rdaner said:
The placement of this bridge saddens me when I look down Portland Street and see the missed oppurtunity.

IMG1801-L.jpg
Click to expand...

just build another one
 
I love the bridge itself but the ramp just ruins it and makes it uninviting. I'm hoping that as Front street develops, some landscaping will improve the ramp. I'd rather see a grassy hill filling the under side of the ramp. A sidewalk is of course an obvious improvement waiting to happen.
 
Jan 27
Today was the first time I been able to do any photo shooting for new year.

One reason the bridge is not open is the fact that all the handrail are not installed nor the posts grouted.

The new traffic lights have been install and waiting the word as to when to turn them on.

Still too much construction material in the way to open the north side.

As to the comments on location of the bridge, that is due to the fact of the height clearance for the electrification over the rail corridor as well the yard. Based on that clearance, you are left with a height difference between the the bridge clearance and surface grade. Both sides have different height. At the same time, the location of the centre support location comes into play, as you are in the flyover/under area as well the yard.

Since the plan has always have access to Portland, you have the west ramp where it is today to meet the accessibility grade requirements also.

I wouldn't hold my breath on seeing anything done to the south side of Front St in the near future for landscaping by the city as well a sidewalk considering its been on the books for some time. With the current idea of turning this area into a transit hub, that going to push anything on street-scraping back further. Without sidewalk on the south side of Front St and no real crossing the street at this time, make no sense or safety protected to build an east stair.

As for the south ramp, cost came into play of not having a east ramp or stair.

May is looking good as an opening day event.
6778192033_bd29becfdf_b.jpg


6778295881_95c115e6e8_b.jpg


6779498113_f5cbcf2883_b.jpg


6779500373_d14e7ce324_b.jpg
 
Pity they didn't continue the yellow-steel motif for the railings on the ramp. It would make that long walk up the ramp into more of an event. As it is, the ramp just looks like this bland lump that was built by the lowest-bidding contractor to fulfill some legal obligation.
 
The second photo from the bottom proves that the column location is not critical to sightlines, that if the pier was 80m west it would not hinder the view of signals from the train. Your photos prove that the column could be moved with little or no effect. I'm not suggesting that the bridge the bridge could necessarily be lowered (though I still think it could), just that the bridge alignment could have been on Portland, with entry ramps to one side. Stairs along the Portland alignment could have provided direct access .
 
I think it's very cool we've got an actual train engineer contributing to this discussion.

I live in CityPlace and overlook the tracks, so I probably see you drive in every day.

Couple questions now that I think about it that maybe you can answer. I'm not an environmentalist so I really don't care, but I'm curious, do they really need to turn on the engines and let them idle for 2.5 to 3 hours before they use them in the afternoon? I see them turn them on those sidings at about 3PM and they often don't drive out till 5 or 6. Why would they need that much time to warm up?

Also, how do you like the new GO engines compared to the old ones? I really liked the look of the old ones more.

Finally, when you drive the trains 'backwards' with the engine at the back, how is it done? Do you sit in the car and control the engine remotely or do you radio a guy back in the engine and tell him what to do? If a train car hits a car at a level crossing, are you in any danger? It seems if you hit it with your engine it would be no contest, but with a train car is it a little more dicey? Do you see people trying to cross level crossing when they shouldn't be?

Sorry for all the questions!
 
The signal bridge is located at the bend in the curve providing straight down the track sight lines to the signal. If the pedestrian bridge was aligned with Portland the signal bridge would be right next to the pedestrian bridge shining a light into the side of it as you can see in the second last picture the signals are at bridge height. The concrete support is where it provides the least restrictions from track realignments and as you can see in the second last picture that is the widest piece of land which wouldn't get in the way of switches and track realignments due to the underpass. Could GO have changed things to make the bridge go straight over the track? Sure, they could mount the lights on the side of the bridge, sacrifice some operational flexibility with more restrictive support placements, and accept a thinner operational corridor since the stairs and required landings would cut into the corridor airspace. The people using the bridge who are in wheelchairs, have limited mobility, strollers, and cyclists would see no benefit and it would benefit the most mobile and fit people by reducing their walking time, while reducing GO's flexibility in the corridor which moves thousands a day.
 
Also, how do you like the new GO engines compared to the old ones? I really liked the look of the old ones more.
Click to expand...

You liked the looks of the non-streamlined ones more? Are you more of a truck person?

Finally, when you drive the trains 'backwards' with the engine at the back, how is it done? Do you sit in the car and control the engine remotely or do you radio a guy back in the engine and tell him what to do? If a train car hits a car at a level crossing, are you in any danger? It seems if you hit it with your engine it would be no contest, but with a train car is it a little more dicey? Do you see people trying to cross level crossing when they shouldn't be?
Click to expand...

The cab car at the back controls the engine remotely on GO trains. VIA trains going backwards would have a person at the back with a radio. Cars are really no match for trains if hit by the front of the train... it is the trucks and trains that cause the most concern, or side impacts. There are people crossing all the time when they shouldn't be. It seems like every year there are at least a few hits despite all the rail safety programs and the obvious risk.
 
vegeta_skyline said:
As Enviro mentioned, the column itself has little impact on sightlines. Its the bridge truss that would cause those issues. And as he put it, more politely than I did, it would indeed reduce GO's flexibility in the corridor which moves thousands, actually tens of thousands of people per day.
Click to expand...
Further to your comment on line of sight, I noticed on Friday that the mast tower over the flyunder by Bathurst are gone now and I think I saw a single light at the underside of the flyover on the south track heading east. Is that true or was I seeing odd? I don't remember seeing it there before. How hard is it on you if that is a signal there now since its on a curve?

With the mast gone now and not having a west look view from Spadina after what I saw at Bathurst, how do you get your signals now? I believed there are some dwarf signals there now, but not sure. I know in the past a number of trains going west would end up stopping just before the top of the ramp. It been a few months since my last visit to the area.

The only way to deal with light of sight in this area as noted by a few, is to use the dwarf signals. Having no experience dealing with the mast or dwarf signals, I would say you need to be more alert with the dwarf than the mast, as you are looking down compare to looking ahead for the mast. Especially in the winter months, when a lot of snow has fallen.

They could put the signals on the bridge, but knowing people, more the bad ass, they will try to get the signals to mess them up.

Can you tell me why the trains depart westward slow until almost the west end of the Port Credit River bridge today compare to the days when there were only 2 tracks? I can see moving slow to the crossing to make sure the barriers were down and then pickup speed. Been on trains where we were on the bridge before picking up speed. I can see the next 2 blocks from the platform and they are usually a solid green for track #1. The odd time its a flash green to move from #1 to #2.

Have you heard when they plan on putting that 3rd track in for the flyunder, as its looks like its ready for the track now?

As for someone luck running out after being hit by a train, the same can be said for the crew. Knew a few CN engineers who did the Buffalo run, who had to pack in their career 1-3 years after hitting someone, as fear took them over especially at night. One chap was off for a year before he got back in the cab and only last a few months before calling it a day. The other one was off 6 months, but call it a day after a few miss a few years later. I have heard cases were engineers have never return to work while other live out their career after hitting someone. Only a few cases like a few days ago for GO, will put GO workforce back to where they are today than putting more service on the line.

Thanks
 
You'd think they can at least put a staircase on the east side.. Instead of making people walk 5 km there and back to get from the ground in front of the bridge on to the freaking bridge.
 
The reasons why a staircase - though desirable - was impossible at this time have been spelled out several times in this thread.
 
vegeta_skyline said:
Are you really still going on about this?
And whats this about a "dubious claim"?
So no, GO didn't mandate the bridge to be in this location just to f*** over the community for the hell of it.
Click to expand...

I'm no train engineer but i do have a question. Let's say, that the city wins the lottery or something similar, and has millions of dollars to cover up the train tracks and build a park. Would that not affect your sightlines?
I'm just curious because so many cities have buried tracks but we can't even build a bridge over the tracks at the most desirable location due to these "sightlines" issues.
 
If money were no object they would probably have a big study on optimal track alignment completed, lower the corridor to give it the required overhead clearance for overhead wires, and install more signal blocks. This bridge wasn't even the best bridge money can buy let alone the best track layout money can buy. The bridge was done on the cheap.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top