Commuter & Regional Rail

[David A]

Actually you can, and many places do mix HSR with regular passenger traffic. The important part is having services in place so a modal shift can start to happen. There are tons of examples of 200km/h trains using the same tracks as 120-160 km/h trains. I’m still not convinced that Alberta will ever need true HSR. The distances between the major cities are not that great. Higher speed express trains travelling between Edmonton and Calgary in just under 2 hours would be sufficient.

Just under two hours would be fantastic. It would reduce traffic on the highway by replacing bus traffic and some auto traffic too.

You could probably alternate express trains with others making stops along the way throughout the day, so the service could also benefit other communities along the route.

 

[The_Cat]

I think that something like an underground station at 105 Street from 102-104 Avenue could work. Land on the west side of 105 Street could be purchased. The underground station could be built below ground, with pedway connections to Grant MacEwan, and possibly Ice District (along 103 Avenue). The line could tunnel underground (below Jasper Avenue LRT) with a downward slope, A portal could exit at the Pallisades (98 Ave/105 Street, south of MacKay Avenue School) with overhead track going over 105 Street. The track continues south, and west of 105 Street and crossing west of Walterdale. The tracks continue up the direction of Queen Elizabeth Park Road and overhead along a right of way east of Gateway Boulevard, meeting up with Strathcona Station.

The track could continue south along the CPR right-of-way to YEG/Leduc. Other stops could include Red Deer, YYC and Calgary. These tracks could double up for regional rail.

 

[erudyk_29]

So were you thinking something like this @The_Cat?

I don't mind this, though I do wonder about the severity of the grade, particularly on the southside of the river on the Queen Elizabeth Park Road section. It may also be quite too expensive to do all the tunneling required, plus the construction of a brand new bridge and other changes to lessen the grade.

I would propose this alignment:

Starting at Strathcona station, we follow the streetcar / former rail alignment and cross over a revamped (or replaced) High Level Bridge with bidirectional tracks. It would become elevated on the northside of the river and when it crosses Jasper Ave. A large central station would be built on the northwest corner of the intersection of Jasper and 109th street with an elevated station. I opted for the name Union Station, since Central is already taken by Central LRT station, which is not the main station to access the RR/HSR station. That would be Corona which would have a pedway connection beneath Jasper to Union Station. It would then continue northbound through Railtown Park, dropping to ground level and then later into a tunnel. It would suck to lose the park but I think it's worth it for the benefits of the rail network. Now I actually like this alignment for LRT as well, so I'm not sure how that could be incorportated, or maybe this line would remove any need for LRT along this route as Regional trains would cover it.

Overall, I like your alignment for its more central location. I think the High Level alignment is maybe slightly more feasible and cheaper though. It also allows the station to be much bigger at the start, and allows for easier future expansion as it would be above ground (elevated actually) and surrounded basically just by parking lots.

In terms of station design, I think using the Miami Brightline Station as a model might be cool. It would most likely have to be wider to accomodate trackage for both High-Speed intercity trains and Regional traffic as well, but I think the general design would look good this way.

What I like most about it is the residential towers built directly on top of the station.

For Strathcona Station, I've brought up Utrecht Centraal before, but that was assuming the main station would be at Strathcona and not downtown. So definitely a smaller station than that, but maybe with similar design ideas.

 

[Platinum107]

So were you thinking something like this @The_Cat?
View attachment 539413
I don't mind this, though I do wonder about the severity of the grade, particularly on the southside of the river on the Queen Elizabeth Park Road section. It may also be quite too expensive to do all the tunneling required, plus the construction of a brand new bridge and other changes to lessen the grade.

I would propose this alignment:
View attachment 539414
Starting at Strathcona station, we follow the streetcar / former rail alignment and cross over a revamped (or replaced) High Level Bridge with bidirectional tracks. It would become elevated on the northside of the river and when it crosses Jasper Ave. A large central station would be built on the northwest corner of the intersection of Jasper and 109th street with an elevated station. I opted for the name Union Station, since Central is already taken by Central LRT station, which is not the main station to access the RR/HSR station. That would be Corona which would have a pedway connection beneath Jasper to Union Station. It would then continue northbound through Railtown Park, dropping to ground level and then later into a tunnel. It would suck to lose the park but I think it's worth it for the benefits of the rail network. Now I actually like this alignment for LRT as well, so I'm not sure how that could be incorportated, or maybe this line would remove any need for LRT along this route as Regional trains would cover it.

Overall, I like your alignment for its more central location. I think the High Level alignment is maybe slightly more feasible and cheaper though. It also allows the station to be much bigger at the start, and allows for easier future expansion as it would be above ground (elevated actually) and surrounded basically just by parking lots.

In terms of station design, I think using the Miami Brightline Station as a model might be cool. It would most likely have to be wider to accomodate trackage for both High-Speed intercity trains and Regional traffic as well, but I think the general design would look good this way.
View attachment 539421View attachment 539422
What I like most about it is the residential towers built directly on top of the station.

For Strathcona Station, I've brought up Utrecht Centraal before, but that was assuming the main station would be at Strathcona and not downtown. So definitely a smaller station than that, but maybe with similar design ideas.

Cool idea!! I like that you put the downtown station where the old Canadian Pacific station used to be . I think this may honestly be one of the most solid options for a downtown train station, as it'd probably be relatively cost-effective when compared with a fully new bridge and underground terminal. It would be a much better use for the Jasper and 109th intersection than Canterra Centre, that's for sure.

 

[David A]

Cool idea!! I like that you put the downtown station where the old Canadian Pacific station used to be . I think this may honestly be one of the most solid options for a downtown train station, as it'd probably be relatively cost-effective when compared with a fully new bridge and underground terminal. It would be a much better use for the Jasper and 109th intersection than Canterra Centre, that's for sure.

Would this involve tearing down all the stores and existing buildings north of Jasper Ave in the busy shopping centre? If so, why not build it a bit further south where there are parking lots and an old small office building?

 

[The_Cat]

So were you thinking something like this @The_Cat?
View attachment 539413
I don't mind this, though I do wonder about the severity of the grade, particularly on the southside of the river on the Queen Elizabeth Park Road section. It may also be quite too expensive to do all the tunneling required, plus the construction of a brand new bridge and other changes to lessen the grade.

I would propose this alignment:
View attachment 539414
Starting at Strathcona station, we follow the streetcar / former rail alignment and cross over a revamped (or replaced) High Level Bridge with bidirectional tracks. It would become elevated on the northside of the river and when it crosses Jasper Ave. A large central station would be built on the northwest corner of the intersection of Jasper and 109th street with an elevated station. I opted for the name Union Station, since Central is already taken by Central LRT station, which is not the main station to access the RR/HSR station. That would be Corona which would have a pedway connection beneath Jasper to Union Station. It would then continue northbound through Railtown Park, dropping to ground level and then later into a tunnel. It would suck to lose the park but I think it's worth it for the benefits of the rail network. Now I actually like this alignment for LRT as well, so I'm not sure how that could be incorportated, or maybe this line would remove any need for LRT along this route as Regional trains would cover it.

Overall, I like your alignment for its more central location. I think the High Level alignment is maybe slightly more feasible and cheaper though. It also allows the station to be much bigger at the start, and allows for easier future expansion as it would be above ground (elevated actually) and surrounded basically just by parking lots.

In terms of station design, I think using the Miami Brightline Station as a model might be cool. It would most likely have to be wider to accomodate trackage for both High-Speed intercity trains and Regional traffic as well, but I think the general design would look good this way.
View attachment 539421View attachment 539422
What I like most about it is the residential towers built directly on top of the station.

For Strathcona Station, I've brought up Utrecht Centraal before, but that was assuming the main station would be at Strathcona and not downtown. So definitely a smaller station than that, but maybe with similar design ideas.

Meow! Looks good

 

[The_Cat]

I think the only challenge could be the length of platform needed. For example, the Union Station platform (and other HSR platforms) average around 400 m. That's about two downtown blocks (north-south) or three downtown blocks (east-west). The Strathcona HSR station would run around from 76 Avenue to 80 Avenue. The standard train car is about 27 metres. The platforms could accommodate about 15 cars.

I think the previous crossing mentioned could accommodate commuter rail.

 

[Platinum107]

Would this involve tearing down all the stores and existing buildings north of Jasper Ave in the busy shopping centre? If so, why not build it a bit further south where there are parking lots and an old small office building?

I think with trying to fit a large train station into a central area, there's issues to consider no matter where you put it haha. I think replacing the Canterra strip mall with a large train station would be the most ideal option, as many large stations around the world often have mall-like qualities, like containing a lot of retail space (which should definitely be incorporated into any station imo). Any station in this area is definitely going to impact and concern residents living in nearby buildings, so noise mitigation should be a priority as well.

 

[erudyk_29]

I think replacing the Canterra strip mall with a large train station would be the most ideal option, .

This.

I think there are some people who like these but it's literally a suburban form strip mall right in downtown, on one of the most prominent intersections in the city. It gives you a lot more room than any other lot in the area to build a truly massive station. Also as @Platinum107 says, the station itself could be a "mall" type of setup. As it is an elevated station, you could have a mall below, the train station at the top of the podium and towers on top. If we're worried about losing commercial space, the station could easily accommodate more than is currently there.

 

[_urbanite]

But how do you get the train to point? We're about to spend $200M on rehabilitation for the HLB, so in 5-10 years we should tear it down and build a new one? Because as it stands right now, even with a 200M rehab, I doubt that bridge is usable for HSR or even regular commuter rail. Ditto for the tunnel south of it and the ROW going through Old Strathcona.

Also, the Canterra shopping district is fairly successful, especially the Save-On-Foods, which I've heard is one of the highest grossing stores in the country. I doubt there would be much appetite from all stakeholders involved to redevelop that district for this

 

[erudyk_29]

But how do you get the train to point? We're about to spend $200M on rehabilitation for the HLB, so in 5-10 years we should tear it down and rebuild it? Because as it stands right now, even with a 200M rehab, I doubt that bridge is usable for HSR or even regular commuter rail. Ditto for the tunnel prior to it and the ROW going through Old Strathcona.

Also, the Canterra shopping district is fairly successful, especially the Save-On-Foods, which I've heard is one of the highest grossing stores in the country. I doubt there would be much appetite from all stakeholders involved to demolish that district

I didn't mention this in the last comment but a few comments back. In this scenario, it would be phased. We would start with just the Strathcona Station and then create the downtown station several years down the track as a second phase. So the timeline would be farther out, probably 15-20 years. Also, this is what I mean when I say that people like the Canterra. I know it's a popular and profitable project, but it's not anywhere near what it could/should be. As I mentioned before, it's literally a suburban form strip mall in the middle of downtown. It has a unique architectural style, but that's it. It's value comes from its location at a quite dense and popular part of the city, not the development itself, which is out of place in the otherwise high urban environment. An urban style mall built beneath a central rail station would be a far better use of land than Canterra.

It would be a redevelopment of the High Level, either a massive renovation or a tear-down and rebuild. I'm not suggesting this would at all be an easy or cheap project, that would be ridiculous. But this is easily the easiest/cheapest way to do it. Every other way would require far more tunneling, new bridges and the claiming of even more land. Using the pre-existing rail ROW saves you the massive headache of acquiring land and clearing it.

 

[_urbanite]

I didn't mention this in the last comment but a few comments back. In this scenario, it would be phased. We would start with just the Strathcona Station and then create the downtown station several years down the track as a second phase. So the timeline would be farther out, probably 15-20 years. Also, this is what I mean when I say that people like the Canterra. I know it's a popular and profitable project, but it's not anywhere near what it could/should be. As I mentioned before, it's literally a suburban form strip mall in the middle of downtown. It has a unique architectural style, but that's it. It's value comes from its location at a quite dense and popular part of the city, not the development itself, which is out of place in the otherwise high urban environment. An urban style mall built beneath a central rail station would be a far better use of land than Canterra.

It would be a redevelopment of the High Level, either a massive renovation or a tear-down and rebuild. I'm not suggesting this would at all be an easy or cheap project, that would be ridiculous. But this is easily the easiest/cheapest way to do it. Every other way would require far more tunneling, new bridges and the claiming of even more land. Using the pre-existing rail ROW saves you the massive headache of acquiring land and clearing it.

I realize it's suburban format isn't desirable for it's location, but at this point is it really that bad that Canterra is there? As I mentioned, it's a successful shopping district, redeveloping it would be a big diservice to those live and work nearby.
Don't get me wrong, I would love to see an urban village or something like it here, and yes in theory this district could all be replaced by an underground mall beneeath the station, but how realistic is that? I've been to train stations in Europe that have malls or retail complexes attached to them, and the common trend with those stations is that they have multiple trains arriving and departing each other to multiple destinations. They're also in more dense urban environments that this station would be in. Not saying it can'y be done here, but no retailer (especially a current ones in the district) is going to want to re-locate to an underground mall and pay the higher rents for what may be a marginal increase in business.

Regarding the existing ROW, there are people who live very close to it, especially through Old Strathcona. Land would likely need to be acquired, and you will have to tunnel under 82 avenue and Gateway to bring the tracks through Old Strathcona, which complicates building out the ROW. The tunnel underneath 109 street would also need to be expanded, but considering the footprints of the buildings above it and around it, that may not even be possible. This may seem like the easiest and cheapest way to do it, but that doesn't necessarily make it the most ideal route IMO. Perhaps it's "easier" (but probably not cheaper) to build the ROW through End of Steel Park and tunnel through the river bank and build a bridge to cross the river at the Rossdale Powerplant (or even on the west side of the Walterdale Bridge) instead? then you could look at building a new downtown station here for example:

Tie this station into the River Crossing redevelopment and I think you see bigger benefit to the city than redeveloping the Canterra shopping district into a station and mall

 

[Tacom8]

i really like the 105 alignment idea, lands into a relatively empty part of the valley, 105 is not nearly as busy to construct along, some empty space along the roadway as you get into downtown just south of Jasper could be a great station build out area with not to bad of a gap to the existing LRT UG stations. here is my best drawing skills on display.

 

[erudyk_29]

I realize it's suburban format isn't desirable for it's location, but at this point is it really that bad that Canterra is there? As I mentioned, it's a successful shopping district, redeveloping it would be a big diservice to those live and work nearby.
Don't get me wrong, I would love to see an urban village or something like it here, and yes in theory this district could all be replaced by an underground mall beneeath the station, but how realistic is that? I've been to train stations in Europe that have malls or retail complexes attached to them, and the common trend with those stations is that they have multiple trains arriving and departing each other to multiple destinations. They're also in more dense urban environments that this station would be in. Not saying it can'y be done here, but no retailer (especially a current ones in the district) is going to want to re-locate to an underground mall and pay the higher rents for what may be a marginal increase in business.

Regarding the existing ROW, there are people who live very close to it, especially through Old Strathcona. Land would likely need to be acquired, and you will have to tunnel under 82 avenue and Gateway to bring the tracks through Old Strathcona, which complicates building out the ROW. The tunnel underneath 109 street would also need to be expanded, but considering the footprints of the buildings above it and around it, that may not even be possible. This may seem like the easiest and cheapest way to do it, but that doesn't necessarily make it the most ideal route IMO. Perhaps it's "easier" (but probably not cheaper) to build the ROW through End of Steel Park and tunnel through the river bank and build a bridge to cross the river at the Rossdale Powerplant (or even on the west side of the Walterdale Bridge) instead? then you could look at building a new downtown station here for example:

View attachment 540472

Tie this station into the River Crossing redevelopment and I think you see bigger benefit to the city than redeveloping the Canterra shopping district into a station and mall

All good points, however I will stick to my guns here. We'd be missing out on a direct LRT connection to the station with that station placement, which is crucial. The nearest is Bay Enterprise Square which is over a kilometer away and uphill. as opposed to quick underground pedway to Corona. Another issue is the whole Rossdale situation, the gondola was cancelled through here because people were worried about the pillars disrupting the river valley. Also, there is an Indigenous burial site there, which is another reason the gondola got axed, I have trouble seeing how a rail line would be allowed when a FAR less intrusive gondola was cancelled due to its intrusiveness I also think that the situation through Old Strathcona isn't quite as bad as you might think. The ROW just south of Whyte would be an issue as it is very narrow, but a quick measurement of some inner city double tracked lines in other cities shows that the ~12 m wide corridor should be enough for a track going in each direction. The line could be a trench through here rather than a tunnel which would reduce costs. The biggest challenge would be the tunnel under the Strathcona House and 109th st, which would definitely need to be upgraded in some way, definitely a challenge but nothing that makes it a total deal breaker.

 

[archited]