GO Transit: Union Station Shed Replacement & Track Upgrades (Zeidler)

[smallspy]

I see you miss job site meetings nor been in the belly of the beast to hear/see about the various issues related to the existing columns and why some increase in size for aesthetics looks. Loading did play a part as well.

The engineer who was working on the structural design of the new portion of the shed certainly didn't miss those meetings....

Dan

 

[DSC]

Metrolinx have announced this 'noise warning' to local residents:
Platform Demolition in Union Station Train - night

• Friday, January 11 to Sunday, January 13, 2019
• Overnight between 8:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m.

 

[Michael62]

Interesting email received concerning overnight work to take place at Union Station

Dear Residents,

Please see below for a summary of overnight work that Metrolinx will be undertaking in the rail corridor. Please note that there is overnight work near Union Station scheduled for the following dates and times:

Between Bay and Church Streets: Conduit trenching - night
(Pullbox installation, Troughing work & Junction Box)

• Wednesday, January 9 to Sunday, January 13, 2019
• Tuesday, January 15 to Thursday, January 17, 2019
• Overnight between 8:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m

Platform Demolition in Union Station Train - night

• Friday, January 11 to Sunday, January 13, 2019
• Overnight between 8:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m.

Southside of Union Station: Wayside Equipment Installation - night

• Saturday, January 19, 2019
• Overnight between 8:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m

For more information about projects taking place in the Union East Station Rail Corridor please find the pdf attached or please click http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/rer/USRC-East_Brochure_2018-EN-Final.pdf

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

Metrolinx have announced this 'noise warning' to local residents:
Platform Demolition in Union Station Train - night

• Friday, January 11 to Sunday, January 13, 2019
• Overnight between 8:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m.

What platform(s) are they "demolishing" and why?

 

[yrt+viva=1system]

I would love to read that comment, since I happen to have accompanied most probably the same team of Deutsche Bahn International (DBI) engineers and recall them telling me after their tour of the interlocking system at TTR (see this short, but excellent video from the Globe and Mail) that they plead everyone "to preserve this unique piece of railway technology history and put it in a museum", as they were fascinated to learn that there still was a place in the world which uses 1930s interlocking technology and thus keeps it functional.

Probably the only other anecdote I feel comfortable sharing here was that they advised us that "you might have a wayfinding problem" after they weren't able to walk or stand for just 30 seconds wearing their high-visbility vests within the passenger areas of Union Station without getting asked for directions...

I tried looking for that specific blog post with the comment but couldn't find it.

I do have to ask though, is the Union interlocking system unique in any way? New York comes to my mind when someone mentions 1930s interlocking technology and there's bound to be plenty on the subway system, MTA, LIRR and New Jersey Transit. I'm sure those engineers would be fascinated by the systems there!

 

[smallspy]

I do have to ask though, is the Union interlocking system unique in any way? New York comes to my mind when someone mentions 1930s interlocking technology and there's bound to be plenty on the subway system, MTA, LIRR and New Jersey Transit. I'm sure those engineers would be fascinated by the systems there!

The USRC is "unique" in the sense that the entire thing is one giant interlocking. The MTA uses a lot of the same technology at many of their interlockings, but they are much smaller and scattered around the system.

Dan

 

[White Pine]

Will the existing/new trainsheds support the reduction in tracks/electrification?

 

[DSC]

Will the existing/new trainsheds support the reduction in tracks/electrification?

You may want to rephrase your question to 'Can the planned reduction in tracks and the addition of electrification fit into the existing shed configuration?" Any relocation of the tracks is the biggest problem as the support pillars are currently laid out to support them (see discussion above). The new wiring is also a problem as it's a very tight fit from the normal pantograph to the Busch shed ceiling and this too has been discussed here - about a year ago if I remember right. The answer seems to be it's possible.

 

[interchange42]

Will the existing/new trainsheds support the reduction in tracks/electrification?

I liked the "quick mock-up" below that @Bif posted a couple pages back (click the "View attachment 169990" link below to see it) as it shows with his orange lines that you probably don't have to move any tracks to have 10 through-tracks and some new wide platforms between them, by simply closing the rest of the through-tracks..The green lines for bay track locations are more of a wild guess, I'd say.

If it can be done without moving the tracks, that's a massive savings in time and expense… so I suspect that's the idea.

View attachment 169990

This is a quick mock up for the west side of Union Station. 10 through tracks and two bay tracks. I haven't tried the east side yet. I assume the new west concourse would be under the bay platforms, on the other side of York. I am not an engineer, but this seems to be what they're after.

42

 

[steveintoronto]

^Many thanks for the Bif diagram. I was looking for that the other day.

If it can be done without moving the tracks, that's a massive savings in time and expense… so I suspect that's the idea.

It has to be that way, unless massive structural bolsters were re-engineered into the deck. That still leaves the question as to the geometry of the platforms, and the (ostensible) asymmetry of the loading platform being larger than the detraining one, and the stair/escalator access to both.

 

[crs1026]

Here's a further mockup showing the existing tracks, the effect of removing 4 (somewhere I read that tracks 2,3, 5 and 7 are the ones proposed for removal) and shifting the southmost track for the wider platform as shown in some of the Metrolinx renders..

I marked the location of the traditional stairwells - there are new ones in the York and Bay concourses, they can only help. The trainshed supports are in line with these, so as one can see, they are not affected.

The one unknown is what tracks might be stub-ended. I would think 9 and 10 would make sense as they are the longer ones, leaving 8 for those long Canadian consists. Depending on the length of 8 and 9, they might allow room for two 10 car consists, stub ended.... and it makes a really nice upper platform/mall with many stairwell options if 9 and 10 are severed.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

Uh oh...

Just trying to track the http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pd..._BoardMtg_GO_Expansion_Full_Business_Case.PDF for more specific details on the track re-arrangement (there are helpful details in it) but just slammed into this:
( Best I post a pic of the whole relevant section rather than lose context by just posting the specific info on Union platforms)

pg 184.

Make no mistake, due to the lack of other options being available, I favour a P3 approach (with severe caveats)(there's excellent examples abroad to learn from), but a piecemeal approach like this is doomed to go wrong...very wrong! If done P3, then best that QP tender this out *for the entire shed* as one contract...as per (for instance) "Toronto Union Station track/platform/approach Consortium Ltd*.

Gee...deja vu...'TTR'.

 

[DSC]

What platform(s) are they "demolishing" and why?

Platform Demolition in Union Station Train: Track 8/9 - night
(Saw cutting and curb demolition - Excavator usage) May be disruptive to residents at 18 Yonge Street

• Friday, January 18 to Sunday, January 20, 2019
• Overnight between 8:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m.

 

[dowlingm]

It seems a shame to determine Union's optimum layout based on a requirement to accommodate a 3/weekly land cruise train... with abysmal timekeeping and again because of length has to back in from TMC. Maybe GO should consider discussing with VIA limiting Canadian to the size of an LL12, and VIA can figure out how to cut in and drop cars en route to provide the needed capacity over the Rockies?

 

[crs1026]

It seems a shame to determine Union's optimum layout based on a requirement to accommodate a 3/weekly land cruise train... with abysmal timekeeping and again because of length has to back in from TMC. Maybe GO should consider discussing with VIA limiting Canadian to the size of an LL12, and VIA can figure out how to cut in and drop cars en route to provide the needed capacity over the Rockies?

That length limitation would just about kill the economics of that route, but maybe there is a middle ground. Such as declaring a curfew around afternoon rush hour, ie if the train falls off its mid-day arrival schedule it will not be received until after rush hour has ended, when track capacity may be available again.

I also wonder if there is a way to bridge TC’s differing treatment of stub ended versus double berthed use of a single platform. Put a power operated derail halfway along the platform? Would a mid platform stop signal suffice? How fail safe a stopping point does TC demand... a concrete block that is raised drawbridge like when the platform is used as one long platform?

There is likely a solution, the question is the will.

- Paul