GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[crs1026]

For all the brickbats Metrolinx has gotten about plans becoming slow paced, I wonder how much of the issue is the Ontario treasury realizing how much Ontario line will cost and will continue to, but knowing that slowing that project is both unfeasible and politically impossible.

Indeed.
If the work were simply going slow, there would be unspent funds piling up.
My conspiracy going right back to Wynne's RER plan was that while Transport may have blessed the plan, Treasury was never on board and has been feeding spanners into the spokes all along.
However, as others have noted, if ML has gone over budget along the way, they have probably exacerbated that by having to use Treasury's grudging allowances to fund overspends on the work to date, leaving nothing for the later planned tasks.

- Paul

 

[Northern Light]

Indeed.
If the work were simply going slow, there would be unspent funds piling up.
My conspiracy going right back to Wynne's RER plan was that while Transport may have blessed the plan, Treasury was never on board and has been feeding spanners into the spokes all along.
However, as others have noted, if ML has gone over budget along the way, they have probably exacerbated that by having to use Treasury's grudging allowances to fund overspends on the work to date, leaving nothing for the later planned tasks.

- Paul

Yes and enormous planned cost bloat. Hundreds of millions for a barebones station at Bloor/Lansdowne. We all know that's a crock. I worked the numbers, I can't find a way to spend that much on what they are building.

 

[drum118]

Oct 8
Had to drop off a camera at Brampton Canon office for repairs and decided to have a look at Mount Pleasant that I haven seen close to 15 years and a huge change since visits. It was open space with the village been built on the nothside which was a great idea to do it then.

When will ML be building a parking structure for that station??? not a spot to be found any of the lots nor on the street to the point cars were parked in the kiss & ride lots. Given how much devlopment has taken place over those 15 years and what coming down the road, where are people going to park even with good transit to the station??

As for adding the 4th track to that station and it goes back to the last time I saw it after the 2nd and 3rd track was built for it that it has to be on the north side. I said during the EA for the 2nd track to Georgetown that there should be 4 tracks from day one with CN seeing 2 but would use a 3rd track from tim to time but still left 2 tracks for GO. I said all the corridors in early 2000's should be 4 tracks with 2 for GO and 2 for CN and CP and still do. To put the 4th track in would require building the tunnels under it with a new access to in in the village area or tear out the south side area that will require new access to the tunnel.

Indeed.
If the work were simply going slow, there would be unspent funds piling up.
My conspiracy going right back to Wynne's RER plan was that while Transport may have blessed the plan, Treasury was never on board and has been feeding spanners into the spokes all along.
However, as others have noted, if ML has gone over budget along the way, they have probably exacerbated that by having to use Treasury's grudging allowances to fund overspends on the work to date, leaving nothing for the later planned tasks.

- Paul

You only have to look a Wynne's election platform that call for the Milton Line to be 4 track by 2021/22 at a Cost around $2.2 billion only to have it disappear after the election to backup your comments.

 

[ctf5650]

They have pretty much completed the subgrade and noise walls for double tracking from Davenport all the way north to Steeles.

It's somewhere between ominous and outrageous how they are maintaining radio silence on actually completing the double track.

Sure looks like the plan is on hold.

- Paul

They have laid rail down at Aurora GO now and have widened the ROW north of the station past Centre street, not sure if it's for double-tracking further north or just where the switch will be

 

[Metroscapes]

Caledonia GO Station news today that construction "has started".

Ontario Newsroom

news.ontario.ca

View attachment 687129

Looking at the track level render, it looks like they are building another shelter on the other side of the tracks to accommodate double tracking at a future date. Which may be one day. Probably.

I'm assuming the "shelter is the tunnel entrance? I hope it's a tunnel entrance anyway. It will make an excellent connection to the Beltline.

 

[crs1026]

Yes and enormous planned cost bloat. Hundreds of millions for a barebones station at Bloor/Lansdowne. We all know that's a crock. I worked the numbers, I can't find a way to spend that much on what they are building.

That station project is funded by the City.

Nothing like a good shakedown.

- Paul

 

[RandomBusGuy]

They have laid rail down at Aurora GO now and have widened the ROW north of the station past Centre street, not sure if it's for double-tracking further north or just where the switch will be

A very quick shot of that track from the train this afternoon.

 

[Sauga89]

So the crossings other than Clarkson, Lorne Park, Stavebank, Ogden and Haig would be closed, presumably?

I see Revus Ave. and Alexandra Ave. nearby, specifically.

Here is the technical report on grade separations the city used to develop the TRIP. The technical report is a couple years old now, and I think parts of it have been posted here before.

From the Lakeshore West section of that report:

Also, this is just Mississauga's report. Presumably, the province has its own report. I could see the province not wanting to grade separate Stavebank or Haig.

 

[Sauga89]

The federal grade crossing elimination program provides somewhere about $12-13m a year for grade crossing work nationwide, and doubtless that bucket has not been supported to anything like the level of construction inflation. That funding bucket should be significantly increased and a massive increase in the single-project cap. I would also consider that an auto insurance levy should be considered (disbursements on the basis of fed/prov/muni cost share) given that presumably improvements in dangerous road crossings reduces the incidents of claims.

I don't know how the insurance industry would react to that, but from GO's perspective, Mississauga's technical report is out of date.

According to the latest Transport Canada rankings, Lorne Park Road is now the riskiest at grade crossing in the entire country. This ranking is based on combined road and rail traffic levels, road and train speed, number of tracks, etc. 3 other GO crossings make the top 10 riskiest, and 11 GO crossings are in the top 20.

 

[DirectionNorth]

That station project is funded by the City.

Nothing like a good shakedown.

- Paul

Worst construction costs for a "regular" infill station in the world, as far as I know. America is not that bad. Gord Perks was not strong enough in renaming those stations - I would have chosen "We're #1 for a change!" and "Toronto is the worst!" as my picks. """Smart""" track, the dumbest move in the world.

Here is the technical report on grade separations the city used to develop the TRIP. The technical report is a couple years old now, and I think parts of it have been posted here before.

From the Lakeshore West section of that report:

Spoiler

View attachment 687327

Also, this is just Mississauga's report. Presumably, the province has its own report. I could see the province not wanting to grade separate Stavebank or Haig.

I wonder if that isn't too aggressive in keeping roadways open. Given that GO Expansion (and Mississauga) are lacking in money, I'd rather they close everything except Lorne Park and Ogden and put up AT connections instead.

(non-)Bridge dream? Too aggressive?

 

[reaperexpress]

I don't know how the insurance industry would react to that, but from GO's perspective, Mississauga's technical report is out of date.

According to the latest Transport Canada rankings, Lorne Park Road is now the riskiest at grade crossing in the entire country. This ranking is based on combined road and rail traffic levels, road and train speed, number of tracks, etc. 3 other GO crossings make the top 10 riskiest, and 11 GO crossings are in the top 20.View attachment 687349

I see that Scarborough Golf Club Road is number 3 - I've long had a fantasy of Metrolinx realigning that portion of the line along with the grade separation to eliminate the current 75 mph (121 km/h) speed restriction, raising the speed to the 95 mph (153 km/h) limit along the rest of the line. But as we know, Metrolinx has no interest in operating fast services nor improving Ontario's intercity services so that would definitely never happen.

 

[kotsy]

North of Queen Street East (LSE).

South of Queen Street East.

 

[reaperexpress]

Here is the technical report on grade separations the city used to develop the TRIP. The technical report is a couple years old now, and I think parts of it have been posted here before.

From the Lakeshore West section of that report:

View attachment 687327

Also, this is just Mississauga's report. Presumably, the province has its own report. I could see the province not wanting to grade separate Stavebank or Haig.

I wonder if that isn't too aggressive in keeping roadways open. Given that GO Expansion (and Mississauga) are lacking in money, I'd rather they close everything except Lorne Park and Ogden and put up AT connections instead.

(non-)Bridge dream? Too aggressive?

Totally agree. Stavebank especially makes no sense for a motor vehicle grade separation. On top of being several times more expensive than an AT-only grade separation, maintaining car traffic at that crossing would undermine Missisauga's ability to affordably create safe, efficient and comfortable AT routes to downtown Port Credit from the north.

Stavebank's QEW crossing is already AT-only, so the road is not a through route for cars anyway.

The only people who drive across the railway at Stavebank are people who live within walking distance of downtown Port Credit, or people who are shortcutting through that residential neighbourhood. If the railway crossing is made AT-only, through traffic on Stavebank would be eliminated, turning it into a safe and comfortable street for AT without needing to build any dedicated AT infrastructure along it.

Which is good because adding sidewalks and cycle tracks on Stavebank would be very challenging:

Stavebank forms a very direct route to downtown Port Credit and Port Credit Station from the north, so it could become a very useful cycling connection.

 

[SubHuman]

... a line where construction is currently underway to continuously double-track the line from Union to Aurora.

... It's somewhere between ominous and outrageous how they are maintaining radio silence on actually completing the double track.
Sure looks like the plan is on hold...

There's been some progress where the Barrie line splits off from the Kitchener line near Dundas and Lansdowne.
However, nothing yet immediately to the north going up towards where the Bloor/Lansdowne GO station is being built, and it looks like it might be more complicated with limited space available.
I assume the new second track will likely be on the east side of the existing track all the way up to Bloor, but it's difficult to tell if there's enough space to do that while leaving all of the existing track in place.
https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threa...-1s-metrolinx-brown-storey.37395/post-2238867

 

[dowlingm]

Even if they complete Barrie double track, they can’t ramp up service without betraying promises made to the community that it wouldn’t happen without electrification. It would provide more scheduling flexibility, of course.

I wonder would Metrolinx have the cheek to fit MP54s with battery packs as previously teased, operate in DE mode uphill and BE mode downhill, and then say “look - we didn’t increase net diesel usage but doubled service”. But a battery MP54 is years away if ever…