Toronto GO Transit: Davenport Diamond Grade Separation | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

^It’s CP’s responsibility to maintain the diamond, both signalling and track, because CP is the “junior” railroad at that location. That principle dates from the steam era. CP has been progressively modernising CTC along the Galt/North Toronto line, and has made other changes eg at the Howland interlocking a couple miles east. A new signal setup may benefit CP by allowing better signal indications especially for trains diverging to the Mactier line at Osler. No surprise if they spend some money on the Davenport signalling so that it talks to newer installations that are adjacent.
We don’t know what CP and ML may have agreed to or how the costs are being split. That article certainly tried to put lipstick on a pig by making small work projects sound important. If it had referred to larger projects that are ‘on’, one might read maening into the omission of the flyover, but I don’t see that as the case.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
crs1026 said:
^It’s CP’s responsibility to maintain the diamond, both signalling and track, because CP is the “junior” railroad at that location. That principle dates from the steam era. CP has been progressively modernising CTC along the Galt/North Toronto line, and has made other changes eg at the Howland interlocking a couple miles east. A new signal setup may benefit CP by allowing better signal indications especially for trains diverging to the Mactier line at Osler. No surprise if they spend some money on the Davenport signalling so that it talks to newer installations that are adjacent.
We don’t know what CP and ML may have agreed to or how the costs are being split. That article certainly tried to put lipstick on a pig by making small work projects sound important. If it had referred to larger projects that are ‘on’, one might read maening into the omission of the flyover, but I don’t see that as the case.

- Paul
Click to expand...
So let me get this straight, according to what you're now stating. This has nothing to do with the 'Davenport Diamond Grade Separation'?

Addendum: And further to the subsequent need to address the present diamond noise level, a proven way being the use of flange-lifting methods:
The noise study found that sound levels from freight trains passing over the diamond reached maximum levels of approximately 105 dBA at 5 m (a sound power level of 127 dBA Lw). For GO Trains, the maximum sound level was found to be approximately 111 dBA at 5m (a sound power level of 133 dBA Lw). The corresponding standard maximum sound level to use for crossovers in the FTA guideline is approximately 90 dBA at 15 m or 100 dBA at 5 m (not accounting for ground effect). The measurements indicate that the crossover noise of the Davenport diamond is 10 dBA (or twice as loud) higher than general estimates would indicate.
Click to expand...
Pg 50, http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/rer/davenport/epr/Davenport_Diamond_EPR_Main_Report.pdf
 
Last edited:
steveintoronto said:
So let me get this straight, according to what you're now stating. This has nothing to do with the 'Davenport Diamond Grade Separation'?
Click to expand...

I’m saying it does not guarantee that the bypass is dead, nor does it help prove that to be the case. I am quite confident that CP and ML have discussed and agreed to the new signalling, whatever its driving reason is. There may be benefits to each party; ML has been quick to tout its value to them but that article is mostly spin. There is no proof that ML requested the new installation, it may well have been CP who initiated the change.

To ML’s claim that this is an improvement project.....I don’t see how replacing an old interlocking with a new one would improve traffic control on the Newmarket line.... but I do see how it could improve traffic control on CP by enabling new signal indications along the entire North Toronto Sub. That might mean CP trains can move more efficiently all the way from Leaside to Osler, occupying the diamonds at more opportune times or maybe by being able to maintain the current maximum speeds more consistently rather than being slowed by restrictive signal indications.

Addendum: And further to the subsequent need to address the present diamond noise level, a proven way being the use of flange-lifting methods:
Click to expand...

I don’t detect the same pressure you are supposing to address the current noise level. I suspect that given the choice between the status quo and the bypass, the local community might well choose the status quo even with its above median noise level.

Lifting diamonds make most sense where there is one heavy traffic track and one lightly used slow speed track. I can’t imagine ML accepting the lesser status. Nor can I imagine CP caring a whit about lowering noise levels. So I doubt anyone would favour that change.

We are of course both speculating here. ML and the Minister are both keeping their cards very close to the chest. We will see eventually.

- Paul

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
I don’t detect the same pressure you are supposing to address the current noise level. I suspect that given the choice between the status quo and the bypass, the local community might well choose the status quo even with its above median noise level.

Lifting diamonds make most sense where there is one heavy traffic track and one lightly used slow speed track. I can’t imagine ML accepting the lesser status. Nor can I imagine CP caring a whit about lowering noise levels. So I doubt anyone would favour that change.
Click to expand...
This isn't about you or I, it's about the community. I love living next to train tracks, to the point that I miss it when I'm not. But most people don't and if the overpass is 'kicked down the road' which you and some others admit 'may or may not happen', and I see every indication of it being so, then the remaining diamond presents a very real problem. And that would not only be easy for Ford to address, but for him to spin it (as we see from the Metrolinx paean to the Glorious Leader's Vision) as a 'cheap solution to the improvements his team of hard working and dedicated loyal servants' can provide. And that's to use a lower noise diamond crossover. Take a look at what's predicted for that diamond, and evidently all diesel, electric has been...errr...'forestalled':

How 'loud' is it? Even though it doesn't bother me, it is audible from Dundas West. If I were Don or Dorothy Normal living close to it, it would be intrusive. Or worse.
183591
Click to expand...
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/rer/davenport/epr/Davenport_Diamond_EPR_Main_Report.pdf

Metrolinx have a bunch more spinning to do...
 
Last edited:
I asked a friend about the work going on at the diamond, here's his response:

"Electronic code from Bloor to Spicer, converting controlled signal Fairbank into intermediate, removing vegetation on the east side of ROW from Bloor for north of Davenport Diamond.

All of this of course is being done at the same time as the enabling works for the grade separation."

So in fact they are "improving" the signal system by upgrading to a more modern system, even if it isn't really going to have any immediate improvements to the trains.

Dan
 
ADRM said:
Good, clear letter. Heartening, too.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry...on what? The 'Public Realm'? It certainly doesn't answer the question that @raptor posed at Engage...and the post is now number 3 btw. Looks like Verster had best brush-up on his dance moves. (Cleared with the QP head choreographer beforehand, doubtless)

If it's so clear, then please explain what this means as some must have a much greater innate understanding of the 'lingo'? 'jingo'? than I do. That sounds like a can being kicked down the road to me...but hey...I didn't get a chance to read the writing on the can before they kicked it again.

183766

Here's the question posed at Engage, just to refresh memories:
Anonymous's avatar

Davenport Diamond Grade Separation
anonymous
Apr 29, 2019 - 15:28
Flag as offensive
Is the Davenport Diamond Grade Separation project still proceeding as envisioned? The RFP closed in February and no announcements since.
Click to expand...

"Once a contractor is in place". Indeed...
 
Last edited:
^Judging by other contracts, Schedule 18 is boilerplate language that Infrastructure Ontario attaches to AFP contracts. This schedule sets out communications roles and responsibilities regarding the project. The contractor usually has to develop and execute a communications plan, but they are required to coordinate their efforts with the buyer (ie Metrolinx). You can find examples by googling 'Schedule 18 Infrastructure Ontario'.

- Paul
 
steveintoronto said:
I'm sorry...on what? The 'Public Realm'? It certainly doesn't answer the question that @raptor posed at Engage...and the post is now number 3 btw. Looks like Verster had best brush-up on his dance moves. (Cleared with the QP head choreographer beforehand, doubtless)

If it's so clear, then please explain what this means as some must have a much greater innate understanding of the 'lingo'? 'jingo'? than I do. That sounds like a can being kicked down the road to me...but hey...I didn't get a chance to read the writing on the can before they kicked it again.

View attachment 183766
Here's the question posed at Engage, just to refresh memories:

"Once a contractor is in place". Indeed...
Click to expand...

Phil Verster wasn't answering "raptor" on UrbanToronto; he was answering Councillor Bailao, who asked if the project was proceeding as planned. Instead of a complicated and overly bureaucratic response, he clearly and succinctly answered the question.

He went on to offer a clear answer as to why they made that decision. I'm not passing judgment on whether the decision itself was sound.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top