Rail Relationships

By Raymond Beshro

Railroads are a central part of North America's history — and its present. Starting nearly 200 years ago, they helped to drive the Industrial Revolution and open up the western half of the continent, allowing the establishment of permanent settlements and the economic activities needed to support them.

Lots of places grew up around the rail stations and rail yards. Chicago went from being a small town to one of the largest cities in North America because of its role as a continental rail hub. There are also smaller towns that were first founded and settled because of the rail industry, like the Borough of Sayre in northern Pennsylvania. It was incorporated in 1891 at the site of a major locomotive repair facility.

As cities have grown and changed, so has the role of railroads. With the advancement of automobiles and trucks as the dominant mode of transportation during the 20th century, rail suffered a steady decline. In the new century, however, our trade-dependent, interconnected global economy and the goal of lowering greenhouse emissions in our transportation network have fueled a rail renaissance.

All that means that trains still chug through thousands of communities every day. But the land uses abutting so many hundreds of miles of tracks are quite different than they were a century ago. Vacant lots in urban areas are rare and, as a result, sensitive development like new residential communities is increasingly occurring in close proximity to rail operations. Communities, therefore, need the right planning policies and zoning regulations in place to address the impact of railroads in their communities.

On the other hand, planners also understand the importance of freight transportation networks and how they support local, regional, and national economies. Railroads are essential to providing for the needs of our households, communities, and industries.

It is important to protect the integrity, capacity, and viability of railroad corridors, setting favorable conditions for the economic attractiveness and competitiveness of a region.

A rail line and crossing in immediate proximity to a residential area in De Pere, Wisconsin. Photo courtesy Canadian National Railway (CN).

A residential neighborhood in Brampton, Ontario, separated from the railroad tracks by an embankment and wall. Photo by Henry Lin for CN.

Freight railroads move our economy

APA recognizes this too, and in 2016, it adopted and ratified its Policy Guide on Freight. The guide notes that "Freight is the physical manifestation of the economy," while also identifying associated issues for communities. On these issues, railroads fare favorably in comparison to other ground transportation sources:

Environment

On average, railroads are four times more fuel efficient than trucks. As our economy and trade grow, using rail transportation will help limit environmental impacts.

Funding and Congestion

Freight railroads use infrastructure that is privately owned, funded, and maintained, as opposed to highways, which require a substantial allocation of public funds, year after year. Freight railroad companies also pay taxes to various levels of government. In 2015, Class 1 railroads paid more than $1.2 billion in property tax across the U.S. Directing freight away from our roads and onto rail also helps to reduce traffic congestion problems that plague almost every urban area in the country.

Safety

Statistically speaking, rail freight transport has never been safer and causes about a tenth of the fatalities that trucks do per trillion ton-miles. However, this statistic alone does not capture the complexity of rail safety systems and their ongoing review and improvement.

Planning near rail

Most states have floodplain and highway setback regulations. The presence of certain infrastructure and natural features demands development controls and proper planning policies and regulations. Unfortunately, the vast majority of land-use planning authorities do not regulate a development project's proximity to rail or require any form of mitigation. This substantial oversight can be a detriment to the safety and sustainability of communities.

Canadian planners, municipal associations, and rail companies joined forces more than a decade ago to address railroad proximity issues. In 2003, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and the Railway Association of Canada signed their first memorandum of understanding to create the FCM–RAC Proximity Initiative.

In 2013, they copublished an updated version of The Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations, also known simply as the Proximity Guidelines. Montreal paved the way by requiring that all new development projects respect the standards set out in the guidelines. Other Canadian cities have followed suit, and many more are evaluating how to bring such standards into force.

Ontario also uses policy statements, legislation, and regulations to protect the viability and capacity of rail corridors and yards so that land uses authorized in proximity to railway facilities are compatible. Among other things, this means that Ontarian municipalities notify affected railway companies of potentially sensitive planning and development applications to seek their input and implement appropriate conditions of approval.

The result has been a collaborative process between municipalities, developers, and railway companies to address the safety and well-being of occupants in new developments.

What more can communities do? From a policy standpoint, master plans and other official planning documents should recognize the importance of rail corridors for the movement of goods and people, and the role such corridors play in the economic competitiveness of our cities and rural areas.

Master plans should also favor compatible land-use designations, such as industry or utilities, on lands in proximity to rail facilities. In some cases, a municipality may nonetheless decide to allow new sensitive land uses on these lands, but they also need to adopt appropriate zoning standards and other mechanisms that will require developers to take the following actions:

• Incorporate an adequate setback between buildings and the rail right-of-way.
• Include safety barriers, such as earth berms or crash walls, to protect buildings and their occupants.
• Install fencing along a mutual property line with a rail corridor to limit trespassing.
• Assess potential noise and vibration impacts and mitigate them appropriately in the design and construction of buildings that will house sensitive uses and occupants. Typical mitigation measures include noise barriers, building materials and glazing with appropriate acoustic properties, provision of air conditioning and residential building designs that do not locate bedrooms in parts of structures closest to the railway, etc.
• Design drainage of new development projects to ensure there are no adverse impacts to railroad lands, as these can affect the integrity of the track bed and generate serious safety issues.
• Require, to the extent possible, that land title instruments such as restrictive covenants be implemented to ensure that mitigation measures are maintained and not altered over time, and that occupants are properly advised of the presence of active rail facilities in proximity.

For adjacent development purposes, railway facilities can be divided into four general categories: main lines, branch lines, spurs, and rail yards. Each calls for specific development standards to regulate elements like building setbacks from the rail right-of- way and the inclusion of safety barriers.

The Proximity Guidelines provide much more detail, and the document also suggests that planners consult with the affected railway company when reviewing development applications, since traffic patterns on rail segments can change over time.

Some land uses simply do not mix with railroad tracks. The presence of schools and shopping centers next to railroad tracks can create temptation for reckless and dangerous behavior, such as trespassing, especially in areas with residential neighborhoods on the other side of the tracks.

To support rail safety, municipalities must take into account the projected impacts on road, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic at grade crossings before authorizing new land uses, densification, and largescale real estate projects. If a crossing requires upgrades to accommodate urban growth and a greater crossing capacity, or if the crossing should be upgraded to a grade-separated structure, this should be addressed by the municipality in advance, to avoid creating a safety issue.

A good example of this is Brampton, Ontario, in the greater Toronto area. Although divided by a busy rail mainline, the former agricultural lands west of Brampton's urban core have seen extensive residential development, with thousands of new dwellings being constructed in recent years. Through proper financial planning and with the evaluation of anticipated traffic impacts, Brampton managed to construct a road bridge over the railway corridor, including bus lanes and sidewalks, in time for the full build out and occupation of the Mount Pleasant neighborhood.

Communities rely on planners to shape and redefine our cities and towns, and to consider a variety of concurrent objectives, such as mobility, diversity, and environmental protection. Public safety is no less important, and planners will need to fine-tune their expertise on this front. Understanding the issues associated with development in proximity to railroads and addressing them will help make our communities safer and more sustainable.

Raymond Beshro is the senior officer for community planning and development for the CN railroad.

Resources

Infrastructure, operations, land planning, dispute resolution, and regulations: www.proximityissues.ca