Ready. Thank you very much. Alright. Then let's go on the record. Good morning. Welcome to the Arizona Corporation Commission. My name is Julia Motter. I am the administrative law judge assigned to preside over this matter. This is the time set for the evidentiary hearing in docket number RRDash03639ADash25Dash0213 involving the application of the town of Sahuarita for approval to modify the Union Pacific Railroad at
grade crossing for the El Toro La Veta multi use path project. K. Let's take appearances starting with the town. Good morning, your honor. John Paladini on behalf of the town of Sarita. Good morning. And for Union Pacific? Reed Campbell, your honor, on behalf of Union Pacific Railroad Company. With me today is Steven Thomas with Benish and Ken Tom, with Union Pacific Railroad Company. Alright. And, mister Campbell, because I know our court reporter may ask at some point, can you spell Benish for us?
Oh, gosh. Let me, pull let me it's a tough one, but I I think I found it right here. Are you ready? B e n e s c h. Okay. B e n e s c h. And that's what I just jotted down, so I guess correctly. Okay. Miss Layton, your appearance, please. Good morning, your honor. Nicole Layton on behalf of staff, and see behind me is Timothy Gooden, although he will not be my witness. My witness will be Jeffrey Cox who I will pan over to when, the time comes for him to testify. Okay. Okay. Alright. Alright. Now I'm hearing an echo.
No? Okay. Alright. Before we proceed, I just wanna go over a couple quick guidelines, particularly for those of you who are on Webex. For those of you who are testifying today, please make sure you're speaking clearly and slowly. Wait for the attorney to finish asking the question before you give your answer. And if you hear an attorney make an objection, please stop speaking. And please try very hard not to talk over anyone else. That makes it very difficult for our court reporter. Those who are on Webex should keep your computers muted at all times if it's
not your turn to speak, And try to keep your camera close enough so that the court reporter, can see your face clearly. Please try to minimize the use of acronyms or define them, if you are gonna use them. Okay. Any procedural issues we need to go over this morning, mister Palladini? No, ma'am. Okay. Anything from you, mister Campbell? None from Union Pacific, your honor. Okay. Miss Layton? No, your honor. Thank you. Okay. Okay. This is the time set for any member of the public to provide comments. We do not have any members of the public present in the hearing room today.
We also do not have any members of the public who have called in today. So please let the record reflect that we have no members of the public who have joined us to provide public comment. Okay. Mister Palladini, would you like to make an opening statement? Very briefly, your honor. This is, a pretty simple one. It, the evidence will show that this is an at grade crossing for a multiuse path, and that it's actually physically separated from the, current signaled crossing. And that at the end of the hearing, we ask that the court finds that the crossing is in the public's interest and
reasonable. Okay. Mister Campbell, would you like to provide an opening statement this morning? No, your honor. I would just note that the railroad is supportive of the town's application. Okay. And miss Layton, would you like to provide an opening statement? Just briefly, your honor, staff is recommending approval of the modifications to the crossing. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Alright. With that, mister Paldini, you can go ahead and call your first witness. Town calls Randy Cheney. Okay. Randy Cheney, can you please come forward and raise your right hand? I will swear you in.
Mhmm. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? And you're gonna wanna press the button on Yes. Thank you. You can proceed. Good morning. Could you state and spell your name for the record, please? Sure. Randy Chaney, r a n d y c h e n e y. And your current position? I'm a project engineer with Somas, and a civil engineer. Could you spell Somas? It's p s o m a s. And very briefly,
sort of introduce, for the record your your educational and professional background. Sure. Sure. Just a summary. Yeah. I went to college here in Tucson and received a bachelor's degree in civil engineering. And, I've been working at Somos for the last, eleven years, and I'm also a professional registered engineer in the state of Arizona. And you are, the town's consultant on this crossing project? Correct. Yeah. The town reached out to us to help them do the design plans for the multiuse path. And within the project, we have the railroad crossing.
K. And in front of you, you brought, copies of the exhibits? Correct. Okay. So I'm gonna point you to kinda go through these exhibits. Could you describe for the court what exhibit a one is? Well, sure. Exhibit a one is our project location. So this is just a zoomed out view of the, crossing within the town of Serena and gives kind of a, like I said, a zoomed out view of where this crossing will happen. And is exhibit a one a fair and accurate depiction of the location of the project? Yes. This is an accurate description. Your honor, we move to admit a one.
Mister Campbell, any objection? No objection, John. Miss Layton? No objection. Exhibit a one is admitted. I'll go to, exhibit a two. Could you describe for the court what a two is? Exhibit a two shows our project area. So the, pink line is the full limits of the multi use path, and then we have a green dot at at where the multi use crossing will be with the railroad. So this is giving a general overview of the project itself. And does it does exhibit a two fairly and accurately depict, what it purports to show? Yes.
Move to admit a two, your honor. Mister Campbell, any objection? No objection, your honor. Miss Layton, any objection? No objection. Exhibit a two is admitted. Move to the next exhibit a three. Could you describe for the court what that is? A three is our crossing detail. So this shows the existing conditions of the street today and the railroad crossing and a little more zoom zoomed in view of of the location where the path will cross the railroad, next to La Vida Road. And exhibit a three accurately and fairly depicts the current conditions as they exist today?
Yes. Move to admit a three, your honor. Any objection, mister Campbell? No objection, your honor. Miss Layton? No objection. Exhibit a three is admitted. K. Let's move to exhibit a four then, please. This one may take a little bit more explanation. Could you describe for the court what a four is? A four is our crossing path improvements that we're proposing. So this is a detailed view of what we're showing in the plans on how we how the multi use path will cross the railroad. And so a few of the improvements that we will do is along the road, we're going to be improving the striping as you in as you,
get close to the crossing to come in conformance with the MUTC the manual of uniform traffic control device manual. So update the striping as as well as warning signs as we as we get to the crossing. And then you will see a the dark line represents the path that will be that will be crossing the railroad. And, as described earlier, the path is separated from the road, and, you can see that we're we're crossing the railroad here with warning signs and striping and then concrete as well to warn pedestrians and bikes that they're getting to,
a railroad crossing. And just to be clear, even though the exhibit is horizontal, the north south alignment is from or the south north is from left to right on this. Correct? That is correct. Yes. We do show our, north arrow that you can see there pointed to the right. And the the path the the the multi use path crosses the the the railroad tracks at a 90 degree angle? Yeah. That is correct. That was one of the requirements that we crossed at a 90 degree angle for safety of bicyclists as they come across the tracks. And,
again, will there be any any changes or modifications to the to the signal crossing on La Valita Road? On La Valita Road, the the signal crossing for the cars is gonna remain as is. Those won't be changed, and we're adding stop signs next to the path for the the pedestrians and bikes. And there will be some addition to the to the from between the road and the crossing where the tracks like. Correct? Yes. Yeah. That is correct. So in order to get the bikes and pedestrians to cross the road road,
we need to add concrete in between the tracks, so they have a smooth surface to cross the tracks. And so the any other construction that's required other than what you've described for this project? We will be adding, pavement and concrete up to the path as well. Right now, it's just dirt where we plan to path to cross. So those are the only other improvements. K. And, does exhibit a four accurately and, accurately depict the the project scope? Yes. It does. No. Your honor, I move to admit,
exhibit a four. Mister Campbell, any objection? No objection, your honor. No objection, your honor. Miss Blanton, any objection? No objection. And, your honor, Hugh and I had a brief discussion, before the hearing. We were gonna mark the the town's application as exhibit a five if there's no objection from, either the staff or the railroad? Okay. Yes. I have marked a copy of the application filed 09/22/2025 as exhibit a five. Mister Paladini,
can you lay down just a brief Sure. Bit of foundation for that? Yeah. Mister Chaney, you have the town's application in front of you? I do. And you're familiar with that application? I am. Could you briefly, is there anything in the application that you need to call out that you haven't already discussed, or or testified before with the court? I I think just, just to reiterate the the need for the crossing. And in in the application, it talks about why a grade separated crossing for the pedestrians and bikes is not needed and warranted. So I think that application or or what is described there in the application is
important as well as just the the main need for the crossing is for the safety of the bikes and the pedestrians as they're using the multi use path. And based on your education and experience as an an engineer, does this application, is it consistent with with reasonable engineering practices? Yes. And does the application accurately reflect the project as it's been proposed, but as we've discussed? Yes. Your honor, I move to admit the application as exhibit a five. Mister Campbell, any objection? No objection. Miss Layton? Miss Layton?
No objection. We're getting an echo at times, miss Layton, that I think the source is your end. Something to be aware of. Okay. Exhibit a five is admitted. Yeah. Honor, that's all the questions I have for our witness. Okay. Mister Campbell, any questions? Yeah. Just a couple of quick follow-up, your honor. I've lost track of the witness where oh, I'm getting a split screen. Is he still on the stand, your honor? Yes. He is. Okay. With regards to exhibit a four, Can you just describe for us just to let us know what the different shading of of green and blue represent on that diagram?
Oh, sure. The, the blue shading is the area of the existing road within the railroad's right away of of what of what is existing and, kind of the footprint of what crosses the railroad. The green shading represents any new pavement that will be crossing the railroad and, an area that, the railroad requested. Okay. I believe in correct me if I'm if I'm wrong, but did you mention that that with regard to the pedestrian and bike path that there would be,
stop signs for them to stop and look at the you know, for potential train traffic. Is that accurate? Correct. Yeah. Within 12 feet of the train tracks, we're gonna be installing stop signs. Underneath the stop sign, there's going to be look both ways signs as well as embedded within the concrete, truncated domes all to warn both pedestrians and bicyclists of the crossing. And, and before that, on signage, we do have, advanced railroad crossing signs to warn the the bikes and pedestrians as they approach the
crossing. In that advanced railroad crossing sign, would that be the circular sign with an x and the r in the left and right quadrants? Correct. Yes. We plan to, have those both for the cars further away from the tracks and then smaller versions of those for the bicycles closer to the tracks. In looking at exhibit a four, are the stop signs that you mentioned referenced on this exhibit? And if not, can you inform the the the judge where they would actually be installed? Okay. Yeah. You you were you were correct. So they would be installed right on top of the,
the look sign, and I I do not see those on the exhibit. And this might be a a better question for your attorney, but would you be willing to submit an updated plan showing those signs included in advance of, the commission's consideration of this, design so that we see exactly where those stop signs would be? Yeah. We'll we'll go ahead and do that, your honor. Thank you, mister Palladini. Do you believe that these improvements, will be in the public interest? Yes. I do. Do you believe that they will improve public safety for pedestrian and users of the multipath?
Yes. I do. Do you believe that it will also increase motorist safety by giving them a separate lane with which to navigate, this crossing La La Vida Road, in by getting them off of, the current roadway? Yes. I do, think the it will be increased safety for the bikes and pedestrians to be separated from the car users on the road. Do you have an understanding of the construction schedule on when you'd like to begin construction? My understanding is, as general, is 2026.
'26. Are you aware that, the construction crews that will be doing the railroad portion of the work, will require coordination in order to find a time for them to do the work that's necessary as part of that project? Yes. More of that. And will you will you work with them on on their schedule in order to find a time that's mutually agreeable between the parties? Yes. I'll I'll help coordinate with the town and the railroad, any of those, schedules. And that's that's all the questions I have, your honor. Okay. Miss Layton,
any questions? Just a few, your honor. Good morning, mister Cheney. Good morning. Good morning. Did you have an opportunity to review the staff report? I did. Good. And do you agree with staff's conclusions and recommendations? Yes. I do. Yes. I do. One follow-up question to mister Campbell is with respect to timing. Generally, when there's a commission decision approving cross modifications, a sort of deadline for completion is set. So do you have an idea of the total timeline of the project, from start to completion? Is that question for you?
Is that question for you? I I do not have time to for that, but that would be more with the, with the town. Okay. Hold miss Layton, hold on. Let's go off the record. Miss Layton echo it. Miss Layton, we're getting an echo from your end. Do you have is there multiple sources? No. Was I echoing earlier when I first got on? You're not echoing. It's that the witness is echoing. Oh. Like, sometimes that happens when there's, like, a phone and something. No. We have it up on, the conference room computer.
Can you try talking again? Oh, yes. Hello? Okay. Now it's not doing it. Okay. Did you do anything differently? I I messed with the volume on the TV a little bit, so I I don't know. Maybe he knows it. We'll try again. Let's go back on the record. Miss Layton, I believe you were asking about a deadline for completion. Do you wanna give your answer again? Sure. I'm not aware of a deadline for completion. I know that the town and the the railroad are still working on their, their agreements between the two.
So I think the start of construction depends on when the agreement is executed, which, of course, will affect the construction schedule. So I'm not aware of a of a deadline of of completion. Okay. I I think the sort of standard for decisions or, I guess, the default is between, like, twelve and eighteen months. So if there's a deadline of, say, 2027, so about twelve months, do you think it would be completed by that time? In my estimation, I would think it would be completed by that time.
Yes. Okay. Thank you. Those are all my questions. Okay. Alright. I have some questions as well. So as part of the multiuse path project, are there any other railroad crossings that are gonna be impacted? No other railroad crossings impacted by this project. Okay. And can you just describe for me what the railroad crossing in its existing state looks like in terms of flashers arms, signage, whatever is Yeah. The the existing, crossing is a two lane roadway,
and they do have flat existing flashers on either side that will light up. The the lights will the lights will flash, and then the arms will come down and stop cars from crossing in the existing condition. So that yeah. That's what it looks like today. And will any of that be improved as part of this project? None of that will be improved in this project. Any of the existing rotor crossing features today will remain as they are. We're just adding the path and, signage and striping. Okay.
And you described some of the signage and warnings for pedestrians. The railroad arms Mhmm. Will those also block the pedestrians when they're down? No. The arms will not block the pedestrians when they're down. We're gonna be, crossing to the west of the arms, but we are we're crossing close to the arms, so the arms and the lights and the flashers will definitely be in view of any of the pedestrians or bikes that are approaching. Okay. So it's on the pedestrians to see the signage
and look before they cross. Correct. Okay. The new signage that's going in that's specific for the pedestrians, will any of that have any sort of lighting or flashers on it? No. Okay. And you had mentioned earlier that the 90 degree crossing for pedestrians was a requirement. What a requirement by whom? From the EPRR when we were first talking about the crossing conditions that they laid out. Things that you'd like, you could see in the exhibit that the road does not cross it at 90
degrees. And so for the bike path, we didn't want to also have that that same skew and so we we threw a couple curves in there that way that the bikes can be parallel as their tires go across the tracks for safety. Okay. There's a reference in the application to the to an Animax mine spur. Mhmm. Can you describe for me what that is? I believe that's, what the the railroad is. So this is a spur off of the, the railroad to go to the mine. That's that's the best sign that the railroad can answer Okay.
To that pattern. Alright. Cool. What will happen with traffic and the crossing during construction? During construction of, when they add the concrete, I think I read in the application that the the road will be closed and traffic will need to detour. But only when they're adding the concrete, not when some of the other signage and striping is being put in? Yes. With with the concrete, for sure, as far as with signing and striping, that'd be up to the contractor how they would do their traffic control. So I I don't have that plan exactly how they they they would plan to to add that.
Do you have any estimate of how long the crossing would be closed for? Just just as a, general estimate, I think it would be a few weeks. On on the long range, it could it could be much shorter, but I don't have the exact time frame. And traffic will be diverted to another crossing during that time? Yes. Traffic would be diverted. Do you know how far the next crossing is? For traffic, there there's a new Road, El Toro, so they they could detour within two miles to cross. Okay. Mhmm. And the reason I'm asking is just about the potential
added travel time for school buses, emergency services. So any information that you have about how this would impact school bus or emergency service travel time, anything you know, if you can share that. Okay. Yeah. I I I like like I said my estimate is on the long range. I think it could be much shorter than that. That crossing that I talked about is within two miles. I know that the town currently is working on a crossing that is closer probably within one mile. So if that one is completed then before this one goes to construction then there'll
be additional access to cross. Okay. Do you have any information about how the the closures and the detour will be communicated to the public? I don't have that specific information now. Okay. And can you tell me what's the surrounding area of the crossing is like? It's very yeah. The surrounding area, it's very rural. So in the Northwest corner, the town just constructed a park to open space. To the, to the south is all open desert. There there was an existing road that Twinbeast Road that used to go through there
that was recently closed, and, east of this crossing is open desert. Okay. And has any construction for the multi use path started already? No. Not yet. Okay. And the project itself, is that what you anticipate beginning in 2026? Correct. Alright. So in terms of the crossing modification, what portion of the work is the town doing and what portion is Union Pacific doing if anything? Yeah. Union Pacific is responsible for the concrete work to go in between the tracks.
So they they will extend those those concrete panels to make the level surface and the town will be responsible for the rest of the path construction. So the asphalt, the concrete, the signing, and the striping. K. And do you have any information about the funding sources for the improvements? There were some there were some information in the application. There were some acronyms used. It was basically town's capital improvement plan and RTAG, parenthesis, perf exchange, or that may have come out of the staff report. I don't recall. But do do you have any information about what those funding sources are?
Oh, yeah. The capital improvement plan is is part of what the the city has available to, pay for projects. The the HEERF exchange, I have less information on, but it has it's it's a funding source that's coming from ADOT from the Arizona Department of Transportation. Okay. Do you know what our tag is? I don't. And is there a construction and maintenance agreement in place between the town and Union Pacific? My understanding is that there's they're, working on that. They have drafts that they've sent back and forth, but it has not yet finalized.
Okay. Alright. I don't have anything further. Any redirect, mister Pellegrino? No. You are. Okay. Mister Campbell, anything else? No, your honor. Miss Layton? No, your honor. Okay. Thank you, mister Cheney, for your testimony today. We appreciate you can go ahead and step down. Alright. Before we proceed, while we were, taking testimonies, someone has called in. I just want I'm gonna unmute them and check-in to see who it is to make sure that we haven't missed a public commenter. So if you are on the phone, I have unmuted you.
Can you please identify yourself? Oh, this is Sean Lake at Union Pacific Railroad. Okay. Thank you. I'm gonna go ahead and mute you again. Alright. Mister Campbell, witnesses today? Yes, your honor. I'll call Steve Thomas to this stand. Alright. Mister Thomas, if you can please, unmute yourself, turn your camera on if you so choose, and raise your right hand. See. Okay. Alrighty. Alright. Mister Thomas, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Okay. Mister Campbell,
go ahead. Would you please state your full name for the record? Steven Thomas. Mister Thomas, by whom are you employed? I'm employed by Benish Engineering. And what are your job responsibilities with Benesch Engineering as they relate to public projects, in the state of Arizona? I'm a public project manager. I represent Union Pacific Railroad public projects, meeting with all the different road authorities and agencies in the state of Arizona coordinating their projects that could impact the railroad. Can you give the,
hearing judge just a brief understanding of your educational background and licensure? I have a degree in civil engineering, and I'm a professionally licensed engineer. As part of your job responsibilities, are you responsible for overseeing the project that's presently pending, before the ACC, Sayuritas, La Valleeta Road project? I am. Yes. And, generally, is Union Pacific supportive of, the town's application? Yes. Union Pacific is supportive of the application. There are just a few things that I would like to address that were not
completely made clear on, the town's presentation. First, there's a question about what the ANIMAX spur or Animax line referred to. Can you clarify for the judge what the Animax lines? Yeah. The Animax Mine Spur is the name of the railroad subdivision in this area. It's you could think of it as the equivalent of a a road name. So it's just how we identify these various lines. And, generally, where does this line begin, and where is it terminated if you know? Yeah. It comes off our Niguela subdivision,
which, runs through Sarita, and it continues west. I'm not too sure how far it goes somewhere into the the mountains at probably a a mine. And as compared to, like, a mainline, say, from Tucson to Nogales, how does this spur line compares regard with respect to the amount of trains it sees per day or per week? Yeah. This yep. This line really only serves, you know, one or two customers at at the mine itself. So it I believe it's two trains a day,
one to the mine and one back. K. Get some notes here. There was a reference about a construction and maintenance agreement. Do you do you do you recall that testimony? I do. With regards to the crossing as it exists today, is there an agreement or construction and maintenance agreement in place for what currently exists? Yes. There is a current construction and maintenance agreement in place. And so with respect to the construction agreement that was referenced in prior testimony, is that essentially a supplement or a modification to incorporate these new,
proposed improvements? Yeah. I I think the draft that, you know, Pacific sent them would actually replace the one that's currently in place. Okay. But, again, as of today, there is currently an agreement between the parties for the operation of the roadway as it's currently designed. Yeah. That's that's correct. There's there's one in place for, yeah, what's out there today. There was a reference to the amount of time that, the crossing would be needed to be closed to complete the railroad portion of the work. Are you able to provide us with a more concrete estimate of the amount of
time needed for the railroad specific portions of the work that would require closing La La Vida Road to motorists. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. The the the road will be required to be completely closed to to traffic for a period of time. That's normally five days to seven days at the most. You know, if I could go in a little bit more detail, the the railroad will do as much work, you know, in a manner that doesn't require any type of traffic control, whether a full closure or even lane closures.
But when they do do that work, it it's they actually will remove all the ballast, the ties, and the rail as well. So there'll be a big hole in the middle of the road, and then they'll actually install new ballast ties rail, and then they'll put those concrete panels on top of it. And that's what will require five to seven days of lane closure for traffic That's correct. Yeah. That yep. That that time from when they remove the existing crossing surface and do all that work like I just mentioned,
it it takes about five days. What type of, crew would do this type of work on behalf of Union Pacific? Yeah. It'll be a a crew that, basically works for the Los Angeles service unit, which is kinda Southern California and Arizona. They'll they'll do the work. And, approximately how much time in your experience do they need in advance to schedule, a time for them to do this type of work? Yeah. The the more the better. You know, give us an idea when you want the work done at least a year in advance and then continuously give us updates so we can track it,
make sure you're you're gonna be ready for us. You know, the railroad will start planning their own work, a good year in advance. Right? So if if we can if they're aware of these other projects, they can get that into their schedule as well. And does this gang that does this, specialized work from the LA service unit have other responsibilities in addition to planned construction, for example, responding to washouts or other natural disasters? Yeah. Absolutely. If if there's a break in the rail or, yeah,
there's a vent that washes out the track, they'll need to go and respond to that to get the track back in service. Recognizing the time that, the the specialized railroad gang would need to coordinate and then considering the potential for, unforeseen work due to either rail breaks or, like, a washout, what would Union Pacific recommend as far as a a timeline with which to complete the work contemplated in this application? I would say, at least eighteen months we'd want in the the,
order. Mister Thomas, you really trailed off there at the end. Can you just restate whatever you stated? Because I didn't catch most of it. That was back to the the question on the time? Yes. Yep. Yeah. I would I'd recommend that, we get eighteen months to complete this project. Eighteen months? That's correct. Eighteen. In the city's or excuse me, the staff report, it has the railroad portion, for the project cost listed at $292,434.
Is that your understanding of the current estimate for the work that would be contemplated within contemplated that would be completed by Union Pacific? That's correct. Yeah. That's the estimated cost for the railroad work. And, do you have an understanding of whether or not Union Pacific will be reimbursed for that work that it's leading as part of, the funding that the town is receiving for this project. Yeah. It's my understanding the railroad would be reimbursed 100% of the actual cost. There was a question that the judge had about additional,
audible or visual warning signs along the path. Are there audible and warning signs related to the roadway, the current gates and lights that are there? Yeah. There is for for the roadway, for the the vehicles on the road. There's there's flashing lights, you know, in both directions, and there's also, bells provided in audible warnings. And I recognize you probably don't have an exact distance, but can you give us just a rough estimate of how far the pedestrian proposed
pedestrian crossing is away from, those audio audio and visual warning signals that will be emancipated from, or will be coming from the the motorist crossing, La La Vida Road. Yeah. That's kinda hard, like you said. And it it's gonna change very between northbound and southbound because the the path doesn't follow the alignment of the road. So, for somebody coming northbound, those flashing lights and gates are gonna be on the far side of the road.
So, you know, you've probably got eight feet between the the sidewalk and the shoulder of the road. And then if the road is, say, 24 feet wide, that's another 32 feet. And then the gate itself is probably another eight feet, so I'm gonna say 40 feet. And then for south lane gate is is adjacent to the pass, so that's maybe 16 feet away. What number did you say, mister Thomas? The so for southbound, it's probably 16 feet, and for northbound, I'm gonna say it's 40 feet. Okay. So 16 as in one six?
That's right. 16. 16. In your experience in working, on railroad crossings and conducting numerous diagnostics in your career, would you expect that the audio and visual warnings provided for roadway traffic would also provide audio and visual warnings for, people using that multipath? Yeah. So I would say for the audible warning that, you know, you could expect the pedestrians to hear that. We we always say that the flashing lights on the road are for the vehicles and not necessarily for the pedestrians.
Right? They're they're positioned to go down the road. But, you know, practically, if you're out there walking, you know, it's likely that you're gonna see the flashing lights as well. But we we like to say, you know, those flashing lights are there for the vehicles, not necessarily for the people on the sidewalk. In in reviewing the the plan submitted by, the town, which we've previous testimony learned include advanced warning of a cross buck, a sign that tells you to look in both directions, and then also a stop sign. Would those signs be per be installed specifically to provide a visual warning to people
at the multiuse path. Yeah. That that's what their intent is to provide that warning. And I if I could, I'll just add. That was all, a diagnostic team recommendation. We recommended those signs and, treatments at the pedestrian crossing. And can you just explain, what the what the purpose of the diagnostic meeting is and what the objective of it is and who attends? Yeah. So the the diagnostic meeting as, is described in the manual uniform traffic control devices or MUTCD, the national standard that engineers use to design,
you know, roadways and sidewalks, multiuse paths like we have here. The the the diagnostic team is a, engineering study, and it's conducted on-site at the the project location, and all the stakeholders attend. So it's, people from the railroad, people from the road authority, people from the regulatory agency at a minimum attend. And was it the diagnostic team's recommendation that, the improvements submitted in the application, would provide a safe, multiuse path for its intended users without compromising safety for either La La Vida Road,
the railroad, or, pedestrians or bicyclists. Can you repeat the first half? Yeah. I'm just was the diagnostic team's recommendation that the improvements as submitted in the application would provide a safe roadway for all intended users and, a safe crossing for, rail traffic as well. Yeah. That that's correct. And do you believe that this, improvement is in the public's interest? Yes. That's all the questions I have, your honor. Okay. Thank you. Mister Paladini, any questions? Yeah. You you you,
mister Thompson, the you said eighteen months. When when would that that eighteen months roughly start? At at approval or at some other point? Yeah. I was, kinda talking about the ACC opinion and order that they typically issue. So, that's what I was getting at. So, you know, assuming this project gets approved and, you know, we get that opinion in order, you know, there's a an effective date. Right? And then it would go at eighteen months would start up the effective date. Okay. That's all the questions I have,
your honor. Okay. Miss Layton. Mister Paladine just covered my clarification question, so no further questions. Okay. Or no questions. Thank you. Alright. That was also one of mine, but I do have a handful of others as well. Can you just describe in detail all of the work that Union Pacific will be doing? I understand there's the concrete fill. What else? Is anything else changing? Well, yeah, I can describe all the work. But, yeah, at the end of the day, the you may not see all the changes. But, you know, it it's the railroad doesn't just blow it back up.
So the the concrete surface, right, those concrete panels, those are precast, concrete panels. They come in eight foot sections. They don't just take, you know, however many more they need and and place them at the end of the crossing and and go towards the sidewalk. They'll actually go in and remove the rail, and so they're gonna remove a 120 feet 20 120 foot section of rail itself and all the ties and all the ballast, all the the supporting infrastructure for that rail. And that's what I was getting at when I said there'd be, like, a hole in the road. Right?
There's not gonna be any track there, so a train can't pass and and vehicles can't pass through it. So they'll remove that old rail. They'll put in a new section of rail in that hole, and and they'll construct that rail off to the side. And so then they'll take, you know, big machines and pick up a big piece of rail and drop it in that hole. Right? That includes the rail and the ties, and then they put the the ballast over it and surface it. And then they'll go in and put in the new concrete panels starting on the east side of the road, right, working their way west,
and it'll be long enough to accommodate the new sidewalk. So the change that you'll see out there, it'll just be a longer crossing surface. But, you know, you may not necessarily, it may not be obvious, right, that they changed all the ties and the rail and ballast as well when it's all said and done. But no changes to the gates, arms, signage, flashers, striping? Yep. Yeah. There's gonna be no changes to the lights and gates, the flashers, anything like that. And then all the signs and pavement markings, everything there is the responsibility of the town.
And is the design work complete already? Yes. And you gave us an estimate of five to seven days for the road closure for that work to be done. Do you have any information about the additional time that will be added to the travel time during that closure for school buses, emergency services, and just the general public? No. I I don't have any, yeah, idea of how much additional travel time will be needed. Though the the Union Pacific,
when they do that work, they will go to the town and get the appropriate traffic detour and road closures that that's needed. So they'll have to go pull a permit from the the town. Okay. And just to circle back for the eighteen months for completion, You clarified that, in your opinion, that eighteen months could start from the date of the commission's decision. So let's assume that the commission issues a decision as early as January. We've heard testimony that the construction may not start until 2026.
Commission's decision could come out January 2026. Do you still feel like eighteen months is sufficient? Yeah. So that would put us, like, 2027. You know, that that I guess if everything goes right, that's enough time. You know? The the the best time for them for the railroad to do this work is typically at the end of the year. So, you know, everything goes well. You know, they could be out there a year from now doing the work. Right? If for some reason they did it, it didn't weren't able to get out there at the end of the year. You know, there it could be possible they might not be able to come back to the
2027. So maybe just to to cover our bases, maybe it's it's better to have twenty four months. I'm not sure. You know, I don't wanna commit to to anything from the railroad that I I can't commit to. Okay. And do you have any information about the status of the construction and maintenance agreement? As in Yeah. The oh, go on. I'm sorry. Just just to clarify, I understand that there is one in place, but the one that's gonna be new. Yeah. The agreement's been drafted, and it's been sent to the town for for their review.
That that's what the status is. Okay. And any public safety benefits to this project that you'd like to highlight? Yeah. I'll I'll, mention the fact that the the sidewalk or multiuse path crosses at a 90 degree, angle that that is best practice for for crossing. So I think there's definitely a benefit there in the way that it's laid out and been designed. Okay. Alright. That's all I have. Thank you. Mister Campbell, any redirect? I guess just one question of piggyback on yours, your honor. Would you agree that there's also a safety benefit by,
providing a separate, avenue for pedestrian and bike traffic to cross this crossing that is not the actual roadway of La La Vida Road. Yeah. I would agree. Yeah. There's a safety benefit there to provide, separate facility for pedestrians and bicyclists. That's all the redirect I have here. Okay. Mister Paladini, anything further? No, judge. Okay. Miss Layton, do you have anything further? Anything further? No, your honor. And we're the echo's back, miss Layton. It was gone, and now it's back. I didn't touch anything in the last few minutes.
Okay. Okay. Well I wanna try. Alright. That is all we have then for you, mister Thomas. Thank you for your testimony today. We appreciate it. Mister Campbell, any further witnesses? No, your honor. Okay. Alright. Miss Layton, you can go ahead and call your witness. If the echo keeps up while we're going back and forth with you, we may have to go off the record and take a break. But let's see how this goes. Oh, yeah. So go ahead and call your witness. I'll swear them in. Thank you. Staff call is Jeffrey Cox. Alright. Mister Cox,
please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Can you please state your name for the record? Jeffrey Cox. And where are you employed? State of Arizona, Arizona Corporation Commission, rail safety division. And what is your position in the rail safety division? I am Greg Frosting inspector. And were you assigned to review this application? Yes. I was. What does your review of the application consist of? I reviewed the application. I reviewed the, engineering studies,
and determined, and then compiled those information into the, staff report as submitted. Okay. So you prepared the staff report marked as this as exhibit s one? Yes. That is correct. Do you have any corrections to make to it? I do not. And do you adopt the staff report as part of your sworn testimony today? I adopt the staff report as written. Yes. Your honor, I'll go ahead and move for admission of exhibit s one. Any objection, mister Palladini? No, ma'am. Mister Campbell, any objection? No, your honor. Exhibit s one is admitted. Thank you. And, mister Cox,
do you believe the project plan ensures appropriate crossing protections for A new multi use path? Yes. I do. And in your opinion, are the proposed modifications consistent with current safety standards and similar upgrade crossings within the state? Yes. I do. Are the proposed modifications in the public interest? Yes. They are. And do you recommend that the application be approved? I recommend the application should be approved. Okay. And, do you support, believe it's mister Thomas that suggested, an eighteen month deadline within a decision? I believe that's reasonable.
Yes. Those are all my questions. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Mister Paladini? I don't have any questions, John. Mister Campbell? Yes. Just one question. Mister Cox, does ACC staff have any objection to a twenty four month window just to provide the railroad, additional time in the event that they, are unable to get to the project in the 2026? I believe twenty four months would be reasonable. No further questions, your honor. Okay. I also wanted to circle back on that, but mister Campbell did it for me. So all I have just relates to the construction and maintenance agreement.
So, typically, staff, likes to see that before the commission, issues a decision in this matter. It sounds like a draft has been circulated. Where is staff at in terms of the construction maintenance agreement? What do you wanna see going forward? I would like to see the fully executed, maintenance agreement. Before the commission issues a decision? The commission that that's correct. I apologize for walking over there, honor. Yes. Before the commission that issues an order and opinion, I would like to see it fully executed, and agreed upon, maintenance agreement. And do you believe that needs to be docketed,
or it can just be shared internally with you? I believe it needs to be documented. Okay. Is there any other documentation that you believe needs to be filed before the commission can approve the application? Not that I'm aware of. Okay. That's all I have. Miss Layton, any redirect? Just a brief follow-up on docketing of the agreement. If Union Pacific or the town believe that there's any sensitive information within the agreement, do you have any objection to a redacted version being docketed and then the safety
division being provided the full effects? Yes. No. No. I take no exceptions. Okay. Thank you. That's it. Okay. Mister Paladini, anything further? No, your I I wasn't quite clear on miss Layton's last question. It seemed I heard I'll I heard garbled. I Okay. If there's a way to repeat that or if there's a transcript of it. I wasn't sure what she was asking. Yeah. Miss Layton, can you just restate what you were asking? Yes. I asked mister Cox if, if Union Pacific or the town were to believe that there's any sensitive information within
the construction maintenance agreement, whether mister Cox would be opposed to a redacted version being publicly docketed, but then the safety division being provided the full copy. Okay. That that that that that I heard that one. Okay. Alright. Mister Campbell, do you have anything further? I do, your honor. It's just a quick follow-up. In previous ACC matters before the commission, the order is called for, Union Pacific to file a notice of completion of compliance item notifying the commission that
the railroad had provided, the ACC staff an under redacted copy. Would the ACC staff be amenable to simply notifying the commission that they had completed that compliance item and provided the ACC staff with an unredacted copy and simply filing notice of compliance with that item with the commission. And that would be acceptable. Okay. Miss Layton, anything further? No, your honor. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, mister Cox,
for your testimony. We appreciate it. Thank you, ma'am. Okay. I wanna go over a couple of things with counsel just to make sure that the order reflects everything that the parties want and that we're all on the same page in terms of the time frame. So first question is gonna be just for mister Campbell. So, normally, our orders would say that Union Pacific shall notify the commission within ten days of commencement and completion of the crossing upgrade. Is that appropriate in this case, or should the notification come from someone else?
I think that it's fine for that notification to come from us, your honor. That's that that would work. That's fine. Okay. And then in terms of completion, which is gonna come from the date of the decision, not from the start of construction, but from the date of the decision, it sounds like Union Pacific is looking for twenty four months because there could be a a gap between the date of the decision and when construction can actually start. So is everyone comfortable with twenty four months for a deadline for completion from the
date of the decision, mister Palladini? Yes. Okay. Mister Campbell? Mister Campbell? Yes. Yes, ma'am. And miss Lane? That's fine, your honor. Okay. Last thing, construction and maintenance agreement, which we all did this once before. I don't know if it was all the same group, but at least most of us, where we had a situation where the construction and maintenance agreement had not been fully executed by the time of the hearing. And I think what we did in that case was we we I held the
recommended opinion in order until there was a compliance filing in the docket, or maybe it was even a notice from staff that staff had reviewed it and approved it, and then we moved forward with the recommended opinion and order. So, obviously, that will hold up this process. I don't know how far along in the process the construction and maintenance agreement is. We can do that again where I don't issue a recommended opinion in order until
Union Pacific has made a compliance filing that it's been provided to staff, and staff files a notice in the docket that it's reviewed it, is okay with it, and everything can move forward. So we can do that again, or we can do something else that someone suggests to me right now. So let's start with you, mister Palladini, your take. Your honor, I I I think we're very close, on finalizing the agreement, so I don't have a problem with with your with your first idea.
Okay. Mister Campbell. Your honor, I would propose that we do something slightly different, and it's what we did in that AHAWAY application, that Tucson project that you oversaw. What we did in that case is, you issued a recommended opinion in order. And then as part of the compliance item for that, you had the railroad submit notice that it had, provided a copy of the, ultimately, the executed, construction and maintenance agreement as a as a docket item.
So the railroad docketed notice of it provided the, agreement to staff, and then staff have the opportunity to weigh in. My concern with the, waiting is that it's just unknown at the time at this time, you know, how long it takes people to get their red lines back and forth. And I would hate to see that slow down the project and potentially impact, the window that the railroad is currently looking at, which is those fourth quarter windows. And so I would think to keep this project moving forward, it might be best to,
just have that submission of the execute notice of the executed, construction and maintenance agreement with providing staff a copy of it independently or separately, that might be best to keep the project moving forward in a timely fashion. Okay. So I know we have definitely done that before where it's been a compliance requirement. And then I think the concern from staff is that then the case moves forward, the commission can issue a decision, and it's it's a compliance requirement. But then if staff has some sort of issue with the construction and maintenance agreement,
they have lost their opportunity to necessarily do something about it in an efficient manner. So I don't there was at least one case where we held up the recommended opinion in order for the construction and maintenance agreement. I don't know if that I don't they all railroad cases have a tendency to blend together, so I don't remember if that was yours, mister Campbell, or not. But I know we did that at least in one case, and that was because it's staff's preference. I I understand the desire to not hold up a case. I think everyone understands the public safety benefits to these projects and wants them to move forward as
quickly as possible. But staff also wants to have an opportunity to ensure that the construction and maintenance agreement, reflects everything that staff needs it to reflect. So let's turn to miss Layton and get her opinion on on what we should be doing in this case. Alright. This is my favorite topic. I I don't necessarily have a problem with taking the approach mister Campbell is suggesting. Obviously, you're correct, your honor, that is normally staff's prep preference to see a construction maintenance agreement prior to a
decision being issued. But based on the fact that if staff reviews it even after a decision and doesn't, like the like a portion of cost, I do think staff has the ability to, move the commission to order another form of that under our statutory authority. So in this case, especially with it being a relatively minor project, just creating the multi use path across the railroad, I think we're fine with this proceeding and then a compliance item in the decision
or the CNM agreement. Okay. Okay. I think that does make some sense given the the scope of this case. Mister Palladini, are you comfortable with that? I am. Okay. Alright. I'm gonna give the parties a chance to make closing statements. And if you have any other issues you'd like to raise, you can do it at that time as well, mister Palladini. Yes, sir. And very briefly, and, we per per the testimony, we will go ahead, and if you could include in in your order, leave to file or docket an amended exhibit a four showing the double sign,
with including the stop sign on top of the railroad crossing sign on both ends. And I'll just say that, you know, the evidence here is pretty much overwhelming. All the parties agree that, this at grade multi use path crossing is, certainly is a much safer way, both to cross railroad tracks as well as to separate pedestrians and bicyclists from from the roadway that the, the construction time for for La Vallejo Road isn't unreasonable and that there are a number of alternate routes
that that I don't think will, interfere with the public's ability to cross a railroad at a different location and that this project is certainly in the public's interest and and reasonable, meets all or exceeds engineering standards for this type of project. And we ask the court to recommend approval to the corporation commission. Okay. Thank you, mister Palladini. And just to circle back on the updated exhibit, I think we'd wanna have that filed as a late filed exhibit
before issuance of a recommended opinion and order. Is that something that updated exhibit a four something you think you could get filed fairly quickly? Yeah. We could we could do that. We could do that within the week. Okay. Alright. So I will ask you to, get that filed within seven days. K. And so in the docket for everyone to be able to review and raise any issues. If anyone does have any issues with that late filed exhibit, please, file something as quickly as possible. Okay. Mister Campbell, further comments?
Just a couple. Yeah. Union ZIP would request the twenty four month window from the date of the executed order. With respect to the compliance item, the compliance item would require us to file notice that we provided staff with a copy, not requiring us to file the actual copy for the reasons that had been previously outlined in testimony. And then I would also just note as a final comment that Union Pacific has a strong, a strong, history of working with municipalities and road authorities throughout the state to come to these
agreements, these construction and maintenance agreements before and after, you know, the formal opinion and and decision is made. So I just would, note that for the record that they do have a strong a strong track record of working with these road authorities. Okay. Thank you, mister Campbell. Miss Layton? Staff continues to recommend approval of the application, and staff also supports the twenty four month timeline in the decision should this be approved. Okay. Okay. Alright. I don't think we have anything further then. So this matter will be taken under advisement pending issuance of a recommended opinion and
order, the filing of a late filed exhibit, by the town. So thank you everyone for your participation today. Thank you, the witnesses in particular, for your time. And with that, the hearing is adjourned, and we can go off the record. Please don't disconnect immediately. Let's give Adam a chance to let us know if he has any questions. Thank you, judge. The only question miss Layton, if you could give the gentleman's name sitting with you again. Jeffrey. J e f f r e y. Last name, c o x. But no.
I'm sorry. Sitting behind you, miss Lee. The other person in the room. There's a lot. Timothy Good. T I m o t h y g o o d. Beautiful. Thank you very much. And, Jojo, I have access to all the exhibits, for everything. So thank you very kindly. Okay. Thank you. Alright. Everyone, you can go ahead and disconnect.