Regina metropolis council discusses trains, pace limits; process movement tabled

City council spent its Wednesday meeting discussing train-related issues, speed limit changes and several other topics.

Councillors Shanon Zachidniak and Daniel LeBlanc put forward a motion calling for the city to look at ways it can address a number of concerns surrounding rail traffic in the city’s Eastview neighbourhood, including noise and pedestrian safety.

In regards to the noise aspect, administration said Transport Canada has final say over any policy that would prevent train horns from being used in the city. Also noted was the likely requirement for costly crossing upgrades like noise-making bells.

“Part of the issue is it’s a federally regulated area and Transport Canada has ultimate authority over that,” Mayor Sandra Masters said. “So if there are safety concerns, Transport Canada has stated that whistles are the way that they feel is the best way to deal with some of those safety concerns.”

Another piece of the motion called for the city to explore moving the rail lines, an aspect already being looked at in several reports coming back to council over the next few years surrounding efforts to remove the much-maligned rail crossings from Ring Road.

Speed limit lowering at Arcola Ave. on-ramp

Council also voted in some technical changes to Regina’s Traffic Bylaw that includes lowering the speed limit on a portion of Arcola Avenue in the east end.

The section of roadway surrounding the Ring Road on-ramp will see its speed limit reduced from 70 to 60, in accordance with a recommendation from SGI.

Councillor Lori Bresciani noted this is the first step in addressing some of the problems with the on-ramp.

Procedural motion tabled

A motion from Bresciani that would have seen protocols for delegations to council change was tabled at Wednesday’s meeting.

The motion included bringing back the requirement for a written submission to be given in advance of making a presentation to council and would also see meeting agendas posted farther in advance.

The motion was tabled due to plans for an informal meeting of councillors over the weekend to discuss what is and what isn’t working from procedural changes first introduced in Dec. 2020.

Comments are closed.