Longboat Area Residents Association (LARA) LARA represents 140 property owners in the USRC between Parliament and Lower Sherbourne Streets.

Transcription

1 Longboat Area Residents Association (LARA) LARA represents 140 property owners in the USRC between Parliament and Lower Sherbourne Streets. List of questions, requirements and concerns to Metrolinx related to USRC track expansion November 2017 Note that the original text provided by LARA is in black (as provided, most recently, to Metrolinx at CAC Meeting #1 on January 9, 2018), with responses from Metrolinx provided in green Justification for E01 Placement and Operation 1.1 Who has made the request to extend track E0? Is it the Provincial government? If so, what department? Metrolinx, an agency of the Government of Ontario, has determined the need for Track E0 based on accommodation for future Regional Express Rail (RER) service levels. As agreed at CAC Meeting #1 and clearly listed in the objectives of the CAC Terms of Reference, additional information on the rationale behind Track E0 is of priority interest to CAC members. Track E0 will be one of the key items covered at CAC Meeting #2 on Tuesday, March 6, Please provide the business and technical use cases (i.e. evidence supporting the expansion based on demographics growth, cost/benefit analysis and pay-off schedule) that had led to this decision. The Government of Ontario made a commitment in 2014 to implement Regional Express Rail (RER). The initial business case for RER recommended a scenario (Scenario 5: 10-Year Plan Optimized) for RER implementation based on financial, economic, and deliverability and operations analyses. The RER initial business case can be found here: nitial_business_case_en.pdf. The recommended scenario has undergone further analysis of infrastructure, systems, service design and other considerations as RER planning has evolved, as the RER initial business case indicated would be required over the life of the RER program. The need for Track E0 has been identified based on accommodation for RER service levels that have been further defined since completion of the initial business case. If Track E0 is not built, potential impacts are as follows: Reduce the potential throughput capacity of Union Station which is required to accommodate RER/SmartTrack service levels Increase in conflicts/delays which can mean more idling Limits the operational recovery in the event of an emergency Page 1 of 9

2 Barrie corridor trains do not have space to turn around Preclude two-way all day service on the Richmond Hill corridor As described above, Track E0 will be an important part of the discussion at CAC Meeting #2 on Tuesday, March 6, What work has been done to improve scheduling of trains heading to Union Station, before making the decision to spend billions in taxpayers money on adding new tracks? Why is efficient train scheduling not solution to creation of a bigger transit capacity? Grand Central terminal in NY has 44 platforms, all served by 4 (!) tracks entering Manhattan down to the station, which hosts 67 tracks. 750,000 visitors pass through it daily. Have you studied their scheduling? Metrolinx is constantly looking at opportunities to improve scheduling of trains (e.g., dwell times, travel times), with safety top of mind. As part of the RER plan to provide 15-minute all day service on most Metrolinx rail corridors, capacity at Union Station needs to be maximized. Union Station has 14 tracks. To accommodate RER service levels, trains must move through the station rather than turnaround within the station itself. Barrie corridor trains, which do not have a matching east-of-union service, must turnaround. To accomplish this, we require added track infrastructure, particularly Track E0. Turning around can take up to minutes, and blocks other train movements. Because Barrie trains are on the tracks on the north side of the station, the turnarounds must also occur on the north side as crossing multiple tracks would cause cascading delays for other train services. Grand Central Terminal in New York City has 44 platforms which allows trains to dwell for extended periods and then turnaround at this end-of-the-line station. At Union Station, we simply do not have that kind of latitude. In terms of the number of trains per hour that each of Grand Central s approach tracks can handle, we are constrained by a number of issues including the length and speed of our trains (takes more time per train to get through) and our signaling system. Although all of these elements are expected to be upgraded, we would still have some bottlenecks at Union Station as it cannot handle the number of closely-spaced arrivals that Grand Central Terminal is able to accommodate because of the number of tracks and the longer dwell times required to load/unload 12-car bi-level trains (MTA Metro North uses single level coaches with level boarding). 1.3 Why is a south-side-expansion-only option not viable? Please provide a detailed, engineering report/subject-matter-expert explanation to justify EO1 placement north of the existing tracks. Track E0 must be built on the north side for the following reasons: Property limits: Further extension to the south would conflict with Lake Shore Boulevard and the Gardiner Expressway, as well as the existing train layover. Page 2 of 9

3 Track alignment: Tracks are needed on the north side of the USRC to service trains travelling to and from Richmond Hill (rush-hour service) and to allow Barrie corridor trains, which do not have a matching east-of-union service and are planned to provide two-way, all-day service, to turnaround. Because Barrie trains and Richmond Hill trains are on the tracks on the north side of Union Station, the turnarounds must also occur on the north side as crossing multiple tracks would cause cascading delays for other train services. As per the summary for the first CAC meeting, a meeting will be held to further discuss Track E0. This is planned to be included as part of CAC Meeting #2 on March 6, How does Metrolinx justify drastically expanding diesel-fume train operation at time, when all levels of government are working to reduce or stop operations that are sources of environment pollution and climate change? Please provide today s vs. targeted count (with the expansion) of trips per day & night per diesel train, per individual USRC line. Metrolinx is working to electrify all Metrolinx-owned corridors as soon as possible. The vast majority of train traffic along USRC East will be electric. In order to increase GO service 25% by 2019, you are correct that we will require our fleet of diesel powered locomotives to achieve this increase in advance of electrifying our commuter rail service. Our diesel locomotives are continuously maintained and pose no risk to local air quality, even at the planned increased service levels. 2 Safety & Health concerns associated with E0 line expansion: 2.1 Background (please respond to each statement to confirm its accuracy and address the noted concerns): The GO Rail Network Electrification Environmental Project Report indicates that E0 will be 100% diesel-operated. That is an accurate statement; however, the track will also be electrified to accommodate electric trains as well Diesel trains will be running on a 7-15 min schedule just 15 meters away from residential dwellings. Current plans contain NO noise/air pollution mitigation. This is not an accurate statement. The service on Track E0 will be 16 trains per day. Metrolinx is not anticipating this level of train service will present any real impacts to local air quality The Richmond Hill line (to extend to E0 line) is owned by CN. What are the details of train operations and maintenance agreement with CN? Metrolinx owns a portion of the Richmond Hill corridor from where it joins the Union Station Rail Corridor to north of Old Cummer GO Station. Metrolinx is required to provide freight routing through the USRC as per the existing agreements with CN and CP, but this will not occur on Track E0. Page 3 of 9

4 2.1.4 Since Richmond Hill line is owned by CN, this line will be available for freight trains with dangerous goods on board, passing by in a mere 15 m distance away from residential dwellings. Track E0 would not be available for freight trains to use Approximately 40% of the CN freight train fleet is not double-stacked so does not require height accommodations at Union Station. Even double-stacked freight trains can switch tracks before Union, to accommodate their height restriction. Typical freight routing from the Bala sub through the USRC crosses from north (Track E2) to south between Jarvis Street and Sherbourne Street All train tracks, including E0, are on an elevation to residential dwellings north of them. Three quarters of the embankment between tracks and residential dwellings is currently covered in a thick canopy of 40-yr-old tress that could serve as a potential barrier in case of derailment. Metrolinx intends to clear-cut the entire embankment, creating a high level danger zone in any case of derailment, not mentioning all noise and diesel fumes flowing directly to LARA homes. The vegetation does not provide any safety measures but Metrolinx understands the vegetative buffer is important to the community. As part of the Design Excellence program, Metrolinx is developing a landscaping plan to replant the areas where trees and vegetation located on Metrolinx property will be removed TPAP/EPR report highlighted toxic-level of air pollutants on USRC line. What is Metrolinx going to do to reduce this concentration to an acceptable level? How does Metrolinx justify further increasing the toxicity of air in USRC by drastically expanding diesel-fume trains? Metrolinx is confident it can operate diesel train service and not adversely affect local air quality. We are happy to discuss this further and be more specific with our response with an understanding of the TPAP/EPR report that you re referring to. It would be very helpful if you could provide this Metrolinx must provide a recently produced safety report detailing any event which may potentially compromise the safety of train passengers, train personnel or residents. A report must be made available for all of the entities using Metrolinx owned tracks. Metrolinx meets or exceeds all the requirements of the Railway Safety Act as it pertains to Safety Management Systems. We report to the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) as outlined in their requirements for incident reporting. Rail Investigation Reports produced by the TSB are available on the TSB website here: Incidents are reviewed and investigated to determine root cause. Corrective Actions are then applied as part of a continuous improvement cycle (Plan Do Check Act). Page 4 of 9

5 2.3 We request the installation of a crash-combination-noise wall on top of the embankment, north of planned train tracks in order to create a bare minimum safety, noise & air pollution mitigation. A crash wall is not required in this specific instance however Metrolinx understands the community has concerns with respect to safety. Metrolinx is committed to safety features of the new track and will include these features in its design. 2.4 Wall specifications: Crash wall to be anchored into embankment during re-building phase of embankment when grading is being changed. A crash wall is not required; however, as previously stated, Metrolinx will include safety features in the design of the new track Noise wall to be built directly on top of the crash wall, with a total wall height of a minimum of 18 feet (or 6 meters) As a result of input received at CAC meeting #1 held on January 9 th, 2018, as well as concerns and feedback shared by community members, Metrolinx is conducting a Receptor Based Noise and Vibration Assessment which will analyze potential mitigation options for current noise and vibration impacts resulting from operation, maintenance, and construction Use material that will allow easy-to-grow vines to prosper, and cover the wall As part of the Design Excellence program, Metrolinx is developing a landscaping plan and design options for noise walls, underpasses, and the embankment. Information on this program will be shared via the Community Advisory Committee Crash+noise wall will be a continuous wall from Parliament Bridge to Lower Sherbourne Bridge (remove north access to tracks on south-west of Tom Longboat Lane and it is redundant to already existing, and much more convenient and wider south access in the same location. Plus, there is another access as Distillery District.) An access consolidation exercise for the USRC East, in which some access gates will be identified for closure, is underway. Information will be shared via the Community Advisory Committee as the exercise progresses. 3 Property Damage associated with track Expansion: 3.1 Vibration mitigation must be implemented. If it is not sufficiently mitigated, expansion cannot go ahead as it will endanger the structural integrity of tax-payers residential dwellings in direct proximity to the USRC at Longboat Avenue. We request to see vibrations measurements done AFTER all necessary mitigations are executed. Measurement distance should be calibrated to no more than 15 m distance from south exterior wall of Longboat Avenue row-homes. If Metrolinx does not mitigate the excess vibrations to be within marginal increase of 25%, Metrolinx needs Page 5 of 9

6 to provide adequate financial compensation to the home owners, addressing potential damages, insurance-coverage rates and erosion of value, as an effect of this major issue. As a result of input received at CAC meeting #1 held on January 9 th, 2018, as well as concerns and feedback shared by community members, Metrolinx is conducting a Receptor Based Noise and Vibration Assessment which will analyze potential mitigation options for current noise and vibration impacts resulting from operation, maintenance, and construction. In addition, as part of the ongoing environmental assessment for the USRC East Enhancements Project TPAP, a vibration assessment will be completed to identify locations where vibration mitigation associated with the new planned infrastructure is warranted. This information will be shared with CAC members (anticipated March 2018). 3.2 In view of the un-resolved vibration issue, Metrolinx should create an expense fund to enable a speedy expense claim process. Claims are investigated and addressed on a case by case basis by our Claims Department. Your Community Relations Specialist (Ryah Kazman) can provide a claims form to fill out. All claimants who wish to make a claim to Metrolinx need to their claim to riskmanagement@metrolinx.ca or mail it in to either 97 Front Street West or 277 Front Street West. 4 Embankment Design 4.1 Ground retaining wall (on Tom Longboat Lane) The retaining walls are being designed as part of an overall reimagining of the landscape along the south side of Tom Longboat Lane. The planting zone is meant to recreate the vegetated zone that provided a visual relief along the lane. The design of the retaining walls will be compatible with the City of Toronto s guidelines for Heritage Conservation Districts. However, the objective is to develop designs that represent contemporary interpretations of the historic designs for railway viaducts The height of retaining wall (from ground-up) should not exceed 6 feet While design is underway and details are subject to change, the height of the retaining wall is planned to be 1.0 m or less to allow a greater diversity of trees that will not impact the safety setback from the track expansion. A retaining wall of this height will also allow residents to experience the landscape visually at the ground level The top of the retaining wall should have a black see-through fence (chain-link or bars), in order to allow pedestrians to see the embankment shrubs & trees A black see-through fence would be appropriate it must be secure, non-accessible, and could be mesh to allow greater visibility The retaining wall should be red brick and capped with light gray ledge on which black bar, or chain-link fence, will sit. Page 6 of 9

7 The colour of the retaining wall is yet to be determined, but should definitely fit in with the colour scheme of the adjacent homes, and may include red brick No soil on the ground in front of retaining wall (it will get overgrown by weeds) Comment noted. 4.2 Landscaping Embankment Embankment must have built-in and functioning, drainage system, which should be maintained indefinitely. Any future water damages stemming from flooding of Tom Longboat Lane must be 100% covered by Metrolinx (3/4 of the embankment is currently covered with thick 40-year old tree canopy that absorbs a lot of water, preventing Tom Longboat Lane from being flooded. With Metrolinx clear-cutting the embankment, the danger of floods are a potentially serious issue). The wall and landscape will be designed to accommodate expected runoff levels, which may include weep holes, aggregate backfill behind the walls, and perforated PVC drainage pipes that empty into an appropriate location. Plant material will be installed to promote absorption of runoff and offset erosion. Where slopes exceed 2:1, additional reinforcement will be applied. Hydroseeding will be completed in the spring so that groundcover establishes quickly (green slopes expected within 4 to 6 weeks) Embankment must be landscaped with mature trees at an equivalent height to the current canopy, to create a continuous thick canopy from Lower Sherbourne Bridge to Parliament Bridge (note that current analysis of tree height limitations due to the embankment gradient and electricity stanchion are not supported by independent research). As part of the Design Excellence program, Metrolinx is developing a landscaping plan. Tree sizes will be appropriate for the growing conditions The top of the embankment should be seeded with a thick web of easy-to-grow vines to cover crash/noise wall installed on top of the embankment. Hydroseeding will be completed in the spring so that groundcover establishes quickly (green slopes expected within 4 to 6 weeks) Metrolinx should provide LARA residents with a continuity plan for maintenance of the embankment = drainage, landscaping & a regular cleanup of garbage. The current proposal for a 2-year plan is not sufficient. The ongoing maintenance of the landscape zone along the south side of Tom Longboat Lane will be dealt with in two ways. First, the plantings will be selected with the objective to create a healthy, self-sustaining, and low maintenance vegetated zone. Metrolinx maintenance teams will have access to this zone from the rail corridor and will be tasked with regular removal of garbage. After the plants are installed, there will Page 7 of 9

8 be a 2-year warranty period in which the contractor has to maintain plant material and make replacements if necessary. After that, maintenance returns to the landowner. Metrolinx is currently exploring options for ongoing maintenance. 5 Maintenance and Construction scheduling 5.1 Background: The scathing 2016 Annual Report of the Office of the Auditor General showcases LARA residents past, and current, frustrations with Metrolinx. How will Metrolinx demonstrate, and show evidence of, its oversight over work done by its contractors? Metrolinx has implemented a vendor performance component in both the procurement process and during contract management. Metrolinx assesses the performance of contractors against performance standards set out in the respective contracts and uses these ratings in scoring the qualifications of the contractor during procurement. Contractors with poor scores may be negatively impacted or precluded from future bidding opportunities. 5.2 Metrolinx must provide notices of maintenance and construction = reason for work, dates, starting and ending times, type of work with details, equipment used and types of disturbance expected. Metrolinx agrees with this approach, and will strive to send updates about maintenance and construction activities in the corridor, outlining the items you have requested, in a timely manner. Metrolinx is working to develop a monthly calendar that outlines the activities taking place in the rail corridor each day, including daytime and overnight work. 5.3 Metrolinx must commit to stipulating and enforcing noise and vibration parameters for all construction vendors and ensure that vendor s adherence to these requirements is actively monitored. Independent construction vendor performance measurement reports must be prepared by Metrolinx and made available to the public. Metrolinx is reviewing its strategy to manage construction related noise and vibration. Current contracts for construction work in the USRC have noise and vibration control sections. Failure by the contractor to comply with noise and vibration requirements is dealt with through vendor performance management and, in extreme cases where the contractor is noncompliant, the contractor may be defaulted. Future contracts for construction work in the USRC will also include noise and vibration control sections. 5.4 What is the process for residents to claim damages and how long it will take before damages are completely repaired? Please provide step-by-step description of the process. Claims are investigated and addressed on a case by case basis by our Claims Department. Your Community Relations Specialist (Ryah Kazman) can provide a claims form to fill out. All claimants who wish to make a claim to Metrolinx need to their claim to riskmanagement@metrolinx.ca or mail it in to either 97 Front Street West or 277 Front Street West. Page 8 of 9

9 5.5 Metrolinx must operate a 24/7-manned complaint line to address concerns of excessive disturbance. Metrolinx is currently investigating the feasibility to have a 24/7 staffed phone line. 5.6 Metrolinx must assess expected noise/idling/other disturbances relating to on-going construction activities. This includes requirements for use of train horns. As a result of input received at CAC meeting #1 held on January 9 th, 2018, as well as concerns and feedback shared by community members, Metrolinx is conducting a Receptor Based Noise and Vibration Assessment which will analyze potential mitigation options for current noise and vibration impacts resulting from operation, maintenance, and construction. In addition, as part of the USRC East Enhancements Project TPAP, Metrolinx is conducting a Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment to analyze the potential impacts and mitigation measures associated with the proposed expansion. Train horns (whistles) are not typically used in the Union Station Rail Corridor, unless there is an emergency (e.g., a trespasser on the tracks), crews at track level need to be alerted or pedestrians or animals need to be warned off the tracks. Page 9 of 9