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

[sctech68]

This new signal is probably more prep work for all the work to be done north of Wallace Ave. It will likely replace the present CP diamond signal
just south of Dupont. Moving it south of Wallace will allow them to move track around without having to move the signal every time the track has to be shifted

 

[Allandale25]

^ Makes sense.

 

[steveintoronto]

This new signal is probably more prep work for all the work to be done north of Wallace Ave. It will likely replace the present CP diamond signal
just south of Dupont. Moving it south of Wallace will allow them to move track around without having to move the signal every time the track has to be shifted

Absolutely agreed, save for "It will likely replace the present CP diamond signal just south of Dupont." Then why would it be dropped at Wallace?

But of course, they're not going to lift the present track until a new one is put in, and voila...two tracks. And then further vacillation on the flyover.

 

[sctech68]

They would replace the signal south of Dupont with a new one south of Wallace. " Moving it south of Wallace will allow them to move track
around without having to move the signal every time the track has to be shifted. "

 

[torontocolin]

I don't agree with everything the Davenport community has demanded, but they did get a deal from ML. A deal ought to be a deal. Remember, the ML folks are the people who will be building the next generation of subways. If their word means nothing, and they can skate away from this one, good luck with consultation and community input to those projects. This is all about getting ML to make firm commitments and then follow through on them. That far overshadows any NIMBYism aspects of this little exchange.

This is exactly right. If Metrolinx is going to effectively be the sole builder of transit in the GTA then they need to be trusted to follow through on their promises. The businesses on Eglinton and Finch need to trust that they will receive the support they're promised during LRT construction. The communities affected by the DRL/Ontario line construction need to trust that the promised stations in their neighbourhoods will actually be built. And this won't be the last flyover Metrolinx needs to build, and the next community will be paying attention. Whether you believe the deal that was made was good or not in this instance, it's critical that Metrolinx be held to it.

 

[steveintoronto]

They would replace the signal south of Dupont with a new one south of Wallace. " Moving it south of Wallace will allow them to move track
around without having to move the signal every time the track has to be shifted. "

In the event, when I was by there just after noon, the signal was gone, and HiRailer tracks were on the pavement adjacent.

 

[crs1026]

^Hard to be absolutely sure from the picture, but it looks like the new mast has a single signal head with three coloured lights. That would most likely be a replacement for signal 41, a northbound block signal just north of Bloor Street. If it were for the signal at the CP diamond governing northbound moves, it would have two heads.

CTC was installed on the line in the 1980's, not the 1960's. Until then, there were train order offices at Parkdale and at Snider, and the line was dark territory. There was always signalling for the diamond with CP.

I'm sure we will see just about everything moved around once construction gets started. I wonder what the timing of the announcement of the contract will be. The RFP was posted in April 2018 so there must be a successful bidder selected by now.

- Paul

Edit: The RFP was posted last April, but didn't close until Feb 2019. See here

 

[steveintoronto]

Edit: The RFP was posted last April, but didn't close until Feb 2019. See here

References I accessed earlier stated "End of Spring" for 'selecting a successful proponent'. It's non-binding, albeit there might be grounds to file for costs entailed if QP continues as they are.

 

[smallspy]

CTC was installed on the line in the 1980's, not the 1960's. Until then, there were train order offices at Parkdale and at Snider, and the line was dark territory. There was always signalling for the diamond with CP.

- Paul

I wasn't around back then to witness it first-hand, but this doesn't jive with both published reports stating that the line (from Parkdale to Concord) was CTC'd and upgraded during the construction of the Toronto Freight Bypass project, nor with the memories of one of my co-workers..

You are normally not wrong about these things Paul, so I'm very open to being proved wrong. But your information doesn't happen to match with the information that is already out there.

Dan

 

[crs1026]

I wasn't around back then to witness it first-hand, but this doesn't jive with both published reports stating that the line (from Parkdale to Concord) was CTC'd and upgraded during the construction of the Toronto Freight Bypass project, nor with the memories of one of my co-workers..

You are normally not wrong about these things Paul, so I'm very open to being proved wrong. But your information doesn't happen to match with the information that is already out there.

Dan

I was going from memory, because I’m getting out of shape enough that wrestling the boxes in my attic to find stuff is getting painful ;-) But since you ask.....

What I could find close to the top of the pile - CN employees timetable April 30 1978 shows Newmarket Sub as ABS Parkdale to St Clair, CTC Snider South to Snider North. IIRC it was the transition from VIA to GO, along with the transition from timetable/trainorder dispatching to radio based MBS/OCS that triggered CTC being installed on the urbanl portion of the Newmarket Sub. Which corresponds to my dusty memory of seeing the signals reconfigured wjile taking the streetcar to work in the early 80’s.

There are lots of pix on line showing train orders being handed to the old CN/VIA Barrie commuter train at Parkdale. I actually have such train orders, and recall riding passngr trains that met other trains by train order at the old Airbase siding.

CN ETT for Nov 1 1993 confirms CTC in place, so that pegs the date as later than 78 and earlier than 93.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

That would most likely be a replacement for signal 41, a northbound block signal just north of Bloor Street. If it were for the signal at the CP diamond governing northbound moves, it would have two heads.

This is an aspect from the Google published 360 degree pan shot of that signal. Accessing the link allows viewing up and down the track from that point.

I note it's by "Vic ". I wonder if that's @vic on this site?

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6579...no-pi-0-ya101.168274-ro-0-fo100!7i5248!8i2624

 

[smallspy]

I was going from memory, because I’m getting out of shape enough that wrestling the boxes in my attic to find stuff is getting painful ;-) But since you ask.....

What I could find close to the top of the pile - CN employees timetable April 30 1978 shows Newmarket Sub as ABS Parkdale to St Clair, CTC Snider South to Snider North. IIRC it was the transition from VIA to GO, along with the transition from timetable/trainorder dispatching to radio based MBS/OCS that triggered CTC being installed on the urbanl portion of the Newmarket Sub. Which corresponds to my dusty memory of seeing the signals reconfigured wjile taking the streetcar to work in the early 80’s.

There are lots of pix on line showing train orders being handed to the old CN/VIA Barrie commuter train at Parkdale. I actually have such train orders, and recall riding passngr trains that met other trains by train order at the old Airbase siding.

CN ETT for Nov 1 1993 confirms CTC in place, so that pegs the date as later than 78 and earlier than 93.

- Paul

This is why I posed the question. Thanks for setting me straight.

Which now raises a new question - these CN dockuments talk about CTC'ing the Newmarket Sub as a means to provide an alternate method of going from north to south (and vice-versa) in the event of an emergency. When and why did these plans change?

Dan

 

[crs1026]

This is why I posed the question. Thanks for setting me straight.

Which now raises a new question - these CN dockuments talk about CTC'ing the Newmarket Sub as a means to provide an alternate method of going from north to south (and vice-versa) in the event of an emergency. When and why did these plans change?

Dan

You mean, when did CN give up the desire for an alternate route from Washago to Toronto?

I don't have a definitive answer, but I would blame Paul Tellier and privatisation. Tellier arrived at CN in 1992, privatisation happened in 1995. The line north of Barrie was abandoned in November 1996. The Newmarket would have been looked at in a different light as CN prepared for the IPO, I suspect....the whole trouble with pre privatised CN is that it was perpetually overcapitalized.

As to why the line was never CTC'd, I suspect that while there may have been a plan, the capital expenditure just never got to the top of the priority list. CN did use the Newmarket for detours right up until the end (sorry, I don't have notes of exact instances, but I do recall those occasions going around the grapevine), but the number of times that was needed, and the line's having too little traffic to make CTC economic, made CTC a bit of a pipe dream. When there were detours, they tended to be unidirectional.

With today's long trains and added traffic, if that route were still available, I bet CN would want to run directionally. As trains have lengthened, the sidings on the Bala Sub are inadequate.

- Paul

 

[vic]

This is an aspect from the Google published 360 degree pan shot of that signal. Accessing the link allows viewing up and down the track from that point.

I note it's by "Vic ". I wonder if that's @vic on this site?

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6579295,-79.4453359,3a,50.5y,296.85h,95.76t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipO0_yNftiC6MU895hqRwBbsYdAr7Jv-W4ZUGdQ6!2e10!3e11!6shttps://lh5.googleusercontent.com/p/AF1QipO0_yNftiC6MU895hqRwBbsYdAr7Jv-W4ZUGdQ6=w203-h100-k-no-pi-0-ya101.168274-ro-0-fo100!7i5248!8i2624

Ummm...ah..no. I've never trespassed on the tracks to take photos.

 

[lenaitch]

You mean, when did CN give up the desire for an alternate route from Washago to Toronto?

I don't have a definitive answer, but I would blame Paul Tellier and privatisation. Tellier arrived at CN in 1992, privatisation happened in 1995. The line north of Barrie was abandoned in November 1996. The Newmarket would have been looked at in a different light as CN prepared for the IPO, I suspect....the whole trouble with pre privatised CN is that it was perpetually overcapitalized.

As to why the line was never CTC'd, I suspect that while there may have been a plan, the capital expenditure just never got to the top of the priority list. CN did use the Newmarket for detours right up until the end (sorry, I don't have notes of exact instances, but I do recall those occasions going around the grapevine), but the number of times that was needed, and the line's having too little traffic to make CTC economic, made CTC a bit of a pipe dream. When there were detours, they tended to be unidirectional.

With today's long trains and added traffic, if that route were still available, I bet CN would want to run directionally. As trains have lengthened, the sidings on the Bala Sub are inadequate.

- Paul

With privatization, companies no longer operate in the public interest but, rather, their shareholder's interest. The new private CN had two routes coming from and going to the same place. Neither had significant enroute revenue (Newmarket connected to the Midland Sub/ but the traffic was getting pretty minimal) and I suppose Bala was faster and under CTC. As you have mentioned earlier, railways run on razor tight margins and it would have made perfect business sense to unload one of the routes. The need for redundancy potential and its ongoing maintenance and ownership costs is measured against temporarily unhappy disrupted customers and the ability to re-route either on CP or through the US. Any form of 'public interest' clause in the legislation, operating regs, etc. to keep rail in certain parts of the country would have to be balanced (i.e. apply equally to CP) and be accompanied by public money. The same arguments happened when CP applied to abandon their Chalk River Sub. and, to a lesser degree, the CN Beachburg Sub., both in the Ottawa Valley.