The City of Toronto has three planning studies underway that will affect Liberty Village, and they will hold a combined open house on March 1 for the next stage of the public consultation.
Dufferin Street Bridges
The south end of Dufferin Street has two bridges — one over the rail corridor, and one over the Gardiner Expressway. Both are in need of replacement, and future plans require a new design. This project had its first meeting last year, and now the City is back to discuss alternative schemes.
Projects related to this include expansion of the GO Lake Shore corridor, provision of clearance for electrification and connection of the streetcar system from Exhibition (East) Loop west to Dufferin. The streetcar extension is part of the proposed Waterfront West LRT line, although it is far from clear whether any of the alignments shown on the drawings for the bridge project would actually be built. The WWLRT is not exactly at the top of anyone’s list of transit projects, but whatever is decided for the new Dufferin bridges may preclude some of the WWLRT options.
New King-Liberty Pedestrian/Cyclist Link
The Georgetown rail corridor creates a long barrier between Strachan Avenue and the west end of the King Street underpass at Atlantic Avenue. With the redevelopment of lands to the north, current and future plans for lands to the south, this barrier isolates the two neighbourhoods from each other. Some crossings are now made illegally, but plans to increase the number of active tracks and the frequency of GO service will make this much more dangerous.
At the first open house last year, various alternatives were presented, and two of these were carried forward for detailed study. The results will presented at the March 1 open house.
Liberty Village New Street
A new street is proposed along the south edge of Liberty Village from just west of Strachan Avenue to Dufferin Street. This road would occupy what was originally planned to be the Front Street Extension, but as a purely local street.
The March 1 meeting will launch this project for comment.
Steve Munro 
It’s hard to imagine where that extra street would go — there’s not a lot of space between the buildings and warehouses at the foot of Atlantic Ave, Jefferson, Fraser, etc. and the train tracks — and the space that is there is being cleared for what looks like an expansion of the westbound GO platform at Exhibition.
LikeLike
So why does a new street require an Environmental Assessment? How do they get around this in Mississauga and York Region (with all those new subdivisions they’d be dealing with 100s of EAs every year)?
Steve: If you’re building a new street in a new subdivision, you don’t need an EA. If you’re making changes to an existing street, on the other hand …
LikeLike
There’s also the Strachan Ave grade separation playing a role in that. The barrier may have been traversable had the original planning from a decade or so ago that envisioned a new GO station just south of King, but the grade separation at Strachan takes that possibility off the table as the proposed grades are impossible for a station to be located there now. This same grade separation also makes illegal crossings not only more dangerous, but in many places would be untraversable; you may be able to get in to the corridor, but getting out would be a problem with concrete retaining walls blocking your exit. If a station in or around this community is going to materialize, it would probably have to be just west of the Bathurst bridge, as the curve north of King is also inappropriate for a station. Given that the planning went ahead on the assumption of a station in the area materializing, I think alternative locations for such should continue to be pursued.
LikeLike
I hope they accommodate the clearance requirements of the electrification catenary when the bridges and grade separation projects are designed.
The last thing we need is brand new construction that doesn’t fit the necessary clearances foe electrification to stand as a reason why that shouldn’t proceed.
LikeLike
Alternative 3 seems to be a Front St extension kind of plan, designed more for highway on flow, off flow traffic. I would prefer to see Alternative 1 implemented, with Dufferin St extended straight down to Lakeshore Blvd as shown on the map as a new road and entrance/exit on pg14 of EX Place Structure Plan 2010.
Also since the Liberty Village New Road probably wasn’t on the cards when WWLRT route was planned, wouldn’t it make more sense for the LRT to swing north (under the railway via a portal) to the new road, as that would serve Liberty village much better, and can temporarily use the existing Dufferin Loop as a turnback point.
Steve: Taking the WWLRT under the railway would be tricky and expensive, and would be complicated by the fact that the rail corridor itself will be partly depressed to get rid of most of the grade crossings at Strachan (a few surface tracks will be retained for the infrequent freight movements that can’t handle the grade on the approaches). It’s one of those “I like the idea, but …” situations.
As a disclosure, I live in the neighbourhood at Waterpark City, and would love to see the Bremner LRT part of the WWLRT implemented soon as possible, post-Ford.
Steve, I think you have previously mentioned possible condo development within the EX Place. Are there reports online, with any info? I personally would prefer ExPlace to remain non-residential. It could be developed more into an year around attraction , if more clubs and restaurants, casinos (a casino already exists) were allowed to operate there, with less restrictions.
Steve: Not condos, but there definitely will be a hotel. What happens with future developments at that site will depend a lot on the mood of the city government.
Adam Vaughan etc seem intent on chasing clubs out of the condofied downtown core, wouldn’t ExPlace serve as a safe haven in the future.
Steve: The clubs depend on the supply of cheap old warehouse space and the fact that they’re all close together. Somehow I don’t think that the buildings at the CNE (or Ontario Place) would qualify or be available.
LikeLike
When I last spoke to Metrolinx staff on the construction management of this project, I asked about that track as it wasn’t shown in the design materials they brought with them, and they said that no tracks are being left at grade. They are sinking all tracks now, they say. Any freight trains coming through here will have to be short enough to safely negotiate a 2% grade.
LikeLike
Karl Junkin said: “Any freight trains coming through here will have to be short enough to safely negotiate a 2% grade.”
Someone better tell CP rail that before they have to deal with another derailment north or east of the city.
LikeLike
“Any freight trains coming through here will have to be short enough to safely negotiate a 2% grade.” Does VIA Canadian fit that description? I guess it must when it goes out East right?
LikeLike
Information on the CP freight tracks. It is not clear to me that Karl J is correct as this document which was issued recently, says “CP rail is not part of the tunnel”.
Steve: The linked document refers to the tunnel in Weston, not the Strachan Avenue crossing.
LikeLike
2% grades aren’t new, they’re just not preferred (but then, anything above 0.4% isn’t “preferred”). It’s not really an issue for VIA just like it’s not really an issue for GO, and if it really is a problem for CP, they can negotiate with CN and GO to come in via the Hamilton and Oakville subdivisions (a negotiation arrangement that CP and CN are already familiar with as CP sometimes cuts across Oakville between the Hamilton and Canpa subdivisions when they’ve got an urgent shipment).
LikeLike
Karl Junkin said: “It’s not really an issue for VIA just like it’s not really an issue for GO, and if it really is a problem for CP, they can negotiate with CN and GO to come in via the Hamilton and Oakville subdivisions (a negotiation arrangement that CP and CN are already familiar with as CP sometimes cuts across Oakville between the Hamilton and Canpa subdivisions when they’ve got an urgent shipment).”
Except that the running rights agreement on the Oakville sub between CP and CN was terminated a few years ago.
LikeLike
“Except that the running rights agreement on the Oakville sub between CP and CN was terminated a few years ago.”
Well that’s just too bad for CP. But then again, there’s not much business left in the portlands for the railways anyway. Back when I worked for CP, business was so slow that they were contemplating abolishing the job that worked down there altogether. It almost wasn’t worth sending out a train with a couple of cars once or twice a week. They may well canceled it by now, since the only freights I ever see on the Lakeshore these days are CNR’s. In any case, by the time the grade separation is completed there may well be nothing left to switch out down there anyhow with all the future waterfront development that’s coming.
LikeLike
Drew, it has nothing to do with switching. You know that CN and CP have an agreement between them that one will offer whatever spare capacity is available on their lines in the event that the other has a derailment. The problem with that is that most of CN’s spare capacity in Toronto are the lines that lead to Union station. As a result, CP has a vested interest in ensuring the grade at Strachan is not too steep.
Likewise, in the event of a derailment that blocks the York sub, CN will reroute their traffic via Union. That is why they will also object to excessive grades at Strachan.
The end result is that the grade at Strachan will probably have to be no worse than the Kingston Sub grade between the Don river and Guildwood (which may be close to 2% in any event since I’m not sure what it is) to get approval from both railroads. However, using a “that’s too bad” mentality will only result in the project getting dragged through the courts by both railroads.
LikeLike
@Nick L: I wasn’t aware of that. Since then, CN let GO purchase the Oakville Sub east of the Canpa Sub, so who knows what kinds of agreements are on the table now?
At any rate, if the trains are short it won’t be too much of an issue.
LikeLike
Wait, I’m confused now, the GO Oakville Sub is not affected by the project in question, the subdivisions affected are GO Galt, GO Weston, and GO Newmarket. CN/GO Oakville would continue to be available at a gentler grade for the mainline freight railroads if a 2% is problematic for them. This project has been in play for 2 years now, and the freight railroads certainly must be aware of this since GO/Metrolinx has a legal obligation to consult with them.
While running rights agreements still exist despite the change in ownership, GO owns all western accesses to the Union Station Rail Corridor now.
LikeLike
@Karl Junkin: remember that the York Sub runs from Pickering to MacMillan Yard. So I was referring to trains terminating/originating from MacMillan Yard that travel north and east of the city. In those instances, depending on where the derailment occurred, trains would travel south along the Newmarket sub, onto the Weston sub, past Union and up along the Bala sub or continue east along the Kingston sub.
And with regards to the consultations, there have been enough screw ups with public works projects in this province during its long history due to someone forgetting to ask a question to warrant asking if someone has double checked.
(And I can’t help but wonder if all this usage of the short form of subdivision is making Steve hungry)
Steve: I’m not going to bite on that one.
LikeLike
@Nick. L: There’s just one problem. There wouldn’t be any reason for CP to use the southern part of the Weston sub in the event of a derailment, because there no longer exists any mainline connection to CP tracks east of Union.
The one connection that existed via CP’s Belleville Sub Don River branch was removed a few years back. The turnouts and switches are no longer in place and the track is essentially condemned.
The next nearest connection is in Oshawa and that’s only yard trackage, a mainline freight wouldn’t be able to effectively use it. You’d have to go a hundred miles or so beyond that for a connection that a mainline freight could use. Which begs the question, has CP ever used CN’s Kingston sub during a previous derailment?
Also take note that as of March 31 2011, the Kingston subdivision up to Durham jct will be transferred to GO transit. So would the provisions for CP to use CN trackage still be valid if the it is no longer CN trackage? It would be interesting to see the contract…
LikeLike
With GO owning most of the tracks that go into and through Union Station and with almost no freights operating along those tracks where would CN or CP get qualified crews to act as pilots for diversions through those areas? I remember a Saturday when CN had a dimensional load shift on a train waiting at the passing siding in Milton that effectively blocked both tracks of the Halton Sub. They had four east bound trains held at Burlington while trying to find qualified engineers or conductors to take the trains across the Oakville sub and up the Bala sub. Worrying about emergency diversions and if they are possible is an interesting, but meaningless, exercise.
LikeLike
drew said: “There’s just one problem. There wouldn’t be any reason for CP to use the southern part of the Weston sub in the event of a derailment, because there no longer exists any mainline connection to CP tracks east of Union.”
I’m just going to let some pictures illustrate the reality on the ground.
This was taken at Danforth GO station during the Oshawa derailment back in 2009.
This was taken from the Queen street bridge during the recent derailment up near Buckskin Ontario. (not my photo)
Now, the only way that the train could reach the location in the first photo or realistically return back to CP tracks in the second is via the GO Galt sub. As a result, you can see that CP rail has an interest in ensuring that they can still run freight traffic along the GO Galt sub and through the Union station rail corridor in the event they need to reroute traffic around a derailment regardless of the status of the Don branch.
LikeLike
Ok so that answers a question I was asking, CP trains have used the Kingston sub in emergency situations. However the grade on the Kingston sub is no where near 2%. Between the Don river (mile 332.4) and its highest point at mile 324.4(8 miles), the grade changes from 265ft above sea level to 555ft. That’s a difference of 290ft over 42,240ft (= 8 miles), which is less than a 1% grade. The steepest incline on the sub is between mile 329.0 and 328.6, a short stretch of 2100 where the elevation drops 22ft, for a grade just over 1%.
Irregardless of CP’s position, GO is going ahead with a 2% grade at Strachan, as well at West Toronto. Its been suggested that CP can’t run one a typical mainline freight train over such a grade.
There is no reason to believe that CP wasn’t consulted during the planning stages for either project. This leads me to believe that CP did not object to such a grade because either A) they no longer plan on using the line i.e. have found alternative routes one reason for which as Robert stated is the need for pilots and the lack there of. Or B) they are willing to deal with the grade by applying certain measures i.e. adding addition units(locomotives) to a consist or shortening any trains which would need to be routed through the line.
My point is that as things stand there is no need to appease CPR because the project is moving forward as is. Once the grade separations are completed you likely won’t be seeing many, if any CP trains being routed that way even in the case of a major derailment.
All this is notwithstanding the fact that most of the lines leading to Union station are no longer under CN ownership and withing a few years GO will likely own all of them. As I stated before as of March 31 the Kingston sub will be transferred to GO which leaves only the Bala sub in CN’s hands. And while CN may have had spare capacity on those lines in the past, GO will most certainly not in the future once all day and increased rush hour service begins on these lines.
LikeLike
I’m no railway expert but one important factor is the length of the 2% grade. If the 2% grade only affects a small part of a very long freight train, it is much less of a problem then one that affects the entire length. In this case I think there would be both an up and a down grade, so over a long freight train, they would cancel each other out. A high grade is much less of a problem for a short freight train or passenger trains which have a much better power to weight ratio.
LikeLike
Regrettably I have been busy and have missed this, and other things.
There is no real need for even a local Front St. – how many millions might this cost? If it were meant for transit, that would be ok to look at. But just for cars?
LikeLike