HomeMy WebLinkAbout74-21REPORT NO. 5
TORUNTO STREET RAILWAY CROSSING
1. history
47?/.
The history of t1iis application to date is outlined below. This
information was obtained from the clerk's report submitted to Council
on February 18th supplemented by subsequent correspondence.
July 69 1973 The investigation of this Crossing was insti-
gated by a letter to the Village Council from
Mrs. bcott Fennell who lives on Toronto St.
and must use this Crossing.
October 109 1973 Council of the Village applied to the Canadian
Transport Commission for installation of signal
lights and gates or proper warning signals at
this Crossing.
November 139 1973 Canadian Transport Coi,imission and C.N.R.
representatives met with the Reeve to examine
the Crossing.
Iovember 299 1973 The following reply was received from the
Canadian Transport Commission:
RE: Proposed installation of automatic protection
at the crossing of Toronto St. in Newcastle, Ont.
over the CN at Lileage 286.75 Kingston Subdivi-
sion.
Following a request by the Village, an investigation was carried out
of the above crossing on November 13 by one of the Committee's Signal
C+flcers in company witli representatives from the Village and the
Railways.
It has been reported that traffic over the crossing is ap,)roximately
25 vehicles per day at a maximum speed restriction of 35 miles per
hour and no school buses.
Although rail traf.iic is fairly heavy, due to the volume of highway
traffic it is considered that automatic protection is not warranted
at this time. It has fiartrler been recommended that the crossing
surface and the roadway in the vicinity of the crossing be widened
to a width of 22 feet for the road surface and 26 feet for the crossing.
This work would be 4t the expense of the Village.
It has also been suggested that if a housing development is opened south
of the tracks, possibly the gradient on the s, -)uth side of the tracks
SKoulcl be improved to provide a level surface on each side of the tracks
for a distance of 30 feet, and the grade improved to be not more than
5%
2 a REPOciT N0. 5
It has also been noted that advance earning ss_gns are not in existence at
the crossing.
.• o 0 0 0 0 o e o o s e o e o 0 o e o 0 o e o e.
December 109 1973 At the Regular meeting of the Village Council, the
Clerk was instr,,icted to turn over this letter and
the related correspondence to the new hunicipality
of the Town of Newcastle.
January 239
1974
A copy of a letL-er from the
C.N. Railway agreeing
with the recommendations of
the Canadian `transport
Commission, was received.
January 25,
1974
A letter from the C.T.C. regiiesting
a reply to their
letter of November 29th was
received.
lWebruary 18,
1974
The matter was referred by
Council to the Planning
Advisory Committee.
i4arch 21, 1974 A further letter from the C.T.C. requesting a reply
to previous correspondence was received.
March 21, 1974 A letter was sent to the C.T.C. advising tliem. of the
referral to tnis Com,iittee.
2. Nature of the Crossing
The crossing is located in the southwest corner of the former Village
of Newcastle (see map). The road lea.dina to the crossing from the
village is paved to the tracks and is approximately 20 feet wide. The
crossing itself is a little narroi,er. There is a fairly steep down-
ward gradient immediately south of the tracks and the road is gravel
from this point on. The railway is 2 tracks carrying the main CNR
traffic between Toronto and Montreal including 120 mph Turbo Trains
when they are in season. There is a stop sign on the north side and
two crossing signs but no advance warnings or other controls.
3. Traff is
While the rail traffic using this crossing is fairly heavy, road traffic
is very light since the road only provides access to two farms as shown
on the map.
4. Conclusion
Because of the very low volumes of road traffic using this crossing,
its improvement rust be a,.signed a very 1014 priority both by the railway
and the municipality. At the present time I feel that the only improv-
ements which could possibly be justified are advance warning signs and
an improvement to the gradient of the approach on the south side. If
this area is ever developed in future for ho�ising, the Main access
(cont o„ o„ a ,) 3 - IMPOM NO. 5
should to via the kill otreet underpass (inproved if necessary) and this
crossing should never tecome more than an emer,ency access to any large
scale development
5. Recommendation
At this time I recommend that
Canadian Transport Commission
crossing does not justify sig
enquiring as to the estimated
vement of the gradient of the
Council authorize staff to reply to the
and the railway acknowledging that this
zalizatzon at the present time and
cost of advance warning signs and impro4
southern approach.
Aespectfully submitted g
74, L r
George F. howden9
Planning Director,
i
s
I
CROSSON&
r
I
l
Hwy 2
i
i I
Ll � y i
I b
-, • -- — — I ,// i cON4!
� I
MITIAL(_, 5i t rt5f
IaUEEN ___ L 9i
I
� I f7FOKFN
1 OARGV 51 - I
0? JA r
LEGEND
RECREATIONAL - PARKLAND
RESIDENTIAL - SEASONAL
RESIDENTIAL- SINGLE- FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL - MULTIPLE FAMILY
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
COMMERCIAL
��fll ®� 1llu
RECREATIONAL - COMMERCIAL
INDUSTF,IAL
0? JA r