PDA

View Full Version : Davenport Diamond Grade Separation



vic
2009-Apr-15, 12:30
Just got this flyer last night at a local community meeting, and have posted it to our neighbourhood website (http://www.southjunctiontriangle.ca/node/264). Steve Munro has also posted it (http://stevemunro.ca/?p=2018).

Looks like GO is hoping to do another grade separation at the Davenport Diamond, which is where the Newmarket sub (Barrie GO) crosses the CPR tracks near Dupont and Lansdowne (just east of the West Toronto Diamond, currently being grade-separated).

First public open house is on Wednesday April 22, 5:30-8:30pm at St. Josephat's, 55 Pelham St.

http://www.southjunctiontriangle.ca/sites/southjunctiontriangle.ca/files/images/DavenportDiamondGrade_OpenHouse1.preview.jpg

andomano
2009-Apr-15, 13:22
Judging by the close proximity to the overpass over Dupont, just south of the diamond, an overpass would be likely be the preferred option. And wow, there really isn't much room to work with at the Davenport Diamond (http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=&ie=UTF8&ll=43.667002,-79.448973&spn=0.001855,0.003455&t=h&z=18).

Hipster Duck
2009-Apr-15, 13:48
This better not end up like the Sniderman diamond where they only left enough space for one track.

Way to have foresight, GO transit. RC Harris would be spinning in his grave.

ShonTron
2009-Apr-15, 14:30
Do you mean Snider (Newmarket Line) or Hagerman (Stouffville Line)? I'm pretty sure Hagerman (on the Stouffville Line, also passing under 14th Avenue, is only a single-track wide underpass, even though Stouffville has amazing potential, more so than the other York Region GO lines.

tapper of spines
2009-Apr-15, 14:41
This better not end up like the Sniderman diamond where they only left enough space for one track.

How do you know this? I take this train every day, and it looks to me like there's room for another track. Of course, I've never actually measured the distance; I'm only speculating based on what I see out the window.

TOS

RedRocket191
2009-Apr-15, 14:48
Unless you're running service every 5 minutes or better I'm not convinced that a short section of single track will be a barrier.

Aerial photos (http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=r8y6dj8c8mk7&style=b&lvl=1&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&scene=28263741&where1=keele%20%26%20highway%207%2C%20vaughan%20on tario&encType=1) of the Snider Diamond shows that a second track is quite possible.

tapper of spines
2009-Apr-15, 14:50
How do you know this? I take this train every day, and it looks to me like there's room for another track. Of course, I've never actually measured the distance; I'm only speculating based on what I see out the window.

Of course, I'm talking about Snider diamond, not Hagerman.

TOS

Hipster Duck
2009-Apr-15, 15:02
Do you mean Snider (Newmarket Line) or Hagerman (Stouffville Line)? I'm pretty sure Hagerman (on the Stouffville Line, also passing under 14th Avenue, is only a single-track wide underpass, even though Stouffville has amazing potential, more so than the other York Region GO lines.

Ha ha. Yes I meant the one on the Stouffville line.

tapper of spines
2009-Apr-15, 15:25
Looks like GO is hoping to do another grade separation at the Davenport Diamond, which is where the Newmarket sub (Barrie GO) crosses the CPR tracks near Dupont and Lansdowne (just east of the West Toronto Diamond, currently being grade-separated).

Is there really a pressing need for this separation? Not that I'm complaining, since I'll benefit from it, but I've been riding the Barrie line for a while and have yet to ever be delayed because of traffic on the CP line. Or do you think that maybe the real reason for this being done is to prepare for the Midtown line?

TOS

RedRocket191
2009-Apr-15, 15:43
Is there really a pressing need for this separation? Not that I'm complaining, since I'll benefit from it, but I've been riding the Barrie line for a while and have yet to ever be delayed because of traffic on the CP line. Or do you think that maybe the real reason for this being done is to prepare for the Midtown line?

TOS

It's to prepare for future expansion on both lines. The barrie line expansions alone will be coming within the next 1 to 2 years.

tapper of spines
2009-Apr-15, 15:46
It's to prepare for future expansion on both lines. The barrie line expansions alone will be coming within the next 1 to 2 years.

Are you referring to all-day service, or something else? Speaking of which, do you know where the passing tracks are going to be installed?

TOS

RedRocket191
2009-Apr-15, 16:17
Are you referring to all-day service, or something else? Speaking of which, do you know where the passing tracks are going to be installed?

TOS

All day service to at least Newmarket, possibly East Gwillimbury.

Don't know where the passing tracks are going to be installed, but they are funded. Either way it proves that you don't have to wait for full double-tracking to improve service.

TOareaFan
2009-Apr-15, 16:33
All day service to at least Newmarket, possibly East Gwillimbury.

Don't know where the passing tracks are going to be installed, but they are funded. Either way it proves that you don't have to wait for full double-tracking to improve service.

really....GO has been selling that story to the Georgetown line for about 20 years! ;)

RedRocket191
2009-Apr-15, 17:02
really....GO has been selling that story to the Georgetown line for about 20 years! ;)

:p

tapper of spines
2009-Apr-15, 18:14
All day service to at least Newmarket, possibly East Gwillimbury.

I have heard it said that there is no signalling on this line north of Aurora. If this is true, does signalling need to be installed to have bidirectional traffic?

TOS

RedRocket191
2009-Apr-15, 19:37
I have heard it said that there is no signalling on this line north of Aurora. If this is true, does signalling need to be installed to have bidirectional traffic?

TOS

The information that I have shows that north of CN CONCORD (Mile 15.5) the tracks is under Occupancy Control System rules. This means that trains have to call in and receive verbal clearance to proceed. In theory it doesn't need to be upgraded if all trains are always on time, but reality is very different.

catcher_of_cats
2009-Apr-16, 09:32
I hope that this grade separation results in a depressed Barrie line instead of an enormous bridge.

yyzhyd
2009-Apr-16, 17:48
Do you mean Snider (Newmarket Line) or Hagerman (Stouffville Line)? I'm pretty sure Hagerman (on the Stouffville Line, also passing under 14th Avenue, is only a single-track wide underpass, even though Stouffville has amazing potential, more so than the other York Region GO lines.

I ride the Stouffville GO daily and can confirm that the Hagerman underpass is designed for two-track operations. In fact they have already begun bringing in material to lay down the second (passing) track from Denison Rd. north to Unionville Station.

EnviroTO
2009-Apr-16, 17:57
This is a proposal that surfaced a couple of years ago and there has been no further mention of it until now. They were planning on an overpass rather that a depressed corridor before and the community was concerned. It seems that the plans on this corridor and the Georgetown assume that there is no possible way to put a road at grade and depress a rail corridor where there is currently rail at grade and a road underpass. It seems obvious to me that you could either close the road temporarily with detours or create a temporary level crossing at or below grade during construction but it seems beyond the creative abilities of the people working on these things. If you suggest a depressed corridor under Dupont in the Davenport Grade Separation project they will probably draw a whacked out proposal where the rail corridor passes under the existing Dupont underpass which is obviously prohibitively expensive being so deep underground.

vic
2009-Apr-16, 18:01
This is a proposal that surfaced a couple of years ago and there has been no further mention of it until now. They were planning on an overpass rather that a depressed corridor before and the community was concerned. It seems that the plans on this corridor and the Georgetown assume that there is no possible way to put a road at grade and depress a rail corridor where there is currently rail at grade and a road underpass. It seems obvious to me that you could either close the road temporarily with detours or create a temporary level crossing at or below grade during construction but it seems beyond the creative abilities of the people working on these things. If you suggest a depressed corridor under Dupont in the Davenport Grade Separation project they will probably draw a whacked out proposal where the rail corridor passes under the existing Dupont underpass which is obviously prohibitively expensive being so deep underground.

I also heard from someone in my neighbourhood that this whole idea was brought up a few years ago. Do you know if there's any documentation online anywhere about it?

EnviroTO
2009-Apr-16, 18:44
There was online documentation at the time. I'm not sure if it was from GO or the city though.

Prometheus The Supremo
2009-Apr-16, 19:10
that's a pretty tight area to work within. it will be surprising to see what kind of solution they will come up with to create the flying junction.

vic
2009-Apr-18, 08:46
Adam Giambrone (heís one of the local councillors in this case) sent the following email last night.



From: Councillor Giambrone
Date : Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:10 PM
Subject: GO Transit Davenport Diamond EA Grade Separation Open House

Dear Resident,

Yesterday I met with GO Transit about their proposal for their Davenport Diamond Rail to Rail Grade Separation Project. They provided me with the attached image of the Snider rail to rail grade separation as an example of the kind of major structure they are proposing to run through our community.

I also was told that they had only advertised their upcoming open house, being held on Wednesday, April 22nd, in local newspapers. They have not sent a single flyer into our community to alert people to the major infrastructure they are proposing to build. This is clearly not good enough, so I have undertaken to have flyers delivered door to door over the next few days to the area bounded by Bloor, Dupont, Symington and Lansdowne to alert people to the upcoming open house. I have attached a copy of the GO Transit flyer for those who do not have it already.

I encourage you to distribute these GO Transit materials to interested residents so that people can either attend their open house, or call them directly, to tell GO Transit what you think about their proposal.

Yours truly,

Adam Giambrone
Toronto City Councillor
Ward 18 Davenport
Chair, Toronto Transit Commission (TTC)

Toronto City Hall, Suite C42
100 Queen Street West
Toronto ON M5H 2N2

(416) 392-7012
www.adamgiambrone.ca
http://www.southjunctiontriangle.ca/sites/southjunctiontriangle.ca/files/Snider%20Rail%20Over%20Rail%20Grade%20Seperation_G O.jpg

vegeta_skyline
2009-Apr-18, 16:15
Do you mean Snider (Newmarket Line) or Hagerman (Stouffville Line)? I'm pretty sure Hagerman (on the Stouffville Line, also passing under 14th Avenue, is only a single-track wide underpass, even though Stouffville has amazing potential, more so than the other York Region GO lines.

Stouffville may have great potential due to the population base along the line, but the rail corridor itself my prohibit it from reaching its full potential. It has a maximum speed of 50mph and much slower in many areas due to the degree of curvature and numerous level crossings.


This better not end up like the Sniderman diamond where they only left enough space for one track.

As has been mentioned this is indeed not the case at all. Both Sinder (bridge structure) & Hagerman (tunnel) have space for 2 tracks.



I have heard it said that there is no signalling on this line north of Aurora. If this is true, does signalling need to be installed to have bidirectional traffic?


The information that I have shows that north of CN CONCORD (Mile 15.5) the tracks is under Occupancy Control System rules. This means that trains have to call in and receive verbal clearance to proceed. In theory it doesn't need to be upgraded if all trains are always on time, but reality is very different.

It definitely should not happen.
Its not practical to run a proper all-day service with OCS only.

If GO wants to run a single train back and forth on the line then there is no conflict in OCS. This is what they do now mid-day on the Weston sub. But that service only extends to Bramalea and the distance is half as long (17 miles) as East Gwillimbury (35.5 miles) or Bradford (41.5) and the Weston service is lightly used because it is very limited leaving Bramalea once every hour and a half.
Having one train run on the Barrie line all day to East Gwillimbury or Bradford wouldn’t even be worthwhile to run. It takes a train about an hour & 10 mins to travel from Bradford to Union then add at least 10 minutes at each end for the train to change ends and do the required brake tests. Basically it would take a train almost an hour & a half to travel each way. That means a the train would leave Bradford once every 3 hours!!
But GO may just go ahead and do this to start because there are no addition costs for the start up.

To run an hourly service, the minimum to be worthwhile, you’d need 3 trains on the line at the same time. This would create a meeting point every 20 minutes between these trains and that’s were problems with the OCS system comes into play. Obviously to start ‘passing tracks’ would need to be built in several location as the line is currently single track in its entirety (there is a ‘service track’ for the York University station, this could be used as a meeting point) In OCS there are no signals and thereby there are no electronically/remotely control switches. Meaning every time trains are to met, one train has to come to a complete stop. A crew member has to get off and ‘line a switch’ by hand. Then the train can go into the passing track/siding, usually at a very slow speed (15mph) and then come to the other end of the track and then wait for train traveling in the opposite direction to pass by. That process alone can ‘waste’ 10 minutes.
If there is just one single delay for either train it compounds the problem. If the train that’s going into the siding is delayed, the train that uses the main line has to slow down and come to a stop and wait until the train has entered into the siding. If the main line train is delayed, the train that’s in the siding has to wait until that train has passed them before they can come out. Once the mainline trains has passed then a crew member from the siding train has to line the switch again for there train to come out at a slow speed. This whole process, while working fine with freight trains, is a huge waste of efficiency in terms of time & energy for a passenger train working on a precise schedule.

2 track OCS would never be allow for high-speed GO trains because if a switch connecting the 2 tracks was every turned the wrong way it could lead to a huge disaster, worse than anything Canada’s ever seen. The signal system (CTC) is fail-safe and will not permit this to happen or allow a train into a block (area) where another train is present.

As mentioned OCS on this line begins at Concord which is located exactly at Langstaff rd. in Vaughan.
The line needs to be upgraded to CTC (Centralized Traffic Control system – signaled track) if they want to run frequent all-day two way traffic.


I ride the Stouffville GO daily and can confirm that the Hagerman underpass is designed for two-track operations. In fact they have already begun bringing in material to lay down the second (passing) track from Denison Rd. north to Unionville Station.

Same thing applies on the Uxbridge sub, except that in this case the entire line is OCS. I can’t believe that they’d even consider putting just a passing track there in OCS. They should double-track the line and install CTC – the signal system. But it looks like their going the inefficient route, just because of the costs…

Btw, I run GO trains for a living and I’ve run a train on all the aforementioned lines.
I dislike stopping at Unionville station, its such a ridiculous grade to build a station on. They should have re-graded the track in that area. First you go down into the tunnel at a 2% grade, then you go back up to the 407 underpass at a 2% grade, only to go back down into Unionville at another 2% grade.


I hope that this grade separation results in a depressed Barrie line instead of an enormous bridge.


If you suggest a depressed corridor under Dupont in the Davenport Grade Separation project they will probably draw a whacked out proposal where the rail corridor passes under the existing Dupont underpass which is obviously prohibitively expensive being so deep underground.

I’d have to assume that the Newmarket sub (Barrie line) will pass over the CP North Toronto sub for this grade separation simply because there’s already a downgrade greater than 1.0% approaching the Davenport Diamond from the north. South of the diamond the downgrade is a little more than half as much. Then again the powers that be might want to have Dupont St. pass over the tracks and not under, in that case the Newmarket sub would go under the CP line. The Dupont St. underpass would be removed and made level, making for a much friendlier streetscape. The same thing should have been done just south of the West Toronto Jct.
Raise Dupont and make it level and have the Weston sub pass under it. As it is planed trains going north on the Weston sub will have to go uphill, pass over Dupont, then go downhill and pass under the CP North Toronto sub and then go uphill again to pass over St. Clair. Instead of being on level ground while passing under Dupont & the CP tracks and then going uphill to pass over St. Clair. But again, cost is an issue.


that's a pretty tight area to work within. it will be surprising to see what kind of solution they will come up with to create the flying junction.

The large building south-east of the Davenport diamond has just recently been demolished. Not sure though if it has anything to do with this project, but i'd would give them some space to play with.

catcher_of_cats
2009-Apr-18, 20:31
Thanks for the insight vegeta_skyline

drum118
2009-Apr-18, 23:46
This will have to be elevated. Doing so will be some fun.

By doing so, the current bridges on Dupont and Davenport Rd can be remove allowing the exist roads to be level allowing better use of the land.

Keep on not stopping off for the past few years to get some shots of this area. Time to do so.

drum118
2009-Apr-20, 11:34
Davenport bridge that will support 3 tracks. Notice hydro wires as will have impact on elevated plan since there not enough distance between the bridge and crossing for fly under.
http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0113.jpg

Looking north toward Davenport
http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0140.jpg

http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0132.jpg

Buildings removed for development at Dupont and has no bearing on this corridor
http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0138.jpg

Looking west
http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0153.jpg

looking south and the Dupont bridge will support 3 tracks
http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0155.jpg

Looking east
http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0157.jpg

May have to take back this parking that built into the corridor at Wallace. The elevation/fly under would have to start south of here as not enough distance for 2% grade by Dupont. Only 8 Townhouses south will have some impact with elevation section starting south of here
http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0176.jpg

My gardens
http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0189.jpg

http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0177.jpg

Bloor Bridge will support 2 tracks with room for 3
http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0193.jpg

My house been raided.
http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0195.jpg

Will have to take over some of No Frills parking lot for 2/3 tracks corridor, but not much.
http://davidfisher.biz/photo/2009/april/2009_04_19/IMG_april-19-09-0206.jpg

EnviroTO
2009-Apr-20, 18:29
I had assumed that there was a platform at Bloor on this line at some time in the past but there doesn't seem to be any sign of one now.

Prometheus The Supremo
2009-Apr-20, 18:39
so is it safe to say that diamonds are NOT forever? ;)

vegeta_skyline
2009-Apr-24, 04:03
Will have to take over some of No Frills parking lot for 2/3 tracks corridor, but not much.

There are no plans to 3 track this corridor and no need to. The planned service increases and demand increases will only require 2 tracks. Also the Newmarket sub will be extended to Bathurst yard as only a single track. (The Weston sub will be 3-4 tracks in this area and the Galt 2 tracks, 7 tracks is the maximum this corridor can handle)
Metrolinx 25 year plan only makes provisions for bi-direction, 2-way, regional rail NOT express rail.
Quite honestly while demand will no doubt significantly increase in this corridor(2,603,600 trips in 2007) over the next couple of decades I can not envision it reaching even the current rider ship levels of the Lakeshore East corridor(11,380,100 trips in 2007). Also the Lakeshore East corridor has provided sufficient service for that many commuters despite being only 2 tracks for over 90% of its length and having VIA service run along that line as well something that won't be an issue on the Barrie line.

RedRocket191
2009-Apr-24, 07:17
For the record, the difference between express rail and regional rail in the RTP is some arbitrarily defined frequency of trains, in this case +/- 30 minutes. You don't need more tracks to upgrade from regional rail to express rail unless you want to implement services that skip some stations if trains fill up early in their runs. On many lines this won't happen and improved frequencies will be able to cope with demand.

tapper of spines
2009-Apr-27, 14:11
In a welcome change, GO has put their presentation slides from the April 22 meeting online:

http://gotransit.ca/PUBLIC/en/news/davenportdiamond.htm

TOS

Prometheus The Supremo
2009-Apr-27, 20:04
In a welcome change, GO has put their presentation slides from the April 22 meeting online:

http://gotransit.ca/PUBLIC/en/news/davenportdiamond.htm

TOS

anyone notice that the "before" pictures show cloudy, dark, rainy scenery while the "after" pictures show clear skies, bright and full of sun scenery? i wonder why that is? ;)

they might as well add some crack whores and street pushers in the before scenery. why hold back? ;)

EnviroTO
2009-Apr-28, 05:37
Hopefully the public is loud in support of option #1. It is nice to see that a huge elevated structure through the neighbourhood isn't the only option they are showing.

Those existing and future pictures are a bit of a joke. Could they take the pictures from a location any further away to make these structures seem more insignificant?

Option 1:
Dupont before: An underpass in the distance. Afterwards: A rise in the road zoomed in.
Wallace before: A road with a level crossing. Afterwards: A ugly shed with a GO train passing by. (They are putting a shed on the road? No, it is actually a picture of option 2 on the option 1 page to confuse people.)

Option 2:
Dupont before: An underpass in the distance. Afterwards: An underpass even further in the distance.
Wallace before: A road with no signs of a railway crossing. Afterwards: A big rail overpass zoomed in.

Option 3:
Dupont before: An underpass in the distance. Afterwards: An underpass even further in the distance.
Wallace before: A road with no signs of a railway crossing. Afterwards: A level crossing in the distance.

Based on the pictures it looks like they are selling Option 3. Nice how they threw an ugly picture of option 2 on the option 1 page for Wallace.

vic
2009-Apr-28, 08:42
You gotta love the way they stuck a building in front of the Wallace Ave. crossing so you can't see it on Page 19.

Nelly27
2009-Apr-28, 23:06
Has anyone heard or know of any groups that are being set up to fight the Davenport Diamond project? I have seen a couple for the junction but not for the Davenport Diamond. I have sent some emails to my MP, MPP, and city councillor but I don't know what else I can do. Please contact me if you hear anything. Thanks!

RedRocket191
2009-Apr-28, 23:28
Has anyone heard or know of any groups that are being set up to fight the Davenport Diamond project? I have seen a couple for the junction but not for the Davenport Diamond. I have sent some emails to my MP, MPP, and city councillor but I don't know what else I can do. Please contact me if you hear anything. Thanks!

Well, why do you want to fight it? I ask because if you come across as someone "fighting it" then people will call you a NIMBY and you won't win any public support here. If you strive to improve the project you'll have a much easier time.

Prometheus The Supremo
2009-Apr-28, 23:50
they should use the trench method for this project, like they did at the west toronto diamond, only with a better (quieter & less shaking) pile driving method.

RedRocket191
2009-Apr-29, 00:19
they should use the trench method for this project, like they did at the west toronto diamond, only with a better (quieter & less shaking) pile driving method.

There is a company that does silent pile driving, but they didn't bid on the West Toronto contract. Will the citizens support sole-sourcing the contract to one of these companies? Maybe, maybe not, especially with the outcry over the subway contract.

drum118
2009-Apr-29, 00:50
they should use the trench method for this project, like they did at the west toronto diamond, only with a better (quieter & less shaking) pile driving method.

It better to raise it as it will bring 2 roads backup up to grade as well leaving one in place. It will free up unused land for better use.

The only issue is the tower line towers, but that can be over come.

It will cost less money to do as well get the construction done faster.

You built the support columns as precast and use precast bridge girders as two piece encasing the track bed in them.

EnviroTO
2009-Apr-29, 07:16
^ But then you have a large elevated monstrosity in the neighbourhood and trains passing overhead echoing their noise over the whole area. I agree it would be cheaper.

vic
2009-Apr-29, 09:27
Has anyone heard or know of any groups that are being set up to fight the Davenport Diamond project? I have seen a couple for the junction but not for the Davenport Diamond. I have sent some emails to my MP, MPP, and city councillor but I don't know what else I can do. Please contact me if you hear anything. Thanks!

Nelly,

I don't want to "fight" the project, but I want the outcome of this to be beneficial to our neighbourhood too. Make sure the best option is chosen, possibly with changes, or don't do it at all.

There's some discussion happening on the South Junction Triangle Residents Association website:
http://www.southjunctiontriangle.ca/DavenportDiamondOpenHouse1

I basically agree with what "galleriamall" has posted there.

EnviroTO
2009-Apr-29, 10:54
I want the outcome of this to be beneficial to our neighbourhood too. Make sure the best option is chosen, possibly with changes, or don't do it at all.

I agree with selecting the best option for sure (i.e. the one that meets the objectives of removing the railway diamong bottleneck and minimizes the impact to the neighbourhood and the environment). I'm not sure how anything would be beneficial to the neighbourhood though. Is the current railway line beneficial to the neighbourhood? Not doing it at all isn't a good option in the grand scheme of improving public transportation in the GTA.

vic
2009-Apr-29, 11:37
I agree with selecting the best option for sure (i.e. the one that meets the objectives of removing the railway diamong bottleneck and minimizes the impact to the neighbourhood and the environment). I'm not sure how anything would be beneficial to the neighbourhood though. Is the current railway line beneficial to the neighbourhood? Not doing it at all isn't a good option in the grand scheme of improving public transportation in the GTA.

I can see a few positive things for our 'hood that might come out of this, depending on which option is chosen and how it's implemented:


More pedestrian crossings, e.g. Paton, and Antler/Lappin (Only Wallace Ave. is open now, between Dupont and Bloor)
Flattening Dupont and Davenport, so the roads don't dip down into underpasses
Removal of the diamond itself would reduce the noise of trains hammering over it.
Trains would not have to re-accelerate after stopping for cross-traffic (less noise/pollution)
If it's in a trench, it might dampen the noise?
A station connecting to Bloor-Lansdowne (a bit out of scope for this project, but I hope they keep the idea in mind)


Right now, the rail corridor isn't very beneficial to the neighbourhood (except that it can be a nice place to walk, illegally, and I kind of enjoy watching the trains go by). It used to service some industries, but not anymore. It may not provide any real benefit to us again...unless there's a station added. No matter what though, I hope that the results of this grade separation a) minimize further negative impacts, and b) give us a few positives.

EnviroTO
2009-Apr-29, 11:55
OK... those expectations are fairly reasonable. I was thinking that by beneficial you meant stations at Dupont and St.Clair or completely silent trains.

vic
2009-Apr-29, 12:36
OK... those expectations are fairly reasonable. I was thinking that by beneficial you meant stations at Dupont and St.Clair or completely silent trains.

I want a silent hover-train that detours up Symington to pick me up at my house.

At last week's Open House, Cesar Palcio (councillor for the area north of the tracks) suggested that he wants a St. Clair station.... Heck, there used to be stations at St. Clair and Davenport too! :)

EnviroTO
2009-Apr-29, 12:48
At last week's Open House, Cesar Palcio (councillor for the area north of the tracks) suggested that he wants a St. Clair station.... Heck, there used to be stations at St. Clair and Davenport too! :)

Those are the requests that worry me. The problem with far fetched requests that seek to turn a GO line into a 12-car double decked streetcar route is that they make more reasonable requests get heard less. On the Georgetown line an Air Rail station in Weston will never make sense.... since when is Weston a hub for the jet set?

RedRocket191
2009-Apr-29, 16:08
I am in favour of more 416 stations. I'm not sure if anything should be done about Dupont and Davenport, but if changes need to be made to those crossings they should strive to be better than they were before. All in all I think it's pretty reasonable and I hope the message doesn't get corrupted by your more militant neighbours.

drum118
2009-Apr-29, 16:20
I want a silent hover-train that detours up Symington to pick me up at my house.

At last week's Open House, Cesar Palcio (councillor for the area north of the tracks) suggested that he wants a St. Clair station.... Heck, there used to be stations at St. Clair and Davenport too! :)

GO has said they would put a station in if the ROW was built. That was like 2004. No way of putting in a station at Davenport unless the overpass is higher sooner as well level. Dupont would be a loction of the milk run station.

Looking at the option of replacing the St Clair bridge, this would allow GO to put in a level station as most of the current area would be on a slope.

The different of between the old one and the new one is the lenght. The old platform went about 50' south of the bridge.

drum118
2009-Apr-29, 16:27
Those are the requests that worry me. The problem with far fetched requests that seek to turn a GO line into a 12-car double decked streetcar route is that they make more reasonable requests get heard less. On the Georgetown line an Air Rail station in Weston will never make sense.... since when is Weston a hub for the jet set?

GO ""NEEDS"" to operate milk run trains where smaller train as used at more station in both 905 as well 416. These stations, as well any new stations in 416, be walkup and be service by transit 100%.

The same can be said for 905 as well with a few exception, where parking will have to play a part as transit doesn't exist nor can be supported by the low density for them.

Nelly27
2009-Apr-29, 22:10
"fighting" might have been a bad choice of words. I know that they are going to go ahead with some form of the project. I just want to make sure the disruption is minimal and we get some sort of benefit out of it. Thanks for the website.

Automation Gallery
2009-Apr-30, 06:27
Bad vibes compel GO to replace piledriver

Noise complaints finally bring concessions at Junction rail site

Apr 30, 2009 04:30 AM
Patty Winsa
Staff Reporter

After months of agitation by residents and elected officials, GO Transit is finally testing quieter equipment at its West Toronto Diamond rail expansion.

And the commuter service has agreed to allow the Canadian Transportation Agency to mediate its dispute with the community, which has complained about the noise and vibrations during construction.

Under the agency's new rules, the community could apply to have the work stopped.

The concessions are a huge departure for GO, which has continued work on the Junction-area rail expansion despite complaints about the diesel-fed piledrivers, which have been hammering pieces of a steel interlocking wall into the ground since January.

"It's a long time coming, but at least they're moving in the right direction," says Cheri DiNovo, New Democratic MPP for Parkdale-High Park, who says that in meetings, GO officials "stonewalled or said they couldn't use any other technology.

"I gather that they're very aware finally that this problem isn't going to go away . ..."

Today, contractors begin testing a computer-controlled piledriver, brought from France, which will work the steel walls partway into the ground using vibrations.

The hammer piledriver will still be needed to pound the wall the rest of the way in.

EnviroTO
2009-Apr-30, 08:47
GO ""NEEDS"" to operate milk run trains where smaller train as used at more station in both 905 as well 416. These stations, as well any new stations in 416, be walkup and be service by transit 100%.

That is more like a subway service and without high-level platforms and more than two tracks it would be very difficult to meet that need on the same line that 20-30 minute service to Newmarket is on. A "milk run" all the way to Barrie would be painful.

Earlscourt_Lad
2009-Apr-30, 08:54
You're right a milk-run to Barrie would be painful. I guess the ideal implementation would be in conjunction with faster service, so that people would take the local service to the nearest station with faster service. Depending on scheduling it could work effectively in providing a measure of local service that would not ordinarily exist.

Maggie
2009-Apr-30, 09:00
Today, contractors begin testing a computer-controlled piledriver, brought from France, which will work the steel walls partway into the ground using vibrations.

wow a french vibrator saved the neighborhood. Seriously though I can hear the pile drivers all the way to dog hill in High Park. Glad there was a solution

Automation Gallery
2009-May-09, 06:02
Today, contractors begin testing a computer-controlled piledriver, brought from France, which will work the steel walls partway into the ground using vibrations.

wow a french vibrator saved the neighborhood. Seriously though I can hear the pile drivers all the way to dog hill in High Park. Glad there was a solution

Does not look like they want to use the vibrator.:mad:

GO defends response to noise complaints
May 09, 2009 04:30 AM

GO Transit's board of directors defended its public image yesterday in reaction to noise complaints from people living near the West Toronto Diamond.

At what was probably the last meeting before the agency merges with Metrolinx, GO chair Peter Smith took exception to transit officials being called "callous" in their response to complaints about noisy construction on the Georgetown corridor.

"None of us are callous in any way in terms of our dealings with the public or in our responsibilities," he said, after residents' representative Mike Sullivan asked the board to cease piledriving in the area around Dundas St. W. and Dupont St.

GO managing director Gary McNeil said the agency is "doing everything we can to mitigate that noise," but isn't yet committed to using a quieter vibratory hammer.

drum118
2009-May-09, 17:33
Does not look like they want to use the vibrator.:mad:

GO defends response to noise complaints
May 09, 2009 04:30 AM

GO Transit's board of directors defended its public image yesterday in reaction to noise complaints from people living near the West Toronto Diamond.

At what was probably the last meeting before the agency merges with Metrolinx, GO chair Peter Smith took exception to transit officials being called "callous" in their response to complaints about noisy construction on the Georgetown corridor.

"None of us are callous in any way in terms of our dealings with the public or in our responsibilities," he said, after residents' representative Mike Sullivan asked the board to cease piledriving in the area around Dundas St. W. and Dupont St.

GO managing director Gary McNeil said the agency is "doing everything we can to mitigate that noise," but isn't yet committed to using a quieter vibratory hammer.

GO chair Peter Smith told GO managing director Gary McNeil he wanted someone to meet with the Principal of the school in question today (Friday) to address their issues.

This is a cop out on GO part as well coming up with a poor construction plan in the first place.

It was their last day on the job.

RedRocket191
2009-May-09, 18:06
GO chair Peter Smith told GO managing director Gary McNeil he wanted someone to meet with the Principal of the school in question today (Friday) to address their issues.

This is a cop out on GO part as well coming up with a poor construction plan in the first place.

It was their last day on the job.

So what do you do if the company that does the silent pile driving doesn't bid? Give them the contract anyway?

Hipster Duck
2009-May-09, 18:13
Does not look like they want to use the vibrator.:mad:

Probably ran out of D batteries.

nfitz
2009-May-09, 20:10
So what do you do if the company that does the silent pile driving doesn't bid? Give them the contract anyway?When you write the bid documents, you get to set conditions, such as the use of such equipment. The contractor is going to go with the cheapest method that fulfills all the clauses of the contract.

RedRocket191
2009-May-09, 20:24
When you write the bid documents, you get to set conditions, such as the use of such equipment. The contractor is going to go with the cheapest method that fulfills all the clauses of the contract.

Exactly. And that's why hindsight is 20/20. GO should strive to do better in the future and should try to introduce the technology here. Not going to argue with you at all.

But I don't think it helps anyone to pile on GO for what they did in the past (sorry the pun). Only what they plan to do in the future.

valkoholic
2009-May-12, 12:48
I thought the City was banning the use of vibrating pile-drivers after complaints at the Minto Yonge Eglinton site? That was pretty fun as well, you could feel the earth vibrating a block away.

Hipster Duck
2009-May-12, 16:32
I am in favour of more 416 stations. I'm not sure if anything should be done about Dupont and Davenport, but if changes need to be made to those crossings they should strive to be better than they were before. All in all I think it's pretty reasonable and I hope the message doesn't get corrupted by your more militant neighbours.

Yeah, me too. I was thinking about ways to integrate the GO system into the TTC at least within the 416. Maybe having fare controlled areas with turnstiles for all GO train stations within the city of Toronto would be a start, and then maybe having some sort of fare-sharing agreement with the TTC.

They could also run trains within the 416 that would be joint GO/TTC ventures that complements existing GO runs. For example, the TTC could run a train between Long Branch and Rouge Hill every hour so that you have at least half-hourly service within Toronto on the Lakeshore line.

Well, I'm pretty sure the TTC would nix that idea because they are about as progressive these days as a Southern senator. But, whatevs, I'm dreamin' here!

RedRocket191
2009-May-12, 16:40
Yeah, me too. I was thinking about ways to integrate the GO system into the TTC at least within the 416. Maybe having fare controlled areas with turnstiles for all GO train stations within the city of Toronto would be a start, and then maybe having some sort of fare-sharing agreement with the TTC.

They could also run trains within the 416 that would be joint GO/TTC ventures that complements existing GO runs. For example, the TTC could run a train between Long Branch and Rouge Hill every hour so that you have at least half-hourly service within Toronto on the Lakeshore line.

Well, I'm pretty sure the TTC would nix that idea because they are about as progressive these days as a Southern senator. But, whatevs, I'm dreamin' here!

I think a single fare system solves most of those problems without going to all that trouble, but unfortunately the change might have to be imposed upon the TTC if they continue their current MO (I would welcome change). Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on which side you are on) the Metrolinx law gives Queens Park the power to impose such measures through provincial policy statements.

Automation Gallery
2009-May-25, 04:31
Councillor now against noisy piledrivers

Pile-driving on this scale completely undermines the livability of the neighbourhood and can be heard from many hundreds of metres away," Palacio writes. "The pile-driving is constant, all day, every day."

http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2009/05/25/9557586-sun.html

vic
2009-Nov-10, 16:16
Just got this email from GO. Posted on our neighbourhood website at:
http://www.southjunctiontriangle.ca/node/488



Phone: (416) 869-3600 ext. 5211
Fax: (416) 869-1563
E-mail: Greg.Ashbee@gotransit.com

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Dear Vic:

Subject: Environmental Assessment study update

Davenport Diamond rail-to-rail grade separation
City of Toronto


In the letter we sent you on April 30, we promised to give you an update about the status of the Davenport Diamond project this fall.

At the public sessions we held in April, the feedback you provided and the interest you showed about this project proved just how important this project is to your community. We took your comments about this project into consideration and thanks to your input, we are planning on proceeding with an Environmental Assessment (EA) that will include the Davenport Diamond, the proposed new station at Saint Clair Avenue, and the future rail service expansion on Barrie GO line. For this reason, we will be cancelling the current Davenport Diamond process, in favour of a larger, more comprehensive EA on the Barrie GO line, which will include the Davenport Diamond.

Our next step will be to tender and award a consultant assignment for this new, larger project scope the spring of 2010. We will be coming back to your community to host public open houses and to conduct a feasibility study over the next year, and with the plan to issue a Notice of Commencement in 2011.

To find the most up-to-date information about this project, please visit www.gotransit.com and click on the Projects & Studies button.

We value your insight and I encourage you to contact me if you have any questions or concerns.

Yours very truly,

Greg Ashbee, P. Eng
Manager, Infrastructure Expansion Planning

Necessary Evil
2009-Nov-10, 17:10
Hmmm...where is this "Saint" Clair Avenue they speak of? Any relation to St. Clair Ave.??

They sure are well informed about the community they are working in when they can't even spell the name of a major Toronto thoroughfare correctly.

Platform 27
2009-Nov-10, 17:12
Hmmm...where is this "Saint" Clair Avenue they speak of? Any relation to St. Clair Ave.??

They sure are well informed about the community they are working in when they can't even spell the name of a major Toronto thoroughfare correctly.

Oh, FFS.

junctionist
2009-Nov-10, 18:35
Hmmm...where is this "Saint" Clair Avenue they speak of? Any relation to St. Clair Ave.??

They sure are well informed about the community they are working in when they can't even spell the name of a major Toronto thoroughfare correctly.

They did. St. is an abbreviation for Saint. That's how it's spelled.

RedRocket191
2009-Nov-10, 21:12
Oh, FFS.


They did. St. is an abbreviation for Saint. That's how it's spelled.

+ 1

EnviroTO
2009-Nov-10, 21:50
Good grief. What is happening to this forum.

andomano
2009-Nov-10, 23:03
Good grief. What is happening to this forum.

been reading this a lot recently.

Coruscanti Cognoscente
2009-Nov-11, 01:33
So is folding this EA into the Barrie Line expansion EA a good thing or a bad thing?

EnviroTO
2009-Nov-11, 13:47
I think it will likely be bad overall. As a limited scope EA they were focused on getting the grade separation done in the short term and the focus was on how the grade separation will impact the community. As part of a bigger EA there will be a delay as they document the entire corridor and the improvements required for all day service and when it comes time for public sessions the issues of a few residents in the area of the diamond will be drowned out by the benefits and changes elsewhere. The larger EA was going to come eventually any ways but now they are waiting for it. I hope the GO Barrie line goes under the CP tracks as that would be best for the neighbourhood but I suspect it wont.

Platform 27
2009-Nov-11, 16:18
I think it will likely be bad overall. As a limited scope EA they were focused on getting the grade separation done in the short term and the focus was on how the grade separation will impact the community. As part of a bigger EA there will be a delay as they document the entire corridor and the improvements required for all day service and when it comes time for public sessions the issues of a few residents in the area of the diamond will be drowned out by the benefits and changes elsewhere.
Yeah, I have to say I'm puzzled by this. I'm assuming everyone showed up at the previous meeting and screamed and hollered about how dropping a carbon copy of the Snider separation in their backyard would damage their property values, and there was a general demand GO "prove" it has traffic demands that can't be accomodated by the status quo.

So now we wait a year to get a report where the first page or two says "yes, it does" and moves on. And the residents are no closer to getting a grade-separation that fits the needs of the community.



I hope the GO Barrie line goes under the CP tracks as that would be best for the neighbourhood but I suspect it wont.
Considering the relief of the Lake Iroquois shoreline to the north of the tracks, the track geometry and earth moving needed to pull off an underpass is bound to be either straight-up impossible or possible only at outlandish expense.

I say take the opposite approach: instead of trying to hide the train, do a nice brick viaduct that fits in well with the architecture of that area and pop Bloor, Davenport and Dupont out of their dugouts under the existing bridges so there can be smooth continuous streetscapes.

The one obstacle to this approach last time was the uphill grade needed south of Bloor wouldn't have been freight-friendly (they actually drafted a worst-of-all-possible-worlds option that had elevated GO side-by-side a preserved and unchanged freight track). If GO buys the whole Newmarket sub from CN as has been rumoured, though, it's plausible freight could be banned from moving south of S[ain]t Clair, or if a through movement option is absolutely essential, add in a N-to-E wye with the CP North Toronto Sub and keep freights off the hilly bit.

A broader Barrie line EA is bound to be interesting, though, as to my eye it's hands-down the line with the most potential in the system. Unlike, say, Lakeshore East, its stations are already overwhelmingly located in well-urbanized cores or have a strong potential to become such. Not only that, but off-hand I can think of 5 or so rather good sites for infill stations on it.

EnviroTO
2009-Nov-11, 16:40
Considering the relief of the Lake Iroquois shoreline to the north of the tracks, the track geometry and earth moving needed to pull off an underpass is bound to be either straight-up impossible or possible only at outlandish expense.

I have a hard time believing it would be drastically different than the West Toronto Diamond separation which with space for four track went under the CP rail line a short distance west of the site. Also the amount of earth moved out to have the line go under would be similar to the amount of fill brought in to go over.

Platform 27
2009-Nov-12, 00:44
I have a hard time believing it would be drastically different than the West Toronto Diamond separation which with space for four track went under the CP rail line a short distance west of the site.
(With apologies in advance for my atrocious Late Pleistocene glaciological skills ;))

As best as I understand, the Weston sub and the Newmarket sub, despite being pretty close to one another in that neck of the woods, deal with very different topographic conditions as they head outbound because of the precise shape of Lake Iroquois (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacial_Lake_Iroquois) ~12,000 years ago. The second map on this page (http://www.lostrivers.ca/points/Lake_Iroquois.htm) is particularly useful as it has the railway lines marked (but not named), while this map (http://www.toronto.ca/culture/history/gallery/ch1/ancient-toronto.htm) from the city of Toronto looks prettier, but requires you to imagine in the railway lines at the appropriate places.

Basically, the Weston sub runs northwesterly up the so-called "Toronto passage" and of all the railway lines running out of downtown Toronto (obv. excluding Lakeshore E + W) has the gentlest possible ride up the Iroquois shoreline. With the sole exception of the ancient sandbar that the Harwood neighborhood is built on (which I think the tracks pretty much cut through at-grade), the topography is essentially flat until nearly Weston. As such, all the West Toronto flyunder needed to do is restore the trackage back to roughly the same height it had to begin with, and it had plenty of room to do so in the ~400 m north of the CP tracks.

With the Newmarket sub, you're running perpendicularly into the Iroquois shoreline within 100m of the diamond. Climbing out of a trench while also climbing a hill makes for unhappy locomotives.


Also the amount of earth moved out to have the line go under would be similar to the amount of fill brought in to go over.
Not only am I not a geologist, but I am also not a civil engineer. :) That said, I think in general building up costs much less than digging down... building an above-grade retaining wall and dumping fill comes much cheaper than pile-driving down, pouring concrete, and excavating and trucking out hardpan. The added complications of keeping out groundwater have to be considered, too, especially as the West Toronto project suggests that underpasses in that neck of the woods mean an unfortunate journey below the local water table.

vic
2009-Dec-15, 16:59
Already a thread about it on UT (http://www.urbantoronto.ca/showthread.php?t=10926), but it's important to note it here too.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/12/15/metrolinx-cn-rail-line746.html
http://transit.toronto.on.ca/archives/weblog/2009/12/15-metrolinx_.shtml

vic
2010-Jan-28, 15:19
Got an email yesterday from GO/Metrolinx. It seems that not too much has changed since the last update on November 10 2009, except that:


GO/Metrolinx have purchased the entire Newmarket/Barrie railway corridor (as reported here on December 15th)
The environmental assessment has been pushed back to 2012.


Here's a copy of the email, also posted here (http://www.junctiontriangle.ca/node/558).



January 27, 2010

Phone: (416) 869-3600 ext. 5501
Fax: (416) 869-1755
Email: gary.mcneil@gotransit.com

Subject: Environmental Assessment study update
GO Transit Barrie Corridor rail service expansion

Many thanks for your interest in our projects.

Metrolinx recognizes the need to expand its commuter rail service on the Barrie rail corridor. GO recently purchased the southerly section of the rail right-of-way, and now owns the entire corridor from Barrie south. GO also built a new rail-to-rail grade separation north of Steeles Avenue to remove conflicts with East-West freight movements on CNís York Subdivision.

In early 2009, a Public Information Centre (PIC) for the Davenport Diamond Rail-to-Rail Grade Separation (separating the Barrie Commuter trains from the East-West CPR freight trains on the North Toronto Subdivision) was held at St. Josephat School. At this PIC, the feedback and the interest shown by the public about this project proved just how important sensitive deign solutions are for this community.

We are taking the communityís comments about this project into consideration. In 2012, we are planning to initiate an Environmental Assessment (EA) that will include a potential design solution for the construction of a rail-to-rail grade separation at the Davenport Diamond, a proposed new station at St. Clair Avenue, and the twinning of the tracks in the corridor to operate some additional GO trains.

Please contact Greg Ashbee if you have any questions or concerns (Tel: 416 869 3600 ext. 5211, or email: greg.ashbee@gotransit.com).

Sincerely,

Gary McNeil
Managing Director, GO Transit
Executive Vice President, Metrolinx

c: Rob Prichard, President & CEO, Metrolinx
Vasie Papadopoulos, Director, Government Relations & Strategic Communications, Metrolinx
Greg Ashbee, Manager, Infrastructure Expansion Planning, Metrolinx

Lilibet
2010-Jan-29, 10:44
Got an email yesterday from GO/Metrolinx. It seems that not too much has changed since the last update on November 10 2009, except that:


GO/Metrolinx have purchased the entire Newmarket/Barrie railway corridor (as reported here on December 15th)
The environmental assessment has been pushed back to 2012.


Here's a copy of the email, also posted here (http://www.junctiontriangle.ca/node/558).

Vic, do you know where the proposed new station at St. Clair West would be located? I'd heard that the block of land on the southwest section of Caledonia/St. Clair West is being rezoned for residential with the idea of putting townhomes in there. On the northwest corner is the cement facility.
Any ideas?

vic
2010-Jan-29, 10:56
Vic, do you know where the proposed new station at St. Clair West would be located? I'd heard that the block of land on the southwest section of Caledonia/St. Clair West is being rezoned for residential with the idea of putting townhomes in there. On the northwest corner is the cement facility.
Any ideas?

Hi Lilibet,

Not sure where that station is supposed to go. I don't really have any more details on this whole project.

However...if you walk along the tracks at St. Clair, you'll notice there's actually an old train station platform up on the bridge, including a set of stairs up from the street (blocked off). So maybe they would keep something similar? Not sure... Although, if they're planning on twinning the tracks, it may require significant re-jigging of everything.

Photos from March 28, 2009. More here (http://vic.gedris.org/pics/2009-03-28/) (scroll way down).
Platform:
http://vic.gedris.org/pics/2009-03-28/MD-2009-03-28-112.jpg

Stairs:
http://vic.gedris.org/pics/2009-03-28/MD-2009-03-28-118.jpg

RedRocket191
2010-Jan-29, 11:12
http://www.boldts.net/photos/StClairStation.jpeg

St. Clair Ave station, in 1982 after it had been abandoned. It eventually fell to arson.

Lilibet
2010-Jan-29, 11:36
Hi Lilibet,

Not sure where that station is supposed to go. I don't really have any more details on this whole project.

However...if you walk along the tracks at St. Clair, you'll notice there's actually an old train station platform up on the bridge, including a set of stairs up from the street (blocked off). So maybe they would keep something similar? Not sure... Although, if they're planning on twinning the tracks, it may require significant re-jigging of everything.


So that's what those stairs are from! Thanks for the info RedRocket. It would be nice to think having a station there might bring some life to that section of St. Clair West. The bridge really does act as a barrier for the west side neighbourhood and from Caledonia westbound until you go under the bridge it's a dead zone. I'm also curious to know what the status is of the proposed residential development on the tract of land I mentioned in my earlier post (the southwest portion of the intersection). Personally I wouldn't buy a property there, but I'm sure there are folks who would, which again could contribute to livening up that section.
Now if only the concrete factory would disappear :p

vic
2010-Jan-29, 11:39
http://www.boldts.net/photos/StClairStation.jpeg

St. Clair Ave station, in 1982 after it had been abandoned. It eventually fell to arson.

Heh..that's pretty funny. The site hosting that image replaces it with a low-res butterfly when linked from another site. You might have to copy'n'paste to get this image to work:
http://www.boldts.net/photos/StClairStation.jpeg
or go here:
http://www.boldts.net/album/StClairStation.shtml

RedRocket191
2010-Jan-29, 11:41
Very odd... I'm seeing the image normally in my post...

Lilibet
2010-Jan-29, 11:52
Very odd... I'm seeing the image normally in my post...

I can see the first two images (stairs and platform) but I'm only seeing the butterfly (bee?) for what you said is the station pre-arson pic.

Lilibet
2010-Jan-29, 11:55
Interesting how two old train stations succumbed to fire. I knew about the Old Weston Road station, but I didn't know about St. Clair West until now.

CDL.TO
2010-Jan-29, 12:04
Very odd... I'm seeing the image normally in my post...

That's because since you saw the actual photo on the actual website first, that's what got cached on your computer.

RedRocket191
2010-Jan-29, 12:24
Now I see it. It's a cute little bug. :)

SGHA504
2010-Feb-02, 00:37
http://www.boldts.net/photos/StClairStation.jpeg

St. Clair Ave station, in 1982 after it had been abandoned. It eventually fell to arson.

Does the VIA Canadian go up that corridor? Did it ever stop at St Clair station?

EnviroTO
2010-Feb-02, 14:51
I think VIA used to use that corridor when the rails were still in place between Barrie and Orillia but now it only uses the section between downtown and Vaughan (Snider Diamond) northbound to get to the line through Richmond Hill and comes southbound through the Don Valley due to the steeper grades on the line which runs up the Don Valley. I am fairly certain "The Canadian" never stopped at St.Clair but numerous other trains to Barrie and beyond did including the "Continental" (northbound at least).

RedRocket191
2010-Feb-02, 15:01
Grades might have something to do with it, but I've heard that The Canadian is simply too long to turn around at the VIA Toronto Maintenance Centre. It arrives from Vancouver with the locomotives facing westbound and has to stay that way. As a result, the only way "forward" out of downtown is to use the Newmarket Sub.

SGHA504
2010-Feb-09, 17:16
Grades might have something to do with it, but I've heard that The Canadian is simply too long to turn around at the VIA Toronto Maintenance Centre. It arrives from Vancouver with the locomotives facing westbound and has to stay that way. As a result, the only way "forward" out of downtown is to use the Newmarket Sub.

Toronto Maintenance Centre being Willowbrook?

Thanks for the info!

smallspy
2010-Feb-09, 18:09
Toronto Maintenance Centre being Willowbrook?

Toronto Maintenance Centre being VIA's equivalent to Willowbrook in this part of the world. It is located opposite the mainline from GO's Willowbrook Shops.

For the record, the actual reason why The Canadian uses its current route is two-fold - one, the wye at TMC is only about 500 or 550 feet long, not nearly long enough to turn the whole train. Two, there isn't enough time to head to the nearest, longest wye (Bayview) to turn the train AND to clean and restock before its next trip back west.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Platform 27
2010-Feb-09, 19:14
For the record, the actual reason why The Canadian uses its current route is two-fold - one, the wye at TMC is only about 500 or 550 feet long, not nearly long enough to turn the whole train. Two, there isn't enough time to head to the nearest, longest wye (Bayview) to turn the train AND to clean and restock before its next trip back west.
I suppose Via could have built a westbound-to-northbound wye track at Canpa Junction, allowing them to do three-point turns immediately west of TMC using the Canpa Subdivision.

That said, I guess speed isn't really of the essence on The Canadian these days, so the current little maneuver at Snider isn't really causing them any harm. I know in part of northern Ontario they've relatively recently moved back to CP trackage for travel in one direction and CN the other. There's no real reason they couldn't use the CP MacTier sub when heading outbound and then rejoin the current route north of Lake Simcoe.

dowlingm
2012-Aug-23, 17:58
Anyone heard anything about the Barrie EA (and thus the Davenport Diamond) process getting going again? We're running out of 2012...