Order No. 1989-R-387

December 1, 1989

File No. 30051.62

UPON reading the submissions filed,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The applicant and the railway company are authorized to carry out the work as shown on the Plan.
2. The work shall be carried out in compliance with the requirements of the Agency respecting highway crossings.
3. The cost of reconstructing, widening and maintaining the highway approaches of the crossing shall be paid by the applicant.
4. The cost of reconstructing, widening and maintaining the crossing with an asphalt surface shall be paid by the railway company.
5. The railway company is directed to prepare all accounts using rates not in excess of those stipulated in Schedule "A" entitled Directives, attached to Railway Transport Committee Order No. R-40634 dated May 20, 1987, or its replacement, for all construction and maintenance work carried out by the railway company under this Order.

The Reasons for this Order will be issued under separate cover.

REASONS FOR ORDER NO. 1989-R-387 File No. 30051.62

January 23, 1990

A dispute has arisen in this case concerning the allocation of costs for a particular type of crossing surface at this location. The District of Burnaby and the City of Vancouver chose an asphalt surface because of its better wearing characteristics but Canadian Pacific Limited (hereinafter CP) states that, while it has no objection to the installation of an asphalt surface at this location, it asserts that its share of the costs of the crossing surface as junior party should be fixed at the cost of a wooden planked surface.

An asphalt surface will require much less maintenance which will result in a decrease in crossing maintenance charges. Furthermore, the fact that such surfaces possess better wearing characteristics means that smoother riding capabilities will be maintained for a much longer period of time, which is an important consideration, bearing in mind the large volumes.

The position that has been taken by CP is that it will not object to the installation of an advanced crossing surface provided that the costs above and beyond the cost of standard wooden planking are borne and paid by the road authority. In other words, CP has arrested its responsibility for crossing surfaces at the technological stage of development which prevailed in the nineteenth century.

It is the view of the National Transportation Agency that the position of CP does not reflect a fair allocation of the costs of constructing an adequate public thoroughfare at this crossing. It is considered that the junior party should bear the expense of an adequate crossing surface that consists of concrete or asphalt without freezing costs at a particular type of crossing surface for the benefit of any party, when it is the junior party.

The estimated daily traffic of Boundary Road is 3,000 vehicles per day, and it is estimated that this number will increase to 5,000 in the near future. Under these circumstances the proposal of the District of Burnaby and the City of Vancouver to install an asphalt surface at this location will better serve the public's need at this crossing.

The National Transportation Agency believes that the road authority proposal more fully addresses the needs for a better crossing surface and, therefore, is of the opinion that the road authority proposal should be implemented for the convenience of the public.

Accordingly, the National Transportation Agency has authorized the installation of an asphalt crossing surface with the costs of reconstruction and maintenance apportioned to Canadian Pacific Limited.