News   Nov 27, 2024
Towers to be Introduced to Longo's Site at 7 and Woodbine in Markham
 766     4 
News   Nov 27, 2024
Masterplanned Community in Markham Would Replace Big Box Centre
 669     1 
News   Nov 27, 2024
Menkes Welcomes First Occupants to Festival at Assembly Park in Vaughan
 1K     1 

GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

reaperexpress said:
The one that caught my eye is the "new track around York U GO". The line was already double-tracked in that area a couple years ago (and the station itself already head a second track long before that), so I'm really not sure what that would be about. Maybe they actually meant Downsview Park, which is still single-tracked at the moment? But the map does also highlight the area around York U.
Click to expand...

I wondered about that also. We’ve assumed that the contracts already let for beginning the double track north of Davenport will extend all the way to the existing DT that runs north from Steeles.... but I recall seeing a document somewhere that hinted it only went as far as Sheppard. Maybe there was a gap remaining, and this is the fill.

- Paul
 

I don't really know what's the point of this track?
Screen Shot 2020-08-18 at 4.09.00 PM.png
 
reaperexpress said:
Hypothesis 1: reduce conflict with CN switchers coming waiting for a path to rejoin the CN York Subdivision
Hypothesis 2: give a reason to finally put York U station out of its misery
Click to expand...
Weirdly it doesn't have a switch from the new track heading towards Downsview Park
 
kali said:
If I recall correctly, the RH electrification bit was to enable more storage for the network - is this accurate?
Click to expand...

Its only 3 trains worth.

I'm sure its an added benefit.

But I think the larger reason I saw was using it as space to turn trains back and not having them occupy platform space at Union or in the USRC while so doing.
 
And if they're turning around EMUs - they'll need electrification on that section of track. It makes sense. Will this require flood proofing the line?
 
kali said:
And if they're turning around EMUs - they'll need electrification on that section of track. It makes sense. Will this require flood proofing the line?
Click to expand...

The short answer is 'no'.

This project (Don Layover) is along the Don Branch, which, within a few meters of crossing the river is at an elevation well beyond flood risk.

This project does not cover, at least in any images thus far, changes to the Bala Sub itself, from Don Branch to the USRC.

Clearly, some changes will be made if only for the purpose of electrification.

In so doing, they may wish (where room permits) to add some flood reliance.

However, they can't do much by way of elevation change as they have Eastern/Richmond/Adelaide flyover, Dundas, Gerrard and Riverdale Park Pedestrian Bridges to pass under.

They might be able to steal a few cm, but not a whole bunch more.
 
reaperexpress said:
Interesting to see that after years of pressuring Metrolinx to improve GO train service to Guelph, the City of Guelph is now squarely opposing Metrolinx's efforts to do exactly that.

<snip>

Separating bikes and cars by paint and curbs is nice, but separating them to completely different route is far safer because it avoids the issue of turning conflicts at intersections.
Click to expand...

This post should be a letter to the editor in itself, well said!
 
Took the 15:15h train from Niagara Falls to Toronto. I tried to shoot some photos at the Hamilton Junction. Seems like CN is still working on the signaling systems. There piles of material I can’t identify.

Someone else might have knowledge what they are doing?
2477F2D6-FCD0-4002-A1B5-B73E0D5014E5.jpegC11E3127-9627-4168-9F38-60413D684D28.jpeg983FC990-C396-4D20-8C11-7908D86F5FD0.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top