-2-

the District's request for Anti-Whistiling at Westwood Street
and Pitt River Road and that this favourable recommendation
would be contingent upon the City passing a complimentary Bylaw
for the Westwood Street crossing. Additionally, we were
informed that the Pitt River Road Anti-Whistling Bylaw would
probably receive favourable consideration even if the City did
not pass an Anvti-Whistling Bylaw respecting the Kingsway Avenue
crossing.

Our recommendation above takes into account the fact that the
Westwood Street crossing is fully protected with flashing
fights and barriers and although we cannot recall! the exact
train speed !imit at that crossing it is rather low as the
trains are entering and leaving the yard limits. However, with
respect to the Kingsway crossing, although there are flashing
fights there no barrier arms and the traffic pattern just west
of the crossing is rather complicated and a motorist may have
his mind more on the traffic than on the railway crossing. This
is In contrast to fhe Westwood Street crossing which has, both
‘ides, a fairly straight level stretch of highway without
traffic complications.

Although not part of the recommendation above it does seem to
me, personally, that an Anti Whistling Bylaw should not be
approved for the Pitt River Road crossing either as the traffic
movement for eastbound traffic is a rather automatic one for
most drivers to make, as they drive it quite trequently, and it
is very easy to simply slide around the correr without paying
full attention to the crossing. However, this crossing is
under the jurisdiction of the District of Coquitlam.

Incidentally, several other Municipalities were contacted,
Burnaby and North Vancouver City among them, and no concerns
were expressed concerning the legal or liability positions with
regard to such Bylaws. :

City Clerk.
RAF/a|

Admi.Trains 04/18/84