue Station 7) to cover emergency calls on the west side of the Crossing. Since the closure of the Crossing, the Jacksonville Fire and Rescue Department has modified its response procedures to handle fire and rescue calls for the west side of the Crossing by placing a new fire and rescue station (Station 17) located on Huron Street, west of and less than two miles from the Crossing. Huron Street connects with St. Claire Street south of the Norfolk Southern crossing. Stations 7 and 17 cannot maximize their potential by providing overlapping fire and rescue services because of the closure of the Crossing. Instead, the two stations serve as backup units for each other. The change in fire and rescue response procedures was required in part due to the closure of the Crossing. It also was necessary to meet increasing demand for service on the west side of the Crossing and to ensure emergency service when there were simultaneous multiple calls. RLI and Tremron also are concerned that emergency services will not arrive timely if the Crossing is closed and the triangle area is sealed. RLI has 16 to 18 employees. In August 2001, a Norfolk Southern train was blocking 20th Street West and St. Clair Street when one of RLI's employees required emergency medical services. Norfolk Southern had to break the train so that rescue services could answer the emergency call. The rescue response time on that occasion was 12 minutes. Tremron has 12 employees. Sometime in 2001, Tremron had to call for emergency medical help for an employee who was experiencing an asthma panic attack. The emergency response vehicle took 30 minutes to respond to Tremron's facility. The record does not indicate whether a train sealed the triangle area at that time. Despite the above-referenced incidents, the average response times for the three fire and rescue zones in the area of the Crossing have significantly improved since its closure in 1998. For example, fire and rescue Zone 5370 includes the triangle area. The average response time for fire response in Zone 5370 was 6.1 minutes in 1997 and 4.7 minutes in 1999 and 2000. The average response time for emergency medical response in Zone 5370 was 8.6 minutes in 1997, 5.7 minutes in 1999, and 6.2 minutes in 2000. The Jacksonville Fire and Rescue Department considers six minutes to be the optimum response time for emergency medical response. Regardless of the closing of the Crossing, there may be times when fire and rescue vehicles need to request that a train be broken in order to access the triangle area. While fire and rescue personnel prefer that the Crossing be open, any restriction to fire and rescue vehicles as a result of the closure of the Crossing has not been and will not be excessive. The Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office has good overlapping vehicle coverage on both sides of the Crossing. There was no evidence presented that police calls have been or would be delayed as the result of the closing of the Crossing. There is evidence that the police do not patrol along Old Kings Road as often as they did before the Crossing was closed. Nevertheless, any restrictions to police patrol vehicles as a result of the closure of the Crossing have not been excessive. I. Effect of Closing on Rail Operations And Expenses Although CSXT has no business necessity to keep the Crossing closed, crossing accidents impact the railroad's operations. This occurs when train crews are relieved from duty and lose time from work dealing with the emotional effects or psychological trauma caused by witnessing serious accidents. Additionally, CSXT has significant liability exposure for crossing accidents at the Crossing, including physical and emotional injury claims brought by motorists, passengers, train crews and pedestrians based upon the proximity of the Crossing to the Moncrief Yard. So far, CSXT has paid approximately $500,000 for claims arising out of accidents at the Old Kings Road crossing, exclusive of attorney’s fees and costs. Amtrak has paid approximately $100,000.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED: That FDOT enter a final order granting CSXT a permit to close the Crossing. DONE AND ENTERED this 11th day of February, 2002, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. SUZANNE F. HOOD 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 11th day of February, 2002. COPIES FURNISHED: William Graessle, Esquire Winegeart & Graessle, P.A. 219 North Newman Street Fourth Floor Jacksonville, Florida 32202-3222 Eric L. Leach, Esquire Milton, Leach, D'Andrea & Ritter, P.A. 815 Main Street, Suite 200 Jacksonville, Florida 32207 Scott A. Matthews, Esquire Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street Mail Station 58 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450 Ernst D. Mueller, Esquire City of Jacksonville Office of the General Counsel 117 West Duval Street, Suite 480 Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Harold A. Shafer Centurion Auto Transport 5912 New Kings Road Jacksonville, Florida 32209 James C. Myers, Clerk of Agency Proceedings Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street Haydon Burns Building, Mail Station 58 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450 Pamela Leslie, General Counsel Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street Haydon Burns Building, Mail Station 58 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450
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 The standards for opening an at-grade railroad crossing are set forth in Rule 14-46.03(2), Florida Administrative Code, which provides: (a) Opening Public Grade Crossings - The foremost criteria in the opening of grade crossings is the necessity, convenience and safety of rail and vehicle traffic. Existing routes should be utilized where practical. Damage to the railroad company's operation and railroad safety consideration must be a factor in permitting a new grade crossing. ... The issues set out above and agreed to by the parties are: Necessity; Convenience (to the public); Safety to railroad and vehicular traffic; and Whether existing routes should be utilized.
Findings Of Fact Necessity The City's application for the proposed public rail crossing within the city limits would connect Buffalo Road with Marina Road over the FEC's mainline track from Jacksonville to Miami, Florida. Buffalo and Marina Roads meet at right angles at the railroad track, with Marina Road running north and south parallel to and east of the railroad track and Buffalo Road running east and west to the west of the railroad track. The proposed crossing would tie the ends of these two streets together making a loop to and from US Highway 1, a major arterial route running north and south. Buffalo and Marina Roads provide access to all property, businesses and activities located along them within this area. These primary activities include two public recreational parks, a public marina, a restaurant, and a boat building works located in that order northward along Marina Road; and the primary activities on Buffalo Road are the City's sewage treatment plant and another portion of the boat building works, both of which are located at the east end of Buffalo Road. The proposed crossing is not required to obtain access to any location along these roads which would otherwise be landlocked. It is only approximately 1.7 miles from one side of the railroad track to the other side by the existing route; however, few members of the general public would make such a trip because of the activities located by the railroad tracks. Most of the projected traffic over the proposed crossing would be through traffic exiting or entering the Marina Road recreational area. This traffic would travel to US Highway 1 via Marina Road and Buffalo Road. The distance from the existing exit at Marina Road and US Highway 1 to the Buffalo Road and US Highway 1 intersection over the proposed route is 0.9 of a mile, almost the exact distance of the existing route. While the crossing would have great utility to the boat works, it is not necessary to the company's operations. Similarly, the proposed crossing would create another route to the recreational area for ambulances from the hospital located several blocks north of the Buffalo Road/US Highway 1 intersection. This route via the proposed crossing would not shorten the trip appreciably and certainly is not necessary. It would be operationally better for the fire department to have two accesses into the industrial area located at the ends of Buffalo and Marina Roads; however, it is not necessary for the fire department to have two routes, as is demonstrated by their successful responses to fires at both portions of the boat works. In summary, the distances involved and the available access to activities and businesses along Buffalo and Marina Roads do not sustain a finding that the proposed crossing is necessary. Convenience Many of the facts above, while not establishing a necessity for the proposed crossing, do establish that the crossing would be convenient. Two accesses into the activities located along both roads would be convenient to regular traffic and ambulances. It would be operationally desirable for the fire department to be able to approach a fire along these two roads from two directions. The proposed crossing would provide almost direct access between the two portions of the boat works now separated by the track. The development of the expanded recreational facilities along Marina Road will increase traffic volume, and at the periods of highest use, for example during softball tournaments, there is already congestion of traffic exiting Marina Road onto US Highway 1. However, the existing Marina Roads US Highway 1 intersection has a level of service A, or no traffic congestion during normal peak use. Further, the intersection would have no less than a level of service C rating with traffic volumes projected after full development of the recreational facilities. Level of service C is the optimum level of service from a planning standpoint considering cost effectiveness. Level of service C would be maintained with projected traffic volumes in spite of the intersection's configuration and location on a banked curve on the incline of the US Highway 1 overpass over the FEC's tracks. This configuration is not the safest possible; however, plans exist to move the Marina Road/US Highway 1 intersection south several hundred feet. This will greatly improve the configuration of this intersection and eliminate the safety problems of the existing intersection. When budgeted and completed this will make this intersection much safer than it is currently. As stated above in relationship to the issue of necessity, the majority of the traffic over the proposed crossing would be exiting or entering the Marina Road recreational complex. A comparison of the distances involved shows that traffic traveling from the Marina Road intersection to the Buffalo Road intersection over the existing route is only slightly inconvenienced. Safety There are two primary safety considerations: Railroad traffic safety and vehicular traffic safety. Railroad Safety: There is an average of 28 trains daily over the FEC's mainline track between Jacksonville and Miami, Florida, at the site of the proposed crossing. The proposed crossing is located on a curve between two curves. The characteristics of the curve north of the proposed crossing prevent a southbound train's crew from observing the actual crossing until the train is 1,200 feet from the crossing site. Due to vegetation along the roadways, the train crew must be almost at the crossing before they can see approaching vehicular traffic. The southbound trains travel at a speed of 48 miles per hour at the site of the proposed crossing and could not stop for an obstacle on the track from the point of initial observation. The characteristics of the curve south of the proposed crossing prevent the engineer of a northbound train from observing the crossing until very close to the crossing. Northbound trains travel at a speed of 35 miles per hour and would encounter great difficulty in stopping within the distance they would first observe an obstacle on the track. Vegetation and buildings restrict the northbound train crews observation of the vehicular approaches along Buffalo Road. This vegetation also restricts a driver's visibility of trains approaching from both the north and the south in three of four quadrants around the crossing. The restricted visibility makes train and vehicular traffic dependent upon warning signals and crossing protection devices. These devices suffer vandalism which can make them inoperable. The isolated location of the crossing would permit vandalism, as indicated by the damage to the dead end sign at the end of Buffalo Road observed during the view of the site. The FEC's data indicates that crossing warning devices do not eliminate crossing accidents. The FEC increased the number of protected crossings from 373 in 1976 to 510 in 1980, while the number of accidents at such crossings increased from 22 in 1976 to 42 in 1979. Such devices are not a substitute for good crossing layout and visibility. The dangers of this proposed crossing would place a continuing strain on train crews, and the only means of providing the margin of safety necessary is to slow the train's speed. This would adversely affect rail operations. Vehicular Safety: The layout of the proposed crossing creates hazards to vehicular traffic. To negotiate the crossing, north and southbound traffic would have to make a sharp 90-degree turn. At the proposed crossing the two roads have different widths and different elevations, making vehicle control and observation over the crossing's crest difficult. In addition Buffalo Road shifts its alignment to the left just prior to the crossing site. A southbound vehicle traveling east on Buffalo Road toward the crossing would have to move left just prior to the point where the road would widen and then make a right turn over the crossing. Failure to move left will cause a vehicle to hit the right cantilever standard, and failure to make the right turn will cause the vehicle to leave the roadway. The lack of room east of the track requires northbound traffic to approach the crossing parallel to the track and then make a 90-degree turn to cross the track. Again, the crossing's crest poses an obstacle to visibility of approaching traffic. The approach speeds for north and southbound traffic are extremely high for the proposed curve. Even with lower posted speed limits the isolation and road conditions will permit speeding along both roads. All of these factors raise the possibility of loss of control, which may result in vehicles leaving the traveled way and plunging into low areas surrounding the roads. Vehicular traffic which fails to make the curve could even plunge into the railroad right-of-way. Problems with this sharp curve are compounded by the inability to bank the road's curve properly and still maintain clearance for rail traffic. There are multiple safety problems with the proposed crossing, which create extremely hazardous conditions for vehicular traffic without consideration of the fact that the driver must also be alert for trains. The dangers at the existing intersection of Marina Road and US Highway 1 are small compared to those of the proposed crossing. In summary, the proposed crossing will expose the public to substantially greater dangers than those of the existing route. Use of the Existing Crossing There is an elevated, grade-separated crossing on US Highway 1 just south and slightly west of the proposed crossing. This provides class A service, the highest level of service possible, to vehicular traffic moving north and south on US Highway 1, or the same traffic which would use the proposed crossing. The US Highway 1 overpass, which is a four-lane major arterial road, will meet the projected traffic volumes until the year 2000. This existing crossing eliminates a railroad/vehicular traffic conflict point entirely. The US Highway 1 overpass provides the safest means of crossing the FEC's track for both rail and vehicular traffic at no appreciable inconvenience.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearing Officer recommends that the agency head deny the application to open an at-grade crossing at Buffalo Road. DONE and ORDERED this 11th day of March, 1981, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN, 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 11th day of March, 1981. COPIES FURNISHED: Appendix I (map) Appendix II (exhibits) Dwight W. Severs, Esquire 509 Palm Avenue Post Office Box 669 Titusville, Florida 32780 Charles G. Gardner, Esquire Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 John W. Humes, Jr., Esquire Florida East Coast Railway Company One Malaga Street St. Augustine, Florida 32084 APPENDIX II LIST OF EXHIBITS City of Titusville (Petitioner) Traffic analysis report prepared by Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. 1980 arterial street plan Sand Point Park plan Revision to Sand Point Park plan Street map of the City of Titusville Aerial photograph initialed by the parties Ten photographs of proposed crossing and surrounding area initialed by the parties Construction plans for crossing Assessor's map Traffic analysis prepared by Tipton & Associates, Inc. Nineteen photographs initialed by the parties Composite 12 photographs of proposed crossing Zoning Map of City of Titusville Commercial Map of Greater Titusville with residences of players indicated Memorandum - Orr to Buschman regarding Accident Record, Marina Road/US Highway 1 Kimley-Horn Traffic Study, Marina Road/US Highway 1 without crossing Kimley-Horn Traffic Study, Marina Road/US Highway 1 and Buffalo Road/US Highway 1 with crossing Florida East Coast Railway Company (Respondent) Memorandum - File from Fernandez regarding Buffalo Road Crossing Manual of Uniform Standards, Department of Transportation Extract from Titusville Ordinance Data for number of at-grade crossings and types of devices Appendix II - Page 1 Number of Crossing Accidents by Type of Device Damage to Crossing Devices Not received Not received Profer - Affidavit of Fondren regarding materials in proposed crossing
Recommendation Dismiss the application to open a public at-grade crossing at Country Club Boulevard in the Citrus Springs Community in Citrus County, Florida without prejudice. DONE and ORDERED this 22nd day of November, 1976 in Tallahassee, Florida. DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: James L. Shroads, Esquire 3250 S. W. 3rd Avenue Miami, Florida 33129 George L. Waas, Esquire Florida Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida Eugene R. Buzard, Esquire Seaboard Coastline Railroad 500 Water Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Mr. Gordan S. Burleson, Sr. Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 William Livingston, Esquire 3250 S. W. 3rd Avenue Miami, Florida
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.
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 Whether there should be an opening of a public at-grade railroad crossing by New Rail Line Construction in the vicinity of: 1420 feet west of Mile Post SX 904, Seaboard Coastline Railroad (Northwest 9th Street), Okeechobee County, Florida.
Findings Of Fact A railroad grade crossing application was submitted by Petitioner, McArthur Farms, Inc., for "opening a public at-grade rail highway crossing by New Rail Line Construction" in an unincorporated area of Okeechobee County on Northwest 9th Street and Seaboard Coastline Railroad, Railroad Mile Post 1420 feet west of Mile Post SX 904, west 900 feet, east 686 feet. The type of roadway is an existing paved two-lane road. The proposal is for a single track spur to serve one (switcher) train per day at a speed of 4 miles per hour. The cost estimate is $5,000 with the cost of the installation charged to the applicant. The cost estimate for annual maintenance is $800 with the cost of annual maintenance charged to the applicant. The signal installation is to be performed by the applicant and is a "warning sign." The cost of the installation is to be charged to the applicant. The application was submitted on February 18, 1977 and received departmental approval on February 21, 1977. The parties submitted a joint exhibit which is the letter from the Respondent, Seaboard Coastline Railroad Company, stating: "Further reference is made to your letter of February 21, 1977, and my reply of February 25 which had to do with application of McArthur Farms, Inc., for a crossing at grade of existing 15th Street by an industrial spur track at Okeechobee, Fla. This Company will have no objections to this proposal with the understanding that all ex- pense in connection therewith, including cost of signals or other warning devices which may be required, will be assumed by the Industry. Presume we shall be given notice of the hear- ing on this application. Yours very truly, T. B. Hutchenson Assistant Vice President" The following statement was made by the attorney for the Respondent, Florida Department of Transportation, and concurred with by the attorney for the applicant: "In summary, Madam Examiner, the applicant made application for a spur line, located between other spur lines, across a two lane road in a rural area. The crossing will be used to service a feed mill. The movements will be in the daytime. There are less than 5,000 motor vehicles presently using the two lane roadway, traveling at less than 30 miles per hour. The roadway is two lanes. The characteristics of the highway in ques- tion are conducive to manual flagging and stopping of traffic. There will be no night movements of the train. And it meets the factual requirements that fall within an exception to any requirement for active signalization inasmuch as the exception within which it falls is in the afore cited provision of the Florida Administrative Code. (Chapter 14-46.03(3)(g)2., F.A.C.) The applicant will pay for the installation of the crossing and the necessary cross-bucks as minimum signalization, and there will be provided manual flagging for the crossings. So need has been established, safety pre cautions have been arranged and the crossing itself falls within the exceptions to active signalization." The Hearing Officer further finds: The need has been established for the crossing. Safety precautions needed have been arranged.
Recommendation Grant the permit upon the applicant's submitting an agreement with the Respondent railroad for the installation of the crossing and the signalization. DONE and ORDERED this 15th day of September, 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 Harry K. Bender, Esquire Nicholson, Howard, Brawner & Lovett 131 Dade Federal Building 119 East Flagler Street Miami, Florida 33131 Eugene R. Buzard, Esquire Seaboard Coastline Railroad Company 500 Water Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202
Findings Of Fact The proposed crossing is located at Florida East Coast Railway Company (FEC) Mile Post 284.6 and would be formed by extension of Medical Center Drive (renamed Jupiter Lakes Boulevard) across the FEC tracks to Alternate A-1-A. The proposed crossing would be located within the jurisdiction of the city of Jupiter, Florida. The proposed crossing would affect an area bounded by US 1 on the east, the Florida Turnpike on the west, Indiantown Road on the north and Donald Ross Road on the south. See FEC Exhibit A. There is no necessity for opening the proposed crossing. The proposed crossing is located 0.32 mile south of the existing crossing at Toney Penna Drive. Access to the area served by Medical Center Drive is available via Old Dixie Highway (0.32 mile) or via Toney Penna Drive and Military Trail (0.99 mile). The existing crossing has lights, bells and gates. It would be more convenient to open the proposed crossing permitting direct access to Medical Center Drive; however, the convenience to the public would be minimal as indicated by the distances to Medical Center Drive via the alternate routes from the existing crossing at Toney Penna Drive. Because Medical Center Drive runs only 0.5 mile between Military Trail and Old Dixie Highway and cannot be extended to the east, the convenience to the public of opening the proposed crossing would be further minimized. Opening the proposed crossing would not enhance traffic flow onto or off of Alternate A-1-A when there is railway traffic because the proposed crossing is so close to the existing crossing that the gates and warning devices of both would have to operate simultaneously. Ref. Transcript of second hearing, page 132 (II - 132). The traffic volume is discussed in Paragraph 6 below. The opening of the proposed crossing would be detrimental to vehicle and rail safety because it would create another conflict point at which vehicular and rail traffic converge. No evidence of the degree of increase in danger was presented. The current traffic volume at the existing Toney Penna Drive crossing does not warrant opening the proposed crossing at this time, as indicated by the fact that it is not signalized (I - 208). It would be approximately five to ten years before the traffic volume approached the maximum capacity of the Toney Penna Drive crossing. The opinion of the city's expert was that in five years the Toney Penna Drive crossing would be unable to handle a peak traffic volume, but this assumed left turns off of Toney Penna Drive onto Old Dixie Highway would be permitted during peak hours (II - 113-118). This turning traffic was the primary impediment to moving the projected volumes of traffic. The crossing would be adequate with these left turns prohibited (I - 265). Traffic volumes are projected to increase, but improvement of any of the existing crossings will reduce volume at the remaining crossings (II - 113-118). Plans exist for the reconstruction of Alternate A-1-A in the area of the Toney Penna Drive crossing and the proposed crossing as a part of a rebuilding project to be undertaken in the next year to three years, to include improvement of the existing crossing. The operation of the railroad would be hindered by opening of the proposed crossing. The FEC track is essentially a single-lane track running north and south on the east coast of Florida. This railway line provides rail service to the major population centers on the east coast of the state. Trains are operated north and south on the single-lane track at the same time, and pass on sections of dual track installed for this purpose. It is desirable that these sections of dual track be three miles in length. Crossings over dual track are not desirable because they are more dangerous than single-track crossings. The number of three-mile sections of track without crossings is decreasing, and the section of track between Donald Ross Road and Toney Penna Drive is one of the few remaining three-mile sections of track in the south- central Florida region without crossings. Because of increased rail traffic resulting from the energy crisis, efficient operation of the railroad and safety requires that provisions be made for dual passing tracks without crossings (II - 128-130, 147, 150).
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearing Officer would recommend to the agency head that the application for opening of a grade crossing at Medical Center Drive over the FEC tracks at Mile Post 284.6 be denied, and that the railroad crossing and intersect ion at Toney Penna Drive and Alternate A-1-A be redesigned and upgraded to accommodate the increased traffic volume projected for the future. DONE and ORDERED this 25th day of September, 1980, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 101, Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Charles G. Gardner, Esquire Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Jerome F. Skrandel, Esquire Old Port Cove Plaza 1200 US Highway One North Palm Beach, Florida 33408 John W. Humes, Esquire Florida East Coast Railway Company One Malaga Street St. Augustine, Florida 32084 ================================================================= AGENCY FINAL ORDER ================================================================= STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TOWN OF JUPITER, Petitioner, vs. CASE NO. 79-781 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY and DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Respondent. /
