[chrisw]

Well, I'm excited to see the shift with OnCorr.

 

[Sunnyside]

They are doing very many things, but piecemeal and without defined end points or even intermediate points. So, lots of major investments are made but tjhen some missing piece prevents ML from leveraging these investments and delivering better transportation. The West Highland Creek bridge is one example, the 401/409 tunnels and the half-finished fourth track through Weston are good examples. Obviously some things have to happen early and then wait for other things, but ML is glaringly bad at staging and executing work in a deliberate manner.



I would not exlude ML from the microscope here. One simple example is Rule 42 flagging - every piece of work performed at trackside requires a Rule 42 foreman (basically a watch person and movement controller) to protect workers from moving trains and vv. When work is cancelled on short notice, the Rule 42 flag protection can't be cancelled as it has been embedded in the train operations plan for the day....., and so a foreman sits in a truck with no work to perform. Similarly, if the flagging is arranged for less than a full day's tasks, there is waste. The flagging is a contracted service so a contractor bills for the no-show date, with markup no doubt. I wonder what the A-G would say if they inquired into the volume of non-productive flagging and other costs related to cancelled or deferred work windows and one-of tasks. The ML folks that talk to me off the record say there is huge wastefulness because work is scheduled but in the end does not proceed as intended. The setup and site prep costs of cancelled work may be significant.

A second area that I see is the extreme rigour in using jersey barriers and elaborate measures to separate work from active rail lines. I am very keen to see safe work sites, but these measures are beccoming so elaborate I feel it's reasonable to ask if ML has reached overkill. I don't know if ML requires these measures or if contractors insist on them.... or how much is required by law....and again I am all for erring on the side of safety. But as the barriers far exceed how work was done even a few years ago, one has to ask why the change. Site prep generally seems to go on for ever on ML sites.

- Paul

I gather then that a large portion of the issue is that Metrolinx is not remotely concerned with controlling costs. I’d go as far to say it’s like its a fact of life.

Not to sound like a broken record, but at best it reads like Metrolinx doesn’t know what it’s doing in prioritization terms. At worst, they are just signing off on whatever is put infront of them without regard for what those things actually are. Then, they stack on an unrealistic (& likely consultant created) ‘best practice’ standard of care— which is then enforced at their expense.

In writing this, it makes me wonder if Metrolinx tolerates these costs because it hasn’t internalized them; they didn’t decide this foreman’s job was $100,000, they just asked for the work to be done.

 

[TwinHuey]

October 17

Rouge River Bridge as seen from Rouge National Urban Park.

November 2023

Rehabilitation work was completed in 2022. The 120 yr old bridge has been designated as a Provincial Heritage Property.

Rehabilitation work on the Rouge River Bridge comes to a close

Historic Rouge River Bridge gets major facelift. Check out the restored provincial heritage property

www.metrolinx.com

Edit - We cycle the Waterfront Trail through here often and on today's ride I stopped to take some non drone photos of this amazing bridge.

 

[Metroscapes]

October 17

Rouge River Bridge as seen from Rouge National Urban Park.

View attachment 605203

November 2023
View attachment 605204
View attachment 605205

Rehabilitation work was completed in 2022. The120 yr old bridge has been designated as a Provincial Heritage Property.

Rehabilitation work on the Rouge River Bridge comes to a close

Historic Rouge River Bridge gets major facelift. Check out the restored provincial heritage property

www.metrolinx.com

And yet it does not look future-proofed for a third or fourth track.

 

[lenaitch]

A second area that I see is the extreme rigour in using jersey barriers and elaborate measures to separate work from active rail lines. I am very keen to see safe work sites, but these measures are beccoming so elaborate I feel it's reasonable to ask if ML has reached overkill. I don't know if ML requires these measures or if contractors insist on them.... or how much is required by law....and again I am all for erring on the side of safety. But as the barriers far exceed how work was done even a few years ago, one has to ask why the change. Site prep generally seems to go on for ever on ML sites.

I don't know how prescriptive federal or provincial workplace regulations are, but every player is very risk-averse these days. I think back to the days of working on the 400-series highways in the GTA, where once we used to work behind cones and a maybe a blocking car, now it is lane closures and barriers trucks.

 

[Sunnyside]

I don't know how prescriptive federal or provincial workplace regulations are, but every player is very risk-averse these days. I think back to the days of working on the 400-series highways in the GTA, where once we used to work behind cones and a maybe a blocking car, now it is lane closures and barriers trucks.

Its because of the MTO and our proficiency with building roads that I start to think that safety regulations aren’t the lowest hanging fruit. At least, it’s hard for me to square that when it affects both equally yet the costs differ so much. We haven’t built a highway in a long time, mind you, but we do continuously expand them. I wonder how much better the MTO is at controlling costs in general- they seem to know how to build a highway, but the jury’s still out if Metrolinx can build rail systems.

Hence I wonder if bringing the MTO and Metrolinx closer together could help. Either on the planning/implementation side, or just leveraging infrastructure collaboration. I picture giving teeth to the MTO’s ‘Transit alternatives’ (as a real option) by putting Metrolinx in the same room from the outset to execute said transit, with the oversight of a more well-equipped agency. But take that as my uninformed opinion.

 

[crs1026]

Its because of the MTO and our proficiency with building roads that I start to think that safety regulations aren’t the lowest hanging fruit. At least, it’s hard for me to square that when it affects both equally yet the costs differ so much. We haven’t built a highway in a long time, mind you, but we do continuously expand them. I wonder how much better the MTO is at controlling costs in general- they seem to know how to build a highway, but the jury’s still out if Metrolinx can build rail systems.

Hence I wonder if bringing the MTO and Metrolinx closer together could help. Either on the planning/implementation side, or just leveraging infrastructure collaboration. I picture giving teeth to the MTO’s ‘Transit alternatives’ (as a real option) by putting Metrolinx in the same room from the outset to execute said transit, with the oversight of a more well-equipped agency. But take that as my uninformed opinion.

I'm not sure the two functions do construction in the same way, but there are always things people can learn from each other.

There has been a dearth of contractors (and workers) in Ontario who have the knowledge and experience on rail projects. One part of this is knowing how to build the specific product - as we've seen with LRT projects, there has been a learning curve in roadbed construction and track laying. Signals and info tech is a very different field for railway construction than anything highways require. .

A bigger part is the interface between the running railway and the construction. The rules for working around running trains are pretty elaborate and don't intersect with anything that is done when building highways. MTO may know very well how to plan and lay out barriers and pylons for a work zone, but controlling work around a live rail line is a much more minute by minute proposition governed by an exacting set of operating rules and regulations. The information and communication flows between MTO and a contractor are very different from the interface between CN/CPKC, ML, and the contractors when planning and executing work.

Similarly, procurement may be quite different. I suspect the provincial bureaucracy that does this is a lot more familiar with highway projects than railways. The process for rail seems to be byzantine, with people triple checking each step, likely out of fear of missing something (which still seems to happen anyways).

I do think ML has a basic deficiency in project planning. One wonders if MTO could teach ML a lot about that. I'm a little long in the tooth to know what tools are used these days, but a good old fashion Gantt chart sure seems to be outside ML's skill set. Maybe start there.

- Paul

 

[innsertnamehere]

Its because of the MTO and our proficiency with building roads that I start to think that safety regulations aren’t the lowest hanging fruit. At least, it’s hard for me to square that when it affects both equally yet the costs differ so much. We haven’t built a highway in a long time, mind you, but we do continuously expand them. I wonder how much better the MTO is at controlling costs in general- they seem to know how to build a highway, but the jury’s still out if Metrolinx can build rail systems.

Hence I wonder if bringing the MTO and Metrolinx closer together could help. Either on the planning/implementation side, or just leveraging infrastructure collaboration. I picture giving teeth to the MTO’s ‘Transit alternatives’ (as a real option) by putting Metrolinx in the same room from the outset to execute said transit, with the oversight of a more well-equipped agency. But take that as my uninformed opinion.

Haven't built a highway in a long time? MTO regularly builds new highways.

They opened the 407 extension to Highway 35 less than 5 years ago.

MTO has also built the 400 extension to Sudbury slowly over the last 20 years.. issues with indigenous reserves has limited progress the last few years, but it continues to chug along.

Honestly one of the biggest differences in controlling costs is that MTO (mostly) still just does traditional procurement, one contract at a time.

Metrolinx has shifted back a bit towards this model with smaller, more bite-sized contracts for the OL instead of one, single mega-contract.

Highways are ultimately also just far less complex pieces of infrastructure to build. There is a reason they are substantially cheaper per kilometre despite being far larger in footprint.

 

[Sunnyside]

Haven't built a highway in a long time? MTO regularly builds new highways.

They opened the 407 extension to Highway 35 less than 5 years ago.

MTO has also built the 400 extension to Sudbury slowly over the last 20 years.. issues with indigenous reserves has limited progress the last few years, but it continues to chug along.

Honestly one of the biggest differences in controlling costs is that MTO (mostly) still just does traditional procurement, one contract at a time.

Metrolinx has shifted back a bit towards this model with smaller, more bite-sized contracts for the OL instead of one, single mega-contract.

Highways are ultimately also just far less complex pieces of infrastructure to build. There is a reason they are substantially cheaper per kilometre despite being far larger in footprint.

Apologies, as I didn’t really keep up with what the MTO was doing then. I think it does lend something to my argument if they actually do continuously build things when saying we should emulate them, but it’s neither here nor there in light of your other points.

I’d add my basic assumption was that Metrolinx is in need of accrued expertise, that the MTO has at least some of by comparison.

Nonetheless, it seems like an ‘easy’ couple of improvements would be to:

1. not reinvent the wheel as it pertains to contracting work, and

2. keeping a continuous pipeline of work to do.

Both of these seem to be works-in-progress, and we can’t really know if one of these change (ie., no transit funding for a decade…) till the time comes.

Also, its fairly obvious building highways is easier- I just wonder if there’s something to gain in the transit sphere given that fact. Ala building concrete viaducts or greenfield alignments, especially considering how much greenfield transit Mx has thrown into RTPs. The MTO doesn’t know a thing about building a rail system, but on some level any right-of-way need to be cleared, graded, etc.

I suppose my point here is that I agree the MTO isn’t going to help at all on building an Ontario Line, but they probably could do plenty for the rail-407 transitway or similar.

I'm not sure the two functions do construction in the same way, but there are always things people can learn from each other.

There has been a dearth of contractors (and workers) in Ontario who have the knowledge and experience on rail projects. One part of this is knowing how to build the specific product - as we've seen with LRT projects, there has been a learning curve in roadbed construction and track laying. Signals and info tech is a very different field for railway construction than anything highways require. .

A bigger part is the interface between the running railway and the construction. The rules for working around running trains are pretty elaborate and don't intersect with anything that is done when building highways. MTO may know very well how to plan and lay out barriers and pylons for a work zone, but controlling work around a live rail line is a much more minute by minute proposition governed by an exacting set of operating rules and regulations. The information and communication flows between MTO and a contractor are very different from the interface between CN/CPKC, ML, and the contractors when planning and executing work.

Similarly, procurement may be quite different. I suspect the provincial bureaucracy that does this is a lot more familiar with highway projects than railways. The process for rail seems to be byzantine, with people triple checking each step, likely out of fear of missing something (which still seems to happen anyways).

I do think ML has a basic deficiency in project planning. One wonders if MTO could teach ML a lot about that. I'm a little long in the tooth to know what tools are used these days, but a good old fashion Gantt chart sure seems to be outside ML's skill set. Maybe start there.

- Paul

This helps make apparent just how different the types of work the two entities do are. Safety seems to be something we cannot address by looking to our highway builder. Since I addressed parts of this above, I’ll just say that whatever crossover there might be should be capitalized upon ravenously, if only so Mx isn’t the one trying to do it…

My interpretation of the issues with procurement are that you’d need a systemic shift to acquaint the agencies and the industry with rail construction in a simple and straightforward way. Otherwise we are just going to have to cross this learning curve one way or another.

I can echo that there are those in Ontario that have been accruing knowledge/ experience. I just hope we don’t throw these modes out now that we’re starting to get the hang of it. For all the stuff in the news, Hurontario, Finch, and Xtown West are leagues from the headache of Crosstown. Perhaps the Hamilton LRT will see that expertise put into action, especially given it’s not even the primary goal of the project.

Also, I got acquainted with Gantt charts halfway through schooling and never looked back. Perhaps Metrolinx just needs more Interns that are with the times.

 

[reinventingthewheel]

1. not reinvent the wheel

namesake mentioned

 

[Northern Light]

Nonetheless, it seems like an ‘easy’ couple of improvements would be to:

1. not reinvent the wheel as it pertains to contracting work, and

2. keeping a continuous pipeline of work to do.

These are both hallmarks of The Spanish Transit building program in Madrid.

***

They are also hallmarks of the way Centre Court builds condos in Toronto. In general keep the same in-house team, the same planners, the same architects etc wherever possible over time. Feed them a steady diet of the same type of work with the same expectations, watch like a hawk, rinse, repeat.

 

[Branden Simon]

October 15, 2024

 

[smallspy]

And yet it does not look future-proofed for a third or fourth track.

That's because they haven't actually done any construction through here. It's been 2 tracks since the 1850s.

Dan

 

[Bojaxs]

Took some photos of Kennedy GO station today. When are they going to knock down the old Scarborough RT track to allow for the extension of the western platform? Most of the work seemed to be taking place in the parking lot and inside the station building. The station is still closed off.

I'm glad I got to the GO station to catch the last "Union bound" train at 4:10pm before that long gap in Southbound service. I wasn't looking forward to taking the subway back to Union. There were a lot of homeless and mentally ill people on Line 1 as I rode up to Bloor-Yonge. Really becoming an issue. I could tell by looking at other rider's faces that they were really uncomfortable. Homeless guy started chatting me up on the subway. He asked for a sip of my coffee. I laughed and said "Hell no, mate! You don't want what I got."

 

[Krypto98]

It's possible some GO enforcement officers are also designated by some or all municipalities to enforce the Highway Traffic Act in vicinity of GO stations, or there's some other legal allowance somewhere, but I can't say for sure. But hey, I've jumped into intersections and helped direct traffic as a regular citizen before.

I know CN police can enforce the HTA within 500 meters of CN property. Wouldn't surprise me if GO officers can do similar