My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/4/1986
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1986
>
6/4/1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:53:02 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 12:30:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/04/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
DISCUSSION RE BANNING TRAIN WHISTLES AT CERTAIN HOURS <br />Chairman Scurlock commented that he voted against any <br />banning of train whistles when this was brought up a year or so <br />ago because he had a question re enforcement. He further noted <br />that he wrote to the FEC requesting voluntary cooperation and was <br />not only ignored but told very clearly that the FEC had no intent <br />of limiting the whistles. He stated that at this time he defin- <br />itely would support an ordinance banning the train whistles at <br />the hours presented in the proposed ordinance. <br />Commissioner Lyons inquired in the event the municipalities <br />do not wish to participate in the proposed ordinance whether they <br />have to adopt an ordinance opposing it. <br />County Attorney Vitunac confirmed they do, but noted we <br />could make the ordinance apply to the unincorporated area only; <br />Commissioner Lyons preferred to make the ordinance apply to the <br />entire county. <br />Commissioner Bowman inquired about our liability if we pass <br />this, and Attorney Vitunac advised that this is a legislative <br />function of the Board of County Commissioners. The Board would <br />be making a determination that people will be protected <br />sufficiently by following the dictates of the statute which <br />require certain size signage, etc., to protect people at railroad <br />crossings at night, and the Board would be making a finding that <br />the increased danger, if any, is worth the added convenience to <br />people because of statistics which show that these train whistles <br />may not save anybody anyway. He pointed out that the ordinance <br />would allow trains to sound their whistles if there is an <br />emergency situation. All the ordinance is eliminating is the <br />mandatory noise when no one is anywhere near the crossing, and he <br />did not think the Board would be liable for anything. <br />Commissioner Bowman inquired if this would hold up in court, <br />and Attorney Vitunac expressed his opinion that it would. <br />Commissioner Wodtke reported that Fort Pierce has adopted <br />this practice, even though their attorney advised against it, and <br />21 <br />JUN 4 1986 BooK 64 r:AcE 610 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.