After months of questions about deteriorating railway underpasses in Smiths Falls, MP Scott Reid is searching historical records to establish who is responsible for repairs at Chambers and Victoria streets.
The Lanark-Frontenac MP toured both underpasses with Hometown News on Sept. 3, accompanied by Member’s Assistant Shawn Morrison, and resident Keith Berry.
Reid had raised the Chambers Street underpass at Smiths Falls council in June.
“We can serve as an intermediary between the town and any federally-regulated businesses,” Reid said, as to how his office can help the process.
“We have no executive authority over anything,” Reid said.
He said his office can research the legal arrangements governing the structures to establish responsibility for repairs and maintenance. If responsibility falls to a federally regulated company, he said the House of Commons and its committees might provide a venue to apply pressure.
Morrison is now investigating how responsibility for the underpasses was originally divided and whether those arrangements have changed.
“I’ve asked Library and Archives Canada to locate original Board of Railway Commissioners documents concerning Chambers Street, along with subsequent amendments,” Morrison said.
He is also investigating the municipal boundary near the Victoria Street pedestrian underpass and whether Montague Township has any responsibility there.
The effort follows months of questions by Berry involving CPKC, the Town of Smiths Falls, Transport Canada and the Canadian Transportation Agency.
Inspections and responsibility
Transport Canada confirmed to Hometown News that the railway bridge structure at Chambers Street and the pedestrian subway connecting Victoria Avenue and Anne Street fall under CPKC’s responsibility for “maintenance, inspection and safety.”
The federal department said railway companies are responsible for the safety and maintenance of their infrastructure under the Railway Safety Act, while Transport Canada oversees compliance through “audits, inspections and other compliance activities.”
Following Hometown News inquiries about the condition of the structures, Transport Canada contacted the railway.
“A Transport Canada engineer has contacted Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) regarding the structures raised in your inquiry,” senior communications advisor Sau Sau Liu told Hometown News.
“CPKC advised that it had inspected both bridges and found no primary structural issues affecting their integrity.”
In an Aug. 25 letter to Berry, Transport Canada also said it had scheduled follow-up inspections to address the concerns raised in his complaint and assess compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.
Transport Canada did not provide the dates or reports for CPKC’s inspections, identify who conducted them or say whether they included the retaining walls and other components CPKC considers the town’s responsibility.
The department said it does not provide inspection reports or related details to the public because they may contain third-party or sensitive information.
“For this reason, we encourage individuals seeking information on this matter to do so directly with the railway,” Liu said.
Hometown News did.
CPKC was asked for the inspection dates and findings, what was examined, whether other deficiencies were identified and whether both locations are considered safe for continued use. The railway was also asked for copies or summaries of its most recent inspection findings.
No response had been received by publication time.
CPKC has separately identified the Town of Smiths Falls as the road authority responsible for the Chambers Street approaches, retaining walls, road surface, sidewalks, drainage, lighting, signage and pavement markings.
The town has not yet responded to questions about what it has spent maintaining those components during the past five years, what work has been completed, whether they meet current municipal engineering and maintenance standards and what repairs or upgrades are planned.
The town was also asked whether a current written agreement with CPKC governs maintenance, repairs or cost-sharing at either underpass.
A closer look at the underpasses
At Chambers Street, Berry showed Reid and Morrison deteriorating concrete, damaged railing supports, areas where he said water enters during heavy rain, and a section of retaining wall he said is bowing outward.
He also showed them an opening behind one section of the retaining wall. Reid put his shoe into the gap to gauge its size, then reached his arm into the cavity.
“That’s crazy. That can’t be good,” Reid said.
Berry has documented conditions at Chambers Street through photographs taken over time. In one set of images, deteriorating concrete visible in an earlier photograph is no longer present in a later one. It has not been established whether the material fell or was removed.
“This has been neglected for years,” Berry said. “This is decades, right? So it’s no one person, one administration’s fault.”
At the Victoria Street pedestrian underpass, the group examined drainage, lighting and damaged handrails. The floor was slick with mud, and areas of deteriorating concrete were visible overhead.
Asked after the tour what concerned him most, Reid said: “Structural integrity is the key issue.”
He cited bowing walls, cavities and rust-affected supports observed during the visit to the two underpasses. He acknowledged that he lacked the engineering knowledge to determine whether those conditions posed a present danger, but said he was concerned they could become dangerous over time.
A century-old paper trail
The Canadian Transportation Agency has uncovered part of the historical paper trail.
The agency recently located three Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada orders concerning the Chambers Street grade separation: orders 19261, 22267 and 39704, along with General Order E-5. (A breakdown of these orders appears in a sidebar.)
CTA media relations told Hometown News it had no information about the pedestrian crossing at Victoria Avenue and Anne Street, but said the street names likely had changed since the crossing was approved.
The agency also confirmed that both crossings pass beneath CPKC’s federally regulated railway yard.
If parties cannot agree over construction or reconstruction costs for a grade separation, the CTA can make a cost-apportionment decision. The agency said parties can also use its mediation service or ask a panel of CTA members to settle a dispute.
“To date, the CTA has not received a dispute related to either location,” the agency said.
In making such a determination, the CTA said its members “will take into consideration any Orders previously issued by the CTA or its predecessors.”
Safety remains a Transport Canada matter.
Asked whether structural and railway-safety questions should go to Transport Canada while responsibility and cost-allocation disputes may fall within the CTA’s jurisdiction, the agency responded: “You are correct. Safety-related questions should be directed to Transport Canada.”
Morrison is seeking the original records and later amendments to establish what responsibilities were assigned when the Chambers Street underpass was built.
Questions beneath Victoria Street
The archival search may also help explain the origins of the Victoria Street pedestrian underpass.
Hometown News reported in January 2025 that the tunnel served the Shawville neighbourhood, which was separated from the rest of the community by the sprawling railway yard.
During a Municipal Heritage Committee discussion at the time, committee member Klaas Van Der Meer described the tunnel as an important link across the tracks.
“It was a tunnel that served a great need for the community to get across the tracks,” he said, noting residents otherwise faced crossing as many as 12 railway tracks.
What remains unclear is who originally built the subway and why.
Morrison raised the possibility that it was built by the railway to provide workers living nearby with direct access to the rail yard, including those living in the former Robinson Avenue rowhouses.
The rowhouses were demolished for safety reasons following a major fire in 2016. Whether they were originally built or owned by the railway as worker housing, and whether they were connected to the construction of the pedestrian subway, has not yet been confirmed through historical records.
Morrison is seeking documents that could establish when the subway was built, who built and paid for it, and what maintenance or cost-sharing responsibilities were established at the time.
Berry said his grandfather moved from the Cobden area to Smiths Falls to work on the railway and lived on Daniel Street within walking distance of the yard.
“The history of rail in this town is huge,” Berry said.
He said the underpasses could eventually become part of that story, suggesting railway-themed artwork on the walls after necessary repairs are completed.
For now, Berry’s goal is more basic.
“I want to see it fixed so it’s safe.”
SIDEBAR:
WHAT THE HISTORICAL ORDERS REVEAL
Documents provided by the Canadian Transportation Agency show that responsibility for the Chambers Street underpass has involved the railway, Smiths Falls and Montague Township since the crossing was built more than a century ago.
ORDER 19261: CONSTRUCTION
On May 20, 1913, the Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada ordered the Canadian Pacific Railway Company to construct a subway beneath its tracks at Chambers Street.
The order followed a hearing involving the railway, the Town of Smiths Falls and Montague Township.
The approved design called for a 30-foot roadway, a five-foot sidewalk and one upright support.
The construction costs were divided as follows:
- Montague Township: $2,000
- Town of Smiths Falls: $13,000
- Railway Grade-Crossing Fund: $5,000
- Canadian Pacific Railway: the remaining cost
ORDER 22267: DETAILED PLANS
A subsequent order approved detailed plans for the Chambers Street subway in 1914.
The document establishes that the project progressed from a construction order in 1913 to detailed design approval the following year. It does not establish when construction was completed.
ORDER 39704: PAVING
A later order concerning paving work again assigned costs to Smiths Falls and Montague. After $5,000 from the Railway Grade-Crossing Fund, the remaining estimated cost of $5,755 was divided: Smiths Falls, 74 per cent; and Montague Township, 26 per cent.
GENERAL ORDER E-5: MAINTENANCE
General Order E-5 established a broader framework for maintaining railway subways unless another order directed otherwise. Under that framework, the railway company bears the cost of maintaining the subway’s substructure and superstructure.
The highway authority bears other maintenance costs, including the approaches, road surface, sidewalks, drainage and lighting.
The documents show that Smiths Falls, Montague and the railway all had financial roles in the Chambers Street crossing. They do not, by themselves, conclusively establish each party’s legal responsibilities today.
Keep connected to your community—Read the latest Smiths Falls news.
Thank you , great information, now let’s see who is responsible, is it safe ? If it is safe then let’s get it stabilized, and refaced