HomeMy WebLinkAboutEGD-013-12Clajrftmn REPORT
ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Date: March 19, 2012 Resolution #: 40 -1 By -law#:
Report#: EGD- 013 -12 File #:
Subject: WHISTLE CESSATION — FEASIBILITY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report EGD- 013 -12 be received;
2. THAT in the interest of public safety, and liability concerns, the Municipality not
proceed with an anti - whistling by -law; and
3. THAT a copy of this report and Council's decision be forwarded to the interested
parties listed in report EGD- 013 -12.
Submitted by:
ASC /Ib /jb
F
Reviewed by:
A.S. Cannella, C.E.T.
Director of Engineering
Services
Franklin Wu,
Chief Administrative Officer
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379
REPORT NO.: EGD-013-12 PAGE 2
1. BACKGROUND
On January 16, 2012 Council approved the following resolution with respect to our
report EGD-001-12:
THAT Staff report to Council with the detailed information regarding
the cost and feasibility of potentially implementing whistle cessation
at all urban area crossings, including but not limited to Mearns
Avenue, Lambs Road, Cobbledick Road and Bennett Road
crossings, and
THAT staff describe the steps that would need to be taken to
implement said cessations.
While our whistle cessation report, EGD-001-12, outlined the technical process
that municipalities must observe in order to implement an anti-whistling by-law
(see page 4, item 4 Whistle Cessation), what Council needed was a very clear
sense of the specific steps that Clarington would need to take, before further
consideration can be given. To further support Council in the decision making
process, staff attempted not only to detail the facts but also to understand what the
implications might be if we were to consider moving forward.
This report will discuss feasibility and implementation as well as clarify the unique
features of rail within Clarington. We will present the information and
recommendations we were able to obtain through consultation with the railways,
and provide a broad overview of potential costs and upgrades that would be
required to protect public safety. And to conclude we will once again put forward
our own recommendation that while whistling can no doubt be considered an
intrusion by some there are many who support the notion that whistling may in fact
save lives.
REPORT NO.: EGD-013-12 PAGE 3
2. RAIL IN CLARINGTON
In consideration of the resolution staff reviewed the Canadian Pacific (CP) and the
Canadian National (CN) rail lines passing through the urban areas of Courtice,
Bowmanville and Newcastle Village, including the Mearns Avenue, Lambs Road,
Cobbledick Road and Bennett Road crossings. Staff determined that the study
area limits should commence in the east, near Stephenson Road, at mileage
155.66 C.P. Rail — Belleville Subdivision Line and C.N. Rail at mileage 284.30 —
Kingston Subdivision line, westerly to the western Clarington Boundary (Oshawa).
In this study area there are twenty (20) level crossings within Clarington, thirteen
(13) are on the CP line and seven are on the CN line (refer to attachment #1).
Train operating speeds on the CN line are 60 mph for freight trains and 100 mph
for passenger trains. On the CP line throughout Clarington the operating speeds
are approximately 60 mph.
Train whistles are regulated by Transport Canada under the Railway Safety Act,
the Railway Locomotive Inspection and Safety Rules. Under these rules, Section
11 (a), a train whistle must be, "(a) a horn capable of producing a minimum sound
level of 96 decibels at any location on an arc of 30 meters (100 feet) radius
subtended forward of the locomotive by angles 45 degrees to the left and to the
right of the centerline of the track in the direction of travel". While we are not
experts in train safety we have tremendous respect for the science, research,
experience and testing that must have informed this precise definition of safety
which is mandated by those who are.
When we look at the distance and radius that a train whistle is specifically
designed to cover the need to assess an entire study area becomes clear,
particularly in locations where one level crossing is in close proximity to others
(see attachment #1). If we were to eliminate whistling at one specific crossing
with the intent to minimize disruption within a defined area we would need to be
sure that whistles at nearby crossings do not radiate into the intended area,
negating the desired effect.
REPORT NO.: EGD-013-12 PAGE 4
3. CONSULTATION WITH THE RAILWAYS
Staff met separately with representatives from both railways and each made clear
the fact that while they could not openly oppose an anti-whistling by-law, neither
would they actively support it. Both railways made clear the fact that in order to
implement whistle cessation a by-law would need to be passed by the municipality
instructing the railway to deviate from their normal operational practice.
The representative from the Canadian National Railway stated, "While CN strives
to assist municipalities in safely implementing whistle cessation, we only wish to
do so in the safest locations. The Kingston subdivision line is a high speed line,
with large volume for all rail traffic, which increases the risk factors associated with
whistle cessation". The railway has also explained that whistling consistency
tends to minimize risk because a scattered, "whistling here, no whistling there",
may complicate things.
Issues of trespass were also discussed and a review of CP Police records has
shown that since October, 2009 there were nineteen reported cases of trespass
within Clarington. Of these nineteen cases, fourteen were in the area of the
Scugog Street crossing, and tragically, one included a pedestrian fatality.
Pedestrian fatalities involving trains, is unfortunately a growing concern,
particularly amongst young, adolescent males. This risk rises in urban areas,
during the school year near crossings that are in relative proximity to schools.
4. AN OVERVIEW OF COSTS
4.1. CESSATION STUDY AND LEVEL CROSSING IMPROVEMENT COSTS
As has been made clear, in order for whistle cessation to be considered, the
municipality must follow the requirements outlined by Transport Canada, which
includes the need for a detailed safety assessment of each crossing and the
recommended upgrades which would be required. In Clarington's case a
cessation study which looks at each of our twenty (20) level crossings, would carry
REPORT NO.: EGD-013-12 PAGE 5
a price tag of$4,000 to $5,000 per crossing, with the total cost expected to be
approximately $80,000 to $100,000 for the cessation study alone.
The improvements that would need to be undertaken would be based on the
number of tracks at each level crossing, operating speeds of the trains, horizontal
track geometry and the protection from conflicts with vehicular and pedestrian
traffic. Electric gates with flashing lights and bells will be necessary in many
locations, the installation of fencing to prevent trespass will be needed, sight line
improvements may be required and even barriers to prevent pedestrian/train
conflicts may be appropriate when considering a whistle cessation by-law. On the
subject of fencing it should be noted that in order to deal with the significant issue
that trespass presents, fencing is an essential feature that implies significant cost
even though it is difficult to determine the extent of fencing necessary at this point.
The specific and detailed costs for the necessary improvements will be determined
through the cessation study but for conceptual purposes we have identified the
preliminary costs as being significant and would of course need to be funded
entirely through the tax levy.
4.2. OPERATING COSTS AND ANNUAL CAPITAL COSTS IMPLICATIONS
In addition to the costs associated with upgrading our Operations Department
would be required to inspect both the crossings and all fencing existing and
required fencing on an ongoing basis. In our discussions with the railways we
were cautioned that in areas where trespass is an issue they have observed a high
level of vandalism by those who use the tracks as a short cut. Our Operations
Department have experienced ongoing maintenance costs for repairs to existing
railway fencing under the Municipality's ownership. Dependent on the extent of
fencing necessary to address any trespass issues prior to the passing of an anti-
whistling, annual maintenance costs could increase significantly.
REPORT NO.: EGD-013-12 PAGE 6
Of particular concern is the fact that the use of short cuts is particularly common
the closer you get to schools. Naturally then, it will be no surprise to suggest that
in these situations those who may be most at risk are students and younger
people. It should not be surprising then to understand that fence maintenance to
discourage trespass will be an ongoing, onerous and costly endeavor.
CN stated that whistles would be restored if fencing was not maintained. CP said
that whistle cessation "makes the crossings less safe".
4.3. COSTS OF ADDITIONAL INSURANCE COVERAGE
The municipality will be required to enter into a liability agreement with the railway
and obtain additional liability insurance to protect the municipality and the railway
against third party claims for bodily injury and property damage arising out of or
resulting from or connected with the issuance of an order to stop whistling at
affected crossings. The estimated cost of additional insurance coverage would be
in the order of approximately $400 per crossing, per year.
5. IMPLEMENTATION OF WHISTLE CESSATION
Should the Municipality wish to pursue whistle cessation the following steps are
necessary:
1. Contact the pertinent railways
2. Notify the public and all relevant organizations of our intent to forbid whistling
in the municipality.
3. Arrange for a detailed whistle cessation study of each crossing at the
crossing and recommend upgrades which would meet all relevant
requirements.
4. Conduct a Public Information Centre.
5. Pass a resolution of our intent to pass a by-law forbidding the use of whistles
at certain crossings.
6. Implement the required upgrades to meet the guidelines.
REPORT NO.: EGD-013-12 PAGE 7
7. Enter into an agreement with each railway with respect to the roles and
responsibilities under Section 11 of the Railway Safety Act.
8. Enter into a liability agreement with the railway and obtain additional liability
insurance to protect the Municipality and the railway against third party
claims for bodily injury and property damage arising out of or resulting from
or connected with the issuance of an order to stop whistling.
9. Where an agreement has been reached between the railway and the
municipality and all required improvements made, the parties may request a
Transport Canada railway safety inspection, after which the municipality can
make sure the public is aware of the intended changes through a public
education campaign, after which they can pass a motion to prohibit whistling.
It is anticipated that this process may take as much as three years to complete.
6. CONCURRENCE — Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance; Fred Horvath, Director of
Operations.
7. CONCLUSION
The issue of train whistling in urban areas has and always will be a quality of life
issue for some in adjacent neighborhoods, while many simply become
accustomed to their presence. Looking at quality of life issues is an important part
of the work we do and so it is on rare occasion that we might look at other issues
as having more importance. Public safety is most certainly one.
Staff have looked in detail at this very complex issue and the deeper we go in our
review; the more convinced we are that the risks need to be appraised. Trespass
continues to be a significant issue particularly because those at risk are, more
often than not, likely to be younger pedestrians, particularly in areas closer to
schools.
REPORT NO.: EGD-013-12 PAGE 8
We have explained that in passing a whistle cessation by-law, we are in effect,
asking the railway to suspend usual operational practice. If we were in fact to do
this we would be required to give serious thought to the complexity of the liability
the municipality would be likely to assume.
If we were to proceed, a comprehensive whistle cessation study would need to be
conducted in the study area, looking at each of the twenty (20) level crossings in
Clarington. The cost of this study is currently expected to cost approximately
$80,000 to $100,000 for the safety assessment alone. The cost for making any of
the recommended improvements suggested by the study would need to be borne
by the Municipality and the cost implications of these improvements, while
significant, would be in addition to the ongoing costs of fencing, maintenance and
increased liability insurance.
It is therefore our continued position that the municipality not pursue anti-whistling
on either the CN or CP rail lines within Clarington because of the potential risk to
public safety.
CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable
Staff Contact: Leslie J. Benson, Manager, Transportation and Design
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Key Map
List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision:
Anne Black
6
K
°- a o
O J
a o m
° m CONCES NR D6
O
K
U O
O �
~ K Z Z
F
O
291
ROAD)
J / i
o ¢
f
p R ZONAL ROAD 9 (C
K
S
< 11:O m
K
¢
a.
O
U r
~
CONCESSI
NASH
ROAD
ROA 4
F BE WET ¢O
ROAD
Z
3 p 3
° o g
p
< o
3
5'162:39
a
161.84
p
161.29
$
N/ph
p
p
°
ROAC
p
rc
Yz
¢°
m
w
m
(�
m o
o
< O o
C CESSION
REET
165:36
CONCESSION AD3
U
W
ICE W
°
O
1 ;
O
�
O
¢
m�
165.98
159:•11
p170�07 169.31
168.79
158.60
_ w
MIGI{y�AYZ
168!22
166.92
°
156.07
m
p
a
ASELINE
167:
62 AD
166.55
a°
0
�VEK(N
296.22
HIGHWAY
1I
rc
RGpO
z p 504T{{
ER VICE
62
156.93
m rc
AO
STUDY 296.19
6
289.08
287.26 286.75
156'40 0 a o
LIMITS
293.80
z
TYPE OF CROSSING
Closed/Blocked
Grade Separation
rr
Level crossing with lights and gates
Level crossing with lights
Level crossing with no automatic protection
RAILWAY SUBDIVISION LINES
C.P. Rail-Belleville Subdivision Line
C.P. Rail-Havelock Subdivision Line
C.N. Rail-Kingston Subdivision Line
291
ROAD)
J / i
o ¢
f
p R ZONAL ROAD 9 (C
K
S
< 11:O m
K
¢
a.
O
CONCESSI
a p
_
ROAD 3
p
O
CONCESSION
ROA 4
F BE WET ¢O
ROAD
Z
3 p 3
° o g
p
< o
3
5'162:39
a
161.84
p
161.29
$
@
o °
°
ROAC
i
6
10.82
`
O
(�
m o
o
< O o
C CESSION
REET
CONCESSION AD3
°
0
1 ;
NEWC STILE
159:•11
1.
158.60
_ w
MIGI{y�AYZ
BROWVIEW
ROAD
°
156.07
m
p
a
157.4.9,aW
a°
0
�VEK(N
rc
RGpO
o
Q
62
156.93
4
288.70
286.16
289.08
287.26 286.75
156'40 0 a o
C
y 285:05 °
_ w 155.66
z
rr