News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6K     0 

innsertnamehere said:
The Canadian standard is 30 metres from edge of the property line shared with the rail corridor, with caveats:

1. Can be reduced by a crash wall (typically by 5m)
2. Can be measured horizontally and vertically
3. "low occupancy space" can be constructed within these areas - i.e. parking, storage areas, etc.


View attachment 686905


This is the full guideline for details. There are further nuances to it than that, but that's the general idea.

In the case of 6 Dawes, they built a crash wall, which reduced it to 25 metres, then filled that 25 metre area basically entirely with low-occupancy space (i.e. parking) until they got 25 metres up vertically, where the units start.
Click to expand...
A key piece here is that it is a guideline, not a hard and fast rule. With the proper negotiation and other mitigating factors it can be reduced. Also, one silly thing about this standard is that it's designed for freight trains. The standard should in practice be reduced on passenger-only lines.
 
SaugeenJunction said:
A key piece here is that it is a guideline, not a hard and fast rule. With the proper negotiation and other mitigating factors it can be reduced. Also, one silly thing about this standard is that it's designed for freight trains. The standard should in practice be reduced on passenger-only lines.
Click to expand...
Yes. And alas from my experience, Metrolinx likes to hold pretty close to the standard in negotiations, as silly and overly stringent as they are.

In this case a 25m setback was applied because they did provide the crash wall:

1760028389623.png


However Metrolinx did seem to allow a bit of flexibility on the definition of "low occupancy uses", with building lobbies, retail, amenity areas, and a small area of the daycare actually being located within the setback. No residential units are located within it.
 
Speaking of Danforth station, there's a petition to get them to add a walkway from the north platform, along the west-side of Main Street to Stephenson Avenue. Which is surprisingly lacking, I realized when I walked in that way once.

www.openpetition.org

Safer Access to Danforth GO — Build a Sidewalk Path from Stephenson Ave - Online petition

Residents accessing the Danforth GO Station from Stephenson Avenue face unsafe conditions every day. The only current access involves unlit stairs and crossing busy traffic without a safe pedestrian crossing nearby. This creates serious risks for commuters, families, seniors, and anyone...
www.openpetition.org www.openpetition.org

The last information session for the station early works is tonight (4 pm to 8 pm). I was there a couple of weeks ago - they were a bit cagey about the station details, though they did say there was a lot of unhappiness at closing the tunnel for 2 years for construction (which does seem unnecessary, given how they've mostly kept the tunnel open at Exhibition station despite MUCH more extensive construction.

They did hint that they were considering a kiss-and-ride at the foot of Dawes Road (opening up a new entrance to the platform there). And made me aware of the petition.
 
innsertnamehere said:
The Canadian standard is 30 metres from edge of the property line shared with the rail corridor, with caveats:

1. Can be reduced by a crash wall (typically by 5m)
2. Can be measured horizontally and vertically
3. "low occupancy space" can be constructed within these areas - i.e. parking, storage areas, etc.


View attachment 686905


This is the full guideline for details. There are further nuances to it than that, but that's the general idea.

In the case of 6 Dawes, they built a crash wall, which reduced it to 25 metres, then filled that 25 metre area basically entirely with low-occupancy space (i.e. parking) until they got 25 metres up vertically, where the units start.
Click to expand...
ANX, Bianca, 500 Dupont, The Dupont, Fuze / Fuze 2, The Dimond, and The Spoke all feature this set up as well. Funny enough, part of the reasons 328 Dupont, in its original form, failed at OMB was because it didn't follow this format.
 
As @drum118 very helpfully posted in the MiWay thread, Mississauga's transit and road infrastructure plan is coming to city council next week. Of note, Mississauga estimates its share of the cost for 5 grade separations on Lakeshore West at $194 million (2024 dollars). The figure is listed in the city's medium to long-term capital expenditure estimates.

The five roads Mississauga wants grade separated are Clarkson Rd, Lorne Park Rd, Stavebank Rd, Ogden Ave and Haig Blvd. I think these grade separations have been discussed before, but I think the $194 million figure is new.

I don't know what the total cost would be, but if they follow the 50-50 cost split the province used for Burloak Dr (before overruns), that would put the total cost at $388 million. $388 million seems a bit low to me for 5 grade separations, so I'm guessing the city wants to pay less than 50% of the costs.
 
Last edited:
Sauga89 said:
As @drum118 very helpfully posted in the MiWay thread, Mississauga's transit and road infrastructure plan is coming to city council next week. Of note, Mississauga estimates its share of the cost for 5 grade separations on Lakeshore West at $194 million (2024 dollars). The figure is listed in the city's medium to long-term capital expenditure estimates.

The five roads Mississauga wants grade separated are Clarkson Rd, Lorne Park Rd, Stavebank Rd, Ogden Ave and Haig Blvd. I think these grade separations have been discussed before, but I think the $194 million figure is new.

I don't know what the total cost would be, but if they follow the 50-50 cost split the province used for Burloak Dr (before overruns), that would put the total cost at $388 million. $388 million seems a bit low to me for 5 grade separations, so I'm guessing the city wants to pay less than 50% of the costs.
Click to expand...
All those grade separations other than Stavebank Rd will be very expensive to do it. Expropriating will happen for a fair number of properties as well relocate a few roads or close them due to been too close to the tracks now. Long over due.

Of course the city doen't want to do a 50-50 spilt and prefer to see 20% of the cost of doing them or less. Lorne Park Rd will be the expensive one,

The most expensive one for the city will be the Mississauga Rd one thatr will be well over $50 million to do with major expropriating and relocating roads.
 
The benefit of those LSW grade separations flows not only to Mississauga but also to Halton, Hamilton, and Niagara. Grade separating that line is a necessary prerequisite to running more trains all the way to Niagara. So the case for the Province covering a good portion of the costs is there.

Mississauga's looming problem is that increased service on the Milton line demands as many, if not more, grade separations - and a couple of those will be tricky also. Taken together, that's a lot of investment for a single municipality to fund in a short time, and again the benefits flow down the line and not just to Mississauga itself.

But, hey, Ford feels that municipalities are just greedy tax grabbers and their funding is excessive.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
Sauga89 said:
The five roads Mississauga wants grade separated are Clarkson Rd, Lorne Park Rd, Stavebank Rd, Ogden Ave and Haig Blvd. I think these grade separations have been discussed before, but I think the $194 million figure is new.

I don't know what the total cost would be, but if they follow the 50-50 cost split the province used for Burloak Dr (before overruns), that would put the total cost at $388 million. $388 million seems a bit low to me for 5 grade separations, so I'm guessing the city wants to pay less than 50% of the costs.
Click to expand...

That would be great, and would leave only a few in Oakville and Mississauga (the only others I think may be useful would be at Fourth Line and Kerr... the rest seem like very low volume roads that could probably be closed off on both sides of the tracks based on my observations riding the train, though I'm sure there would still be a handful of complaints)
 
crs1026 said:
The benefit of those LSW grade separations flows not only to Mississauga but also to Halton, Hamilton, and Niagara. Grade separating that line is a necessary prerequisite to running more trains all the way to Niagara. So the case for the Province covering a good portion of the costs is there.

Mississauga's looming problem is that increased service on the Milton line demands as many, if not more, grade separations - and a couple of those will be tricky also. Taken together, that's a lot of investment for a single municipality to fund in a short time, and again the benefits flow down the line and not just to Mississauga itself.

But, hey, Ford feels that municipalities are just greedy tax grabbers and their funding is excessive.

- Paul
Click to expand...
Who will benifit from those grade seperations well be GO Transit Riders and VIA Rail as the amount of traffic for those crerrent crossing is very light. To encourage drivers within all those regions to use GO let alone VIA, you need high quality of service and speed for the LSW.

Those who will benefit from the Milton grade separtion will be GO Transit riders and CPKC since this is CPKC mainline to/from the US. It has way more current traffic crossing those crossing that are affected by trains crossing those crossing and more so once all day service comes to that line. Doing grade separtion on that line will be a lot more expensive than the LSW for Mississauga.

There is still one garde crossing in Mississauga for the Kitchener Line that could be easy be close off to traffic but a major issue for pedestrians as its a real long walk to get to one side of the tracks with ML not wanting to put in a tunnel if the road is close for the pedestrians.. Bramption is dealing with one grade seperation now but has a major issue dealing if 2 crossing today that benefits GO Transit Riders, VIA Rail and CN since this is CN Mainline to/from the US as well parts of southern Ontario.

It is a lot to ask municipalities to fund these grade seperations when it will provide next to no improvement for the crossing to a lot depending on the road and the line that will benefit those who use that ine in the first place.

Mississauga perfer others pickup the cost regardless what it is in the first place than pay for it even though its their responsibility to do so in the first place.
 
One can make the argument that the payback for municipalities is the growth and hence added taxation revenue resulting from transit. The problem is that this revenue comes in later years as development happens, and municipalities do not have the ability to borrow to bridge the gap.
Maybe we should be looking for some form of new debentures or bonds to enable municipalities to raise capital for such investments.
There is still the issue of coordinating these investments along rail lines that span multiple municipalities. This argues for making the Province the major player for funding and execution.

- Paul
 
reaperexpress said:
Crazy that they're only building a single track and platform on a line where construction is currently underway to continuously double-track the line from Union to Aurora.
Click to expand...
Looking at the track level render, it looks like they are building another shelter on the other side of the tracks to accommodate double tracking at a future date. Which may be one day. Probably.
 
Sauga89 said:
As @drum118 very helpfully posted in the MiWay thread, Mississauga's transit and road infrastructure plan is coming to city council next week. Of note, Mississauga estimates its share of the cost for 5 grade separations on Lakeshore West at $194 million (2024 dollars). The figure is listed in the city's medium to long-term capital expenditure estimates.

The five roads Mississauga wants grade separated are Clarkson Rd, Lorne Park Rd, Stavebank Rd, Ogden Ave and Haig Blvd. I think these grade separations have been discussed before, but I think the $194 million figure is new.

I don't know what the total cost would be, but if they follow the 50-50 cost split the province used for Burloak Dr (before overruns), that would put the total cost at $388 million. $388 million seems a bit low to me for 5 grade separations, so I'm guessing the city wants to pay less than 50% of the costs.
Click to expand...
So the crossings other than Clarkson, Lorne Park, Stavebank, Ogden and Haig would be closed, presumably?

I see Revus Ave. and Alexandra Ave. nearby, specifically.
 
reaperexpress said:
Crazy that they're only building a single track and platform on a line where construction is currently underway to continuously double-track the line from Union to Aurora.
Click to expand...

They have pretty much completed the subgrade and noise walls for double tracking from Davenport all the way north to Steeles.

It's somewhere between ominous and outrageous how they are maintaining radio silence on actually completing the double track.

Sure looks like the plan is on hold.

- Paul
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top