Skip to content

Pitt Meadows says CP Rail has not addressed city safety concerns

City Hall drafting opposition to railway’s application for expansion
30158779_web1_210122-MRN-NC-Stopcprail-stoprailpics_1
There is strong public opposition to CP Rail’s proposed expansion in Pitt Meadows. (Special to The News)

The City of Pitt Meadows launched another salvo at CP Rail and its application for a new logistics park in the city on Monday, and is working on a rebuttal to be sent to the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA).

The railway company has made formal application to the CTA, seeking approval for facilities that would allow for the storage of fuels, grain and other agricultural products, and vehicles.

READ ALSO: CP Rail makes application for new logistics park in Pitt Meadows

The city issued a press release on Monday saying there are quotes in the application that the city categorically disagrees with.

“We wanted to make sure we had a counter to CP’s comments,” said Mayor Bill Dingall, noting a more formal and detailed response is also being prepared.

The proposed logistics park will be built on 41 hectares of farmland near the Pitt River Bridge in west Pitt Meadows. It would add a rail, transload, and distribution facility adjacent to the Vancouver Intermodal Facility (VIF), which is already there.

The city maintains the logistics park poses high-hazard health, safety, and environmental risks to the city.

The statement from the city said it’s inaccurate for CP to state they have heard and addressed concerns from the city regarding the ability of Pitt Meadows Fire and Rescue Service to properly service the proposed facility.

“The city has clearly and on multiple occasions communicated to CP that Pitt Meadows Fire and Rescue Services (PMFRS) is volunteer-based and lacks the personnel, equipment, infrastructure, or specialized training to respond safely to the vast majority of emergency scenarios arising from the proposed CP Logistics Park,” said the statement, adding CP’s commitment to “deliver training to personnel associated with emergency response” is insufficient and fails to address the city’s concerns.

“It appears that CP is minimizing the extensive risk that will be created by the Logistics Park and they continue to propose insufficient mitigation measures,” said the statement. “This will place Pitt Meadows residents, PMFRS staff/volunteers, CP employees, and various public and private properties at extensive risk during an emergency scenario.”

City Hall also said that since CP announced the proposed logistics park in late 2020, the city has provided extensive feedback to CP’s Comparative Site Evaluation, Terms of Reference, Environmental Effects Evaluation and conducted numerous independent studies and third party reviews to provide CP with an opportunity to better understand and mitigate local issues and community concerns.

Despite these efforts, both CP’s detailed response to the city as well as their CTA application are fundamentally flawed, said the city, and do not take into account the city’s feedback in a meaningful way. They have not adequately identified or mitigated many significant detrimental impacts, including:

• Drainage systems including the Katzie Slough and Kennedy Pump Station;

• Noise and vibration;

• Transportation including Lougheed Highway and Proposed McTavish Connector;

• Air quality and human health;

• Emergency services;

• Local agriculture; and

• Water quality, wildlife, fish, and vegetation.

The city is writing an extensive rebuttal to CP’s application with the intention to submit to the CTA, CP, and various ministries and agencies. Dingwall expects the issue to be back before council this September. Council has been on a break during August.

READ ALSO: Mayor Dingwall announces he won’t run for Pitt Meadows council again


Have a story tip? Email: ncorbett@mapleridgenews.com
Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.


Neil Corbett

About the Author: Neil Corbett

I have been a journalist for more than 30 years, the past decade with the Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows News.
Read more