VIA Rail

[ShonTron]

There are three railway swing bridges in Peterborough. Only one is used.

The most northerly of the three is the ex-CN Lakefield Sub bridge, permanently swung open, tracks removed. The rail trail that follows it takes a new high-level bridge, from where I took this photo:

Abandoned CN Lakefield Sub Swing Bridge

The middle one is the CP Bridge, still in active use for traffic to/from Preneveau and Blue Mountain. The southern one, fixed in the open position, was for the ex-CN Campbellford Sub. The track was used after CN abandoned the Peterborough-Belleville route, but serviced by CP. The customers are now entirely gone, the City of Peterborough bought the corridor, and built an extension of the Lang-Hastings Rail Trail to Lansdowne Street, allowing hikers and cyclists to pass under Highways 7/115.

The Campbellford Sub was built at the Grand Junction Railway, later part of the Midland Railway of Canada and then Grand Trunk.

Apart from the CP line, and spurs to General Electric and Quaker Oats, all track in Peterborough (mostly built by CN and its predecessors) has pretty much been removed or abandoned and awaiting removal now. The Port Hope, Pontypool and Lindsay (it became the Midland) built the track that entered Peterborough from the southwest. CP took that over in 1990, and it, too, is abandoned and mostly removed.

Peterborough is great because it kept almost all the abandoned railways intact and used as trails within the city. You can bike all the way to Uxbridge and Haliburton (via Lindsay), Lakefield, and Campbellford (and even Belleville), or even just to Trent University, almost entirely on rail trails.

 

[steveintoronto]

We seem to have fallen into a rabbit hole with this whole Peterboro debate. It's only one example where the Havelock line may look attractive in the short term but be a bad deal over all. And that whole discussion is only one clue in our speculating from the bleachers as to what line VIA may be considering. I am equally astounded how some people can naysay the con's of this routing and cling to the premise that it's the best option.

And this isn't going to happen along any other alignment? This is still *magnitudes* easier than doing it along the the Lakeshore RoW. There will be *many more* bridges of great length and cost to build along a Lakeshore alignment. So what other options are there of (gist) "underutilized freight lines and abandoned routes"?

What boggles me is that you fail to consider the alternatives, and yet keep dissing the Peterborough one. This is *by far* the best option, and the track is even extant, albeit not used east of Havelock for a mile or so.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

Transport minister aims to get on track with Via Rail’s upgrade proposal
National Post - http://news.nationalpost.com/news/c...-get-on-track-with-via-rails-upgrade-proposal

"This is the homework in front of us during the coming months and we’re going to do it very seriously." - Federal Minister of Transportation Marc Garneau

"The 2016 federal budget promised $3.3 million over three years to study Via’s high-frequency rail proposal. However, Garneau said a government decision on the dedicated track and fleet upgrade could come sooner."

 

[steveintoronto]

There are three railway swing bridges in Peterborough. Only one is used.

They look almost identical, different railroads, but probably the same local builder. So you've done that route? It's on my agenda as soon as it gets warm enough. But first, the Uxbridge to Peterborough leg:
Revisiting the Uxbridge–Peterborough Rail Trails
http://spacing.ca/toronto/2014/08/03/revisiting-uxbridge-peterborough-rail-trails/
Then:
Trans Canada Trail between Peterborough and Hastings completed
Final section of multi-use trail officially opened at ribbon-cutting ceremony

Read more: http://www.kawarthanow.com/kawarthanowguide/2015/11/10/trans-canada-trail/#ixzz48RocsuFL
The only time I've seen paving like that in Canada is rail-trail south of Brantford. Crushed limestone remains my favourite.

Are you Sean Marshall by any chance, ShonTron? (lol...you don't have to answer).

Edit to Add: Note the fixed bridge in the background. That must be Lansdowne St. (Edit: Correction detailed in newer post) Note the grace and clearance. Excellent model as an example of what can be done to replace the present CP swingbridge. And yes, rail bridges can be and are that graceful. Many like that are planned for the UK's HS2.

 

[ShonTron]

You got me.

I don't use my real name on the forum as it allows me to say what I like without finding it in a Google search. But I don't really hide here either - I post photos from my Flickr account that uses my real name, and I sometimes post articles from my blog other other sites where I'm the author.

 

[steveintoronto]

You got me.

I don't use my real name on the forum as it allows me to say what I like without finding it in a Google search. But I don't really hide here either - I post photos from my Flickr account that uses my real name, and I sometimes post articles from my blog other other sites where I'm the author.

Well sir, take a bow! Your articles have inspired me *(see note at bottom), and that Flikr posting of the bridge, (and it was linked by clicking on it) and a matrix of other aspects started to make me wonder.

We've got to do some miles! But that brings me to an aspect I've repeated a number of times on the old O&Q: It would devastate me to see the loss of the trail if it is re-used for dedicated passenger rail. I'm determined to be part of discussions on a joint use of the RoW if it comes to that. So many of those old RoWs are now superb cycling, albeit some are better for the surfacing than others. Fine crushed limestone does me just fine (28c rear, 25c front) on an almost fifty year old Reynolds 531 rebuilt by Argos Racing in the UK. (That's maxed out, it's a very narrow frame, but larger tires are now vastly more efficient and flexible for application). As well as being far more tolerant of heaving earth due to freezing and thawing, and tree roots, crushed limestone is also a heck of a lot easier to go down on (something that shouldn't happen but does occasionally) than asphalt, and oddly, crushed limestone if well packed is almost or just as fast.

Which cues an idea for a topic: "Rail-Trails, the machines used, recommendations and routes". I'll post a pic of my "Argos Renovated 531" taken in England after buying it for a song some ten years ago.

* Due to your article http://spacing.ca/toronto/2014/09/19/lake-lake-back-rail-trails-southwestern-ontario/ I did the Port Dover to Guelph via Brantford and Cambridge run in 6 1/2 hours last summer, complete with wrong turns losing me an hour in Simcoe and an hour trying to get across Cambridge ( a hell best not discussed). It was incredible, albeit those kinds of highs are hard to better, but we'll see this year!

 

[steveintoronto]

I'd incorrectly identified the road bridge in the background of Shon Tron's pic as "Landsdowne Street Bridge". I still had the location wrong. After closer searching, I've correctly identified the bridge (Nassau Mills Road Bridge) and dug out some interesting history. This wouldn't even get this far nowadays, as the "Navigable Waters Protection Act" is no more, Harper et al gutted it, I researched this for a court case in Guelph, which I won, albeit the complainants (The City) were so inept they didn't realize the revised Act no longer covered The Speed River...whatever. The Act per-se is very....errr...'watered down' as well as renamed and neutered.

(Please see added edit at end of this post.)

That bridge sets the precedent I needed to make my case for similar in place of the CP swing bridge still extant:

Reference Numbers
Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry: 10-01-54338
Parks Canada Agency: ~~~~

Environmental Assessment Type
Screening

Responsible or Regulated Authorities
Parks Canada Agency
Transport Canada

Reasons for a Federal Assessment
On April 15, 2010, it was determined that an environmental assessment was required in relation to the project because the Parks Canada Agency considered taking action in relation to subsection 14(2) of the Historic Canals Regulations and Transport Canada considered taking action in relation to section 5 of the Navigable Waters Protection Act.

Project Description (as posted in the Notice of Commencement)
This application (site location is Nassau Mills Road over the Otonabee River in the City of Peterborough; formerly Lot 5, Concession 11, Township of Douro, County of Peterborough) for bridge works on the Trent-Severn Waterway consists of the minor rehabilitation of the existing Nassau Mills Road Bridge including the removal of existing expansion joint assemblies, conversion to semi-integral abutments, removal of asphalt, waterproofing and paving of the deck, scarifying and concrete overlay of the sidewalks, replacement of bridge railings and concrete end posts, replacement of light standards and guide rail improvements. The rehabilitation is scheduled for summer 2010. Under section 5 of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, an environmental assessment is required in relation to this project because the Parks Canada Agency may provide federal lands for the purpose of enabling this project to be carried out and may issue a permit or license under [Section 14 (2)] of the Historic Canals Regulations and because Transport Canada may issue an approval under the Navigable Waters Protection Act. The Parks Canada Agency will act as the Federal Environmental Assessment Coordinator for this environmental assessment.

Final Decision
A decision was taken on September 27, 2010 and was that the authorities may exercise any power or perform any duty or function with respect to the project because, after taking into consideration the screening report and taking into account the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, the authorities are of the opinion that the project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects.

http://ceaa.gc.ca/052/details-eng.cfm?pid=54338

That makes it likely that, pertinent to the Transportation and Railways Acts, and in view of vastly reduced powers of at least the present Waterways Act (I'm not sure on the status of the "Historic Canals Regulations"....I suspect that's also been loosened) approval for refurbishing the O&Q swing bridge and/or replacement is a formal procedure, little more. The EA will have to be considered, and most likely, on the basis of this decision, waived.

This may seem trifling to some, but it sets-up exactly why using this corridor offers a rapid and easy way to get "shovels in the ground".

Edit to Add: I'd raised the question of "precedence" earlier, to which Mister F gave a fair and considered answer, since I'd phrased it for the Maria St Bascule Bridge.

But here's the answer when dealing with the *railway* movable bridges under the jurisdiction of
Historic Canals Regulations

SOR/93-220

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT ACT
:

Precedence at Swing and Lift Bridges

• 32 (1) The superintendent shall give precedence to trains at a railway swing or lift bridge.
  
  
• (2) The superintendent shall give precedence to vessels at a highway swing or lift bridge during the hours in which the bridge is scheduled to operate.

• SOR/2002-191, s. 5(E).

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-93-220/page-6.html
Date modified:
2016-04-29

One more credit to Desjardins-Siciliano for getting this right, even though has hasn't said it...lol.

Please pass on the info to him, Urban, albeit I'm sure that as an Attorney specializing in this area of law, he already knew that.

Edit to Add: RE: The former Navigable Waters Protection Act:
The Globe and Mail
Last updated Friday, Oct. 19, 2012 7:53AM EDT

Amendments to the Navigable Waters Protection Act introduced as part of a sweeping budget implementation bill on Thursday limit its application to 97 lakes, 62 rivers and the three oceans that border Canada. That means construction of dams, bridges and other projects would be permitted on most waterways without prior approval under the act, which currently covers any body of water big enough to float a canoe in.

Transport Minister Denis Lebel said the changes are meant to reduce the red tape for municipalities and cottagers seeking federal approval for small projects such as culverts or lakeside docks. He said the purpose of the act is to minimize interference with navigation, adding that waterways not on the new list will be protected by other federal laws and by provinces and municipalities.

“Over time, the scope and application of a law that was designed to protect navigation has expanded to the point where it now applies to brooks, streams, ditches. So now, even the most basic foot bridges over small streams still require pages of paperwork,” Mr. Lebel said on Thursday.

The list of the bodies of water that will be covered include the ones most frequently used for transportation, Transport Canada officials said, adding that it could be altered in the future.

The name of the act will be changed to the Navigation Protection Act, a move officials say recognizes its “historic intent” to focus on navigation, not water.

The changes garnered praise from municipal representatives, who said they would help pave the way for economic growth and infrastructure development. [...]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...aw-governing-navigable-waters/article4622873/

 

[mdrejhon]

I learn something new everyday!

 

[MisterF]

Peterborough is great because it kept almost all the abandoned railways intact and used as trails within the city. You can bike all the way to Uxbridge and Haliburton (via Lindsay), Lakefield, and Campbellford (and even Belleville), or even just to Trent University, almost entirely on rail trails.

The rail trail network in Ontario is actually really impressive. You can go from Uxbridge to Perth and then from Carleton Place through Ottawa almost to Montreal. In other words, most of the way from Toronto to Montreal on rail trails. The cycling layer on Google Maps is an impressive resource for cycling. It's missing some routes but it's the most complete one stop shop that I can think of for cycling routes. It also makes it apparent how lacking Toronto is in bike infrastructure - not only behind Montreal and Ottawa, but Brampton and Mississauga. That's kind of sad.

 

[ShonTron]

Lanark and Renfrew Counties bought the former CP Chalk River Sub; in a few years, it will be open for hikers, cyclists (and probably, sigh, ATVs) from Smiths Falls to Mattawa. It would close the gap, allowing for a rail trail ride all the way from Kingston to Ottawa.

The gap between Smiths Falls and Perth would remain.

 

[steveintoronto]

I learn something new everyday!

I went looking for the Historic Canal regs for other matters, and found them to be fascinating. I tripped across the railway movable bridge precedence by chance, but now I read through purposefully, I'm finding other gems.

*In general* navigating at night is permitted, as far as I can tell, I can't find anything to state otherwise, but note this:

(3) At night no vessel shall attempt to pass any bridge not equipped with traffic signal lights while the light shows red or when no light is showing.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/C.R.C.,_c._1564/FullText.html

That clause, combined with railway precedence....ostensibly by the "superintendent's" authority, means that if unmanned, the rail bridge, if movable, can stay in the down position all night to host freight or night passenger trains. Again, this point may seem trivial, but it chips away further at the tendency of some to find fault with the extant Peterborough alignment. Suddenly, the 'fanciful' concept of using a movable bridge becomes eminently sensible given sufficient warning (a given with the most modern communications based signalling and control ) to *lift* the bridge. Default position will be down, not up. A modern Bascule Bridge could easily set position in five minutes or less. Consider the Cherry Street bridge just south of Lakeshore Road as an example.

I've added a reference to how the "Navigable Waters Protection Act was gutted" to post #1148, and run up against the text limit for the post, so will add this here:

From the new Navigation Protection Act (note the powers of the "Minister"...e.g: Min of Transport, who can *arbitrarily* dictate many facets of how this Act is applied)(with an enthusiastic Transpo Min (Garneau) this is very much in favour of Desjardins-Siciliano's proposal)

Movable Spans
10 Unless otherwise approved by the Minister, the owner of a movable span bridge shall maintain on duty in charge of the span at all times a responsible person who is trained to operate the span.

• SOR/86-970, s. 3.

• 11 (1) The person in charge of a vessel passing through or under a bridge where two passages for navigation are approved shall use the passage on the vessel’s starboard side.
  
  
• (2) The Minister shall make special provisions governing navigation through or under any bridge where more than two passages for navigation are approved.

12 The signal to be given by a vessel for the purpose of having a movable span opened shall be three long blasts of a whistle or horn.

• 13 (1) When the signal specified in section 12 is given by a vessel approaching a movable span bridge, the responsible person referred to in section 10 shall open the span immediately, or as soon thereafter as is reasonably possible, to permit the passage of the vessel.
  
  
• (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the Minister may prohibit the opening of any movable span during specified periods and the person in charge of the span shall not open it except under such conditions as may be prescribed by the Minister.
  
  
• (3) The person in charge of a vessel shall not allow the vessel to enter a passage for navigation through or under a movable span until the span is fully open unless the vessel can safely move under the span while it is closed.

• SOR/86-970, s. 4.

• http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/C.R.C.,_c._1231/page-1.html#h-6

Edit to Add: The Lift Lock is only open during daytime hours. Note the very last line of this re: "swing bridges":

Trent-Severn Waterway National Historic Site of Canada
2016 Hours of Operation
May 20 to June 26
Monday to Thursday 10:00am – 4:00pm
Friday to Sunday; and Victoria Day 9:00am – 7:00pm

June 27 to Sept 5
Monday to Thursday 9:00am – 6:00pm
Friday to Sunday; and Canada Day, August Civic Holiday and Labour Day 9:00am – 7:00pm

Sept 6 to Oct 10
Monday to Friday 10:00am – 4:00pm
Saturday - Sunday; and Thanksgiving 9:00am – 5:00pm
[...]
LAST LOCKAGE - IMPORTANT
Follow these guidelines to maximize chances of being locked through at the end of the day:

1. All vessels must arrive at the designated blue zone at least 30 minutes before closing time.
2. At swing bridges, the last bridge swing will be 20 minutes prior to closing time.

http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/lhn-nhs/on/trentsevern/visit/visit3.aspx

 

[Urban Sky]

[...] In any case, it strikes me as problematic to have trains crossing a movable bridge every half an hour on average. How frequent are the trains on the Amtrak lines you're talking about? How busy are the waterways they cross? I suppose it might be possible with a new bridge. [...]

A precedent already exists with the draw bridges currently upgraded for the Brightline (formerly: All Aboard Florida) project:

[...] The marine industry and the proposed All Aboard Florida passenger train are making peace over the New River bridge in downtown Fort Lauderdale.

[...]

At issue is a 1970s bridge over the New River that is kept open for boats and closes when freight trains pass — up to 14 times per day. All Aboard Florida plans to use the tracks when it starts high-speed passenger service next year, requiring the bridge be closed 16 extra times per day.

A water taxi passes the Florida East Coast Railway New River drawbridge.

The marine industry has balked that the extra closings could choke access to the river and the canals, marinas and boatyards.

When the bridge is closed at high tide, it sits just 4 feet above the water, making it hard even for a kayak to pass underneath.

Since spring, the Coast Guard has been testing a plan that places a person, or "tende,r" at the bridge. Communication with the tender has cut the time needed to open and close the bridge.

What's more, the Coast Guard has set a standard that the bridge be closed for no more than 60 minutes in any two-hour period, a schedule that further allays concerns for boaters, Purcell said.

While the bridge still is controlled from Jacksonville, the tender now can communicate with operators to slow down for a boat passing through or to quickly open the bridge after a train passes, leaders said.

All Aboard also plans to develop a Web application and a mobile app offering train schedules and other information, among other tools to help boats and trains share the river, Reininger added. [...]

Read the entire article (dated November 6, 2015) at: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/fl-boat-show-all-aboard-train-20151106-story.html

[...] The district’s five-member commission is expected to decide whether to seekfederal grant money to increase the clearance underneath the bridge so that more boats can pass under it, reducing the need to lift and raise a bridge that has been under scrutiny due toa pair of malfunctions last year. The change would only improve navigation under the bridge, and would not alter the grade of the span or the train tracks that run over it, said George Gentile, chairman of the district’s governing board.

Michael Reininger, All Aboard’s president, said he was “very optimistic” about the proposal, adding that the company plans to work with the district to secure the federal grant money.

The district estimates the bridge modifications would allow roughly 85 percent of the boaters who use the channel to pass under a fixed portion of the bridge, Gentile said.

+
LANNIS WATERS
The FEC railroad bridge over the Loxahatchee River Monday, February 3, 2014. The clearance is very low, as can be seen ... Read More

[...]

The Loxahatchee bridge has been a sore spot for opponents of Brightline’s service, which is expected to add 32 trains a day on the Florida East Coast Railway tracks. Brightline’s passenger trains will run between Miami and Orlando with stops in Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach.

Boaters have argued the increased rail traffic will result in more frequent bridge closures, making it more difficult for them to navigate by the span.

From January 14, 2014 to October 31, 2015, more than 140,000 vessels passed under the bridge. The vast majority of those boats had an air draft of less than 8 feet, according to a report released by the Jupiter Inlet District. [...]

Read the entire article (dated April 8, 2016) at: http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news...more-boats-under-bridge-when-all-aboar/nq2xP/

 

[steveintoronto]

Lanark and Renfrew Counties bought the former CP Chalk River Sub; in a few years, it will be open for hikers, cyclists (and probably, sigh, ATVs) from Smiths Falls to Mattawa. It would close the gap, allowing for a rail trail ride all the way from Kingston to Ottawa.

The gap between Smiths Falls and Perth would remain.

Peterborough is great because it kept almost all the abandoned railways intact and used as trails within the city. You can bike all the way to Uxbridge and Haliburton (via Lindsay), Lakefield, and Campbellford (and even Belleville), or even just to Trent University, almost entirely on rail trails.

I'm considering opening a topic on Rail Trails, it's not just you and I, Shon Tron, others are expressing real interest in this too as we see from answers from MD, F, Alex and others.

I'm both troubled and delighted at the possibility (inevitability?) of the old O&Q becoming an operating rail line again. On one hand, the tranquility and divinity will be altered, but on the other, for the pittance in relative terms that it would cost to add a cycle lane back in next to the track (with the possibility of even that become a twinned track later), there could also be a wonderful offset offered by the province and the feds to also run a stopping limited service along the line with a car dedicated to cycles and hiking gear, akin to the GO Niagara train, that promotes and caters to those like ourselves who absolutely drool at the thought of doing many of those intersecting trails, but have a logistical challenge in getting there and back. Same 'stopping' service would also cater to the locals that need rail connections to along the line. Possibly a single or two car D/EMU could provide this service, more cars added when demand dictates. This would be a massive PR coup for the Feds, Province, Operating Consortium, and businesses catering to tourists. Peterborough would especially benefit economically, in many ways. It would attract an operating subsidy from affected counties too.

I intend to pursue this and related topics in a separate 'Rail Trail' forum. Any help that Shon Tron could provide most appreciated. I'm looking out the window right now, and wondering what I'm doing inside? I'm salivating at doing many of those trails, and a rail connection would be a massive enabler.

 

[MisterF]

A precedent already exists with the draw bridges currently upgraded for the Brightline (formerly: All Aboard Florida) project:


Read the entire article (dated November 6, 2015) at: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/fl-boat-show-all-aboard-train-20151106-story.html


Read the entire article (dated April 8, 2016) at: http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news...more-boats-under-bridge-when-all-aboar/nq2xP/

Interesting information, thanks. It still seems like the long term goal is still a higher bridge in Fort Lauderdale. The important thing is that the train schedule isn't compromised while still allowing boat traffic.

 

[steveintoronto]

Interesting information, thanks. It still seems like the long term goal is still a higher bridge in Fort Lauderdale. The important thing is that the train schedule isn't compromised while still allowing boat traffic.

And more important than that in the instance of the Peterborough Trent Canal bridge is that that it has a degree of precedence the Fort Lauderdale one doesn't. Default for the Fort Lauderdale bridge is open. For the Peterborough case, and all "Historic Canals" in Canada, is closed, and even beyond that, closed for whatever times the Minister (of Transport) states is to be the case:

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the Minister may prohibit the opening of any movable span during specified periods and the person in charge of the span shall not open it except under such conditions as may be prescribed by the Minister.

For better or worse, Canada's arbitrary Cabinet powers dwarf those of many other democracies. The US equiv doesn't have that kind of power!

Here's the US Federal Register for that bridge: (note, this has now expired, but the outcome of this trial is detailed in Urban's links. In Peterborough's case, as we're discussing, these powers are already extant and of much greater advantage to the railway operator)

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; New River, Fort Lauderdale, FL
A Rule by the Coast Guard on 05/18/2015

Action
Notice Of Temporary Deviation From Regulations; Request For Comments.

Summary
The Coast Guard is issuing a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Florida East Coast Railway (FEC) Railroad Bridge across the New River, mile 2.5, at Fort Lauderdale, FL. This deviation will test a change to the drawbridge operation schedule to address the inability of the bridge owner, FEC, to operate the bridge under current regulations.
[...]
Presently, in accordance with 33 CFR 117.5, the bridge is required to open on signal for the passage of vessels. The bridge is usually maintained in the open to navigation position and only closes for train traffic.

The bridge owner, FEC, determined that by installing an automated system, vessel transit will be more efficient. This automated system allows the railroad dispatcher to receive a signal that the bridge must close for approaching trains. The dispatcher will then be advised when trains clear the bridge so it can reopen.

Any vessel requesting a bridge opening must contact the bridge tender via telephone or radiotelephone (marine radio) on VHF-FM channel 9 or 16 to coordinate safe passage through the bridge. The tender must provide information to include, but not limited to authorization for the vessel to continue its transit when the bridge is open to navigation, or the tender must advise that the vessel will have to wait because a train is approaching. If a vessel is required to wait, the bridge tender must indicate the amount of time the vessel will have to wait until the train is clear of the bridge. The FEC Dispatch number and bridge tender phone number will be posted at the bridge so they can be seen by vessels approaching from either direction. The bridge tender's number is 305-889-5572 and the FEC Dispatch number is 800-342-1131.

This deviation seeks comments on FEC's operating schedule and tests an automatic operating system as the method for operating the bridge to determine whether a permanent change to operations can be approved. The deviation period will run from 6 a.m. on May 18, 2015 through 6 a.m. on October 16, 2015.

During the test deviation period, the draw of the FEC Railroad Bridge across the New River, mile 2.5, at Fort Lauderdale, FL, will operate as follows:

(a) The bridge is constantly tended.

(b) The bridge tender will utilize a VHF-FM radio to communicate on channels 9 and 16 and may be contacted by telephone at 305-889-5572.

(c) Signage will be posted displaying VHF radio contact information and the bridge tender and dispatch telephone number. A countdown clock for bridge closure shall be posted at the bridge site and visible for maritime traffic.

(d) A bridge log will be maintained including, at a minimum, bridge opening and closing times.

(e) When the draw is in the fully open position, green lights will be displayed to indicate that vessels may pass.

(f) When a train approaches, the lights go to flashing red and a horn starts four blasts, pauses, and then continues four blasts then the draw lowers and locks.

(g) After the train has cleared the bridge, the draw opens and the lights return to green.

(h) The bridge shall not be closed more than 60 minutes combined for any 120 minute time period beginning at 12:01 a.m.

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

Dated: April 22, 2015.

Barry Dragon,

Bridge Administrator,U.S. Coast Guard,Seventh Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 2015-11931 Filed 5-15-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-04-P

https://www.federalregister.gov/art...tion-regulations-new-river-fort-lauderdale-fl

For the Peterborough example, from what I can gather, albeit I'll read it all again and keep digging, there only needs to be an operator present during times of operation, and since that is precluded when the lift-locks are closed, the bridge, if a drawbridge (or any movable one) remains locked down and unattended, and the bridge usable during that time. That's a huge advantage over US regs, albeit there might be 'deviations' to that regulation in some individual cases in the US. It could well be that in this instance, the O&Q is advantaged by the Trent being an "Historic Canal".

Here's the Ft Lauderdale drawbridge in operation. Note the time it takes to open. If one is installed at Peterborough, time will be even less to open, as the span is less, and ostensibly, it will be single track. And! It only needs to open suffice to clear the "22' air draft" required for the Trent. Note the weight and speed of the FEC freight crossing this, and also the draft of the track level to the water, almost the same as the present Peterborough example. In Peterborough's case, that track level can be heightened at least a few feet to reduce the necessary clearance a drawbridge would need to open to, and reduce the depth of clearance for the counterweight to sink to, making a design easier and ostensibly even faster to operate when necessary.