GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[steveintoronto]

As we discussed a long while back, some narrowing of the Railpath around Bloor is likely unavoidable to squeeze the fourth track in through there. In the grand scheme of all the great additions that have been announced for the Railpath network, that's not that hard a pill to swallow. I just hope it doesn't come as a surprise to anyone.

The RailPath will become narrow in a few location for the new track. It will be a surprise to many people since it was never made clear what the full plan was to look like before construction started for what there now.

Hiving a section off of the rail path will be relatively simple, albeit I question why the fence and path went where it did in sections when the land was acquired from CP...but that is easily addressable, I walk that stretch every day and have considered it a thousand times...the *real* puzzler is that the fourth track bridge newly installed over Bloor is misaligned to the station, or vice-versa! The southeast corner of the station hangs over the RoW as aligned. Maybe there's an easy answer to this, but it appears that there's been a huge F-Up.

I'd considered that the bridge could be eased along the bridge abutments, and it can, no major problem, but it's the vertical supports in the middle of the bridge that present the challenge. It's not insurmountable, by any means, it'll be costly though, but every time I walk past that, I can't help but wonder: 'WTF?' Conversely, they could skim the edge off of the station's upper structure, but I don't think that is going to happen, albeit it also fouls the track alignment to the platform, rebuilding the glassed-in southeast face might be unavoidable. It protrudes over a foot into the RoW that abuts the east side of the platform. They're going to have to pull out the concrete steps and fencing they finally finished about three months ago too. I know that Metrolinx is in dispute with the general contractor of that station, and beyond the severe leaks in the roof at the south atrium, one can see other very real problems, this being one. As to how Metrolinx had no idea this was happening at the time of construction is a good question.

Anyone have any answers on that?

[...]
“It’s hard to believe, isn’t it?” the auditor told a news conference Wednesday, singling out the company for errors in building a stairwell and sloppy welding that ruined $1 million in glass on the bridge.

The same firm, which Lysyk did not name, was given a $39 million contract to build a new GO and Union-Pearson Express station on Bloor just east of Dundas.

“That company should not get another contract,” said New Democrat MPP Catherine Fife (Kitchener-Waterloo). “This is, seriously, not rocket science.”

Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca said he has asked his staff to develop an “urgent action plan” within 60 days on problems flagged by the auditor. [...]

https://www.thestar.com/news/queens...ds-to-up-their-game-auditor-general-says.html

 

[ShonTron]

There will be an additional tender going out the fourth track to the south, and a third one for finishing/upgrading the stations along the line. This is in addition to the tender already out (and maybe awarded?) for the 4th track and tunnel under the 401.

Etobicoke North station, the new "station" on the north side of the corridor, appears so temporary, with no station building, proper bus loop, or amenities, I wonder if there are plans to move or close it. A station at Highway 27/Woodbine Racetrack would probably serve more station customers better, especially commuters in Woodbridge.

 

[crs1026]

Etobicoke North station, the new "station" on the north side of the corridor, appears so temporary, with no station building, proper bus loop, or amenities, I wonder if there are plans to move or close it. A station at Highway 27/Woodbine Racetrack would probably serve more station customers better, especially commuters in Woodbridge.

In GO's Station Access Plan, which was approved at the December ML Board meeting, the recommendations for enhancing this station location are marked "Tentative". The report states that a move of the station is being considered. The possible relocated location is actually to the east, near Islington Ave.
No specifics on when this might lead to a decision.

- Paul

 

[TOareaFan]

Etobicoke North station, the new "station" on the north side of the corridor, appears so temporary, with no station building, proper bus loop, or amenities, I wonder if there are plans to move or close it. A station at Highway 27/Woodbine Racetrack would probably serve more station customers better, especially commuters in Woodbridge.

yet woodbine did not make the cut when the new stations in the "416" were announced.

 

[drum118]

Jan 23

In GO's Station Access Plan, which was approved at the December ML Board meeting, the recommendations for enhancing this station location are marked "Tentative". The report states that a move of the station is being considered. The possible relocated location is actually to the east, near Islington Ave.
No specifics on when this might lead to a decision.

- Paul

The only place by Islington is where the UPX yard was to be, but you need to build a parking structure when you build the station, since there is no land for surface parking lots. You currently have Lowe's there now and not sure if they would give up the land for a surface lot.

 

[drum118]

Jan 23
Here a view of Downsview Park GO Station

 

[steveintoronto]

(RE: Bloor Station)...the *real* puzzler is that the fourth track bridge newly installed over Bloor is misaligned to the station, or vice-versa! The southeast corner of the station hangs over the RoW as aligned. Maybe there's an easy answer to this, but it appears that there's been a huge F-Up.

I'd considered that the bridge could be eased along the bridge abutments, and it can, no major problem, but it's the vertical supports in the middle of the bridge that present the challenge.

Just got a chance to look at it closely again. I have to correct the point on the southeast corner of the upper glass structure fouling the platform protrusion, it doesn't, the edge is clear of the building, but it makes the kink in the track to clear the building and platform to be even more pronounced than I first thought. The bridge is clearly misaligned to the platform edge.

For all intents, the building section shown is symmetrical, note the spacing of the bridge on the left to the building, needless to say it is correct, and the track stays perfectly straight entering the station. Note how much closer the bridge on the right is. It has insufficient width to allow for angling the track to correct for the misalignment, it's simply in the wrong place. That bridge is brand new, never used, and the vertical beams mid structure been attached to caissons specifically placed mid-roadway.

Here's an overhead pic:

 

[crs1026]

It's definitely ugly, but I wonder whether it's within the limits of curvature to allow a slight wobble - track only needs to move laterally by 4 or so feet to clear the UPE platform. GO and UPE will be at slow speed anyways (for station stops), but it would be unfortunate if a permanent speed restriction were required for through VIA and express GO trains. Hold on to your drinks!

Definitely not how I would want it designed, but it may still work.

I wonder how badly UPE needs that platform anyways. Maybe the UPE section can be shaved back a bit. Redundancy is good, but I wonder whether all four UPE platforms and four GO platforms are going to see much use.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

It's definitely ugly, but I wonder whether it's within the limits of curvature to allow a slight wobble - track only needs to move laterally by 4 or so feet to clear the UPE platform. GO and UPE will be at slow speed anyways (for station stops), but it would be unfortunate if a permanent speed restriction were required for through VIA and express GO trains. Hold on to your drinks!

Definitely not how I would want it designed, but it may still work.

I wonder how badly UPE needs that platform anyways. Maybe the UPE section can be shaved back a bit. Redundancy is good, but I wonder whether all four UPE platforms and four GO platforms are going to see much use.

- Paul

When I first noticed it when I moved here just over a year ago, my first thought was alarm, and then thinking it's been positioned to be pulled laterally into place later, until inspecting the mid vertical supports. They're anchored solid. The bridge is beautifully built, and load capacity looks to be very high, that bridge can take the heaviest freight loads.

Perhaps it was a well intentioned mistake to avoid being too close to the West Toronto Trail? It would almost have to abut the trail bridge to be properly aligned. If there is a kink put in the track that close to the station, longer wheelbase cars are going to interfere with platform edge clearance, let alone there having to be a speed restriction imposed (which would effectively bar the VIA trains being diverted on that line).

There is the possibility of skewing the tracks to the east at the northern end of the bridge and doing as wide an arc as possible from there to attain the alignment for the platform. There's also the possibility of the high-level platform (which protrudes about six inches beyond the low-level edge) being cut back at the south end for ten metres or so.

I keep looking at the situation, thinking they couldn't have made such an absolutely glaring mistake, but these things do happen in engineering, bridges that don't align, tunnel segments being way off, etc.

If anyone else gets the chance to check it out, please respond with your views. I know Drum is there a lot.

Edit to Add:
Here's a possibility. I've stared at these many times, presuming them to be underground conduit electric feeds for lighting, traffic signs, or the like. But they might be for wash plates (the load bearing flat plat at the bottom of vertical supports) as bolt-down points. Part or whole of the trail bridge side cantilever will need to be cut back to clear the realigned new bridge, but as apparent in the lower pic, the mid bridge support looks like it can be unbolted and slid laterally.

Note the bolts!

 

[drum118]

Jan 23
Downsview Park Station

 

[steveintoronto]

Great pics as always Drum, but I'm trying to find something positive to say about the looks of what must have cost a bundle. Ummm...a tribute to the 60s perhaps? A tribune to airport hangars? Tractors in the modern age, and where to house them? Soviet Celebration?

 

[crs1026]

After taking a quick peek, it has me shaking my head. The bridgework ends so close to the corner of the station that there is little room to bend the rail. And the overhang on the platform is not that wide, so the track has to clear the concrete footing. Perhaps the north end of the bridge can be modified. Shifting the bridge itself would be basically starting over, and would require a shift of the railpath bridge also.

If the clearance is there, it's only by a few cm's.

Back when the project was building, I heard some grumbling about clearance issues, but more in the context of contractors taking liberties with the drawings which forced rework. Don't know if this issue was connected.

- Paul

 

[ShonTron]

Won't GO Transit have two platforms at Downsview Park? If so, are they accessible through the TTC station without paying a TTC fare?

 

[jcam]

Jan 23

The only place by Islington is where the UPX yard was to be, but you need to build a parking structure when you build the station, since there is no land for surface parking lots. You currently have Lowe's there now and not sure if they would give up the land for a surface lot.

6 Monogram Place, behind the Quality hotel, looks empty...and appears to be for lease. You could have the station off the Resources Rd loop west of Islington, with bus and passenger dropoffs, and then put a big parking lot on Monogram if the property remains vacant. Or you could rezone, allow Metrus to capitalize on the value uplift, and get an agreement with a new developer that includes a parking garage.

 

[steveintoronto]

Shifting the bridge itself would be basically starting over, and would require a shift of the railpath bridge also.

Great shots! They far better illustrate the present alignment than the Google pics I posted. I'm now of the opinion (I was looking closely just half an hour back) that the bridge must be slid over, and most likely the 'conduit ends' on the the road median under the bridge are bolt down points. Whether there is just reinforced concrete or some metal structure under those points is a good question. That is the only span that lacks supplementary vertical supports either end (between walkway and road) and it looks like it was made that way to facilitate moving.

And yes, it will entail skiving off the edge of the present rail-trail. Bloor is way too busy to hop over and measure the off-set from present vertical piers to the ostensible new position, but it appears that the western gangplank of the trail bridge will have to be removed. I was just checking, it's in atrocious condition anyway, most of the struts are half-way through corroded.

My guess now is that there was consideration of 'cross that bridge when we come to it' (pun fully intended) as to needing that sliver of the present trail alignment. Even with the bridges almost touching, straight alignment still going to be tight, and a high fence will have to be erected to prevent trespass from one span to the adjacent one. (the gap will be mere inches)

There is one complication that I see: The present vertical piers are embedded into the concrete median. I suspect they expect to cut them off with a torch. Perhaps because the present positioning is temporary and not load bearing, they're not fully supported underneath. The wash-plates in the new position would be fully load bearing rated, as would the underlying concrete structure.

It's an very interesting little story though, and it will take the closing of Bloor to do it, I can't see lane restrictions alone seeing this done.