saveyorksouthweston
New Member
one less ugly road underpass.
Now to work on keeping John Street open.....City of Toronto motion clearly states mandate of NO STREET CLOSURES, and ELECTRIFICATION.
one less ugly road underpass.
Now to work on keeping John Street open.....City of Toronto motion clearly states mandate of NO STREET CLOSURES, and ELECTRIFICATION.
Hmm. I'm picturing a code-sharing agreement between Air Canada and the HSR project to enable international connections.
John street is not completely closed. It's just closed to cars.
If you are going to advocate for something it would help your case if you were honest. And somehow you don't seem to catch the irony about advocating for greater freedom of mobility for automobiles while complaining simultaneously about the pollution from a mass transit system.
John street is not completely closed. It's just closed to cars.
If you are going to advocate for something it would help your case if you were honest. And somehow you don't seem to catch the irony about advocating for greater freedom of mobility for automobiles while complaining simultaneously about the pollution from a mass transit system.
...the irony about advocating for greater freedom of mobility for automobiles while complaining simultaneously about the pollution from a mass transit system.
does anyone know the answer to the following question:
in order for a CP freight train to pass under a roadway bridge, what is the minimum distance the track must begin to slope down before the bridge is reached? distance between start of slope down to bridge overhead?
When the Baltimore and Ohio was completed the maximum grade was 2.2%, and this became the yardstick for the highest desirable grade when crossing the continental divide. 2.2% grade means 116 feet elevation change for every mile travelled. Ideally you would have half that grade or better to keep fuel consumption down and speeds up.
like i mentioned before and others have too, they're building a trench around 1200m long which will eliminate the need to build 2 road underpasses. if they go just a bit longer and add the CP tracks into the trench as well, they can remove all the level crossings, eliminate the lawrence ave. road underpass and restore it to grade plus keep john street open.
the current plan for the trench just looks very weird. 4 tracks in the trench, two outside at levels crossings, a ped bridge + road closure and an existing underpass:
church-------------------------king-----------------------------john-------------------------lawrence
2 track CP level Xing.............2 track CP level Xing.............2 track CP level Xing......... ugly existing underpass
............................................................................ped bridge only
4 track GO/22 trench.............4 track GO/22 trench.............4 track GO/22 trench....... ugly existing underpass
this makes more sense:
church-------------------------king-----------------------------john-------------------------lawrence
6 track CP/22/GO trench.....6 track CP/22/GO trench......6 track CP/22/GO trench......6 track CP/22/GO trench
for the other part of your statement:
closing down john street doesn't eliminate the car pollution john street automobile traffic would have caused, it will only relocate it to king street or lawrence. it does nothing to eliminate pollution and will increase automobile trip time causing more pollution (be it not by that much). it's not like removing a freeway to get people out of their cars and encourage them to use transit. a 2 minute detour won't get what would have been john street vehicular traffic to convert to public transit.
electrifying the blue 22 tracks and the GO tracks will drastically reduce local diesel emissions along the rail corridor. yes, electricity has to be generated and that may cause emissions somewhere else but that's another problem that is being addressed by the phaseout of coal fired power plants and the introduction of more cleaner power generation options. there will be lots of diesel trains operating in the georgetown rail corridor section from the airport to union station, also add to the the CP mactier sub east of the humber parallel to the georgetown sub. i don't expect all locomotives traveling through this corridor to be on electric power but if a good chunk which includes the blue 22 and georgetown GO does, at least it's a significant reduction.
and before anyone decides to take things out of context , yes, i'm aware that the current locomotives use electric motors but they have diesel generators on board which generate the electricity for the motors.
i had a feeling it was around 2%. does that translate around 45.52 feet length for every 1 foot of drop in elevation?
what is the minimum clearance required for a CP freight train to make it under a bridge? i found a online source for a bridge that states its clearance at 23.62 feet but i don't know if that's a standard throughout.
so by this figure and above numbers, the sloped length of track would have to be around 1075 feet (327.66 meters) before it reaches the bridge clearance.
Unfortunately CP refuses to lower their rails and won't sell to GO/Metrolinx since the tracks are a major freight route to the north.
Is the Lawrence underpass all that bad? I mean really should we be looking at tearing up existing infrastructure (infrastructure that works) just for aestetic reasons?
Meaning that we'd likely have to rebuild the Dennison and Jane bridges as well.