Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEGD-015-13 C]aFftMR REPORT ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: May 27, 2013 Resolution#: By-law#: Report#: EGD-015-13 File#: Subject: RAILWAY LEVEL CROSSING REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EGD-015-13 be received; 2. THAT in the interest of public safety, the Municipality, in cooperation with the Canadian Pacific Railway proceed with applications to Transport Canada under the Grade Crossing Improvement Program for funding of the top 2 priority level crossings being at CP Mile No. 168.55 - Holt Road north of Baseline Road and CP Mile No. 168.22 - Baseline Road west of Holt Road; 3. THAT in the interest of public safety, the Municipality, in cooperation with the Canadian Pacific Railway, Canadian National Railway and Transport Canada, proceed with the completion of a detailed safety assessments of the level crossings at the CP Mile No. 164.22 (Scugog St.) and the CN Mile No. 287.26 (Cobbledick Road); 4. THAT staff continue to monitor the remaining 9 level crossings and report back to Council at such time that additional improvements to any of the level crossings are recommended for future application to the Grade Crossing Improvement Program for funding; 5. THAT staff develop a maintenance policy for level crossings that address adequate notification by the railway authority and the Municipality of Clarington, provides a minimum standard for restoration of disturbed road approaches and provides a minimum turnaround time for repair of deteriorated level crossing surfaces between the rails; and CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 Cladiwn REPORT ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT 6. THAT a copy of this report and Council's decision be forwarded to the interested parties listed in report EGD-015-13 as well as Canadian Pacific Railway, Canadian National Railway and Transport Canada, Reviewed by: Submitted by: A.S. Cannella, C.E.T. Franklin Wu, Director of Engineering Chief Administrative Officer Services ASC/RA/dv CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 REPORT NO.: EGD-015-13 PAGE 3 1. INTRODUCTION As part of Resolution #GPA-255-12 related to EGD-013-12, Council requested: "THAT Staff investigate and report back on installing gates at Prestonvale Road and Baseline Road immediately to the east of Rundle Road; and THAT Staff investigate safety upgrades at all other railway crossings in Clarington." As requested Staff have completed a review of all railway level crossings within the Municipality that intersect with roads under Clarington's jurisdiction. An exception to this are those level crossings on the Canadian Pacific Railway's Havelock Subdivision Line running along the northern extreme through Burketon due to the low traffic volumes, infrequent train volumes and the lower train speeds along this line. 2. BACKGROUND The Municipality is serviced with two main railway lines. The Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) provides two (2) railway subdivision lines, the Belleville Subdivision Line running along the lakeshore and the Havelock Subdivision Line running along the northern extreme through Burketon. The Canadian National Railway (CN) has the Kingston Subdivision Line running along the lakeshore. The different types of road/railway crossing for each railway are identified on Attachment #1. The level crossings reviewed as part of this report are summarized in Table 1 below. The Belleville Subdivision of CP carries roughly 21 freight trains daily through the Municipality of Clarington with an average operating speed of 100 km/hr (60 miles per hour) on 34 km of single track. The Kingston Subdivision of CN carries roughly 46 trains 22 high speed Via Trains and 24 freight trains at up to speeds of 160 km/hr (100 miles per hour) on 31 km of double track. Currently railway operations in Canada are governed by the Railway Safety Act to "promote and provide the safety of the public and personnel, and the protections of property and the environment." REPORT NO.: EGD-015-13 PAGE 4 Table 1 — Level Crossings in Clarington MILE CN/ STREET NAME LIMIT LIMIT EXISTING WARNING SYSTEM, NO. CP 149.86 CP East Townline Rd Lakeshore Rd Conc Rd 1 Flashing Lights and Bells 152.9 CP Lakeshore Rd 808m E of Jaynes Rd 1208m E of Jaynes Rd Flashing Lights and Bells 155.66 CP Lakeshore Rd Riley Rd Stephenson Rd Flashing Lights and Bells 158.07 CP Arthur St North End Newcastle Conc Rd 3 Flashing Lights and Bells 160.82 CP Concession St E Bragg Rd Darlington Clarke Flashing Lights and Bells Townline 162.38 CP Lambs Rd Concession St E CPR Crossing Flashing Lights and Bells 162.92 CP Mearns Av Flaxman Av Sprucewood Cr Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells 164.22 CP Scugog St King St Odell St Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells 165.98 CP Maple Grove Rd Baseline Rd Bloor St Flashing Lights and Bells 166.55 CP Holt Rd Baseline Rd Bloor St Flashing Lights and Bells 166.92 CP Baseline Rd Rundle Rd Holt Rd Flashing Lights and Bells 167.08 CP Rundle Rd Baseline Rd Hwy. 401 Cross Bucks Signage 168.22 CP Baseline Rd Courtice Rd Hancock Rd Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells 169.31 CP Trulls Rd Baseline Rd Bloor St Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells 170.07 CP Prestonvale Rd Baseline Rd 1100m N of Baseline Flashing Lights and Bells Rd 278.54 CN East Townline Rd Lakeshore Rd Conc Rd 1 Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells 281.6 CN Lakeshore Rd 808m E of Jaynes Rd 1208m E of Jaynes Rd Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells 285.05 CN Riley Rd Lakeshore Rd Metcalf St Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells 285.38 CN Metcalf St Mill St S Riley Rd Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells 286.75 CN Toronto St 1184m W of Amos St 41m N of Milligan St Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells 287.26 CN Cobbledick Rd Highway 2 Service Rd Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells 289.08 CN Bennett Rd South Service Rd 50m S of Wilmot Creek Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells Drive 290.44 CN Port Darlington Rd West Beach Rd Lake Rd Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells 296.22 CN Darlington Park Rd Courtice Rd West End (Darlington Gates, Flashing Lights and Bells Pr v Park REPORT NO.: EGD-015-13 PAGE 5 3. LEVEL CROSSING SAFETY MEASURES With the exception of the CP crossing of Rundle Road, each of the at grade crossing is protected by a warning system consisting of either flashing lights and bells or flashing lights, bells and gates. Due to the high speed of the CN line and the fact that it is a double track, all 9 level crossings on this line that intersect with a public open road allowance have flashing lights, bells and gates. Along the CP line, 4 level crossings that intersect with Clarington roads have flashing lights, bells and gates, 1 location has a cross buck warning provided and the remaining 10 have flashing lights and bells. Currently all level crossings in Clarington comply with the Railway Safety Act, 1985. Since this time there have been no significant changes at these crossings other than growth in the Municipality resulting in an increased Daily Exposure Index (Number of Vehicles X Trains per Day). This recent growth resulted in an upgrade at the Mearns Avenue Level Crossing in 2008. It is important to note that Transport Canada is in the process of reviewing their Draft Canadian Railway — Roadway Grade Crossing Standards, January 2012 (CRRGCS) with stakeholders and it is anticipated that these standards will Come Into Force (CIF) sometime in 2015. Based on feedback from Transport Canada there will likely be some revisions to the proposed Standards prior to them being finalized. Additionally it is expected that proponents will have roughly 5 years from CIF of the Standard to comply. Currently the Draft Railway/Roadway Grade Crossings — Technical Standards and Inspection, Testing and Maintenance Reports, 2002 (RTD-10) guidelines are used to assist with determining requirements for warning systems at level grade crossings undergoing modifications such as a change in train speeds, road reconstruction and additional tracks. It should be noted that no additional funding is currently proposed for these changes and it is expected that applications will be processed through Transport Canada's Grade Crossing Improvement Program. Staff anticipate an increased demand on this program. REPORT NO.: EGD-015-13 PAGE 6 4. LEVEL CROSSING REVIEW The purpose of the review was to look at current conditions and to identify general safety and operational issues through site inspections at all 24 at-grade crossings and provide recommendations for improvements that are feasible. The goal of the review was to propose and prioritize mitigative measures and provide recommendations for further specialized safety assessment where required. The scope of the review included: • Physical inspection of each crossing including approaches, physical layout, etc. • Creating a list of deficiencies that could reasonably be corrected and, where possible, recommendations on correcting them. • Determining crossings locations where a more specialized Safety Crossing Assessment is required in consultation with Transport Canada and the applicable Railway authority. The review was prepared using the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) for Canada , and with current Transport Canada regulations (CRRGCS / RTD-10) as a guideline assuming modifications at the level crossings will be required at some time in the future either to deal with railway expansion, speed changes or general growth in the Municipality and under the following considerations: • All the information was obtained at the site during the time of the inspection. • Potential vehicle and pedestrian sightline concerns • Design vehicle used: tractor trailer (tractor with 16.15m trailer). • Use of 160 km/hr (100mph) maximum train speed on the Kingston Subdivision as per CN time table. • Use of 100 km/hr (60 mph) maximum train speed on the Belleville Subdivision as per CP time table. • 46 CN average daily trains information was provided by CN. REPORT NO.: GD-015-13 PAGE 7 • 21 CP average daily trains information was provided by CP. All of these considerations fall under one fundamental objective: Consider the safety of the crossing users at the existing conditions. 5. STAFF REVIEW AND ANALYSIS The following is a summary of the most common issues found at the crossings: • Need of pavement markings such as "No passing lines" and "Stop bars" on road approaches or the repainting of stop bars as per standards. • Requirement for additional advance warning signs on road approaches • A high number of the crossings (12) show a transition surface (between tracks and road) that is in poor condition or showing signs of wear that should be brought to the attention of the Railways. CP has replaced most of the crossing surfaces but not all of the CN crossings provide a smooth transition surface for drivers. • Based on visual observations sightlines were adequate, but being that this is a screening study, real sightlines should only be obtained as part of a more detailed safety review (assessment). • 2 out of the 11 CP level crossings meet our screening criteria for consideration of upgrading the crossings with gates based on current cross- product (number of daily trains X Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT)) exceeding 50,000 also referred to as an exposure index. All of the minor recommended safety improvements noted above such as the improved signage and road paint will be addressed with the $75,000 approved in the 2013 Engineering Services Capital Budget for Railway Level Crossing Improvements. The Operations Department also assist with efforts to improve the level crossings through their annual level crossing surface improvements in which they work with REPORT NO.: GD-015-13 PAGE 8 the rail authorities to improve the driving surface across the crossings. Typically they are able to complete one location annually. On the more complicated crossing surface improvement projects Engineering Services provides design, approval and administration assistance to ensure the Municipality's needs are addressed. Over the last few years Operations and Engineering staff have noticed that there have been some challenges in dealing with the railway and the maintenance of the level crossings. These challenges have been notification of rail work, restoration of disturbed road approaches and timely maintenance of the crossing surface. It is recommended that Engineering Services develop a level crossing policy that addresses the above challenges with the following: • Notification of Railworks - rail authority to provide a minimum of 2 weeks notice from time of proposed works unless it is emergency repair. • Notification of Road Works — the Municipality to provide a minimum of 4 weeks' notice of road improvements at a level crossing unless it is emergency repair. This is a longer period due to limited availability of rail flagging staff. • Develop minimum standard for restoration of road approaches disturbed as a result of railway works. • Develop a minimum standard for response time for replacement of deteriorated crossing surface between the track rails. This policy will provide Operations, Engineering Services, the Railway Authority and the public a clear understanding what is expected at the level crossings as it relates to regular maintenance. In addition to the to the above noted recommendations for improvements staff identified two specific crossings requiring a more detailed safety review to address the unique nature of the crossings and potential users: REPORT NO.: EGD®015®13 PAGE 9 CN Mile 267.26 Kingston Subdivision at Cobbledick Road The two lane asphalt road crosses four tracks. Although the asphalt on the approaches is in fair condition, the crossing surface does not provide a smooth driving surface due to several issues such as: • Asphalt is deteriorating at crossing. • Crossing surface (wood) is bouncing as cars pass over it. A possible foundation and/or drainage problem is suspected. Some planks (wood) need to be replaced. The crossing in general is in poor condition. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that the crossing main users are seniors from the Wilmot Creek retirement community on the South side of the crossing. During the visit it was observed that the users take extra precautions to drive through the crossing, extending the time required to cross. This could represent a safety concern for the drivers and for the Railway. This crossing requires a further, more detailed assessment. It is estimated that a detailed safety assessment will cost $16,000 to complete at this location. CP Mile 164.22 Belleville Subdivision at Scuqoq Street The crossing is single tracked with a travelled two lane paved asphalt road and a rubberized crossing treatment, with an intersection (Wellington St) located 6 metres from the track on the SE quadrant. The crossing offers a very unique configuration that presents challenges for vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists. The angle of the crossing is skewed making the site even more constrained. Although removal of the Wellington Street intersection with Scugog Street would be the best solution, it is not feasible. As a result of the unique configuration the crossing has been provided with multiple protective measures by the Municipality and the Railway as follows: REPORT NO.: EGD-015-13 PAGE 10 • Stop sign is provided at the intersection for drivers from Wellington St. • Additional lights have been provided oriented towards all approaches. • Cantilever has been installed on the South approach to provide enough warning time for drivers as the sightlines are restricted on the SE Quadrant due to the acute angle. • The crossings itself is in fair condition. This crossing requires a further, more detailed assessment to address improvements for all users. It is estimated that a detailed safety assessment will cost $18,000 to complete at this location. 6. TRANSPORT CANADA'S GRADE CROSSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (GCIP) Considering that the major level crossing improvements identified in the review will improve safety, it is recommended that Staff proceed with completing the necessary work to allow Clarington to apply for 50 percent funding of costs associated with the safety improvements through Transport Canada's Grade Crossing Improvement Program (GCIP) at the 2 top priority locations that meet our screening criteria for consideration of upgrading the crossing to add gates. These locations are: • CP Mile No. 166.55 - Holt Road north of Baseline Road; and • CP Mile No. 168.22 - Baseline Road west of Holt Road The Grade Crossing Improvement Program (GCIP), funded under Section 12 of the Railway Safety Act (RSA), provides a contribution of up to 50 percent of the cost of a crossing improvement project. The maximum contribution to a recipient for a single project is limited to $550,000. Contributions cover the cost of safety improvements only and do not include future maintenance costs. Responsibility for remaining costs must be negotiated by the involved authorities (usually railway companies and municipalities). If the authorities REPORT NO.: GD-015-13 PAGE 11 cannot reach agreement, they may ask the Canadian Transportation Agency to make a determination. The typical cost sharing arrangement between the municipality and the railway ranges from 12.5% to 50% for the Municipality and 50% to 87.5% for the railway depending on funding arrangements. In September/October, once all the projects have been prioritized by Transport Canada, a list of recommended projects is sent to the Minister for approval. Once the projects are approved by the Minister (usually around the end of April), Transport Canada sends a notification to the applicant. At this time, Transport Canada will ask the recipient to provide an approximate start date and completion date for the project that correspond with the construction season for the following year. It is important to note that no work can proceed on a project being considered for funding until after the application has been submitted. It is recommended that the Municipality, in conjunction with the railway, submit an application for funding in the current year and wait for the funding announcement in April and budget for the work in the following year if funding is approved. It should be noted that the application remains in the annual process until it becomes a high enough priority to be approved for funding. If the railway or Municipality decides to move the project forward, it can do so, provided they fund 100% of the project. Should their funding application be approved after the work is started or complete they will be reimbursed by Transport Canada. This was the approach that was taken with the Means Avenue level crossing. Due to the limited amount of available funds in a given year, the applications received under the Grade Crossing Improvement Program are prioritized by Transport Canada Staff and the funds are allocated based on the seriousness of the safety problem and the potential for avoiding fatalities, injuries and damage. The following factors are used by Transport Canada in prioritizing, and in assessing a grade crossing for funding: • Number of trains (annual daily average) • Number of vehicles (annual daily average) REPORT NO.: GD-015-13 PAGE 12 • Maximum train speed • Maximum road speed • Current level of protection • Multiple track crossings • Width of the travelled portion of the roadway • Angle of crossing • A history of accidents Other key factors that could also be looked at include: • Proximity of adjacent intersection • Proximity of adjacent switch • Interconnection with traffic signals • Severely restricted sightlines • Inconsistent warning times • Curved or angled approach that impedes the view of approaching trains • Driver behavior • Driver confusion • Driver distractions • Driver expectations • Type of roadway • Type of traffic • Proximity of recreational facilities, schools, industries etc. • Overall visibility of the crossing area/lights/signs REPORT NO.: GD-015-13 PAGE 13 Table 2 below provides a priority listing of the 11 level crossings where gates (drop arm) improvements for the CP line are recommended based on the exposure index. Table 2 — Priority Listing of Level Crossing Improvements AVG. 0 O CID URBAN ROAD DAILY EXPOSURE EE MILE OR SPEED TRAINS AADT INDEX CL NO. RURAL STREET NAME LIMIT A B A X B = C 1 166.55 RURAL Holt Rd. 60 21 3270 68,670 2 166.92 RURAL Baseline Rd. 70 21 2801 58,821 3 160.82 RURAL Concession St. East 70 21 2177 45,717 4 165.98 RURAL Maple Grove Rd. 70 21 1656 34,776 5 170.07 RURAL Prestonvale Rd. 60 21 1582 33,222 6 158.07 URBAN Arthur St. 70 21 1032 21,672 7 162.38 RURAL Lambs Rd, 60 21 459 9,639 8 149.86 RURAL East Townline Rd. 50 21 319 6,699 9 152.9 RURAL Lakeshore Rd. 60 21 215 4,515 10 155.66 RURAL Lakeshore Rd. 50 21 167 3,507 11 167.08 RURAL Rundle Rd. 50 21 24 504 An estimate of cost per improvement ranges from roughly $250,000 to $350,000 but a more detailed estimate will be developed during the application process. Should Staff resources not be available it is estimated that the application process will cost roughly $5,000.00 per location. As can be seen in Table 2, the Baseline Road level crossing east of Rundle Road does meet our exposure index screening criteria for consideration of the addition of gates while the crossing at Prestonvale Road did not. In order for Prestonvale to meet the exposure index screening criteria there would need to be 50% increase in road traffic volume from the current 1582 vehicles per day to roughly 2380 vehicles per day. We anticipate small increases in traffic over the short term with larger increases expected once the remaining lands in south Courtice adjacent to Prestonvale Road develops. Staff will continue to monitor all of these crossings. REPORT NO.: GD-015-13 PAGE 14 7. CONCURRENCE — Not applicable 8. CONCLUSION Based on the review of the 11 non-gated rail level crossings it is recommended that staff begin the process of reviewing the top 2 level crossing priorities with Transport Canada and Canadian Pacific Railway in order that applications can be made to the GCIP for funding. Additionally it is recommended that the CP level crossing at Scugog Street and the CN level crossing at Cobbledick Road be advanced to a more detailed review in consultation with the railway authorities and Transport Canada in order to determine options to mitigate some of the concerns identified in the level crossing review exercise. Funding for the top 2 priority safety improvements and the 2 detailed Safety Audits should be considered during the preparation of the 2014 Capital Budget. Staff will continue to monitor the remaining level crossings on an ongoing basis using their screening criteria of exposure index exceeding 50,000 for consideration of the addition of gates. Staff will update road traffic count information annually at the following 3 locations as the exposure index for these crossings is approaching 50,000: • Concession Street East —west of Regional Road 42 • Maple Grove Road — North of Baseline Road • Prestonvale Road — North of Baseline Road At such time that there are any planned changes to any of the remaining 9 locations or should the screening criteria be met, Staff should proceed to engage Transport Canada and Canadian Pacific Railway to initiate the process to upgrade the crossing with gates and to submit application for funding under the Grade Crossing Improvement Program. The work that the Municipality has undertaken as part of this level crossing review will be of great assistance in prioritizing future safety improvements that may be mandated under future legislation as is proposed by the Draft Canadian Railway — Roadway Grade Crossing Standards, January 2012 (CRRGCS). REPORT NO.: EGD-015-13 PAGE 15 CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development X Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives X Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Ron Albright, Manager, Infrastructure and Capital Works Attachments: Attachment 1 - Rail Crossings in Clarington List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Canadian Pacific Railway Canadian National Railway Transport Canada Mrs. Anita Oliveira .` - ► fir- ,. co CL Lu rim AN Nil I I- -- a�_ a _ •1 �I • -- I -_e r' = 1 •-iYUXi��if�-v� � "'.�..it , �It