[trevorhayden]

It's a distraction from CorruptCare scandal.

 

[Edmcowboy11]

Well I hope she is in love with Shinkansen trains and decides that Alberta should have that as the backbone of our rail network.

 

[The_Cat]

Smith would probably have the trains run on coal!

 

[Barnaby]

I'm pretty sure she's just a foamer, guys.

Take the wins while you can if you are someone that hates her. I'd be happy to see this from any Albertan politician.

 

[Foolworm]

Another round of virtual engagement:

Passenger rail engagement

People living in Alberta are sharing their thoughts on the development of the Passenger Rail Master Plan.

www.alberta.ca

 

[yeggator]

Been thinking a lot about the grade separations that need to happen in South Edmonton, and I'm wondering how you would do it at the Whitemud Drive ramps and 34th Ave? Did some rough measurements and it appears that you would need at least a 200 m approach for a road-over-rail overpass (based on 50th Street and CPKC rail yard) or a 140 m approach for a road underpass (based on 63rd Ave by Gateway). Between Gateway Blvd and the CPKC ROW, there's barely a distance of 50 meters. Do you build overpasses that completely skip over Gateway Boulevard with no access to the latter? Do you squeeze in more interchanges to maintain that access? Do you adjust the grade of Gateway Blvd at those intersections to allow for a shorter approach to get over/under the tracks (for the Whitemud ramps, you'd have to completely rebuild the Gateway Blvd overpass over Whitemud Drive for this solution)? What about adjusting the grade of the rails? With approaches that are around 380 m long, you could bring the tracks above the grade of the intersections with 5.5 meters of clearance below the rail overpasses, all while the grade is gentle enough for freight and high-speed passenger rail. The space is there for approaches that long, but you have to completely rebuild the tracks, meaning high costs and immense disruptions for freight rail traffic. Plus, the current container yard on 99th Street and 34th Ave will be rendered useless. What do we do?

 

[chrisvazquez7]

I would say, cheapest and least disruptive is to keep the road configuration the way it is at Whitemud Drive. Short term, just double track the existing mainline level crossing to provide capacity through the area. Then eventually build a viaduct for the passenger trains (at-grade could stay for freight, at least for the medium-term, so they can retain access to the intermodal yard to the south) that would bypass all the crossings in the Whitemud area. 34 Ave is a little easier to configure since there are no other structures in the area already. That could just be a simple underpass for the road with a reconfigured intersection at Gateway.

 

[husky]

I attended the Alberta's Passenger Rail Master Plan virtual session this evening. Sharing some of the interesting information/slides below.

• The plan is to continue working so they can present the findings to the government in the fall for consideration in Budget 2026.
• Interestingly, they did note that for the corridors they have looked at for high speed rail, the high speed rail was estimated to be less than twice the cost of conventional rail.
• The vision for the station in Edmonton is to be downtown. They are currently trying to figure out how to get the rail there and it is likely it will be a greenfield corridor. Representatives from the Province and City agree that it could be transformational for downtown.

They also completed an analysis of the services they are looking to move forward to the 30 year network (which is those services seen to be feasible within the 30 year planning horizon) and that analysis is shown below.

Regional Rail:

Commuter Rail:

Which resulted in the following emerging 30 year network:

 

[trevorhayden]

If this was China, the 30 year horizons would be 5 years and 60 years would be 10 years.

 

[The_Cat]

In 30 years, Alberta could have 8 million people, with about 80% in the Edmonton-Calgary corridor.

 

[northlands]

Greenfield, you say? Here's my sicko mode suggestion (red at/above grade, blue u/g) if no existing rail ROWs can be utilized.

Put grand central station terminus stretching from 103 to 102 ave between 97th to 95th, plus extended over 97th st where the law courts building is, utilize those existing pedway connections to Churchill, and have direct access to Quarters VLSE station.

The stretch down Baseline is probably elevated. Replace the Dawson with a nice combined vehicles on the bottom rail on top bridge. Old coal mines a major concern near the Rowland Rd portal, and McNally Highschool is probably demolished (but it's having geotechnical issues already). Overall fairly minimal expropriation required, mostly in Fulton and Riverdale north of Rowland Rd.

 

[thommyjo]

I still like the idea of using a new high level bridge to do a terminus at government centre. Less ideal than Churchill though. But a way for us to sort out the massive costs that bridge will be.

Does greenfield forsure mean a henday type route though instead of a straight shot south from downtown?

 

[northlands]

Does greenfield forsure mean a henday type route though instead of a straight shot south from downtown?

I don't think so. Could also probably make a very convincing case to run it up 91st to the old 68 ave ROW and cut over to CPR's Irvine yard and up from there.

 

[cmartin58]

I think the central station will almost certainly be in the quarters.

Not only does the HSR/Airport line need to get downtown and connect with LRT somewhere, but it also needs a path for commuter rail to get out of downtown towards Spruce Grove, Stoney Plain, St Albert (and 60 year connections to the north east).

That combined with the need for space to build the station and the cities desire to redevelop the quarters, I think we know our future station location (approximately).

 

[Tropical]

My primary wish is that this can also link Old Strathcona to downtown.