Sebastian wants railroad, state to pay for quiet crossings

SEBASTIAN — Florida East Coast Industries’ plan to construct a high speed passenger rail system between Miami and Orlando, called All Aboard Florida, has been the subject of extensive Council and local government discussion since its introduction in 2012 and, at its Wednesday meeting, the Sebastian City Council discussed a proposed resolution addressing the project.

The resolution would request that the state fund or require FECI to fund any expenditures the City incurs because of the project, such as the costly optional quiet zones at each of the city’s five crossings.

In part, the resolution points out that the project would increase railroad traffic and noise; negatively impact area businesses by redirecting travelers from roads to rails; would cause a financial burden to the City; and potentially decrease the quality of life.

In addition to the funding requests, the resolution asks that the governor and legislature to “explore extending direct benefits of passenger rail service to the City of Sebastian and . . . explore partnerships from which the area might benefit directly to offset and/or mitigate the impacts of All Aboard Florida.”

Councilwoman Andrea Coy warned that Sebastian and all the other local governments and intergovernmental agencies must stay ahead of the game, insist on being informed as the project advances and be proactive in making their individual City’s needs and requests known.

She suggested holding regular workshops and reiterated the necessity for staying on top of the issue.

If not, she warned, “. . .are we in trouble, because that train is going to zoom by and we get nothing.”

Coy suggested two additional request points be added to the proposed resolution, and the other Council members agreed. Councilmen Jim Hill and Richard Gillmor suggested instead of Council workshops, public workshops might be a better way to provide information for the residents, since Council already has access to good information.

Staff will update the resolution, adding Coy’s two additional sections and bring it back to Council for action at the April 9 meeting.

Comments are closed.