The tragedy on the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) tracks last week that claimed the life of an 18-year-old Cochranite revealed the enormous influence a railway incident has on the town of Cochrane.
By no means was CPR or the train’s operator at fault for what occurred, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that when instances like last Thursday’s do happen, and a train is forced to stop due to a collision or a derailment, the town of Cochrane is forced to come to a standstill.
The reason this is concerning and needs to be addressed is simple, and it certainly is not to minimize any tragic situation that may occur, like the one last week: it is to be wary of one that may materialize due to our streets becoming impassable.
For some people driving in Cochrane last Thursday evening it took them well over an hour to cover a few kilometres…thankfully, none of these people were paramedics, firefighters or police.
But who is to say that one day this could not be the case?
Countless towns and cities across Canada can thank their very existence to CPR, as with the laying of tracks and construction of train stations has spurred the creation of several communities…Cochrane being one.
But constructing roadways, particularly those over railway tracks, is not the easiest thing to accomplish and get approval for from CPR.
Just this past year, when the town opened its railway crossing on Centre Ave., the crossing at 4th Ave. needed to be closed immediately, because CPR will not allow more than three at-grade rail crossings in Cochrane.
There are two locations in Cochrane that would benefit greatly by having a rail crossing: reopening the 4th Ave. crossing (this would relieve some of the traffic woes on 5th Ave., and at both intersections with Railway and First Street); and extending Horse Creek Road to meet Quigley Dr., which would connect the communities of West Terrace and Heartland, making travel between the two quicker, safer and environmentally friendlier, while also easing traffic on Highway 22 and 1A and at the all-important intersection of the two.
The concern with multiple at-grade rail crossings within a community would surely be safety; the more crossings, the more potential for accidents and/or tragedy, some would say.
This very well could be the case – here are some statistics from Transport Canada on railway incidents in 2014: There were 1,225 rail accidents reported; 174 involved dangerous goods; there were 57 rail fatalities; 15 per cent of rail accidents were crossing accidents, that included 25 serious injuries, 20 fatalities, nine of which involved pedestrians; in Alberta, there were nearly 40 crossing accidents, or 22 per cent of the Canadian total.
Speed limits for trains vary greatly depending on track curvature, operational requirements, what the train is carrying and the track type class. The most common class of track is Class 4, where there is speed limit of 97 km/hr for freight trains and 129 km/hr for passenger trains.
Considering how many trains run on average per day in Canada – 1,100 according the Rail Association of Canada – they are a fairly safe means of transportation.
Using the 1,100 runs per day estimate, that’s 401,500 runs each year, and in 2014, there were 1,225 reported accidents, or .3 per cent accident rate. And accidents at crossings would only account for .04 per cent of railway incidences.
Which is precisely why additional rail crossings should be strongly considered in communities like Cochrane for safety reasons. Does the slight possibility of there being an accident at a railway crossing mean we should neglect something that could result in tragedy during a rail incident?
Unfortunately, more crossings would not have saved the life of the young Cochranite last week. But if it saves someone else from heartbreak during a railway episode – like a house fire, heart attack, or other medical emergency — then it’s worth it.
