March 12, 2012
Dida Berku
Councillor, District 3
5801 boul. Cavendish Blvd.,
Côte Saint-Luc, QC H4W 3C3
Re: Meadowbrook development
Dear Ms. Berku,
Pursuant to the letter you have sent us with respect to the development of a portion of the
Meadowbrook green space into residential properties, we have reviewed the feasibility of such a
project in light of the proximity to CP rail operations and have concluded that the project is not
compatible with our operations in the area.
Firstly, the proposed location for a crossing is not feasible due to the high embankment near the bridge
carrying CP’s Vaudreuil subdivision.  This poses a safety risk that cannot be mitigated. Secondly, the road
connection would land right in the AMT Sortin yard which is not compatible with the track
configurations and operations, also posing a security risk. Both of these elements mean that the
proposed project does not meet proximity guidelines, guidelines which are in place to protect not only
the security but also the comfort of residents in areas where CP has operations against noise and
vibration issues.
Generally speaking, Canadian Pacific does not support the location of any residential development
directly adjacent to active rail corridors and yards, which are essentially heavy industrial uses. Although
we do our best to be a reasonable neighbour, all operations of active rail corridors and yards create
considerable noise and vibration. Residents typically want peace and enjoyment. CP operates 24 hours
a day, seven days a week and must have the full flexibility to do so to meet the needs of the economy.
These two realities pressed against each other inevitably lead to conflicts which typically get worse with
time. Proximity and safety conflicts also arise when rail/road crossings at grade are created over active
railway lands.
When due consideration is not given to these issues, residents there will at a minimum raise complaints
about rail operations negatively impacting the use and enjoyment of residential properties or blocking
their path while waiting on passing trains. In both scenarios railway operations can also be affected
negatively, impacting customers and the economy.
Other significant proximity issues typically arise when residential development encroaches near rail
operations, that being an increase in illegal pedestrian trespass on active railway property, putting
people at serious personal risk while doing so. Therefore, in the interests of public safety and security,
we also consider these conflicting land uses.
CP works with communities to avoid planning conflicts like these before they arise. Collaborative
relationships like these are fundamental to our corporate culture and our operations. Therefore, if a
municipality approves a development adjacent to the railway, we believe municipalities should require
the adoption of development guidelines that mitigate all of these impacts. The Railway Association of
Canada and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities have worked together to create proximity
guidelines to address such concerns. However, given that the municipality is not in support of this
particular proposal, CP respects and supports this decision.
Regards,
Breanne Feigel
Director Public Affairs & Strategic Communications
Canadian Pacific