GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[crs1026]

We have heard little about any plans to improve the GO station at Etobicoke North. Adding the fourth track will impact the access to the present (temporary) station. I wonder what’s up with it.

- Paul

 

[SaugeenJunction]

Contract Awarded for Highway 401 Rail Tunnel

EllisDon Capital Inc. + STRABAG Inc., with WSP Canada Inc., Dr. Sauer & Partners and Amec Foster Wheeler for design.

"Construction is scheduled to begin in spring 2018, with an expected substantial completion date for late summer 2021."

This is one of those unsexy but essential projects. Glad to see it moving full steam ahead.

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

We have heard little about any plans to improve the GO station at Etobicoke North. Adding the fourth track will impact the access to the present (temporary) station. I wonder what’s up with it.

- Paul

My understanding is that track shifting would occur to allow the new track to be placed on the south side of the corridor to eats of Islington, as the existing road overpass there would be able to accommodate it. Around there, tracks would be cut and shifted from how they're laid now. WRT Etobicoke North, there's space on the south side too where they removed to former platform, will just require a new structure over Kipling.

The fifth track for the tunnel, though? No idea. Maybe a lead to/from the future UPX maintenance facility that would extend to the existing northernmost freight spur west of the 401. But I don't know if it will fit under Islington without impacting Resources Road.

 

[raptor]

SQ-2017-COCO-026 - SQ-2017-COCO-026 - Prequalification for Early Stations’ Improvements Project

Description
Request For Pre-Qualifications

Pre-Qualification No. SQ-2017-COCO-026

Prequalification for Early Stations’ Improvements Project

Metrolinx is issuing this Request to be Prequalified to establish a Prequalified List of Design Builder Proponents to carry out the design and construct infrastructure upgrades required at various GO Transit Stations located in the GTHA through an open, fair and competitive process

The objective of this Request to be Prequalified (Stage 1) is to develop a Prequalified List of Design Build Proponents (including their named Subcontractors, and Key Personnel), with the necessary experience, qualifications and resource availability to provide the Design Services and the Work to be issued via the Stage 2 invitational procurement process for Early Stations’ Improvements.

Pre-qualification Submissions will be accepted until the Closing of 3:00 p.m., Thursday February 8, 2018, via Metrolinx Merx Electronic Bid Submission (EBS) and will be opened by Metrolinx staff as soon as is practicable after the designated Closing.

Pre-qualification documents are available online at www.metrolinx.merx.com

Only those Proponents that Metrolinx has determined, in its sole discretion based on the Evaluation Criteria stated herein, to be qualified will be added to the Metrolinx Prequalified List of Design Build Proponents for the Design Services and the Work.

 

[KevinT]

The fifth track for the tunnel, though? No idea. Maybe a lead to/from the future UPX maintenance facility that would extend to the existing northernmost freight spur west of the 401. But I don't know if it will fit under Islington without impacting Resources Road.

If the width of the south span is the same as the north over Resources Rd they just might be able to sneak two tracks through there by rebuilding the abutment to a purely vertical one, but they'd need to nip off some of the hotel and Toronto Hydro properties to do it. Hydro is probably getting nipped for the 401 tunnel work anyway, so that just leaves the hotel. (Note: Pure speculation based on Google satellite view.)

 

[crs1026]

The problem with Etobicoke North is that there are no pedestrian tunnels. A fourth track in any configuration needs a tunnel under the tracks somewhere. It may be a shorter lead time item than the 401 tunnel, so hasn't been actioned yet.... but something will have to be done eventually.

The new 401 tunnel is two tracks, but I haven't heard that the end state is five tracks. Squuezing three into the existing tunnel has always been problemmatic and I wonder if the end state will remove one track from the current tunnel.

- Paul

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

The problem with Etobicoke North is that there are no pedestrian tunnels. A fourth track in any configuration needs a tunnel under the tracks somewhere. It may be a shorter lead time item than the 401 tunnel, so hasn't been actioned yet.... but something will have to be done eventually.

Do they? Passing under the tracks is currently facilitated by using sidewalks and stairs along Kipling. They certainly need better switchbacks to reduce travel for those using accessibility devices, but I don't see the need for a tunnel.

The new 401 tunnel is two tracks, but I haven't heard that the end state is five tracks. Squuezing three into the existing tunnel has always been problemmatic and I wonder if the end state will remove one track from the current tunnel.

- Paul

Hmm. Good point. Maybe we (I) overread that part. Then again why wouldn't you build in the extra capacity.

 

[TOareaFan]

This is one of those unsexy but essential projects. Glad to see it moving full steam ahead.

How essential is this if there is no solution further west?

If all we can run is the trains we are currently running, how essential is this tunnel?

 

[SaugeenJunction]

How essential is this if there is no solution further west?

If all we can run is the trains we are currently running, how essential is this tunnel?

Well, it is essential for future service. Why wait for the 407 Freight Bypass to get started on this? It is just being proactive, and that's a good way to build transit.

Also, the Kitchener corridor is forced down to 3 tracks at this point, whereas the rest of the corridor is wide enough for at least 4 tracks to Pearson. At the moment, Metrolinx is laying the 4th from esentially were this project will occur to the USRC. It is a vital part for future plans, and considering that the completion date is 2021, we may be in a different spot service-wise by then. Also, with 15-min UP Express, VIA, and GO service, adding an extra track wouldn't hurt.

 

[crs1026]

Do they? Passing under the tracks is currently facilitated by using sidewalks and stairs along Kipling. They certainly need better switchbacks to reduce travel for those using accessibility devices, but I don't see the need for a tunnel.

It's a pretty awkward routing from the parking lot and especially from the TTC stops. It works, yes, but in a system that is itching to build Taj Mahal stations, EN is an odd place to be so parsimonious.

What does DD have against Etobicoke that he wouldn't add this to the list?

Hmm. Good point. Maybe we (I) overread that part. Then again why wouldn't you build in the extra capacity.

I have always believed (conspiracy theory, here) that this tunnel fell off the table when costs first started to mount with GTS and when UPE became the paramount deliverable. If you look at how the interlocking signalling was built, a four track mainline was clearly designed and roughed in. Then cuts came, and three tracks was all that was affordable. The fourth track is sitting there all wired up in the signalling, just waiting for someone to connect the leads. I don't believe anyone ever intended to add a fifth track, as it was never roughed in, and doing so would force rework on what was just built.

Contacts with knowledge of the engineering of the three track tunnel tell me that clearances are so tight that nobody was really sure that the dynamic air pressures would allow trains to pass in the tunnel without clipping something. This was tested carefully but only just before opening in 2015. Again, just a theory, but I bet it's something that ML would want to ease especially if it is the limiting clearance point on the whole line for electrification and whatever new equipment that may require.

- Paul

 

[crs1026]

How essential is this if there is no solution further west?

If all we can run is the trains we are currently running, how essential is this tunnel?

It would rectify the problem where mid day service ends well before the evening peak, and skips stops eastbound in late afternoon. It might enable some counter flow service at peak, at least as far as Bramalea.

There has to be a back story on why CN is allegedly opposed to allowing more trains to use the tail track (Platform 4) at Bramalea. Taken on its own, their position is ludicrous. It has to be tied to something bigger.

- Paul

 

[TOareaFan]

It is not clear to me that:

1. This tunnel adds value (at least anywhere near value commensurate with it’s cost) without also getting something done further west;

2. That it could not be built concurrent with the other improvements west of there IF they get negotiated/approved/built

CN’s position makes perfect sense to me.....why would they give up something the other guy wants until they get all that they (CN) want in return.

Something that the various ML/ON Gov’t negotiators on this corridor seem to have never learned.

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

I have always believed (conspiracy theory, here) that this tunnel fell off the table when costs first started to mount with GTS and when UPE became the paramount deliverable. If you look at how the interlocking signalling was built, a four track mainline was clearly designed and roughed in. Then cuts came, and three tracks was all that was affordable. The fourth track is sitting there all wired up in the signalling, just waiting for someone to connect the leads. I don't believe anyone ever intended to add a fifth track, as it was never roughed in, and doing so would force rework on what was just built.

Contacts with knowledge of the engineering of the three track tunnel tell me that clearances are so tight that nobody was really sure that the dynamic air pressures would allow trains to pass in the tunnel without clipping something. This was tested carefully but only just before opening in 2015. Again, just a theory, but I bet it's something that ML would want to ease especially if it is the limiting clearance point on the whole line for electrification and whatever new equipment that may require.

- Paul

It would rectify the problem where mid day service ends well before the evening peak, and skips stops eastbound in late afternoon. It might enable some counter flow service at peak, at least as far as Bramalea.

I think that theory has been sussed out here and is understood to be true. But 3 tracks is certainly a potential pinch point for 2 way all day GO service on the Kitchener line, especially when VIA is also using the corridor.

There has to be a back story on why CN is allegedly opposed to allowing more trains to use the tail track (Platform 4) at Bramalea. Taken on its own, their position is ludicrous. It has to be tied to something bigger.

- Paul

It is ludicrous. Does Metrolinx not own the lead? It is the exact same setup as the Lakeshore West line at Aldershot; a lead to a GO platform on one side of the corridor, three mainlines through, conflict between GO and freight as they have to switch sides. Why does it work on one corridor (every 30 min) and not the other? I'd be appreciative of any insight into this. @smallspy ?

EDIT: Looking at my records, Metrolinx does not own the lead into Bramalea, ownership is up to the signal bridge east of Halwest.

 

[Allandale25]

It is not clear to me that:

1. This tunnel adds value (at least anywhere near value commensurate with it’s cost) without also getting something done further west;

2. That it could not be built concurrent with the other improvements west of there IF they get negotiated/approved/built

CN’s position makes perfect sense to me.....why would they give up something the other guy wants until they get all that they (CN) want in return.

Something that the various ML/ON Gov’t negotiators on this corridor seem to have never learned.

Contacts with knowledge of the engineering of the three track tunnel tell me that clearances are so tight that nobody was really sure that the dynamic air pressures would allow trains to pass in the tunnel without clipping something. This was tested carefully but only just before opening in 2015. Again, just a theory, but I bet it's something that ML would want to ease especially if it is the limiting clearance point on the whole line for electrification and whatever new equipment that may require.

- Paul

Given Paul's comments, even with the existing UP Express service, VIA and GO services, do they ever have a three train meet through the existing tunnel? Paul, has this only been done once and only for the 2015 test? Would a tunnel help with reliability for the existing service levels? If the Bypass discussions or Agreement takes too long, runs into property owner opposition, challenges with the utilities, or no government wants to fund the published $2.2B cost* (or too much funding goes to subways), maybe they can pressure CN to just allow them to buy some property to get them to the south side of Bramalea. That wouldn't be ideal but it could be a potential scenario. In that case the tunnel is definitely needed.

*The $2.2B is from the Capital Group report that's in the agenda packages from the June, September, and December Metrolinx Board meetings. It doesn't break down this cost or confirm it would cover the Bypass costs and any other upgrades needed between Bramalea and Kitchener.

 

[crs1026]

Given Paul's comments, even with the existing UP Express service, VIA and GO services, do they ever have a three train meet through the existing tunnel?

I'm sure that does happen occasionally. The test was because, well, you never can be sure until you try. I have been told there is a slight speed restriction through the tunnel, but I don't have any documentation to confirm that. The point is, it's clearly the limiting clearance point on the line, and one would not want that kind of pinch point if it can be avoided.

They could certainly find a solution (one set of crossovers would do it) at Bramalea, but as noted CN has the hammer on what happens on whatever land it owns, and if it wants to be sticky on this there is nothing stopping them. I don't know where the exact property line is, but a cheap solution would have to run under the existing overpasses at Bramalea Rd and at the 407. I bet that is all owned by CN. Hence, the problem.

I do think it is worth doing the tunnel now, rather than waiting. It's a big enough task that it would add one more headache to whatever has to be done when/if the Bypass is finally agreed to. Doing it now, even if the economic return is low until the bigger job is completed, is just buying a bit of insurance towards the whole project staying on track.

- Paul