GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[reaperexpress]

Do we even know what the province priced for there mega $billions number? They could have priced it all the way to Galt for all we know.

Well given that they stated that one of CPKC's demands was full grade separation, I assume they costed out full road/rail grade separations at all existing road crossings. However, several of them could probably be omitted or scaled back to save a lot of costs. Here are some ideas to do so:

Loreland Ave: it's just the driveway for two properties. Would CPKC really back out of the deal if we left this level crossing in place, but agreed to remove every other level crossing?

Haines Rd: Does this really need to be a full motor vehicle grade separation? The road is only a block long anyway, so closing it to motor traffic would cause minimal inconvenience.
A pedestrian/bicycle grade separation could be provided to maintain local connectivity at a fraction of the cost of a full road/rail grade separation.

Ontario Ct: This crossing can just be closed and replaced with a pedestrian bridge. It only really serves 20 houses that are already connected in both directions via Rutledge Road anyway.

Thinking bigger picture in Streetsville: do we even want motor traffic to be crossing the tracks in the centre of Streetsville? Providing that connection encourages people to use the town centre as a driving shortcut, which negatively impacts the safety and attractiveness of walking/cycling on the narrow streets in the town centre, and thereby generates avoidable car traffic. Based on the Dutch Sustainable Safety principles, all of these crossings would be closed to private motor traffic and be replaced with pedestrian/cycling grade separations. Drivers would need to cross the tracks via the roads that are actually suitable as through traffic routes, namely Eglinton and Britannia (which are already grade separated). This would transform Thomas/Bristol and Queen Street into quiet streets that could become very attractive routes for walking/rolling, cycling, e-biking, e-scootering even though there isn't necessarily space for dedicated cycling infrastructure. That would make those modes much more attractive ways to get to get across town or to/from the centre of Streetsville.

The biggest issue with closing all those is that it would also block MiWay Route 44 Missisauga Road that currently runs straight down Queen Street here (it doesn't serve Streetsville Station). To mitigate that impact on transit service, the Streetsville Station busway could be extended 440 metres along the tracks to Queen Street. This would save a ton of time for buses serving the station, since they currently need to backtrack 1km to Thomas Street after serving the dead-end bus terminal.

Miway Route 9 would be unchanged apart from the elimination of that backtrack at Streetsville Station.
Miway Route 10 could be extended to Streetsville Station which would also provide a new cross-town connection via a transfer to route 9 using the station's pedestrian tunnel.
Miway Route 44 would gain a connection to Streetsville Station but the walking distance from bus stops to downtown Streetsville would increase by up to 300 m.
Miway Route 46 could be extended from Erin Mills Town Centre terminal to Streetsville Station, connecting its neighbourhoods and that terminal to the station.

With private motor traffic blocked from cutting through the centre of Streetsville, there would be minimal traffic getting in the way of buses. Sure, driving around the block is a bit inconvenient, but is it really worth hundreds of millions of dollars to build a railway trench through Streetsville, just to enable cars to continue degrading the safety and attractiveness of central Streetsville?

 

[nfitz]

Well given that they stated that one of CPKC's demands was full grade separation, I assume they costed out full road/rail grade separations at all existing road crossings.

They probably costed it out; but they only need one to grade separate them from CPKC.

Streetsville is quite far down - I don't see that they have to start with any enhanced service that far west. How many level crossings from Bloor West station to Cooksville?

 

[SaugeenJunction]

Well given that they stated that one of CPKC's demands was full grade separation, I assume they costed out full road/rail grade separations at all existing road crossings. However, several of them could probably be omitted or scaled back to save a lot of costs. Here are some ideas to do so:

A little birdie told me that part of this deal, in terms of demands from the infrastructure owner, includes grade separating every road crossing. When that’s considered, $6.2 billion makes a bit more sense. Would love if someone could confirm this too.

 

[drum118]

Because all of the stations are future-proofed for a track configuration where GO has 2 dedicated tracks on the north side and CPKC has 2 dedicated tracks on the south side. See below how the full buildout would look:

Kipling Station (no changes. The corridor is already quad-tracked)
View attachment 540695

Dixie Station (1 new track on the north side)

Cooksville Station (2 new tracks, one on each side)

Erindale Station (1 new track on the north side; new side platform). Or alternatively, 1 new track on the south side

Streetsville station (2 new tracks on the south side)

Meadowvale Station (2 new tracks, one on each side)

Lisgar station (2 new tracks, one on each side)

CPKC Milton Yard (2 additional tracks; no changes to yard access)
View attachment 540696

GO Milton yard (2 additional tracks; no changes to yard access)

Milton station (1 new track on the north side)

If GO uses the northern pair of tracks, the only significant station construction required would be to add pedestrian tunnels/bridges at Dixie, Lisgar and Milton stations. The existing pedestrian bridges/tunnels at Kipling, Cooksville, Erindale, Streetsville and Meadowvale would not need to be modified at all.
I think it's clear from the overhead images that relocating all the platforms, pedestrian bridges/tunnels, and the Milton GO yard to the south side of the corridor and relocating the Milton CP yard to the north side of the corridor would be far more expensive than just adding additional tracks with the existing platform and yard configurations.

Meanwhile at the Humber River, a new bridge is required regardless of whether it is part of a rail-to-rail grade separation.
View attachment 540694

I suspect that sum of the costs to completely rebuild every station, build a new CP yard on the north side and build a new GO yard on the south side would be more than the net cost of building the new Humber River bridge such that the passenger line swaps sides with the GO line.

If it turns out that the sum of all that stuff is still cheaper than the net cost to swap sides at the Humber then yes the right solution is indeed to completely rebuild the entire corridor with platforms on the southern pair of tracks.

To be clear, Cooksville and Lisgar have provisions for a second track with the current platform becoming a centre platform. Erindale and Kipling have two tracks today as a centre platform. It has been too long since I saw Streetsville and Meadowvale to say there is a centre platform there now.

Dixie will have to be a new station as there is no provision for it to be a centre platform now.

I've asked this before, but I'll ask it again.....

Why do we need to have a grade separation/flyover to move the GO operations to the north side of the corridor? It strikes me as being better in the long-term to keep the GO runs on the south side of the corridor (and therefore negate the reason for flying the GO trains over to the north side), even if that means paying a bit more up front to build more platform faces.

Dan

The $250 million is over kill with cost ranging from $20 million to $75 million depending on the size of it, location and buying land. Some have been over $100 million.

To have GO run on the south side in place of the current north side requires all stations to be totally rebuilt except for Milton. Still require a fly under to get to it as well the yard. Kipling will have issues with the hydro corridor and access from both ends to the Canpa Subdivision line.

Still must grade separate 4-5 roads in Mississauga and a few in Halton depending on their master plan. Ninth Line, Erindale Rd and Wolfdale grade separation are on the do list of Mississauga books along with Thomas. I have no idea where Mississauga Rd fits in as it is just more than grade separation since the mill is staying.

Having Go on the south side in Streetsville removed the interference with the Cargo flow yard and servicing industries on the Orangeville line.

Bottom line, the corridor needs to be four tracks from day one when expansion happens with a few fifth tracks where possible.

As a note, Burloak Grade Separation is costing $60 Million

 

[dowlingm]

given that it appears the last CP customer on the Orangeville line has ceased service, does that change anything? Should GO be talking to CP about moving their yard activity in Streetsville to somewhere else on the south side of the line? Given that yard is adjacent to the GO bus depot, perhaps there is a case for Metrolinx to acquire the yard to support bus and rail activities over a consolidated site.

I realize that there is a desire to “save” the OBRY in entirety but I am predicating my thinking here on the basis that that ship has sailed.

 

[smallspy]

I have a feeling CPKC wants to hold on to their Milton Yard and it's specific location right off of Trafalgar to act as a surplus container yard for when the Vaughan yard reaches full capacity.

Their Milton yard is close to a lot of new warehouses and right off of the 401.

That's unlikely. Vaughan operates quite a bit below it's maximum capacity limit, plus CP still owns more land around it to expand it again should they need.

Because all of the stations are future-proofed for a track configuration where GO has 2 dedicated tracks on the north side and CPKC has 2 dedicated tracks on the south side. See below how the full buildout would look:

Kipling Station (no changes. The corridor is already quad-tracked)
View attachment 540695

Dixie Station (1 new track on the north side)

Cooksville Station (2 new tracks, one on each side)

Erindale Station (1 new track on the north side; new side platform). Or alternatively, 1 new track on the south side

Streetsville station (2 new tracks on the south side)

Meadowvale Station (2 new tracks, one on each side)

Lisgar station (2 new tracks, one on each side)

CPKC Milton Yard (2 additional tracks; no changes to yard access)
View attachment 540696

GO Milton yard (2 additional tracks; no changes to yard access)

Milton station (1 new track on the north side)

If GO uses the northern pair of tracks, the only significant station construction required would be to add pedestrian tunnels/bridges at Dixie, Lisgar and Milton stations. The existing pedestrian bridges/tunnels at Kipling, Cooksville, Erindale, Streetsville and Meadowvale would not need to be modified at all.
I think it's clear from the overhead images that relocating all the platforms, pedestrian bridges/tunnels, and the Milton GO yard to the south side of the corridor and relocating the Milton CP yard to the north side of the corridor would be far more expensive than just adding additional tracks with the existing platform and yard configurations.

Meanwhile at the Humber River, a new bridge is required regardless of whether it is part of a rail-to-rail grade separation.
View attachment 540694

I suspect that sum of the costs to completely rebuild every station, build a new CP yard on the north side and build a new GO yard on the south side would be more than the net cost of building the new Humber River bridge such that the passenger line swaps sides with the GO line.

If it turns out that the sum of all that stuff is still cheaper than the net cost to swap sides at the Humber then yes the right solution is indeed to completely rebuild the entire corridor with platforms on the southern pair of tracks.

I'm well aware of the layout of the trackage, thanks.

The historic reason why GO operated on the north side of the corridor was because there were far more industries on the south. That is reasoning no longer stands.

Every station was built with either tunnels or bridges to allow access to the platforms, and in most cases the station facilities are located to the south of the mainline. That means that in most cases the tunnels/bridges already cross all of the necessary tracks and then some. Most of them would not need to be lengthened in order to reach the south side of the corridor.

Yes, there would be an increased cost to build all of those new platforms. Yes, a new platform at Kipling would likely have to be shifted a bit to the west. Yes, GO's Milton Yard would need a bit of a rethink.

But would that cost of all that be greater than the cost of building a flyover and all of the other things that go along with continuing to operate GO's service on the north? I'm really starting to think that it would be a wash, and again, it would be better operationally for everyone.

Dan

 

[TheHonestMaple]

My guess for the Hamilton GO station upgrades for summer 2024 will include new platform canopies, and a new bus station canopy. Anyone want to take a guess, based on similar upgrades to other stations in the GTA. Unionville or Guelph comes to mind.

For some perspective Guelph's station upgrades (which also included new bus infrastructure) cost around 60 million.

 

[Allandale25]

From the GO Transit/UP capital projects update, on the agenda of the next Mx meeting, we learn:

View attachment 539605
View attachment 539606

Report link:

https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1707425516/Documents/Item_15.6_-_Capital_Projects_GO_UP_EN.pdf

There was a brief reference to preparation works on the Kitchener Line in Phil Verster's verbal report at today's Metrolinx board meeting. I think it relates to the "civil works" and the "CN-owned segment" of the "line" as noted above in @Northern Light's post. I'll post the time-marked link later.

 

[reaperexpress]

Every station was built with either tunnels or bridges to allow access to the platforms, and in most cases the station facilities are located to the south of the mainline. That means that in most cases the tunnels/bridges already cross all of the necessary tracks and then some. Most of them would not need to be lengthened in order to reach the south side of the corridor.

Yes, there would be an increased cost to build all of those new platforms. Yes, a new platform at Kipling would likely have to be shifted a bit to the west. Yes, GO's Milton Yard would need a bit of a rethink.

But would that cost of all that be greater than the cost of building a flyover and all of the other things that go along with continuing to operate GO's service on the north? I'm really starting to think that it would be a wash, and again, it would be better operationally for everyone.

Relocating all of the platforms to the south side of the corridor would not be a small undertaking.

Take Cooksville station for example:

The current platform would need to be completely demolished to make room for freight tracks, and a completely new platform built further south, with all the construction costs of the platform, shelters, full-length canopy, several stairs and two elevators. There would likely be several track shifts required and potentially a temporary platform during construction.

The pedestrian tunnel can be reused, though they would need to build new stairs and elevators. But for pedestrian bridges it doesn't matter if the new pedestrian bridge is longer or shorter than the current bridge. Either way a new pedestrian bridge is required since the current pedestrian bridge is supported by the elevator building on the platorm that would be demolished. A completely new elevator building and structural support would be required, which are most of the cost of a pedestrian bridge anyway. They could probably reuse some of the materials of the existing bridge's span, but that's about it.

How much would all that station construction cost? I don't know. If the above quote of $60M for Guelph is accurate for the cost of building a new platform and vertical circulation then we'd be looking at $480 Million of additional construction to move the 8 stations to the south side of the corridor. Add in the cost of building a new CPKC yard somewhere east of Milton and converting the old CPKC yard to a GO Yard and we're easily looking at over half a billion dollars to shift GO to the south side of the corridor. I suspect that the net cost of adding a rail-to-rail grade separation in Etobicoke is less than that.

 

[drum118]

Relocating all of the platforms to the south side of the corridor would not be a small undertaking.

Take Cooksville station for example:

The current platform would need to be completely demolished to make room for freight tracks, and a completely new platform built further south, with all the construction costs of the platform, shelters, full-length canopy, several stairs and two elevators. There would likely be several track shifts required and potentially a temporary platform during construction.

The pedestrian tunnel can be reused, though they would need to build new stairs and elevators. But for pedestrian bridges it doesn't matter if the new pedestrian bridge is longer or shorter than the current bridge. Either way a new pedestrian bridge is required since the current pedestrian bridge is supported by the elevator building on the platorm that would be demolished. A completely new elevator building and structural support would be required, which are most of the cost of a pedestrian bridge anyway. They could probably reuse some of the materials of the existing bridge's span, but that's about it.

How much would all that station construction cost? I don't know. If the above quote of $60M for Guelph is accurate for the cost of building a new platform and vertical circulation then we'd be looking at $480 Million of additional construction to move the 8 stations to the south side of the corridor. Add in the cost of building a new CPKC yard somewhere east of Milton and converting the old CPKC yard to a GO Yard and we're easily looking at over half a billion dollars to shift GO to the south side of the corridor. I suspect that the net cost of adding a rail-to-rail grade separation in Etobicoke is less than that.

There is enough land on the south side for Cooksville to have five tracks there now. As noted, not a simple project not only for the station, but bridges over Hurontario St.

CPKC would have to run on a new north track and bridge that don't exist today before work can start on the south side. Both CPKC and GO will have to share that new track as well as the existing one GO uses today. Both the platform and the walkway bridge will have to be removed. Haft of the tunnel will have to be blocked off as there will be no access from the north side to the new south side platform.

A new walkway bridge will have to be built along with an elevator as well to the new platform with stairs and elevator for the remaining tunnel to the new platform.

Building a new bridge over Hurontario will be an issue that will require a temporary RR bridge to shift tracks to build the first haft before building the whole bridge. At the same time, you have an LRT station there. The new bridge should include the walkway overpass bridge that has been cancel for it. A new entrance to the platform from the street sidewalk will have to be built with an accessibility ramp to the platform.

The platform location can be shifted to the east a short distance or be place like the current one.

The first thing that needs to happen is to build the new pier support walls on both sides of the track set back further from the street sidewalks with the north side seeing a new bridge or temporary RR bridge along with a new track. The existing north access to the platform will have to be close off 100% requiring riders to do a long walking trip to get to the platform by John St and a fair number of riders use that access today. Will add an extra 5–10-minute travel time for them.

As for grade separation for every road, both CPKC and ML would love that that comes at great cost along with major impact on traffic, but most of all pedestrians. Both the city and the locals of Streetsville opposed closing off roads as it is not feasible to grade separate them in the first place, other than close them off. The KW and the Lakeshore lines have the same issues as well let alone elsewhere in the system.

One needs to look closely at the land along the corridor to see if it is feasible and cost-effective to move stations from one side to the other as well as how long it will take.

From my point of view, it is far cheaper and faster to have GO stay on the northside with the corridor expanded to 4/5 tracks along with the fly under at Humber River. You can have the whole corridor completed in a 1/3rd to 1/4 of the time than doing the southside at a fraction of the cost as well. Money that could be used elsewhere in the system or for better service

The biggest issue for the corridor is Mississauga Rd grade separation that will be very costly to do it.

 

[Dan416]

I think realistically that they would just utilize anything that has been built as is rather than tearing things up that were built with a certain service plan in mind. No need to reinvent the wheel, just use what has been built.

 

[ShonTron]

Perhaps a bus interchange could be built where the 403 passes under the CP line, in conjunction with completing the Mississauga Transitway, which would allow for quick and easy connections with Erindale Station.

That would allow for frequent two-way service to Erindale to start, as the really complicated grade crossings are closer to Streetsville.

 

[drum118]

Perhaps a bus interchange could be built where the 403 passes under the CP line, in conjunction with completing the Mississauga Transitway, which would allow for quick and easy connections with Erindale Station.

That would allow for frequent two-way service to Erindale to start, as the really complicated grade crossings are closer to Streetsville.

That idea was looked at but was rejected along with the cancelation of stops for Creditview and Mississauga Rd. There is no timetable when that missing link will be built let alone getting to/from Sq One.

The last idea for getting to/from Sq One was building a bridge over the City View and the 403 at Duke of York that will then run west to connect to the existing section.

There was to be a plan to look at a connection from a new bus terminal on the northside of Rathburn to the northside of the 403 and the existing east section where the Transitway terminal would be underground.

Having at station at CP line would see more ridership than some of the existing stations as well cutting ridership travel time compared going to Cookville station, transfer to the LRT to get to the Transitway or to MCC. The only problem with that, it a short distance from Erindale station that sees poor bus service now. Using a different type of service would support the idea.

 

[reaperexpress]

I think realistically that they would just utilize anything that has been built as is rather than tearing things up that were built with a certain service plan in mind. No need to reinvent the wheel, just use what has been built.

It's not that simple. Using the existing infrastructure requires us to spend $100+ Million on a grade separation to reach that existing infrastructure so it's not necessarily cheaper. My guess is that it is in fact cheaper to reuse the existing platforms but it is theoretically possible that it's cheaper to rebuild everything on the south side.

 

[ARG1]

I do want to point out that Cooksville station opened with tactile strips on the north end of the platform where there is no track. Unfortunately I don't work at Metrolinx so I don't know what the thought process is, but it does imply that they designed it assuming they would use the northern track in the case of service expansions.