crs1026
Superstar
We have heard little about any plans to improve the GO station at Etobicoke North. Adding the fourth track will impact the access to the present (temporary) station. I wonder what’s up with it.
- Paul
- Paul
Contract Awarded for Highway 401 Rail Tunnel
EllisDon Capital Inc. + STRABAG Inc., with WSP Canada Inc., Dr. Sauer & Partners and Amec Foster Wheeler for design.
"Construction is scheduled to begin in spring 2018, with an expected substantial completion date for late summer 2021."
We have heard little about any plans to improve the GO station at Etobicoke North. Adding the fourth track will impact the access to the present (temporary) station. I wonder what’s up with it.
- Paul
The fifth track for the tunnel, though? No idea. Maybe a lead to/from the future UPX maintenance facility that would extend to the existing northernmost freight spur west of the 401. But I don't know if it will fit under Islington without impacting Resources Road.
The problem with Etobicoke North is that there are no pedestrian tunnels. A fourth track in any configuration needs a tunnel under the tracks somewhere. It may be a shorter lead time item than the 401 tunnel, so hasn't been actioned yet.... but something will have to be done eventually.
The new 401 tunnel is two tracks, but I haven't heard that the end state is five tracks. Squuezing three into the existing tunnel has always been problemmatic and I wonder if the end state will remove one track from the current tunnel.
- Paul
How essential is this if there is no solution further west?This is one of those unsexy but essential projects. Glad to see it moving full steam ahead.
How essential is this if there is no solution further west?
If all we can run is the trains we are currently running, how essential is this tunnel?
Do they? Passing under the tracks is currently facilitated by using sidewalks and stairs along Kipling. They certainly need better switchbacks to reduce travel for those using accessibility devices, but I don't see the need for a tunnel.
Hmm. Good point. Maybe we (I) overread that part. Then again why wouldn't you build in the extra capacity.
How essential is this if there is no solution further west?
If all we can run is the trains we are currently running, how essential is this tunnel?
I have always believed (conspiracy theory, here) that this tunnel fell off the table when costs first started to mount with GTS and when UPE became the paramount deliverable. If you look at how the interlocking signalling was built, a four track mainline was clearly designed and roughed in. Then cuts came, and three tracks was all that was affordable. The fourth track is sitting there all wired up in the signalling, just waiting for someone to connect the leads. I don't believe anyone ever intended to add a fifth track, as it was never roughed in, and doing so would force rework on what was just built.
Contacts with knowledge of the engineering of the three track tunnel tell me that clearances are so tight that nobody was really sure that the dynamic air pressures would allow trains to pass in the tunnel without clipping something. This was tested carefully but only just before opening in 2015. Again, just a theory, but I bet it's something that ML would want to ease especially if it is the limiting clearance point on the whole line for electrification and whatever new equipment that may require.
- Paul
It would rectify the problem where mid day service ends well before the evening peak, and skips stops eastbound in late afternoon. It might enable some counter flow service at peak, at least as far as Bramalea.
There has to be a back story on why CN is allegedly opposed to allowing more trains to use the tail track (Platform 4) at Bramalea. Taken on its own, their position is ludicrous. It has to be tied to something bigger.
- Paul
It is not clear to me that:
1. This tunnel adds value (at least anywhere near value commensurate with it’s cost) without also getting something done further west;
2. That it could not be built concurrent with the other improvements west of there IF they get negotiated/approved/built
CN’s position makes perfect sense to me.....why would they give up something the other guy wants until they get all that they (CN) want in return.
Something that the various ML/ON Gov’t negotiators on this corridor seem to have never learned.
Contacts with knowledge of the engineering of the three track tunnel tell me that clearances are so tight that nobody was really sure that the dynamic air pressures would allow trains to pass in the tunnel without clipping something. This was tested carefully but only just before opening in 2015. Again, just a theory, but I bet it's something that ML would want to ease especially if it is the limiting clearance point on the whole line for electrification and whatever new equipment that may require.
- Paul
Given Paul's comments, even with the existing UP Express service, VIA and GO services, do they ever have a three train meet through the existing tunnel?