by George Andreassi. tcpalm.com
Concerns raised by Treasure Coast residents failed to convince federal railroad officials to derail or put the brakes on the All Aboard Florida passenger train project.
The Federal Railroad Administration received about 9,500 public comments that generally opposed the establishment of a passenger rail line between Miami and Orlando and 5,960 comments that generally supported the initiative.
The Final Environmental Impact Statement downplayed the public’s concerns about the harm the addition of 16 trains per day in each direction would cause to emergency response times, traffic congestion, property values, boat navigation, wetlands and quality of life, among other issues.
“Mitigation measures would be required that will reduce these potential adverse effects,” federal railroad officials said in the report.
The Railroad Administration’s final report basically stuck to the conclusions of the September 2014 Draft Environmental Impact Statement that found no significant impacts resulting from the $3 billion project.
One of the main differences was the final report addressed many of the concerns raised by the public during a series of meetings as well as in written comments during the 75 days after the draft report came out.
“Most comments came from individuals in the general public, living, working, or having property interests in the project study area, particularly residents of Martin, St. Lucie, and Indian River counties,” the final report says.
The proposed passenger train service would run on the Florida East Coast Railway tracks between Miami and Cocoa, and on new tracks to be built along State Road 528 between Cocoa and Orlando.
Here’s how the federal railroad officials dealt with the following issues in the final report:
EMERGENCY RESPONSE:
Public concern: Railroad crossings will be closed 32 times more per day, potentially delaying emergency responses by police and fire rescue vehicles.
Federal Railroad Administration response: Upgrades to road crossings will be coordinated with and/or communicated to local emergency responders, as activations at the road crossings are expected to be more frequent with the increased frequency of train traffic. However, the delays are also expected to be minimal, as the passenger trains should clear a typical crossing in less than a minute. This improved communication with emergency responders will have an overall beneficial effect on minimizing potential conflicts and their consequences.
TRAFFIC CONGESTION:
Public concern: Traffic congestion and travel delays will increase, especially in downtown areas, as a result of the new passenger trains.
Administration response: The analysis found that typical railroad crossings would be closed an average of 54 times per day (3 times per hour), with average closure times ranging from 1.7 minutes (passenger) to 2.8 minutes (freight). The total average hourly closure would range from 4.2 minutes per hour to 4.5 minutes per hour, an increase of approximately 2 minutes per hour in comparison to the “No Action Alternative.”
By 2016, the delay at each intersection would increase slightly. … The effect of the project at these locations would be minimal.
PROPERTY VALUES
Public concern: Adding passenger train service to the FEC tracks would decrease the value of nearby homes.
Administration response: AAF would not introduce significant new disruption, noise, traffic or other effects that could affect property value. Properties along the railroad are already valued according to their proximity to the rail line.
Because the FEC was established over 120 years ago and has been in continuous operation since the late 1800s, any impact of the railroad on the valuation of nearby properties, up or down, would have already occurred long ago and would not be substantially changed by the added passenger trains.
BOAT NAVIGATION
Public concern: The railroad bridges traversing the St. Lucie River and two other rivers will be down 32 times more per day, forcing boaters to line up and wait while coping with currents and other vessels.
Administration response: AAF would implement a series of mitigation measures to reduce vessel delays at the three operable bridges. These measures would include publishing a set schedule for each bridge … providing public access to bridge closure schedules; and implementing a notification sign/signal/horn at each location with countdowns to indicate the times at which the bridge will begin to open and close.
Additionally, AAF will establish a point of contact with first responders and emergency personnel to promptly respond to unforeseen waterway emergencies. AAF will also rehabilitate the lift mechanisms on all three movable bridges, thereby ensuring more reliable openings and closings.
WETLAND IMPACTS
Public concern: The rail project will impact 263 acres of wetlands.
Administration response: AAF has proposed measures to avoid and minimize wetland losses through the use of retaining walls and increasing bridge length over rivers and associated riparian zones to the greatest extent practicable.
AAF has proposed to mitigate impacts to waters of the United States through the purchase of in-kind mitigation bank credits from federally approved mitigation banks whose service area covers the project. AAF will provide mitigation as necessary to satisfy state permit requirements.
QUALITY OF LIFE
Public concern: The new passenger train service will harm quality of life by disrupting normal every day life, including exacerbating traffic congestion at railroad crossings and creating noise.
Administration response: The AAF passenger service would not be introducing a new rail element along this corridor, and the incremental effects of adding passenger trains would not significantly degrade the quality of life in municipalities and communities along the rail line.
While the addition of passenger rail service would increase noise and result in more grade crossing closures, these effects would not be significant and would comply with (federal and state) guidelines. In addition, AAF has proposed a number of mitigation measures, such as the use of pole-mounted horns to decrease noise, to reduce the effects on communities, and to provide safety improvements at grade crossings.
TRAIN REPORT
Final Environmental Impact Statement for All Aboard Florida passenger train project:
https://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/Details/L16955
Read the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) Executive Summary here:
FEIS_Executive_Summary