GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[DonValleyRainbow]

The future might never happen

Is this a reference to political decisions on Ontario or the end of the world by nuclear war?

 

[salsa]

Perhaps we should stop coming up and implementing crap plans and then have more crap plans to cover up such crap plans while taking a crapload of time to determine if such crap plans are crap or not while the crappy powers that be try and figure out if the crappiness of such crap plans is something whether the crappy public is going to give a crap about or not?

"Crap" word count: eleven. We have a winner!

 

[TOareaFan]

Is this a reference to political decisions on Ontario or the end of the world by nuclear war?

Just a play on the old saying "tomorrow never comes"....I always remember the story in the 1980s about a pub in England that put a sign on the bar that said "free beer tomorrow"....when punters came in for their free pint they were greeted by the same sign! See tomorrow never comes....one sued and the judge ordered the bar to remove the sign....so they replaced it with one saying "free beer yesterday!"

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

Just a play on the old saying "tomorrow never comes"....I always remember the story in the 1980s about a pub in England that put a sign on the bar that said "free beer tomorrow"....when punters came in for their free pint they were greeted by the same sign! See tomorrow never comes....one sued and the judge ordered the bar to remove the sign....so they replaced it with one saying "free beer yesterday!"

Okay that's good. Sorry to raise my morbid fears.

 

[drum118]

Is this a reference to political decisions on Ontario or the end of the world by nuclear war?

Well, its been 107 years since the Queen/relief line was to be built.

With the clown in the White House, war is around the corner.

It can take years to a 1,000 years before things get done. Still waiting for my HSR train. Wouldn't see it in my life time, but did the chance to ride a few of them elsewhere.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

the glass is half full guy in me wants to rephrase this as "nearing completion of current improvements....they are already planning ahead for the next phase"....the best way to avoid soul crushing mega projects that disrupt service/use is to embark on lifelong continual/gradual improvements

Fair enough.

Well, its been 107 years since the Queen/relief line was to be built.

With the clown in the White House, war is around the corner.

It can take years to a 1,000 years before things get done. Still waiting for my HSR train. Wouldn't see it in my life time, but did the chance to ride a few of them elsewhere.

Lets leave foreign politics out of this.

 

[steveintoronto]

Are they ever going to finish this haha.

The gist of Den's comment is correct, from what I'm reading of the RFQ. What I find puzzling is why this (or much of it) wasn't included in the contracts already issued for trainshed and underlying infrastructure. Not only that, how many times have the USRC "chokepoints" been used as an excuse of the present congestion rather than lack of platform space (the latter is a very real issue, but that doesn't change the illogic of the present excuses in this instance). And it raises questions as to what the present UPX platform and investment was all about if they had an intention to "enhance" things later? They've been 'announcing' RER now for years, if not a decade.

We may not have the whole story here, and whose fault is that? It seems to me that the "choke-points" on the approaches and the present flat-junctions need to be addressed at the same time as this, or before it. If throughput and yard speed can be increased, an argument could be made that with re-arrangement of present platform use, there is already suffice capacity (only just, but I'm applying logic to the most pressing need).

I suggest Metrolinx look at doing a 'double deck' track arrangement into Union to allow RER (and perhaps UPX, which is very awkwardly placed for track crossing) to 'fly' either under or over (my preference) the present set of tracks to allow an *upper* set of platforms in Union, or perhaps in a new shed attached south of the present new one above the three 'freight avoidance tracks', and at the same time, allowing 'flyovers' at each end of the USRC to attain grade separated acquisition up the Don Valley or the Weston Corridor as well as the Lakeshore line with minimal disruption of the traffic already on those lines. This would take the lowering of some extant tracks under the western leg road overpasses to accommodate, but with the USRC touted to become "completely passenger" then the clearance height under the present road crossing bridges only has to the present height of the present new train-shed times two + thickness of the added rail bridge deck. I've studied the present road bridges, there appears to be room. Inclines too steep to do it? Take a look at the present underpass in the Bathurst Yard. With the touted EMUs of the RER, distributed traction will allow that incline rate and more without problems. This is done in a number of other northern nations (Sweden for example).

But I guess such vision isn't the stuff of elections and PR announcements...

Read this very carefully: (there's a number of points that raise serious questions, not the least "finance"..."design, build and finance")(someone's sending out a message without exactly stating it: PPP or PFI. More on that later)

Request for Qualifications Issued for Union Station Enhancement Project
February 23, 2017
TORONTO - Infrastructure Ontario (IO) and Metrolinx have issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for interested parties to design, build and finance the Union Station Enhancement project. The infrastructure upgrades are required to accommodate the planned expansion of GO Transit rail service, which link into Union Station as the major transit hub in the City of Toronto.

The RFQ outlines the scope of work required, which includes:

• Construction of a new platform, including a new roof structure
• Development of a new concourse area below the platform
• Safety and state of good repair works within the train shed
• A new emergency power system

This project is part of Metrolinx's work in support of GO Regional Express Rail (RER). GO RER will provide faster, more frequent and more convenient transit service across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), including electrification of core segments of the GO rail network by 2024-25. The program will provide new travel choices for commuters, significantly increase transit ridership, cut journey times and help manage congestion across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area.

Major infrastructure updates are required to bring this level of service to communities across the region, including: adding track, modifying GO stations, improving rail crossings, building required systems for electrification and adding new locomotives and train control systems.

The RFQ is the first step in the procurement process to select a team to deliver the project. IO and Metrolinx will evaluate submissions to prequalify project teams with the relevant design and construction experience. Teams that qualify will be invited to respond to a request for proposals, which is expected to be issued in summer 2017. Interested companies must register with www.merx.com to download the RFQ.
[...]
Quotes:

“These improvements to Union Station are necessary steps that will support our expansion of GO Transit service across the network. By improving service and providing people with more transit options, we are managing congestion, creating jobs and making your commute faster than ever before.”
Steven Del Duca, Minister of Transportation

“The Union Station Enhancement project, which features a new platform and enables expanded GO Transit service, will benefit thousands of commuters by offering more frequent trains and a quicker ride to work or home. Those in communities across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) can cut car trips and increase their transit ridership, helping to reduce traffic congestion and contributing to shorter delivery times for companies moving their products or providing services using busy GTHA highways.”
Bob Chiarelli, Minister of Infrastructure

“The Union Station Enhancement project will make marked improvements to Union Station that allow for us to proceed with the Regional Express Rail transformation, bringing residents of the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area a faster and more efficient way to travel.”
Bruce McCuaig, President and CEO, Metrolinx

“The Union Station Enhancement project is an important component to help deliver the RER program. IO looks forward to reviewing the RFQ submissions by the market for this project.”
Ehren Cory, Divisional President, Project Delivery, Infrastructure Ontario
[...]

http://www.infrastructureontario.ca/Request-for-Qualifications-Issued-Union-Station-Enhancement/

Very curious....

Edit to Add: How visually intrusive would "double stacking/decking of at least two RER tracks and platforms" be to the landscape? Well...there's this massive proposal to create the "Rail Deck Park" over that corridor, and anyone overly concerned of how stacking rails into Union would look had best think as to what is already being planned....which brings us back to 'neverendum' when it comes to tweaking Union Station. Since the upper deck clearance would still fit under the present road bridges, that concern is a bit moot.

 

[dowlingm]

Is this where they sneak in the expense of raising the trainshed above electrification clearance?

 

[steveintoronto]

Is this where they sneak in the expense of raising the trainshed above electrification clearance?

It's a good question still, even if that point isn't in this RFQ. I watch vids of US tunnel operations, and although they all preclude double decker operation, the catenary is still a lot lower than for single decker operation outside the tunnel. So one has to wonder if there isn't a little give possible in TC regs for catenary height to match what the FRA allows? That would certainly have positive ramifications for a twin track two level rail corridor to carry RER above the present tracks into Union into an added shed attached immediately south of the present one above the present "freight by-pass" tracks.

Anyone know the latest on the catenary height debacle?

Latest I could find was a year ago:

[...]
Experts at Metrolinx, the provincial transit agency, are scratching their heads about how to solve the problem. One option is to adapt the catenary so it fits under the arches, perhaps using a rigid rail instead of wires, as some railways do when they run trains through tunnels.

Another is to dig up the tracks and lower them a bit, so the trains can fit under the arches, but there is only so far builders can dig before they hit the thick supporting slab underneath the shed.

In the worst case, they would have to raise the roof. That would mean cutting through the dozens of columns one by one and inserting new sections to make them taller. It would be a tedious and expensive job – just how expensive they can’t say yet. Because it would be impossible to raise the whole huge roof at once, engineers would have to jack it up in parts, raising each bit by bit. Like all the renovations at Union, the work would have to be done while the station is operating.

On a recent tour, Michael Wolczyk, Metrolinx’s vice-president in charge of corridor infrastructure, said he was “confident, probably 75 per cent” that engineers would find a way to avoid raising the roof. “We’ve got a lot of great minds working on it.” To help out, Metrolinx has hired one set of consultants to give advice on GO electrification and it’s seeking another to advise on the train shed.

Apart from the matter of clearance, there is another little issue. The new overhead electrical will have to be grounded to prevent people on the platforms from getting a shock. That means digging down into the shed floor, gobbling up more time and money.[...]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...es-and-an-electrified-future/article28448568/

I question the last paragraph I quoted above. Of course it must be ensured that any metal objects should be *earthed* (separate meaning from "ground" which the tracks would be, the two are ideally the same potential, but in practice, esp with 25kV catenary, residually often at a different potential, especially under load) and therefore the tracks and metal superstructure of building strapped together at close intervals, but that is a minor issue compared to catenary height.

 

[rbt]

Is this where they sneak in the expense of raising the trainshed above electrification clearance?

I really hope it includes any pieces necessary. There isn't much remaining time to run another train shed tender, pick a winner, and get to financial close before the next provincial election.

That said, I'd expect them to lower the rails (bolt directly to concrete floor) rather than raise the shed. TTC is testing the below track suspension system. They would work in the GO trainshed, lower the rails by several inches, and probably also reduce vibration.

Thanks Steve Munro.

 

[steveintoronto]

...I'd expect them to lower the rails (bolt directly to concrete floor) rather than raise the shed. TTC is testing the below track suspension system. They would work in the GO trainshed, lower the rails by several inches, and probably also reduce vibration.

My immediate thought was whether this is being used at St Pancras Internation station in London, the terminus for HS1 in the UK, and with a new concrete slab floor at ground level, and a massive new concourse underneath, directly analogous to Toronto Union, and indeed it is:

[...]
In 2003, work began on the redevelopment of St Pancras and the installation of infrastructure to enable the station to serve the international Eurostar service — all part of the High Speed 1 project, formerly known as the Channel Tunnel Rail Link. In effect, a new station has been constructed next to the original and the train shed extended.
The original station floor has been strengthened and the undercroft opened up to form a new concourse. The station entrance is now at ground level. The track deck and station floor have been replaced with reinforced concrete slabs supported on the original cast iron columns. [...]

http://www.engineering-timelines.com/scripts/engineeringItem.asp?id=120

And from Pandrol:

[...] Against intense competition Pandrol Vanguard was selected for use throughout the St. Pancras high speed rail terminus in London, UK. [...]

http://www.pandrol.com/wp-content/uploads/Vanguard-retrofit-case-study.pdf

That the Vanguard type fasteners were chosen for a slab base above a concourse bodes very well for using same or similar at Toronto Union, and doing as rbt suggests. Lowering the tracks the necessary few inches would also effectively raise the platform height, a good thing in the case of TorUnion.

 

[jcam]

When it talks of a "new concourse", it makes me think they'll be adding deadheading platforms either west of York or east of Bay - i.e. new concourses building off of the Bay and York teamways.

 

[dowlingm]

If the rail is depressed, then while Panguard might deal with rail anchoring, one wonders what happens with vibration and noise in the structures underneath. It's one thing to depress when nothing is underneath, or when you're doing it deliberately as part of a planned design. If the underground structure and support design assumed that the shed would be tall enough without depressing the rail, well...

 

[smallspy]

Is this where they sneak in the expense of raising the trainshed above electrification clearance?

No, because they don't need to raise the trainshed.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[innsertnamehere]

When it talks of a "new concourse", it makes me think they'll be adding deadheading platforms either west of York or east of Bay - i.e. new concourses building off of the Bay and York teamways.

it would just be an expansion of the concourse underneath of the new platform presumably. Similar to the new concourse and platform that they built around 10 years ago.